• @Cryan24@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    841 month ago

    So company with vested interest thinks people should do thing that makes the company money, gotcha

    • Admiral Patrick
      link
      fedilink
      English
      17
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Pretty much.

      Every time I’ve heard “[X] should embrace AI or get left behind” it’s being said by someone making or selling AI (or a product they shoehorned AI into).

  • N3Cr0
    link
    fedilink
    English
    521 month ago

    Artists embraced Adobe long enough. It’s time for a change.

  • paraphrand
    link
    fedilink
    English
    35
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    So we downvote here when we disagree with an article? Wouldn’t you wanna upvote it so others see the bullshit Adobe is spouting?

    • ElPussyKangaroo
      link
      fedilink
      English
      121 month ago

      I had the same confusion a while back… This is just an article… There’s no point in downvoting the post sharing the article…

  • @over_clox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    181 month ago

    Sure, because screw artists with unique talent and style, let’s just have AI crank out the same style crap every day…

    I’m rapidly getting tired of this new AI art era, looks like the same shit every day anymore.

    Where’s the human factor anymore? Where’s the talent, where’s the skill?

    • @And009@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -71 month ago

      That’s not how we should see it. Digital artists spend a lot of time creating and trying different things. On the other hand we have people with different conditions who have ideas without the skills yo execute anything.

      This allows everyone to do more and quicker, increasing the earning potential. AI is useful as long as it levels out the playing field. It’s the malicious use we need to moderate and like drugs, thats a slippery slope.

      • @Pandemanium@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        61 month ago

        When I am amazed by a piece of art, it’s because a person was able to conceive of a scene and then use techniques they’ve learned to bring that scene from their mind into reality. I think, “Wow, how did they decide to blend those colors together in such a way, and why? I wonder how hard it is to get that right? How long might it take me to learn the same technique?”

        But when I look at a piece of art made by AI, I think, disappointedly, “Oh, they didn’t. Nobody leaned the technique to paint this, there may not be any feeling behind it, or any point at all, other than ‘it looks good.’” It’s just not impressive.

        And I’m pretty sure that most people could learn how to prompt successfully in a matter of days or weeks. Real artists practice their craft for years, learning and perfecting techniques and often developing their own unique style.

        • @barsoap@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          0
          edit-2
          30 days ago

          “Oh, they didn’t. Nobody leaned the technique to paint this, there may not be any feeling behind it, or any point at all, other than ‘it looks good

          “May” being the important word, here.

          I suggest that if you cannot tell the difference between “someone who knows art did this piece” and “someone just hit generate” then you have no business critiquing art.

          And I’m pretty sure that most people could learn how to prompt successfully in a matter of days or weeks.

          …that won’t give you art skills. It’s practically impossible to develop an artistic eye, much less mind, by hitting generate, the feedback isn’t sufficient, you can’t train like that. No model prompts the same, btw, frankly speaking prompting is about the worst way to condition a model when you’re out to create something specific.

          The art is not in the fucking medium. Never was. Never will be. Come at me for this and I’ll be referencing urinals on pedestals.

      • @socphoenix@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        51 month ago

        How does it increase earning potential? Best case it would flood the market with shit and result in less income due to either dilution of spending amongst thousands of idiots using “ai” or destroy the need for a market in the first place. If everything is ai why would I pay the “artist” instead of just going to stablediffusion or something similar?

          • @socphoenix@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            030 days ago

            Because phones are still not able to shoot as well as a professional camera, never mind the skills needed to frame or light the scene correctly.

            • @barsoap@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              230 days ago

              Why would you hire a photographer instead of renting a camera, then?

              …because you know shit about photography (I presume, for the sake of argument). Why would you hire an AI artist over doing it yourself, then?

              • @moseschrute@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                126 days ago

                I’m predicting it now. There will be either an app or a bot that collects all the photos taken at a wedding by guests and generates “professional” photos of the event. So you won’t need to frame the photos anymore. You will only need enough perspectives to predict what a framed photo would look like.

                I’m against AI replacing human creativity. This is just a prediction. Not saying I want it to happen.

  • @EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    111 month ago

    One can look at art as either being about “the end result” or about the process of human expression. AI can produce the former (of varying quality), but not the latter.

  • Tiger Jerusalem
    link
    fedilink
    English
    91 month ago

    Hot take here: they’re not wrong. AI speeds up tons of processes that many traditional artists won’t be able to keep up, just like digital painting sped up tons of processes that traditional painting could not keep up.

    This doesn’t mean that traditional art will die. Physical art will surely find it’s niche and it will be sought after by collectors, for example. But in the commercial environment, faster is better and AI will be a factor.

  • Annoyed_🦀 A
    link
    English
    81 month ago

    I too embrace Adobe Illustrator once but i’m not successful. Cool program though.

    Wait, wrong AI.

    • @And009@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      11 month ago

      It’s by far my favorite tool. Want to see what AI can actually do and not the crap they are pushing so far

  • @werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    51 month ago

    Forget artists! I’ll just get Adobe AI and create the logo I would have paid an artist to make…if I had ever a need for a logo. What else does Adobe do anyways other than logos 😆.

    Goodbye artists, is also saying goodbye Adobe. They gotta thread lightly.