this post was submitted on 28 Dec 2024
750 points (92.5% liked)
196
16774 readers
3629 users here now
Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.
Rule: You must post before you leave.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Lemmy when discussing health care: Karl Marx
Lemmy when discussing creative works: Ayn Rand
It would sure be cool if all art could belong to all people.
Sadly, as long as we live in a profit driven system, there needs to be a way for artists to claim ownership over their work.
I don't see how people think this is any sort of slam dunk or how it could go against leftist principles.
load more comments
(7 replies)
I don't know if Marx would disagree with individual artists owning the intellectual right to their artworks.
And if you asked Lemmy about how long copyright should last, I doubt that Ayn Rand would approve.
Everything's just a retelling of Gilgamesh anyway, why bother protecting "originality"
load more comments
(1 replies)
because I don't make art to sell, I'd love to train an Ai on my pics or songs and then see what it can make when given cool prompts :)
But I'm far from the competitive capitalism scene so I more view such an activity with a sense of wonder instead of anything to do with a loss of paid work.
Fuck AI art, honestly. I find the idea of using AI for instance in microbiology for finding combinations of proteins awesome, and so is it being used to help people learn and improve. For instance, when I don't understand concept in like math and engineering, I ask AI to give me advice. But using it for 'art' is honestly disgusting. It steals personality from art.
Scientific applications, espcially needle-in-haystack, or insanly huge data sets in general, are the best use for AI that I've seen.
I have also seen artists use generated backdrops for art with a character they drew, and I have though about giving a generator a confusing prompt for an audio clip, so I can edit it, then turn it into a soundfont, or make it into some other kind of muscial tool.
But yeah, "clouds in sky, sunny, high definition digital art backdrop" is easier to type than learn how to make, but it is a starting point for some. Fine by me, as long as it's a tool/element, rather than the piece itself. And LLMs are not to be trusted past a similar point either. They are ok usually for asking where to start, when even that isn't known, or easy to word. They usually give horrible results beyond a what to search for tho.
Tap for spoiler
side note: ChatGPT many moons ago was asked "How difficult would it be to overthrow the US government?" The response started with "It would be very difficult to overthrow the US government," followed by a lot of hooplah about how much access to weaponry and intelligence the military has. I stopped using it shortly after, as it was kind of rude about the question asked, and had no clue what fruiger aero is, outside of an old font/typeface... I'm extremely disappointed in the corpo LLMs tbh.
And also, steals art from actual artists. "Training data" is just a euphemism.
When I was making an android game I wanted to make art so i made an ai art gen on Perchance. OP would hate it most of all since a large part of it is the combining of different artist styles. I personally love being able to combine my 5 fav artists and see what prompts become with them combined.
I recently realized the artist Hannah Yata results in cool trippy pics. I then went to her site and yeah her pics are really like that. She's one of maybe 8 artists I've recently found a special connection to that I would not have known about otherwise.
so yeah ai art may be bad for struggling professional artists but for people that are not big money game studios yet, ai art basically allows having nonstockimage art in projects legally. I can 100% say ai art empowers me to have visuals where I could not have before unless i used stock(gross) images or had starting wealth to pay artists. So if you focus on artists losing, also focus on the poor but smart kid in some poverty place who is now that much more empowered to make something on their phone and legitly escape poverty.
There was a wealth barrier to visual art; now there isn't.
Entrenched struggling professional artists cry. People needing art that weren't wealthy enough to pay for it win.
When drugs become fabricateable at home by anyone, drug companies will also cry. People that weren't wealthy enough to pay for them win.
Same thing.
Poor artists.
But when you're the one no longer paywalled it's a different story.
You could always have commissioned an artist to work with you on your project, there's tons of artists who work for very reasonable prices and your game wouldn't look like an incoherently mishmash.
And I could commission a portrait artist instead of taking a selfie with my phone.
It all depends on your objectives and budget. For many people a few hundred bucks are just too much. And for a small payment (like 5-25 bucks) most commissions will return much worse results that the AI. For a result actually better we would be talking about an amount of money that obviously not everyone is capable to pay.
load more comments
(4 replies)
"Oh you could always simply spend thousands and thousands of dollars commissioning an artist to create artwork for your game you are building on a zero dollar budget and will most likely return $0 regardless of if the art is AI or commissioned"
Gee that's really tempting.
load more comments
(5 replies)
I can 100% say ai art empowers me to have visuals where I could not have before
"Stealing stuff empowers me to have stuff I wouldn't have otherwise."
load more comments
(1 replies)
Honestly I think people should embrace their medium, whatever it is.
view more: next ›