It's saddening this artist only does AI-assisted artwork now. They're talented but they're absolutely wasting it.
I'm thinking he/she uses it because it's easier and more efficient for making their game. I'm assuming they'll return to drawing w/o AI later on after the game is completed, but we'll see.
I'm thinking he/she uses it because it's easier and more efficient for making their game. I'm assuming they'll return to drawing w/o AI later on after the game is completed, but we'll see.
Just a guess here, but I think in time artist till stop relying on AI so much when they realize making artwork that look like the same as everyone else isn't making them as competitive as they wanted, especially its just a press of a button. It is an excellent color and rendering reference source.
Reminds me of the 90s when Photoshop got big and a lot of old traditional artist that got into started slapping filters on everything.
Just a guess here, but I think in time artist till stop relying on AI so much when they realize making artwork that look like the same as everyone else isn't making them as competitive as they wanted, especially its just a press of a button. It is an excellent color and rendering reference source.
Reminds me of the 90s when Photoshop got big and a lot of old traditional artist that got into started slapping filters on everything.
But only time will tell.
Exactly! Only time will tell, that's all we know. But still, AI models are getting better, faster, and more diverse, and it makes work much easier for artists, so naturally it would make sense for artists to use it more. Still we never know what may happen it the AI field. The image is beautiful btw.
It's feels weird to refer them as artist still, even though the the artwork itself wasn't made by them but just refurnished.
Photographers are considered artists, are they not? Even though they don't usually make what they're photographing. Nor the camera they used. Some touch up the photos, some don't even do that.
A sizable chunk of artists in the industry does nothing but clean-up work of their betters.
A sizable chunk of artists in the industry does nothing but clean-up work of their betters.
Might be cruel to say so, but outside of a business setting, are those same artists actually being patronized for that kind of work though? Patrons pay with money and/or time (such as watching/reading series) to see the works credited to well known artists/illustrators in works such as anime, manga, and games. You don't see the same sort of patronage when it comes to the assistants for their edits, cleaning, and supportive work for the lead artist. If an artist is using the AI to do most of the work, then that artist isn't really the lead artist of the work that was produced. The people aren't actually being a patron to the artist when supporting the work, they're in fact being a patron for the AI and the artist is taking full credit for the work done by someone else.
The way I see it with AI, the AI should be treated as a commissioned or contracted artist (or writer). Even if the commissioner of the work is dictating what the contracted artist is to create, you don't see the commissioner being called the artist of the final work that was created. The more a person depends on the AI to do the work in assistance, the less it's their own work and the more it is simply the AI's work.
Photographers still have to actually take the picture and put effort into the shot, be it setting up the perfect shot, managing the photograph's subject material(Dealing with people, animals, time of day, etc). As someone who does photography for a hobby, the difference between someone who takes a photograph normally to someone who puts a ton of effort into one is night and day.
Then the same thing can be said for an AI artist. There are those that just type in "I want big boobies", wait for their GPU to max out for 10 minutes and paste the results on their Twitter with the caption: "My hard work for today!". And then there are those that meticulously pose a 3D model and set up a scene, or draw out the pose they want, and feed it to the AI for rendering either as final result or using it for further refinement. The artist Dikko, for example, most likely does the latter.
GreyOmega4K said:
The way I see it with AI, the AI should be treated as a commissioned or contracted artist (or writer). Even if the commissioner of the work is dictating what the contracted artist is to create, you don't see the commissioner being called the artist of the final work that was created. The more a person depends on the AI to do the work in assistance, the less it's their own work and the more it is simply the AI's work.
I don't see it that way. I compare AI to any human made tool. People start with manual labor, and eventually figure out tools to do it for them, doing better than them, or help them do it better and faster. I'm speaking strictly in the context of industry, not as a personal skill attainment. To me, AI is the same as a tractor. You can hire a hundred people to dig with a shovel, or get one tractor that does it better and faster.
The operation mechanism for AI, in its current state, is the text prompt, and the subsequent text prompts. Or the base image you create. These require human effort (some more than others). As I said earlier, you have lazy AI users, that do it purely out for attention (or in some cases to spite legit artists), and then there are legit AI artists that use it as a tool to make art more efficient.
The operation mechanism for AI, in its current state, is the text prompt, and the subsequent text prompts. Or the base image you create. These require human effort (some more than others).
More or less describing the process of commissioning someone else to make art for you by giving them the perimeters of what you want. You don't think it takes a commissioner human effort to exactly order what they want?
Then the same thing can be said for an AI artist. There are those that just type in "I want big boobies", wait for their GPU to max out for 10 minutes and paste the results on their Twitter with the caption: "My hard work for today!". And then there are those that meticulously pose a 3D model and set up a scene, or draw out the pose they want, and feed it to the AI for rendering either as final result or using it for further refinement. The artist Dikko, for example, most likely does the latter.
I don't see it that way. I compare AI to any human made tool. People start with manual labor, and eventually figure out tools to do it for them, doing better than them, or help them do it better and faster. I'm speaking strictly in the context of industry, not as a personal skill attainment. To me, AI is the same as a tractor. You can hire a hundred people to dig with a shovel, or get one tractor that does it better and faster.
The operation mechanism for AI, in its current state, is the text prompt, and the subsequent text prompts. Or the base image you create. These require human effort (some more than others). As I said earlier, you have lazy AI users, that do it purely out for attention (or in some cases to spite legit artists), and then there are legit AI artists that use it as a tool to make art more efficient.
Yep, just like a commission. AI is no tool, it's automation or delegation, you literally let someone or something else do all the work for you based on some parameters. Sure you still have to describe it a bit, but that was the same with 'traditional' commissions. A tool is something like a hammer, it makes more things possible or more efficient but you are still in complete control and you are still making most of the effort, with automation or delegation you are pretty much dependent on the hardware or other person and don't have full control, or at least as much control as the other party allows.
So no, like the other poster above me, I disagree with the statement that 'AI is a tool', it's more a unpaid labourer, a slave if you will, letting it do all the work based on a short description. Or with a very few a co-worker where you take over the result and refine it a bit, which I do respect a little bit more in the end.