Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.
Rule: You must post before you leave.
Alt text: Using AI is the coolest new way to let people know you have no imagination of your own
As much as I have issues with AI, I feel like it would actually help you get your imagination set down in a way you could actually show people? Like I can think of a wonderful scene in my head, but I can't even draw a straight line with a ruler and you want me to draw that scene? Hell no, and lack of ability isn't lack of imagination, it's just a skill issue.
Drawing however is a vital part of the creative process. Creativity is not only about getting your mental image on paper, but also to learn and hone your limits as an artist.
Bob Ross said that stuff about "happy little accidents" for a reason.
So a ~~paraplegic~~ quadriplegic can't be creative? 🤔
Or, let me rephrase because this is a serious question testing the limits of your statement: what impact would you say being ~~a paraplegic~~ unable to perform basic motor functions has on someone's ability to create art, given that (according to you) they cannot perform such critical parts of the creative process?
Well first off, most paraplegics still have use of their arms, so drawing should not be a problem there.
Quadriplegics have access to digital interfaces and there are many example of an artists who use their mouths to paint. Henry Salas has lost function in 90% of his body and has been a digital artist for over a decade. https://www.henrysalas.com/digital-art
Well first off, most paraplegics still have use of their arms, so drawing should not be a problem there
Lol fair enough, my bad, I'm still shaking off the sleep, I did mean quadriplegics!
So then in this view it's not just using your extremities to create art, but any part of your body, which is a crucial part of the process. Your mouth, a foot, a nostril - all valid bodily extensions to interface with the world and create "real art" with.
But language is another interface between someone's mind and the world; why is that not a valid extension to create art with? What about people who generate their AI art piecemeal, using inpainting and careful prompting to correct features they don't want? What about professional photographers using their existing knowledge of photography to create award-winning compositions entirely with AI? Is it fair to say these people have no imagination?
The issue is when people use chatgpt or whatever to form a reply for them, like i get that people can't draw hence cannot implement said imagination, but...word? It doesn't have to be fancy, just type out what they have in mind. It happened right in Lemmy as well.
AI art is real art because people get mad at it
AI art is real art because people made it.
Good to see people finally stop being a bunch of reactionaries about it.
Artists make art using tools. AI is a tool. Bad artists still make bad art regardless of tools.
EDIT: Getting down voted by n00bs that don't even know a DDIM from a Euler A but call folks 'prompters' like it's derogatory.
You've still gotta be good at prompt engineering to make great AI art.
Like you said - it's a tool which requires nuanced skill like any other art. It just happens to lower the barrier to entry a pretty significant amount
Okay. I write lyrics and have Suno turn them into full songs to make wife laugh. My wife laughs. But according to you I don't have any imagination because I'm not a multivocal singer, can't play any instruments, don't have my own band to play for her on demand? Fuck off.
For personal use I see little issue with it. If you, however, start publishing them, suppressing other voices and/or making money off of it, it becomes less clear.
Well, I've shared my creations because I think they're funny too, and maybe other people will, but I'm not gonna put them on an album and sell them! I'm just arguing the creative side of it. Those tracks wouldn't exist without my lyrics, and I typically go through a bunch of "takes" to get the melodies and rhythms I want, so for someone to say there's no imagination involved feels thoroughly unfair to me.
They're a replacement for skills and knowledge, not imagination.
This is why people point out that they lack skills and knowledge.
I understand not liking AI but you don't have to be a jerk to aphantasics to do it
That and you need to be pretty imaginative to get some nice results from prompts
"boobs big tits heavy chesticles smothering me to death"
Nice
The modern Leonardo da vinci, ladies and gentlemen
I prefer to do it the old fashioned way:
who needs imagination when you have algorithms to do the thinking for you? 😜
This was chat GPTs attempt at writing a funny reply to this post.
'Write me a reply, that gets upvoted by the Lemmy OG IT bubble' ;)
GPT: “What’s Lemmy, lol”
Not even the AI listens to our gibberish
I've had some really cool image ideas I would have never been able to create myself, so take your artist elitism and shove it.
Just pick up a pencil!
Restoftheowl.jpg
Excuse me, I have no imagination but I don’t resort to AI
Based!
Look up what people used to say about digital art and tell me if history repeats itself or not
I was actually there. The backlash against digital art usually came from:
The reality is 99% of people that create images or music have little to no real creativity, it's far higher for text.
You can be crazily creative with thrown paint and make images you can stare at for hours or you can do the most generic shit with a hundred brushes and 12 years of art education.
Of course a creative person can use ai in fascinating ways to create visually stunning images. The better tools get the more control we have over output and the more intricate and ¹complex the things we'll make. I've seen loads of really cool things from ai which are every bit as creative as anything else, as with all art you have to seek out creativity and originality.
I believe that people with a good imagination actually make use of Ai better, they can generate way more interesting prompts.
Then the choice of where to do inpainting and outpainting with further prompts is a very artistic decision.
I’m pro AI at this point. Any use it has in the real world have and will continue regardless if AI art somehow gets restricted. AI is choosing who gets jobs, doing the work previously done by humans, and companies will continue this trend.
Being able to create art that is good and makes someone money is already a 1% kinda thing (I don’t mean money-wise, I mean just the ability to earn money as an artist at all). If we can’t save the rest of humanity, artists are just going to have to join us.
the indomitable human spirit: nuh uh :3
I use it to kickstart my email replies. I'm a great editor but terrible at creating from scratch.
I like these apps to help me come up with ideas for different story concepts.
lmao the proompter cope in this thread is real
Maybe other people just enjoy something and there's no reason to put them down for it. I wish I knew something you enjoyed so I could make fun of you for it. Sad person.
ChatGPT is great for yapping about patriotism for a school history essay, but It's completely unable to write anything useful or sensible. So I'll keep on doing things like art, storywriting and programming myself, but I'll use whatever cheats I have available for the pointless things I'm forced to do.
Jokes on you, I don't need AI to tell me that. I couldn't make a good build in Minecraft if you held me at gunpoint.
The ability to speak doesn't mean you're intelligent.