If we’re talking artistic credibility (as opposed to job security, plagiarism, and environmental impact), I want anti-AI people to uninstall their desktop graphics applications like Photoshop and GIMP. If you depend on buttons, value inputs and algorithms to get the art you want out of the machine, as opposed to using an easel and scanning your work into the PC without minimal touch-ups after the fact, then you’re no better than the person typing book-length prompts to get what they want. If you animate with key frames instead of hand-drawing every frame, you’re likewise just as credible (or not) as the prompt jockey. Hell, if you at any point use CTRL+Z, CTRL+C, CTRL+X or CTRL+V, you’re as artistically incredible as Paulie Promptnuts.
Just to be clear, I don’t think any of those things. But if you’re dismissing art on the basis that AI was used at some stage in its development, you should be thinking those things.
if someone learns art on digital systems they can grab a pencil and do the same on paper. maybe they’ll be annoyed by lack of the undo button, maybe they’ll have to learn colour mixing, and how materials interact with each other, but the core ability to make art is fully transferable between ditigal and paper
same goes for animation. btw. your statement about it doesn’t make much sense, keyframes are a concept used by both digital and traditional animators. and if you meant frame interpolation then it’s a brute force calculation of the most average of averages given two data-points, 90% of the time the animator has to go back and fix it, developing their animation skills that they can then take to paper and do just the same (would just take way longer)
now what will a prompt typer do without their AI?
fuck all is what they’d do. the only transferable skill from that would be idk writing image descriptions for the visually impaired
Speaking as someone who dabbles with all kinds of art.
What are you talking about? I can’t even begin to make the art i make digitally on paper and i am using a drawing tablet. I heavily use blended layers and may zoom in to the pixel level to meticulously get something perfect.
My used to be art teacher (pencil drawing, digital drawing and tattoos) started lesson 1 with affirming that digital painting is not drawing and you can not use a drawing tablet to draw. They affirmed its its own thing and much closer to painting.
You could raise one point for eye hand coordination holding a pen like item to draw lines there are transferable skills there but for all my digital work, my paper drawings suck, and i don’t even want to think about that guy i know that was actually good on paper, but disliked using a drawing tablet so much he used a mouse to “scratch” drawings on pc instead.
If we are considering experience broader creative techniques there is also the very common (and very fun) art of making collages.
People used to do this with magazines and you needed to be good with scissors. Doing it online eliminated that skill yet public internet images and photoshop actually turned that hobby in an actual career. (I know many magazines where every cover is a photoshopped collage of pictures)
I like to to point this one because in my
Own dabbling with ai generated (diy comfyui -not an llm prompt) the creative energy i put in feels much close to making collages, and a little bit like coding. You start with something basic and then you gradually change and mold stuff into intention.
My actual critique of ai generation is actually something much more basic… its just not as fun, its carving a rock that can change shape and sometimes it just sucks.
i meant the knowledge of line weight, colour theory, perspective, shapes, how light works, where shadows fall, how to treat your values, and the million other things that you can take to paper, that i have taken to paper as a ditigal artist
drawing ditigally is one way of drawing sure, but the skills you get as you draw are 90% transferable to any other medium - you just need to learn the new tool first
I feel like your being incredibly specific about how it applies to one art form.
Ai generation is not drawing. Just like drawing is not woodcarving.
Id like so see pencil or brush skills transfer to photography. Which is a good example because i have taken photos with intentional effect to make them look paintings.
Someone who works abstract without light play does not need to know light theory to be an artist.
If you want to do make the same art on a different medium sure knowledge is transfered but that really depends on what you are trying to do which is different for every creative individual.
In my experience there is knowledge overlap between making photoshop collages and building advanced ai generation flows.
These tools also complement eachother.
Generate a specific something, photoshop it into the final product.
overlap between drawing and photography? easy, composition, colour theory, framing, in fact you could take everything (aside from gear knowledge) from photography and apply it to drawing or painting
pretty much all mediums of art have the same basic core - concepts that can come in handy no matter what other medium you grab, shapes, colours, compositions - you learn those by working with any medium, and you can take them everywhere else
Hot takes are good when they’re like a campfire: other people gather around and start talking. This, though, is more like lighting a pile of used toilet paper on fire.
With the shit in the TP being false equivalence. It compares two situations (AI usage vs. the usage of other tools) as if they were the same for the sake of artistic credibility, when they obviously are not.
As I am replying, you got 9 upvotes and 9 downvotes; looks like the perfect “storm” to put my hot take too.
We got psychotic people on both side, when you get this grade of polarization people usually lose the perspective.
AI is a technology, an human logical entity like math: AI works on very advanced (probabilistic) math. Math is not the evil… but an actual evil does exist.
There’s a difference between a LLM chatbot that runs on your local GPU… and one in the cloud.
The chatbot on your GPU is “trapped” by your questions, your needs, your choices.
Today the chatbot on the cloud will tell you that Elon Musk is a controversial person, tomorrow it will tell you Elon Musk is the savior of the Earth and you’re not worthy to kiss his feet.
People seeing absolute evil in AI, are against you running your chatbot locally, on your PC.
People enthusiastic about AI will accept any “gift” (or AI GF) Elon Musk will give them.
I used autocorrect to write this sentence, which is a language model trained on copywritten works. It just so happens to have been developed in the 2000s instead of the 2020s.
There are definitely lines being arbitrarily drawn around AI, and there’s not a sensical flow to what any individual might believe is an acceptable AI use case. Nobody has really sat down and made a full documentation of every modern AI use and weighed the benefits and detriments they have on society. I think many of the outward haters of AI are likely just as ignorant as the blind defenders of it.
The Hottest of Takes:
If we’re talking artistic credibility (as opposed to job security, plagiarism, and environmental impact), I want anti-AI people to uninstall their desktop graphics applications like Photoshop and GIMP. If you depend on buttons, value inputs and algorithms to get the art you want out of the machine, as opposed to using an easel and scanning your work into the PC without minimal touch-ups after the fact, then you’re no better than the person typing book-length prompts to get what they want. If you animate with key frames instead of hand-drawing every frame, you’re likewise just as credible (or not) as the prompt jockey. Hell, if you at any point use CTRL+Z, CTRL+C, CTRL+X or CTRL+V, you’re as artistically incredible as Paulie Promptnuts.
Just to be clear, I don’t think any of those things. But if you’re dismissing art on the basis that AI was used at some stage in its development, you should be thinking those things.
no,
if someone learns art on digital systems they can grab a pencil and do the same on paper. maybe they’ll be annoyed by lack of the undo button, maybe they’ll have to learn colour mixing, and how materials interact with each other, but the core ability to make art is fully transferable between ditigal and paper
same goes for animation. btw. your statement about it doesn’t make much sense, keyframes are a concept used by both digital and traditional animators. and if you meant frame interpolation then it’s a brute force calculation of the most average of averages given two data-points, 90% of the time the animator has to go back and fix it, developing their animation skills that they can then take to paper and do just the same (would just take way longer)
now what will a prompt typer do without their AI?
fuck all is what they’d do. the only transferable skill from that would be idk writing image descriptions for the visually impaired
Speaking as someone who dabbles with all kinds of art.
What are you talking about? I can’t even begin to make the art i make digitally on paper and i am using a drawing tablet. I heavily use blended layers and may zoom in to the pixel level to meticulously get something perfect.
My used to be art teacher (pencil drawing, digital drawing and tattoos) started lesson 1 with affirming that digital painting is not drawing and you can not use a drawing tablet to draw. They affirmed its its own thing and much closer to painting.
You could raise one point for eye hand coordination holding a pen like item to draw lines there are transferable skills there but for all my digital work, my paper drawings suck, and i don’t even want to think about that guy i know that was actually good on paper, but disliked using a drawing tablet so much he used a mouse to “scratch” drawings on pc instead.
If we are considering experience broader creative techniques there is also the very common (and very fun) art of making collages.
People used to do this with magazines and you needed to be good with scissors. Doing it online eliminated that skill yet public internet images and photoshop actually turned that hobby in an actual career. (I know many magazines where every cover is a photoshopped collage of pictures)
I like to to point this one because in my Own dabbling with ai generated (diy comfyui -not an llm prompt) the creative energy i put in feels much close to making collages, and a little bit like coding. You start with something basic and then you gradually change and mold stuff into intention.
My actual critique of ai generation is actually something much more basic… its just not as fun, its carving a rock that can change shape and sometimes it just sucks.
i meant the knowledge of line weight, colour theory, perspective, shapes, how light works, where shadows fall, how to treat your values, and the million other things that you can take to paper, that i have taken to paper as a ditigal artist
drawing ditigally is one way of drawing sure, but the skills you get as you draw are 90% transferable to any other medium - you just need to learn the new tool first
I feel like your being incredibly specific about how it applies to one art form.
Ai generation is not drawing. Just like drawing is not woodcarving.
Id like so see pencil or brush skills transfer to photography. Which is a good example because i have taken photos with intentional effect to make them look paintings.
Someone who works abstract without light play does not need to know light theory to be an artist.
If you want to do make the same art on a different medium sure knowledge is transfered but that really depends on what you are trying to do which is different for every creative individual.
In my experience there is knowledge overlap between making photoshop collages and building advanced ai generation flows.
These tools also complement eachother. Generate a specific something, photoshop it into the final product.
overlap between drawing and photography? easy, composition, colour theory, framing, in fact you could take everything (aside from gear knowledge) from photography and apply it to drawing or painting
pretty much all mediums of art have the same basic core - concepts that can come in handy no matter what other medium you grab, shapes, colours, compositions - you learn those by working with any medium, and you can take them everywhere else
Hot takes are good when they’re like a campfire: other people gather around and start talking. This, though, is more like lighting a pile of used toilet paper on fire.
With the shit in the TP being false equivalence. It compares two situations (AI usage vs. the usage of other tools) as if they were the same for the sake of artistic credibility, when they obviously are not.
As I am replying, you got 9 upvotes and 9 downvotes; looks like the perfect “storm” to put my hot take too.
We got psychotic people on both side, when you get this grade of polarization people usually lose the perspective.
AI is a technology, an human logical entity like math: AI works on very advanced (probabilistic) math. Math is not the evil… but an actual evil does exist.
There’s a difference between a LLM chatbot that runs on your local GPU… and one in the cloud.
The chatbot on your GPU is “trapped” by your questions, your needs, your choices.
Today the chatbot on the cloud will tell you that Elon Musk is a controversial person, tomorrow it will tell you Elon Musk is the savior of the Earth and you’re not worthy to kiss his feet.
People seeing absolute evil in AI, are against you running your chatbot locally, on your PC.
People enthusiastic about AI will accept any “gift” (or AI GF) Elon Musk will give them.
I used autocorrect to write this sentence, which is a language model trained on copywritten works. It just so happens to have been developed in the 2000s instead of the 2020s.
that language model doesn’t regurgitate the media it was trained on. it just makes sure you don’t misspell your thats
I suppose I was referring to the next word suggestion feature, but you’re right.
There are definitely lines being arbitrarily drawn around AI, and there’s not a sensical flow to what any individual might believe is an acceptable AI use case. Nobody has really sat down and made a full documentation of every modern AI use and weighed the benefits and detriments they have on society. I think many of the outward haters of AI are likely just as ignorant as the blind defenders of it.