Why Artists are Fed Up with AI Art.
2022 ж. 23 Жел.
1 253 203 Рет қаралды
AI art is leaking into the mainstream in the form of stable diffusion and Lensa, but there are serious ethical concerns with this unregulated tech. I'm NOT anti AI, in fact, I believe AI can be of immense benefit to us in the future. But the ethics of AI in its current state MUST be talked about, in order to steer this tech in the right direction. Leave ur thoughts in the comments below!
Thumbnail art by the amazing @ CaraidArt on twitter
Check out Steven Zapata's GREAT VIDEO on the dangers of AI: • The End of Art: An Arg...
✨ Monthly tutorials on my Patreon: / samdoesarts
🤩 my Prints: www.inprnt.com/gallery/samdoe...
⭐️ my instagram: / samdoesarts
💫 Gumroad shop: gumroad.com/samdoesarts
on a lighter note, Merry Christmas my children :)
First
Merry Christmas Sam 🎄
Thank you, Sam
Merry Christmas!!
MERRY CHRIMAS
Calling artists gatekeepers for not liking AI is like calling runners gatekeepers because they won't let you use your car in a foot race.
Artists gatekeep all the time. It's nothing new. Like when it came to digital art, traditional artists didn't consider them artists. There are countless examples, artists gatekeeping from the beginning of time -- with ai art, it's nothing new.
Well, as long as they truthfully state it’s Ai generated and don’t try to claim it’s handmade, I don’t see how the foot race metaphor holds up. A more apt one would be a runner calling someone participating in NASCAR a fraud since they don’t use their legs to race. It’s not the same race!
@@o_o474 you both are so out of the loop, its not about being an artists that uses ai whats the issue, its using other peoples work without their permission to create said work, so in this case when there are better regulations and protection for artists then yeah we will tell you that if you do ai art you suck, because you are stealing, once that get solved then sure call yourself artist or whatever, as long as you keep up with people that actually learned how to make iterations and fixes (the fundamentals of art) while using that same ai, in order to get unique looking work that is :). By then the analogy would be like when mathematicians use a calculator vs a regular person
It is more like artists insist on running where everybody is driving a car. Artists need to adapt to reality.
@@the-ai-art dude its not like artists are losing their job. We know how people are fucking dumb and they cant polish AI produced art, so they still need artist. You just missing the point of the video. Its about using somebody's art without their consent. There would've be zero problem, if they only used art bases(forms, colors, perspective, shapes, compositions, depth etc, not someone's finished art) in their databases. But they DO use it, and its the problem we trying to bring attention. But people like you instead replying "LaZy ArtiSt canT AdApt" just making things too dramatic. Its more law and ethic troubles, not "gAteKeePinG"
I find it crazy how some people call artists greedy, when they're the ones using AI to make cheaper art, so they can pay less and keep more.
Wouldn't you go for quality at less price? If you think your art can be copied by AI easily, maybe it's time to improve it.
@@arkapatra9852 I'd say it's not a matter of improving your skills so much as asking yourself whether you make art more for the joy of creation or more for the money.
@@MrAbrahamleon but if there was no money, nobody would make art.
@@pokemonfan2630 I hope that is sarcasm. Being an artist is a satisfying profession. Rarely anyone becomes a labourer or cleaner because they are passionate about it, but most artists love what they do. Money is a second factor.
@@arkapatra9852 Money is very important though, I wouldn't say it's a second factor. Passion first, for oneself, but without money you're nothing. I've seen artists crying on twitter because they don't make enough money on some months and barely afford food or living. Please speak for yourself.
"If AI makes me an artist, then a microwave makes me a chef" - a wise internet artist
People have baked entire cakes in microwaves
@@SMCwasTakenok...? what does that prove.
@@Foam_Woa nothing, it's just something I pointed out I still agree that AI artists are lazy Making meals in the microwave is more akin to making professional art in MSpaint
@@SMCwasTaken that makes sense, ty for clearing that up-
@@romeosraThe thing is you have flexibility with a paint brush, you have the ability to move the camera, with AI, you just fill it with a shit ton of prompts with no real consistency. People have said with photography that it isn't art, but with photography: you can change how you frame it, what filters you use, how you take the photo, etc. Many variables that go into making photography make it a solid art form, and these variables allow it to be mended and molded into new forms. Sure your shot might look a bit blury if you do something wrong but it might add to the photo. Which brings me to why me and many others don't think AI should be making art. It's not a tool like a paintbrush, it's more of a pencil to mark the sketch. AI art is devoid of mistakes, devoid of flexibility, creativity, and originality. You give it a prompt and it will not, nor ever, make something original or that breaks the status quo that human artists can. What it generates is devoid of mistakes, and as bob ross said "Mistakes are just happy accidents." They don't make a painting worse, they make it human and more artistic. And as for flexibility, you can't ajust its settings or position like you can with a camera. It's always random, no consistency in style whatsoever. And as for creativity/originality. The human mind is a harbinger of ideas and artistic creativity, AI just works off of said images and never makes anything new. But this doesn't mean AI art isn't completely bad. It can be used as a tool for inspiration in ideas since it is good at melding ideas together. You can't get anything new from it but you can interpret what it means and use what you think it means as inspiration. It's just nobody uses it for that and they just want their "Original character, my little pony, purple, in the style of [random tumblr artist]." It can be used in making art, not for making art. tl;dr: read through the whole thing since this is a nuanced subject and can't be explained in one sentence.
The irony of AI art bros is that they tell us artists to shut up and deal with it, but they cry about ppl stealing or mimmicing their AI art prompts. The hypocrisy is hilarious.
Genuinely I wish AI artists would shut up. I've never been a snobby artist but I will be snobbier than a millionaire if it means defending the talent I've been developing since I was in 5th grade. I have control of my own hand or pencil. Sure they can make a pretty anime girl, but I can go in with my own hands and fix her jawline, her hair, the background or hands to make them look natural. I put my art out there so I can make people proud and feel inspired, not so it can be stolen and used by rich bastards.
How dare other intelligences learn and develop their own abilities? I never said you could learn from my art! Look away or gibs
Yeah I saw someone bitching about prompts getting leaked on ChatGPT store. The irony of not even understanding your own whiny entitlement and getting pissy when people rip you off
One, nobody serious does that. Two, AI artists don't exist, unless you're counting the computer, which I don't. Three, everyone in this situation is a complete crybaby.
@@Skiddull i know. this shit's stupid. everyone's shitting themselves and throwing tantrums over this ai war. it's honestly fun to watch
What makes me most upset about this whole situation is how aggressively heartless people's reactions are. Not only do people not care, they celebrate the downfall of artists. It is said AI generated art lacks soul & humanity... my dude, somewhere along the way society has ALREADY lost this
lol what? youre seeing only the worst of the worst of the worst of "people" almost everyone in the real world (AKA people that actually touch grass) undersrands the value of true art ai art vids ATTRACT talentless doucheb@g techbros that wanna "own the elites" just cause theyre bitter over their own failures in life just like a vid on trans rights or minority rights attract conservash!te 12 year old trolls and ruzzian bots' hate speech. vids like this attract talentless douchy techbros and they are STILL the EXTREME minority even here in the place where they gather.
100% agree…remember a time where everything we bought was handmade, high quality and long lasting, AND affordable? Now we can enjoy 70% plastic clothes and cheap plastic electronics that break down or stop receiving critical updates a few years in, or incompatible with other electronics to force you to buy new models. For a price that should make people angry, and also make people angry that they end up in the landfills so quickly. You would think with producing things nauseatingly cost effective everything should be far cheaper than it actually is. But no. The 1 percenters absolutely need their private jets, private islands and private yachts. They even create movies about social inequality to laugh at their own jokes…while 75% of the population survives paycheck to paycheck. It’s a whole circus out here. Us artists have the front row seats…
I feel you. True human creativity enriches the world around us. If society values soulless, mass produced products rather than something truly unique and special then there's some major issues with what we place our value on.
Nobody celebrate the downfall of artist, they celebrate the superiority of AI. Something being better than you doesn't make you less talented, that's a loser mentality.
@@TheEllord33 The only one here who has a loser’s mentality is you by having no empathy for others who actually put effort into something that they’re passionate about
Honestly AI has affected so many artists it's insane so I'm glad that a big artist like you are talking about the situation
Ikr
i agree
Sorry the vid took so long!
@@samdoesartsno worries the information is very informative!
@@EXCYTLagreed
I am not related to art, I was just researching ai art for business purposes, I've heard that artists are not happy about it and wanted to know why, and stumbled upon your video. Thank you for putting it out there. It honestly blows my mind how people refuse to understand and empathize with your struggle, even if you aren't an artist, it's not freaking hard to imagine what it's like to spend years working on your craft and produce a lot things, and then have those things stolen and the fruits of your labour being used for profit by others. Disgusting. Why the hell would anyone push against you in this matter? Dear artists, please value yourself, you are a gift to the world and your work is immensely valuable, keep fighting for yourselves. I'm a regular person but I will take any chance that I get to speak for your benefit and do what I can to help.
artists are going to need to start fiming their creation to go with the art. stop posting potos of work, and instead post clips panning from side to side without the whole piece in frame.
there are tons of reasons. reason 1 lazy people think they are artist by doing art on using prompots generating images based on pictures of others that worked maybe 40 - 50 hours per image. Reason 2 Copyright problems reason 3 People dont pay for it the artists they pay the companies. (Latestly used ai for testing it and it outputed image based on my original art and i didnt knew it. Already contacted a lawyer because its 100% not allowed even if they claim it on sites. last and most important reason some things in art only some artists are able to do so. With that they destroy there years of work being so unique by makin trash of it.
Because progress. I am in art and design space for more than 20 years, doing both digital and traditional. AI is just another tool. I don't feel threatened by it, nor am I afraid "my style" will be ripped of, as I don't consider my, or anyone's style to be unique, as it is a result of collective civilizational development and a base of visual references humanity created throughout history. Eventually, it all boils down to an idea, the one with better and more creative idea will be the one to come up on top. Regardless of tools and techniques used. And just like traditional or digital art, there will be tons of uncreative, uninspired pieces that are all the same. Should we also talk about digital art from that perspective, and talk about millions of people who came into the art space only after they got access to tools that basically allow them to fix any mistake and redo anything as many times as they want, using guides, references, or just blatantly copying style or ideas from others? Given the times we live in and techniques available to artists, it's hard to draw a line in the sand and say "here's where traditional ends and ai begins". 99% of what you see online would be impossible without digital tools, and most artists that are active today would take completely different career path if they didn't have access to such tools, as it would be too time consuming/difficult/expensive to accomplish the same using only art supplies for most people.
@@yohatch lmao I saw your comments before, your sneaky attempt at looking like you know anything by saying you're in "art and design" space doesn't mean you're an artist or have any idea about anything that's happening, and your further attempts at justifications just solidify you know absolutely nothing. People struggle to define art but it's simply expression of oneself and their ideas through their understanding of the world, it's the skillful use of world elements and manipulating them to their bare bits, the more precise it is the more clear you are at expressing your ideas, which is achieved through a journey of learning every artist goes through, hence becoming more respected in art communities. That's why the artist and their journey is very important with their works and why they are never stripped away from each other, their artwork is the direct result of their life, years of honing a skill and what they want to express from their mind, it's linked to the artist in every way. They lay all the bits units of what makes their art and present it to real world from their mind. Those people, be it traditional means or digital, will use whatever possible to them to make those units and manipulate elements to make their art, they are able to make what they want regardless of medium, be it using stamps, arranging flowers, carving wood, etc, honing the skill of knowing exactly what to do with what they have along with what they want to create is their journey to understand the world and use it to express themselves, and the result is the art they produce. It's a very personal process and to people outside, it looks incomprehensible. That's why artists understand eachother and stand for themselves, they know what's up. I give my digital program to other students in my design club, they are completely clueless, they can't create out of thin air, even after knowing what the program gives them; but I can, and another artist other than me can too, once they understand what they are given in the program. Those people don't have a history of learning and understanding what they want to create, despite knowing how to operate what they are given (programs), and that's the reason they are in our design club, not because they are actually an artist. I can tell you're don't know anything cuz you can't tell how digital and traditional art don't take away the artist's journey in any way, an undo tool is equivalent to a really efficient eraser, there's something undesirable, you erase it, or just undo it, traditionally impossible, digitally possible due to the controlled system we have created. It says nothing about an artist's skills, a pen, colours that aren't limited and cost individually, it's just the removal of mundane tasks that only take time unless someone tries to be creative, but for most, it's just the realistic option to work on a system controlled by them just conveniently. How much money you spend on your art supplies is not what makes you an artist, it's your understanding from what you want to create and what you have. Millions of people coming into art space (as if people didn't just draw in their homes before internet) is just a good thing, meaning people can finally explore their interests and not be burdened by supplies and their cost, both of which are not a determinant of their skills. References are a part of a learning artist's learning tool, and that's where Ai has its place as a tool, to be used as a tool for generalizing a dataset and understanding the most probable direction of art. It's similar to references. It's all for learning purposes to only aid the artist's own art they create themselves. Otherwise whatever people say when they describe Ai as a "tool" is not a tool, they are neither used by artists nor anyone who has any intent of learning from it, it's used to get a poor attempt at creating the most probable image bits corresponding to the words, for the intent of being used as the end product, the the dataset is the actual artists, people who have their respective journeys with their skill and expression. The end result lacks everything that makes an image art, i e. a creator and their individuality, and that's why artists end up being able to differentiate between images created by artists and generated by Ais. So, "it's hard to draw a line" is just a you problem, someone who has no idea what art is. There's no line to be drawn, they are not in the same category to begin with. Same with your fantastical thinking that digital artists can't draw traditionally.
This guy (Sam) doesn't really struggle. Yeah he faced some unpleasant idiots who sent him AI images to taunt him, but he'll survive. He has 2 million followers on Instagram alone. People know that he does art for real, not with AI. He is set for life. His following will only grow, people will buy his prints, buy his Patreon etc. However, artists younger than him, his fans, artists that are in earlier stage of their career than him... are f*cked Some idiots trolled me too, by sending me AI copies that were based on my work. But I don't have 2 million followers, I have 72 followers, since I started my Instgram only in mid-2022. My work is good (I've been told) but nobody cares anymore, because AI images flood instagram. I don't even work digitally, but with traditional methods, but still nobody cares. And you can't even get anyone to look at your work, unless you post Instagram Reels. This was changed by IG earlier this year
I'm tired of not knowing if an art piece is AI or not. When I see something I like, I want to be able to find the artist to see more of their work. Now I feel like the only thing I see is AI art and it creates so much distrust for me on the internet, when it's become so difficult to tell them apart - what's made by an AI and what's made by real human beings. I tend to not feel like using any art websites because I have such mixed feelings whenever I go on there. Like pinterest and deviantart among others... it makes me really sad.
Ai art sometimes kinda gooffyyy
@@Helloguys13795 but not in an interesting, original way, but boringly odd.
What's interesting is that the companies making these models just auto scrape images from the web and because of what you're talking about they are scraping tons of AI generated images now and it's screwing up all the models to the point where they are probably all going to start developing methods to tag AI art. But there's only so much new art and many artists are starting to use new tech that "poisons" their art against being used in AI. So honestly even if these companies find a way to innovate, they won't have much new data to work with and models will likely actually get worse
Tbh even at this moment a.i art is very predictable. If i see something a.i it'll make me feel like I've seen something exactly like this before. With actually artist you have the same feeling but it's more distinct and less uncanny
why do you care if its ai or not? Do you care when you see cool sunset if its a natural occurance or pollution of plants that makes some cool colors in sunset. Its still a cool enjoyable sunset, it is what it is. if you like its I think its bad to make it worse for yourself by second guessing the nature of it. If its good for you- let it be just good. Any art is just a repetition in some way. AI is just easier to make in a moment (but code and all programming behind is an art by itself, not counting macine time to teach the model)
As an artist myself i think they should pay artists for art to be fed to the AI and should give credit. (edit: tysm for so many likes) I also think that Ai art should just leave artists bc at this point it's just problematic.
@Olive I wouldn't be surprised if these companies get sued. I really think the artists should get together and get a GoFundMe started. I would donate and I know a lot of fans would. Corporations stealing from hardworking people yet again.
@@littleripper312 no one can sue them . even i am not artist but a software engineer and this AI which we considered in the last months as Hollywood fantasy it became a danger for developers also by creating tools like chatgpt which can create a whole website in 5 min . the sad thing is that they are the developers who created this tool to mae other dev loose their jobs .
@Olive If they can check thousands of images, they can give credit to those they use.
Do you pay for, or give credit for, every image you use as inspiration or reference?
@@anonymouse257 an image you look at that inspires you to create something entirely different is not the same as stealing a photo and poorly photobashing it without credit. The two are not anywhere close to the same so it blows my mind how people keeo pretending its an argument LOL
Unfortunately, I think the reason that the music industry has avoided this issue is simply the fact that who controls it are the massive studios, not musicians, that hold the rights to the songs. They have also fought for legislation to protect their profits for decades. The art industry simply doesn't have the same power to go after these companies at the moment. Hopefully that changes.
It makes me wonder - there's definitely going to be some (legal) sharks circling as they can smell some blood in the water, and since the US is so litigation-crazy I'm very surprised no well known guys like Sam have been approached by lawyers to set some kind of precedent against this stuff - it would be a very big deal. The US copyright office just refused to copyright an AI produced comic as "there needs to be an element of human authorship for a work to be copyrighted", so that's already something to set a precedent in this field. Do we need art publishing houses the same way we have music publishers who look after songwriter rights? If there's ai trained on someone like Sam, does that give him the right to royalties?
@@ls.c.5682 well said! I also wonder why artists in US haven’t yet pulled those AI-art generator companies in court…
It kinda has a similarity, because large production studious have a hundreds of concept artists on their shoulders. Now, the content produced by those artist are the property of the studio and since art style is not under copyright, a studio can fire 90% of labor, because now it can be done with less budget and just a few ai-skilled people by the same time. The custom corporate ai models are already being trained privately for different purposes, imagine how big is dataset of various images belonging to Disney, and artists who made it have no legal rights to use it. The case for music is a bit hard to understand. I think the progress is slower here because music pieces is a more complex thing than visuals. Its patterns can be purely explained by complex mathematics, but ai companies seems to try the same predictive models as for text. Probably, just need another approach that will solve it better. As an example, now there are simple diffusion models that basically somehow understands the visual graph of sounds and can replicate the similarity by generating variations of those images. I don’t know the full kitchen of this case, but it’s just fascinating how widely digital information can be reinterpreted.
That is true but it is only a matter of time until these studios will adapt ai to their advantage. Let's face it.. legislation just can't keep up with technology.
So, basically choosing between the cuff and the shackle.
As someone who wants to pursue art as a carrier, I am so glad you're putting your voice out there and addressing this issue. It comforts me and gives me hope that maybe it's not all over for my dream future.
Don't give up, we need artists
Maybe you could do something productive that society values enough to shell out hard earned cash for. Or you could be like the candle-makers and complain about artificial light.
@@CJ-nd9ggomgg i forgot these ppl existed. So why r u defending AI art when you say art is useless?
@@CJ-nd9ggGo back to Groove Street and be quiet.
@@CJ-nd9gg your just sad that your bloodline will be the only people to care who you are, meanwhile people who have talent will be remembered for something.
I think Hayao Miyazaki put it very well when he described AI art as "an insult to life itself." If it's possible to irreversibly infect datasets, I'd gladly opt in just for that.
That's actually a good plan that a fair number of people are murmuring about. Probably best to be discreet with these ideas until it's time to attack.
Google the Nightshade tool. Might interest a lot of involved people.
Nightshade has entered the chat
Yes! There is invisible poison you can add to your art before posting it! It's called nightshade, and it scrambles the art just the most unnoticeable amount, it looks the same to humans, but models trained on it can't recognize the image anymore.
i know how. if they need raw data types, upload massive blank pngs recreate the consencious objector incident but with larger decompressed pngs MAKE 300 SEPTILLION YOTTABYTE .ZIP IN PNG FORM AND WRECK AI ART also spam watermarks to fuck them up
To summarise, we're not saying AI bad. We're saying the people behind AI who are finding legal loopholes and making money out of it bad.
All they had to do was find the artists they are interested in on Art Station (if they have an account) and do a collaboration. I get that not everyone can afford art and they want cheaper alternatives but we still have to look at the disadvantages.
@@crystaleefyffe1230 you're living in capitalism. If it can be done cheaper, it will
As a programmer, I'm with the artists on that. We can't let these companies to stole and monetize others work. Machine learning will need to adapt to a limited set of data or need to somehow simulate creativity in order to create their own art
AI is a tool, unfortunately its a exploitative tool in how its been implemented and regulated. And it will be a widely used tool unfortunately, but it needs to be restrained and regulated. And until it can be so it should be halted and expunged.
artists should just unite, and develop (through crowd funding) their own open source/free access AI art generating algorithm, to disable the use of AI for commercial purposes.
I hate how all these people who use AI call themselves 'artists', when they have created nothing. Then they get mad at actual skilled creators who voice their displeasure with their work literally being stolen.
I'm convinced a lot of the people so desperate to shut artists up are the same ones who aren't artists. Obviously that's a general assumption, but I am truly convinced these people are just obsessed they got a new toy and are afraid the big bad artists are demanding even a fragment of something resembling respect or empathy.
I’m not an artist or digital artist but… I do not support AI art. I understand and respect the time, blood, sweat and tears that artists have put in to their art.
You're exactly right. They couldn't create anything on their own because they're not artists. But they actually believe they create something when they use AI. If someone then lifted their AI "creation" they'd be furious.
I very much agree, though I would hate to generalize. If AI users can at least show some empathy and honest respect for non-AI users, then at least they don't have a problematic ego. The real problem for now are those companies only promising opt-out features, when they should already be OPT-IN. Once that is dealt with, we could settle on how users could ethically use the models. Though the best course of action would be to completely remove and remake the models from scratch. Either that or let the companies go bankrupt from having to pay-up for every original piece of data they collected without consent. (UPDATE) Looking back at this comment, I've realized that even using AI ethically still would not solve the bigger issues around its influence and how there would always be people using it to exploit/replace others instead of empowering us to have better lives [quite a subjective proposition]...because of the way society uses its resources for PROFIT above everything else, making many people cynical of technological advances even if they could benefit us. We're used to this, so if something seems revolutionary, it's only natural we would be skeptical of the people behind it.
i agree I have used AI but for ideas for my next OC or next illustration and it seems like people are just making fun of our community like its a waste of time.
I love how the ai artists treat us like we are some kind of secret society trying to gatekeep art. Like, you know you cand do it yourself right? We're not special because we create art. We just put time and effort in our ability to create something, and that is something that everyone can do, you don't have to be special. I don't know where they get the idea that we want to feel unique because we can draw.
I am so shocked how many people are so in favor of AI art. Seeing comments like “it’s better than human art” or “just let it happen” like wtf?? I am in disbelief that any HUMAN would be in favor of this. I’m curious to see their reaction when AI takes their jobs and leaves them unemployed, will they be singing the same tune I wonder?
@@nutterbutter865 But let's be serious: AI will probably prevail in the future. Jobs will disappear and new ones will emerge. It's like every time a new technology comes along and automates things away. The best thing will be to combine the two. Art has changed a lot in the last few decades and yet it continues to exist. With the emergence of digital art, art has not lost its soul and died out
@@Swedroxx 🤓
@@nutterbutter865 You're literally getting mad that people don't have to spend their lives learning to draw... nothing is stopping you guys from drawing if you want to. Just now we don't have to spend our money or time just to get a single drawing
@@dillonblair6491 Uhh no??? Did you even watch the video? We're mad that our art gets stolen and no one does anything about it, even get told by idiots like you that we're just "over reacting".
Its so scary with AI, i had seen something like ai audio, someone was using AI audio's of an actual person to advertise there product and the actual person replied saying that it wasn't them.
I’m not an artist but now I’m pretty mad at the big ai corporations rn, like they can’t just swoop in and yoink the art work that people put hours and passion in, sending support to people that are experiencing this, merry Christmas btw
thank you so much, we need the support of non-artists more than anything in this situation, because not everyone understands why we artists are so upset by this.
I'm giving this a thumps up just because you used the word "yoink"
you would be surprised to know that this is not exclusive to "big corporations", machine learning people are creating more models every week and putting it out like toys for kids, if you have a high end pc you dont even need a big corporation remote pc to use it, it's basically out for anyone now, for free
Name one game company or film studio that's accepting A.I. (Machine Learning)-produced work over human-produced work. I'll wait. At worst, A.I. just gives a bunch of unskilled amateurs a toy to use and places like DeviantArt a new niche of kitschy crap that already exists aplenty by human "artists." At best, A.I. is a tool that can help truly skilled, truly worthwhile artists speed up their production and assist with their human-produced work--if they so choose. Folks are panicking over nothing.
I'm sorry, ai big corporations? Can you name a few? These are barely a group of developers or researches. Stop building up narrative for yourself, there's no conspiracy theory of greedy capitalists trying to take artist's jobs.
We should make laws around AI quick before it's too late to the point it steal artist's jobs.
Yes. AI art is not democratization of art, it's literal communism. Artists are feeling like those farmers, when Josif Stalin confiscated their farmlands by force in Soviet Union. Funny how many Americans suddenly furiously SUPPORT COMMUNISM, when it enables THEM to make pretty pictures in Midjourney.
It's already late.
as photography came 100 years ago painters was seen as obsolete. Well, life shows the other way. And, yea, when cars came we dont need horses or horse-thing-drivers, but we need drivers, mechanics, car painting guys, car plant guyes etc. You cant stop the progress by repressing the tool. Its an evolution, we just dont know where it will take us
@@Vorobiov_Evgeny AI will cause a lot more pain. This is not just horses --> cars. It's humans -> robots. Artists are just expreciencing it some years before others. Ultimately, only low intelligence blue collar jobs will remain. And since earth population only grows, you can see where that leads. Mass unemployment, mass depression, violent civil unrest. Big corporations control the most powerful AIs and make all the profits. Any job where one uses knowledge and intelligence, you won't be needed for, since you are a bad and slow worker compared to AI. Just wait 10 years. This will get ugly. Elections in 2024 probably already get ugly, people will release incriminating DeepFakes about candidates 1-2 days before election. It is super easy to create now.
@@shredd5705 I dont see where it goes. Mass unemployment and depresssion will not make corporations profitable. How they will make money? Who will buy their stuff? Their own blue collar emploees? Where all this metal workers when now we have metal plants, making 10000 of objects in time when 1 pro would do it 200 years ago. Its like internate made postmans practically obsolete, but instead new type of data emerged and now we stream news and videos instead of reading newspapers and send paper mail. I dont think your view is anythen expect negative prognosis as extremal example. Its like sayng buyng dog will make it bite your face off. Yes it might, but it will be result of your actions (aka bad dog-raising and owning habits)
Genuinely I wish AI artists would stop this. I've never been a snobby artist but I will be snobbier than a millionaire if it means defending the talent I've been developing since I was in 5th grade. I have control of my own hand or pencil. Sure they can make a pretty anime girl, but I can go in with my own hands and fix her jawline, her hair, the background or hands to make them look natural, or make them look the way I intended as a human. I put my art out there so I can make people proud and feel inspired, not so it can be stolen and used by rich bastards.
AI artists aren't rich. They are nerds who like to use public domain software. Your success or lack of is entirely YOUR fault
@@Mr_Mistah I'm talking about the companies the AI artists use, not the AI artists themselves. Don't know why you're tryna start something with me though.
The thing is, the AI artists can also do all those things to bring their vision to life, they just need to get good enough to draw the outline and then have the model adhere rigidly to the shape while the AI fills in the colours and fine detail. "AI Artists" are not as big an issue as "Artists using AI".
The scary thing is that this isn't limited to 2d art. I'm a 3d artist, and there are already early versions of 3d model and environment generation AIs. I feel scared that these are just gonna get more better and eventually replace some of us.
Hopefully this tech can be regulated if people can fight to make it better. If it makes you feel better 3d modeling may be harder to train because the data sets are not as accessible or large as 2D datasets.
I'm a 2d artist, and I wholeheartedly support the 3d community. Please stand up for yourselves and for any others, because the more we talk back, the faster we will win
And yet, still no perfect UV unwrapping AI.
Isn't that what technology does? Should we uninvent the automobile because the horsekeepers/farriers/carriage-makers lost their jobs?
@@ori2368 there’s a blender addon that uses AI generated images to wrap a 3D model (its very crappy, but it works)
This should be taken to court honestly. We need a big group of artists to come together and take it to court.
What? To censor a form of imagery? Wouldn’t you be repeating history?
@@raven3696Ohhh like the Lena image? I think that cappuccino just meant for the AI’s systems to be re-organized, since it’s current build is problematic. I agree with their statement, but it shoulda been more specific. (No hate at all)
It can't be taken to court, it's just a super knew case that can't be judge correctly right know, there is lack of laws that protect artists
I saw in Callimara’s video that PETA saved artists against ai apparently
@@raven3696 you don't exist without us, ai bro. Stopping your freedom of stepping on others isn't censorship, you're just a baby. Tell me, what history are we repeating; because right now, we are repeating the history of corporate's exploitation of innocent hard working individuals once again, gaining all the cash with little to no work put in all for the 'sake of progress' dog whistle. Exploitation is not progress, it's regression, go back to the smog and acid air days of the industrial revolution where that mindset belongs xD
I don't mind it, but what I have a problem with are these "Ai Artists" creating Patreons and charging people for stuff they didn't do. That's a very scummy thing to do
Right
I don't agree with that sort of practice either, it's really immoral and unethical.
We are litteraly doomed, no empathy, no feelings, no normal marriages, depressed men, wars in Ukraine and Israel...
@@11EdYi11DrQwartz BOO HOOO CRY CRYYY!!!
it's total bullshit. ai-generated images (not "art", images) really shouldn't be monetized unless you built the ai your damn self and only trained it on your art and your art alone
It's sad that 11 months in... this has not changed :( AI bros continue to be as inhuman and incapable of empathy as the day this video was posted.
@@Apparently-A-Golemif u don't mind me asking why does that bother u? like u wouldn't know that someone would use ur artwork since there's so many AI art being made
@@Apparently-A-Golem I'm an artist myself btw but I wouldn't be bothered, I probably wouldn't even know that my art was being used 😭 if it's being sold them I understand but if it's just some random person then I really don't get the need to be afraid of it
@jammedblood I'm sorry, did so see the video to know why you asking that is so stupid? Artists don't like to see their OWN ART into other AI generator learning programs, you might not be the one to use the art of the artist that commented here, but there will always be one that will use or scan the entirety of the internet to use as many arts as possible in their own model, using the hard work of another artist to make a amalgamation with no effort and being not even half as good as a art made by human hands, not only diminishing the product of the artists, but also basically stealing the money those artists could make. All I know is that I'm happy knowing yours AI art cannon be copyrighted because it uses arts that are not yours, so one day... it might not be today, but one day, those AI bros art will be stolen as well, and we will see how they feel about that.
🤓
@@FenLupimo I just don't understand why it's a huge deal unless it's a bigger artist, like if it's being sold I understand or being used for terrible stuff but most people can tell when something is AI
I dunno why, but this video made me cry. I always thought " my art isn't good enough to be stolen and used for AI", but the idea that other artists are having a piece of them stolen and to be told it's not a big deal when they speak up is just depressing.
Nothing is being stolen. Styles which weren't original in the first place can't be stolen. Chill.
@@moonie9000 truth
Artist: I hate ai art, it's meant to directly replace artists! GameDevs/Programmers: CHADgpt is my lord and savior.
@@moonie9000 they stole the art from artist (WHICH IS BY THE ARTIST AND OWNED BY THE ARTIST) and didn’t give credit or ask for permission
@@moonie9000 ai should be illegal.
When I was young, I was told I had to get “a real job” because artists don’t make any money. After decades of fighting my natural desire to create, I have finally started making art again. I am much happier making art, but I’m sure not making any money. It’s not just young people struggling to find a market for their art! Now when artists put our art out there in order to find a market, we just end up getting our images ripped off by AI. This old lady is mad too!
eh. ai art is already a dying fad that only clickbait articles/vids and companies scummy enough to cheap out on using them use. trust me, as a 20 year veteren pro artist, youre better off with nothing than ANYTHING from them. just keep working, find your unique style, and trust me youll start making a living quicker than you think. its all work work work. cant depend on inspiration or "being in the mood", you gotta practice and put in the time as much as you can all day everyday. learn how to use social media and to sell your art. it probably will never be a glamourous lifestyle but itll be confortable and youll be doing what you love for a living. ❤️❤️❤️
@@aa-tx7th Naive much? You think massive companies like Microsoft and Adobe invest into AI despite apparently being "a dying fad". Be against AI if you want, but at least operate on less ignorant grounds.
@@olivercharles2930huge companies bought into crypto and lots a ton of money lmao
@@olivercharles2930 Adding to your point: Even companies like wacom and riot used ai art not too long ago.
what do you think about "artists" who draw stuff? Arent they do the same thing? They watch other art, learn and make their own based on what they saw. Just tool is a pen and it takes a lot of time, comparing to ai prompt. But principal is the same. It just easy to make something "well drawn" with AI But "art" things comes not from visual quality or drawing quality, it comes from idea behind it TO be honest I dont see most hand drawn stuff as art. Its just anime girs os somethings meaningless. It does not evokes anyh feelings, you dont think about what you saw, you glance and moove on. Does it matter its hand drawn or not? It does not have any weight, except hand drawn thins took hours of someones life, It Still can be just a nice pic with no meaning whicn never will touch anyones heart, bring emotion or chellange the mind. Yes, chance that hand drawn thing is more "art" are way bigger because pearson have ideas and commiting hours of time to draw something meaningless less probable, than just making "anime titties superhero in forrest" prompt. But lets be fair, art will be art when its made by artist, not when its made using tool someone think is "right"
Hating artists is really the beginning of our downfall as a civilization. Artists are creators. We need these minds.
Artists are usually grifters and schemers.
The hubris of your comment is why people hate artists. They’re mostly creepy scum with a god-complex. Do something useful.
@@ThatZenoGuyLMFAO!!HOW WOULD YOU KNOW?? I MEAN AFTER ALL, YOU AREN’T AN ARTIST??
@@ThatZenoGuy Americans are usually racist and imperialist. Now I sound like an asshole, don’t I?
Well, AI artist might be an artist too. he just didnt had 10 years of drawing practice to draw, but is art just a skill? If no the AI artist is as artist as not AI, he just skipped the skill grind part. I never made AI art, never drew an art- so I am not an artist. But does amount of manual labor matters in this case? Or the art and what I feel when I see it matters more? I thought that art is about making people feel stuff, to interpret something, to see things in a new way. Why the medium matters? Its the same as to say: than singing is not an art, you cant touch it. Or singing is an art but drums are not, as you jkust bang on this man made thing. Ok whats with electric drum? Or with software drum which is basically and a sequenscer. Its all the same, the person behind matters more. And we come to questions what is an art and how AI can not be an art. I think a lot of AI made stuff is not an ART, same with hand made stuff. But its way easier to generate 10000 pictures with ai and uipload it somewhere and call it a day And its a lot harder to draw 1 image of this visual quality. So by the time you can draw as good as AI you are more intensional with wha you draw and % of what you draw being an art is way bigger. But anyway saltiness of some people came from their effort not being appreciated, I guess. It might be effort to draw or to make prompts and sort thru images it gives you. Sometimes you draw meaningless images noone feels shit seeing it, sometimes you generate sthings noone gives a shit, just a glance becaue AI makes it look well drawn, but its still meaningless image. Its an artist who makes thing an art, doesnt matter the tool- brush, pen, AI model or a photo camera
I would happily pay for a model, that hast data of consenting artists. They could even use it as a measurement of quality. “We trained with high quality art of consenting artists. To get this model, pay 10 bucks per version. The artist gets 70%.” Something like that.
Yes, i feel like a lot of artists (me included) have some pieces we spent like a day on and dont care that much about "Just put that in the model" id say. Not my $80 piece I spent weeks on.
Well, the incentive for creating AI art is that you don't have to pay much, or at all. Mist people that use AI either don't have the time or can't draw, and they don't want to pay high prices/at all for their generated images, so something like your idea could definitely work, but I don't think it will be appealing for the big chunk of the air arg market. I use AI when I want to generate an image for fun, bc I don't have the time and skill to draw, and I don't want to pay a lot of cash for something that I can create with code lol
@@dankrigby5621 But that creating us using unauthorized work. Its using others work LITERALLY. Not Inspired by, not gotten the idea from and not copyright free. If you remix a song and upload it then its still not yours unless you asked for permission. Tracing isnt ok, photoshopping together art and claiming it as your own is not ok. And SELLING that art is logically (acording to other copyright laws) also illigal. Which a lot of these AI models do, they sell you the ability to use others art. Just learn to draw, it aint that hard and doesnt take a lot of time. 10min MAX a-day for 3 months and you can forever draw whatever u fuking want without stealing from people who actually put in that time to learn.
@@snufhuffboy5101 nah dude I don't have the time, nor patience TK learn to draw. Same way I could ask you to stop using calculators and just learn to do calculus on paper, it isn't that hard if you really tried every day lol. Art for private use shouldn't be unaccessible for the general population if we can easily make it accessible. It needs a legal framework for that tho. Especially for commercial use. There is no game in letting people create their art with AI in a private manner.
@@dankrigby5621 Yeah, I want to use AI for DND with friends but since its kinda unethical rn I feel I cant. Then I have to work with art and also come home and do more art for personal use. ART ART ART ART ART, id go crazy. But still, drawing is rewarding as fuk I recommend it if AI is never up to the standard you hopes to get.
If someone wants an AI, they should draw thousands of pictures themselves and use them.
based
@@i34g5jj5ssx shut up, you are not cool
Raja Nandepu is a great artist who uses his own creations to train his model
@@i34g5jj5ssx Aİ cant draw. İt steals. Just try prompts like bunny with dog theets and cat ear, he can't do it because no one do that. But human can do that, there is the difference of stealing and inspring
@@torchofhope7634 It doesn't steal. It learns, just like a human baby, they can't just start drawing if they don't learn from something.
I've been gaslighted time and time again after I said AI "art" was unethical. Someone tried to guilt me by saying "but, but, but what about people who are disabled who can't draw" "you're gatekeeping art". No, I'm standing with artists who put their hearts and souls into every brush stroke. AI is setting a dangerous precedent.
Dont fall for the gaslighting. A lot of those same talking points were perpetuated by corporations to try to keep artists quiet
They keep pretending it's used for the "good" and to "help" a group of people when in the first place, they're targeting struggling passionate people. What about the disabled artists they scraped art from for their datasets huh?
Yeah that and there are plenty of disabled artists that get by just fine. I know at least one that can only use his eyes. Don't fall for the gaslighting.
sounds exactly like gatekeeping to me. Using flowery language of "standing with artists who put their hearts bla bla bla" doesn't change that.
It is undeniable that there are good outcomes to AI art, such as allowing people with disabilities to produce high fidelity artwork. HOWEVER, the question we'll need to answer is: does the ends justify the means? I don't think the good outcomes of AI art justify the theft of millions of artworks.
i am in my early 20s and started to learn art and what are you saying sir is really true . Art is hard and only those people survive who has passion for it. Ai is just ruinning it for everyone.
no, its just making it fun for 99.99999% of people, its just the artist who already do art wining
whats wild to me, is when people have such little disrespect for artists, and act like AI will replace artists and what we should just accept it and stop trying to make art... when in actuality AI art is dependent on said artist to function.. like how ironic can you be 😭
The reason why people don't really care about how the artist is feeling is because they gained more out of AI than out of Artis . This is why as artists we are disregarded and stolen from. We as Artis are being raided and the people who supported us are gaining from it .
It's literally the essence of a group of humans, greedy, selfish, and impatient. We are better than them and we must be against A.I art as it still takes our sweat and blood.
You over charge. You take too long. Revisions are a nightmare. Why wouldn't we want to replace you?
and there are things they refuse to draw and or commissions are permanently closed
@@WorldOfConsequence So your saying in that case, because the amount of effort and love put into art and the long time to create it that it’s perfectly fine to steal it? Oh well in that case I should steal peoples music cause it takes too long, or I could steal houses cause they take too long to build, actually with that logic I could steal just about anything. Your also mad cuz they CHARGE for their work?? Making art can be a profession and a way to get money, some people need art to survive, and it already doesn’t make the best pay so to say it’s FINE to steal their work cuz your mad that they are a human being instead of an AI which can’t make its own art without taking a HUMAN’S piece of art? I may seem rude but I just want you to understand that art is something that people can work really hard on, and it’s important to value them
Ai can do things but it still has restrictions.
Just because a gallery opens its doors, doesn't give its visitor the right to steal the artwork on the walls.
They can't take pictures and reference the materials for their own work?
Copying isn't stealing.
@@ronster. It's different when a machine automates it, that's the whole point. Now that this "referencing" is affecting artist's very existance, they do have the right to prohibit the use of their images. Also, since it's all machine learning, no one is really learning the technique, it's all layers uppon layers of humanly incomprehensive nodes, so it adds to the unfair feeling. (and no, don't say you can undertand it, I'm a computer science student and read ml papers, best you can go off of is intuition)
@@mew.P so what your saying is photo shop should be outlawed
@@mew.P thats what photo shop is... ai art generates original art by learning from what is sees like a person does so everyone protesting ai art should really be up in arms about photo shop and photo shop also uses ai sooo.....
Because the entire point of art is human expression. Something a robot cannot do.
Art, no matter the medium, is about self-expression. If there is no "self", then there is nothing to express.
sorry I'm late to the video but I wholeheartedy agree with all of this. I mostly just draw for fun, and I don't plan on making it into a career, but AI "art" is still so scary to me. I have a lot of friends who do want to go into the art industry and I really really hope that they are able to be successful, as they're amazing and skilled and so hard-working, but with stuff like this the future is so uncertain. My best friend made a silly little instagram reel a while ago about AI being bad and had so many comments from full grown adults arguing with a teenage girl, which was a little funny at first, but it got to the point that she had to turn the comments off entirely to stop being harrassed. It sucks that we could very well start living in a world where machines get to draw and write and create, while people are left to work hard labor :( I actually am hoping to possibly go into a field where I can implement more moral elements to technology such as this, because the sad part is that the concept isn't the issue, it's the way it's being exploited by people who just want to do things the easy way and make money and stealing the hard work of creators :/
When the whole AIs trained specifically on your style originally happened, someone posted about it on a facebook art group I'm in. And among the discussion, this dude. This dude replied to me and said "well, if he was any good, he wouldn't be replaced by AI" So yeah, you heard here first folks! If Sam Does Art was any good as an artist, he would not be replaced by the AI trained specifically on Sam Does Art artstyle, which would not exist without Sam Does Art's skills.
Can you honestly expect unempathetic mediocre people to self reflect that their precious eye candy wouldn't exist if there wasn't a talented, hard-working HUMAN who made the art in the first place. Don't bother with these people, for they were always wishing for things to be this way because they are jealous that they don't have the same commitment, drive, or Imagination needed to be anything special.
@@Mind_ConTroll I want you to reread my comment and point out where did I even bring credits up and how relevant it is to the particular situation I was talking about.
It's basically your boss assigning you to train a machine to do what you can do, so that they can fire you.
@@Mind_ConTroll Ai art can't replace human art, it's not replacement nor evolution since it simply does not exist without human artist and does not improve without human artist. Saying offer something better than the AI is dumb as fuck There's nothing the AI cannot learn, the only threat it faces is misinformation and getting fed shit art.
@@Mind_ConTroll except that it's not. These programs just take the original artwork and apply some static to it such as a blur filter. It's been illegal to do this for forever. Taking artwork you don't own and modifying it for non-personal use is fraud. Also, all artists are influenced by others' styles because there are core elements to art such as lines, shadows and composition...this program doesn't do that, it takes the original artwork and then randomizes it in some manner such as a blur filter or deviations in the shading by adding or subtracting values. It is literal forgery and as stated in the video, is being used to defraud artists of their work to benefit the company or individual providing the program. Also, the printing press did not replace scribes, they still exist, in fact, they're everywhere because what used to be uncommon knowledge is now available to 90+ percent of the population instead of what used to be less than 30% (the ability to read and write). The original scribes were so few in number, they were probably just hired by the companies to man the printing press and ensure its accuracy. Also, print never replaced paint. It's still the primary medium for physical artwork. By the way, if you want to go the "if your artwork is so easily reproduced, maybe you were not valuable in the first place?" route, just about EVERY media company in the world would like a word with you about copyright infringement over digital goods, you know, those things that can be reproduced in infinite number? This isn't about adaptation, these companies are literally stealing work and calling it their own. You also fail to realize that AI can only "vary" an artwork for so long before it becomes gibberish. Allowing this to continue causes the entire concept of artwork to become worthless until some undesignated point where everyone realizes that the AI works are so homogenous that there is no real difference between them and no reason to be impressed, especially when a purchase is required. When it comes to human artists, it will literally be one in a million chance that someone has an art style similar to your own if you get passed the basics
If you do some study about the music business in last 100 years, you’ll find a big chunk of it is about how talents are being taken advantage of by the business men. But slowly musicians fought back. I think you’re absolutely right and it’s time for artists to do the same. Sadly there’s no easy path.
I'm a musician too-I use samples to compose music. A synthesizer is an instrument which is loaded with preset sample patches designed by sound egineers and loaded into hardware/software. A musician then composes with those patches to make an original piece of music.
A year after this video and I'm currently out of art school looking for a job and the amount of offers is so scarce it's incredibly demotivating. Fuck unethical ai. Copyright ain't a joke
Keep your head up and don’t give up!
as a programmer, big L, i get 100k job offers by AI companies
@@MASKEDBTi si kriv što on pati, zato začepi.
@@HyperDevv cool for you, I'm not saying ai in general is bad my guy, I'm just saying the sourcing of information from ai and the internet in general does not have enough legislations and that big companies are the problem, not ppl using it to get their dnd characters or a visual for their own personal nonprofit project
To be fair, that's not just an art thing. The entry level job market is kind of screwed in general if you don't have personal connections.
As an artist I'm tempted to build and train an AI to sample and copy all of my own art and style so I can make it do grunt work and then finish it myself. Cause it would be fun making a render in 30mins instead of 3 hours. Without losing quality or soul or a human touch. This is really the only way I see AI art used properly by artist, with thier own work. And this was also something used before AI existed if anyone knows the history of Rembrandt.
Great work thanks for putting this together!
Sup man
We need them timeskip songs Mikey 🤣...it's hard when I feel I'm the only one who has them stuck in my mind, that was good stuff
Sensei 😩🙏
We should let more people know about this issue
I don’t really have anything else to say that hasn’t already been said, so I’m just commenting on this video for the algorithm because more people need to see this and educate themselves.
I'm a computer scientist, and it saddens me to see the toxicity from users toward artists, derived from the existence of these AI models. There's no justification for that, and there will never be. The way current AIs work is definitely too close to the source and that needs to be taken into account for evaluating the ethics of those models, before we go out of our ways to monetize and capitalize on these models. I do hope that the laws will catch up quickly with this, and people will be prevented from continuing to capitalize on models trained using copyrighted data obtained without a license. As you mentioned the models *could* be trained exclusively on open-source and public domain images (I don't like the term copyright-free, because in most cases, it's not true -- having a permissive license doesn't cancel out copyright, only public domain does, and public domain doesn't exist in all countries), although this will very definitely result in much lower quality models with lower quality output -- not because permissive licensed art is inferior, but because there's less quantity of it. That said, I do believe that with enough evolution of the technologies used for AI art, in the future we could get to a point where the process used by AI will be unique and original. But this will require that the models learn about shapes and colors, instead of learning how to predict what an image looks like based on a prompt and random noise. I do not believe that creativity is a special thing that only fleshy brains can have, but rather an emergent property of the complex abstraction that our brain does, which is orders of magnitude more nuanced than current AI models (regardless of their size) can hope for.
well said
I agree as an artist and programmer
I'm an artist who thinks this "No to A.I." movement is largely emotionally-based panic. But I do greatly appreciate your rational view given here and agree with most of it. The only caveat I find here is that, at least here in the Western Hemisphere, I see no way one can enforce laws against A.I. technology merely analyzing existing copyrighted works without it also affecting human artists from doing the same. The same space human artists have to merely observe, study, and emulate another's artwork (without directly plagiarizing them), is the same space that creators of A.I. (Machine Learning) models are using (or exploiting, depending how you view it). The giant "loophole" with A.I., if you will. It's technically just capitalizing upon what's legal for humans because you can't copyright a style, nor can you stop someone from analyzing a publicly-displayed copyrighted work and creating a different new result from such analysis. I think the only way around this issue is that those companies building A.I. models are just going to have to make the decision to "opt-out" of using established copyright works on their own, to appeal to the people, rather than being enforced by policy. Or, as you say, to "get to a point where the process used by AI will be unique and original" somewhat on its own. Though, even with such a "point," A.I. image production will still always rely upon emulation of provided data. Humans will always serve as a machine's source of data, in some way. The only question, really, is who's willing to serve as the data? I think an "opt-in' option as the default will help alleviate most of this matter. It's really the only true option I see as quelling concerns.
It's the "artists" that lashed out at ai users.
@@BrianLockett there's enough data already on the internet, it has no big need for more art. I agree that it is emotionally based but to be fair it's the same way book writers panicked when the printing press was made. They were treasured and then suddenly there was no more need for them even though they loved what they did. Same thing is happening to artists, there will be no need for them to exist anymore in the business and commission world. They can still draw or whatever but they will be preoccupied with another job like an office or retail one which will dam their passion. Some people might seek them out though for the sake of aesthetic, the same way painters are brought to weddings to paint scenes instead of photographers. But there won't be a need for a giant selection of artists as there is now. There's million of us right now but in the future only a thousand or even a hundred might be wanted.
petition: out with "AI art". in with "AI image generation", or AIG.
Excellent video! I was totally unaware of this issue but not surprised. I stand with the artists and will share this video to spread awareness.
I never knew that I was way happier when my only worry as a begginer artist was "will people like it?"
Now it's "What if people like it" 😂
💀
@@kneelesh48 💀 ☠️
Go to traditional. Easy. I mean, the problem is not AI, the problem is that artists are thinking about the future money problems. So society is the problem (always has been anyway...) I mean just go to traditional. Easy beezi.
@@RainbowGhostOverdriveMany artists are already incredibly underpaid for their work, despite it being a career most studios value. Or hell, it doesn't even have to be for animation productions: look at literally any building, piece of furniture, or logo ever created. You'd assume a machine would CNC the design, right? That design would require the input of people who have knowledge of good color theory, shape language, and visual composition. Who do you think the corporations that need designs for these products should hire to give their company an "identity?" ANY GRAPHIC ARTIST. ANY PRODUCT ARTIST. Artists are responsible for the concept art of products, food, commercial venues, and giving it flair that appeals both to consumers and companies. Replacing those artists with AI robs those companies of design ideas that would otherwise evolve the visual language of their branding for mass appeal. TLDC; pick up a pencil. Pick it up.
The problem with being an artist is that people always tell them they are useless parasites until the work they suddenly fall in love with is created. Once the work is created, it gets exploited by the same people without any regard for the artist..
Yeah it is ironic.
@@cosmicreef5858 ironic but not illegal. Unethical? As they say beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and so is ethics IMHO
looks like they were right :(
@@MrJoe1199 It is, in fact, illegal.
Cool
Programmers: ❌Automate routine work so that people concentrate on a carefree life full of entertainment and art. ✅Automate entertainment and art so that people forced to concentrate on boring routine work.
as both a programmer and an artist i can safely say the majority are against this ai bs, especially ai art
@@furiousmilk6559 Hello, fellow programmer-artist! Yeah, people who stole others's hard work to build up AI are evil. But I do understand that it's part of the future... Dystopian future, because so far it made the life easier for big companies, not middle class people
Ai will never replace artists, the industry will be terrible and we will regret it forever.
The fact that just today an artists got laid off and replaced with AI and in the email they said “we will continue to take inspiration from your art” sums this situation up perfectly. They basically said “oh thank you for providing us with your work for years, we are now going to unethically feed it to a machine which you didn’t consent too so we can cut you out of our bottom line”
Please let us know where this person was fired from so we can shame that company publicly.
To me, this is the real worry. If you try to remove all "copyright work" from future stable diffusion models in order to make it worse... you just set up corporations to have the only decent models. Everyone wants it removed, but it's not going to help you with employment. What it will do is make it so you have to pay another company to use their good model. Basically turning it into a pay to win system.
@@RandDesu so there's no point? Is that what you mean? I'm freaking out about this, its killing a part of human nature, reinforcing the, if you aren't great at something you shouldn't do it mentality. Singing, making art, dance! These are Al things people nowadays are too embarrassed to do because they're not naturally great. Fuck that shrak
I have seen this screenshot before. Who was it, and which company fired the artist?
@@RandDesu Then what needs to happen is that artists from all walks need to band together, and build their own economy to fund and work their own projects. *We don't need these companies.* We have our own ideas.
Not an artist here, but I have very close friends who I see family who are. They put their souls into their art pieces, and it’s important to them. If something I cared about have been invalidated like this, I would be angered as well. This doesn’t mean that I’m not frustrated about this though. For myself, writing is how I express my feelings just like these artists and they have been used to make more works of art. All in all, just be kind to each other and considerate.
it's not even "invalidated" , it's directly stolen. It was taken without permission, reproduced without permission and as shown in the video, used to take sales away from the original artists by defrauding them of their work. It's been illegal to modify another person's works of art without permission for quite a while...and this company did exactly that. Heck, my dad sued a person that made a paint-based reproduction of one of his photographs who then sold it for like 40x what the photo was initially worth. There wasn't even enough deviation to consider it an original work...it was a photo-realistic copy of the original. There was more to it than it just being taken as well, but I don't remember
@@nathanielbass771 Understandable
It's not even about craft. many of the 100s of millions of AI art made every day now, is people wanting to see pictures that don't exist. it's not just lack of patience, it's demand for what's new and personally appealing to us each. I know its hard for artists but AI has proven to be very beneficial for mental health and stress. even in hospitals now. In the future artists should be compensated when their work is scraped to make these programs.
@@Bamazon1990 This will not happen in a capitalist world without being legal
@@Bamazon1990 We can't wait and hope that these companies will do something good for us, because they won't, they never do if that will not profit
The amount of people in the comments that think they should be entitled to steal other peoples work is actually crazy to me
i know right! i dont think any of them actually watched the video 💀
@@exthiria honestly, even if they did, they wouldn’t of cared. 😭
A huge problem is the poor communication of the term "artificial intelligence" Ai does not exist in the way we like to imagine it. Theres no fidelity it lacks that human element to make a snap judgement.
Thanks for challenging the argument I hear all over social media "Only non-artists are complaining about AI, real professional artists think it's great". I seriously wonder how many artists they actually know when they say this. Extreme tunnel vision.
Yeah they use it for utlity functions that are a pain in the butt, and I'm okay with that. It's the wholesale stealing of people's work that is evil.
@@pr0j3ct2501 Who, artists using AI for utility functions?
@@alianna8806 Me. I use it for stuff that's annoying/small/nobody wants to do. It's fine. But concept artists, storyboard artists and matte painters are being wholesale replaced willy-nilly, and they're the ones with the real talent. It's disgusting.
@@pr0j3ct2501 Gotcha, I don't know how that would apply exactly, but I am curious how you go about doing that, it is interesting how people are interfacing with it creatively. My main issue is using it as deception or to rip off specific artists. The future scenario of it learning and getting way better is definitely concerning too. I can see how it would be useful as a reference for drawing from, I am interested in giving that a try. I just don't see most as a finished product.
I think artists might have to go offline and sell physical copies of their work advertised as "Non-AI generated", "All Natural", "painted/drawn by humans". Perhaps even recording the process of painting it as proof. People are still impressed by human skill so perhaps the process could be monetized rather than the final product, almost like a performance. And selling the art offline would ensure that it's not entered into a database and used in the AI algorithm. That is until they change the system to not use copyrighted works or make it so that artists are not opted in by default.
and it’s even worse considering just the sheer amount of artists who use social media to promote and sell their artwork. It’s like we’re having to move a step back in time because of AI.
@@prettysureimhere Not because of AI, moreso because these people have been posting publically-available copies of their work online for anyone to copy..
offline artistry is an incomprehensibly slow and cost-ineffective approach tho. if abour 10% of all viewers purchase your product, think of how many people you can reach on the street vs how many people you can reach on the internet. Its just... unsurvivable at that point
@@Pyrrho_ exactly because of AI art. Because artists now know the threat of AI stealing their art and using it for commercial gains, many future artists will be scared to reach out online, resulting almost a step back in time and going back to selling art outside of the online world.
@@Killerbee4712 exactly! And going offline isn’t a worldwide solution either. Artists exist all over the world, not just in 1st world countries where “going offline” might be “viable” even if you have to bust your ass to do it
Vary well said… I’m an amateur artist at best… and I have loved using AI art… I see it as a very useful tool, and while I’ve heard artists treating it like it was the apocalypse, I thought it was overblown… I see your point now… way to keep a level head and organize your thoughts into a convincing argument. Reform of AI art now has my support. Sorry that happened to you man.
I completely understand how artists who spend years honing their skills can feel frustrated with their work being appropriated by big-tech in such way, and yes, young artists might be feeling utter hopeless right now. It all feels quite unsavoury. That being said, nothing can stop the wheel of technological progress, and this is a typical case where people are going to have to adapt to this new reality.
there's a big difference between labor jobs being taken by machines and generative jobs like writing, drawing and composing. You by saying this are actively supporting the bulldozing of the entire art and creative industry.
@@Lambsauce10is there really? both are often done for peoples comfort and entertainment. If you can automate something that brings people happiness make it take less work to produce then whats the problem with that? People throughout history have lost jobs to automation, it kinda just tends to happen, however these automations bring about good things long term.
as an artist I feel quite sad to spend hours making art and getting little recognition... while an AI does better than I do in a few seconds and has much more merit and recognition...
Viewing a great quality piece done in seconds is quite disheartening but remember that there's no time or emotion that's gone into it. That's worth something in and of itself.
When you see a good looking ai image don't think about the machine generating it Think about the nameless artists in the dataset whose hardwork let's the image exist in the first place It's because of artist that this is even possible to begin with
For artist to get a recognition you should also work on marketing yourself, not just bumping up the skills.
@@AlexiosLair yes recently one of my arts reached 10k likes
it's more on how you utilize the social network and promoting your artwork now a days, i mean getting more AI in the scene pretty much doesnt change the industry because music, video, games, 3D/2D art scene is already saturated by a lot, also year by year we get new automation tools beyond AI which pretty much we also need to discuss because with such a little effort in skills within half year someone with half year can pretty much draw Anime artwork because of how easy to use drawing tools these days (oh yeah Drawing display only cost 200-400 bucks so enough christmas saving can buy it)... not to mention not good at anatomy? using 3D models you can trace body to what you wanna do... so yeah...
I am so glad that you are addressing this topic Sam! This isn’t a situation that people should be taking lightly and dismissing. As an artist myself, I hope the people that support AI art know how much AI is hurting the art community.
i don’t think it’s right to target “ai art” as a issue though. this is my first time learning about this issue but it feels like people are finding the art that ai generates as competition for real artists, with that being a big problem. In that sense i don’t think it’s justified to stop ai art, but i do see the problems with taking human art and using it as training data. even with that, ai doesn’t ‘copy directly’ but forms patterns based on the data it analysis so there is something to be argued there
@@cyanic3032 Ai art takes already existing art and mixes it with other art to create stuff. it's literally stealing, i don't understand your point there is literally nothing to argue.
@@angelicloli9381 It doesn't. AI generates completely new images. As Sam explained in the video, since AI doesn't have human experience and habits, but is trained to "believe" that it's input data is "correct" - it tends to create completely identical replicas to it's input data in part and in whole. AI generated images made by AI trained with small datasets may look like photocollage because the AI is "trying" to be "correct". If a computer engineer could prove that AI literally does photocollage, this would be a non-issue and shut down by a bunch of copyright claims. The issue is that AI does generate brand new images with incredible likeness to existing copyrighted material and for monetary profit. Those images were input into AI datasets without the owners' consent. This is the "data laundering" Sam talked about in the video. This needs new rules and regulations that haven't been made yet since the technology is new and growing. There have been several issues like this with rapidly growing technology in the past few years. It's caused by the incredible speed at which technology in general and computer software in particular is advancing. To illustrate this issue - imagine if there were no horses, carriages or asphalt roads and then one day someone would invent the car. Humanity would need years to regulate traffic laws to catch up with the existence of the automobile, while suffering from heavy losses to life and property because of accidents. There were no rules or regulations regarding the collection of art into datasets and now it's being used to train AI and make a monetary profit. Some artists' livelihood is currently being hurt, but we can all hope that eventually there will be laws put in place that allow human artists and AI art to coexist peacefully.
@@Shining4Dawn "human artists and AI art to coexist peacefully" that can be possible ONLY if the AI is trained to look for copyright free images ( the CC licence). As long as it keeps taking copyrighted material ( on top of various datas that are globally protected by PRIVACY laws) there cannot be any peace. Slavery cannot be supported and supporting a tool that makes bank off UNPAID labor is not the future.
I believe that most of ai "art" supporters are people who hate commission artists and want art for free
Proves why more people should start putting in the hard work to become artists, not just for perspective for how the creative process works, but also to give people something beyond just being another consumer cog in our capitalistic-run societies. Part of the issue why I think most people don't think much about AI art is because most people think of art as a consumable product/commodity, and it can be hard to value someone else's hard work if all you're doing is taking/consuming without putting in effort as well. Give people something that they can work hard in (ie making art themselves without AI) and people would view the easy and less rewarding route of making AI art differently.
Virtually everyone has had multiple art classes growing up, virtually everyone has tried to make drawings at some age or another. Virtually everyone has an understanding of the time investment and effort that goes into making art the traditional way. That understanding is part of why many prefer AI art, because we already have other hobbies and responsibilities and spending years getting marginally decent at making art by hand is not an appealing thought or even a realistic option for many.
@@TheTeddyGuy28 Your claim is actually false. No, most people dont know how hard it is to draw, and never actually tried to make art.
At least in the US, every single kid who attends public school has an art class every single grade through at least all of elementary, and typically in middle and high school too. There's probably a hilbilly school or 5 out there without art teachers, but well over 90% of schools have them and have put children to work on drawing and making projects. Almost everyone born with hands has tried drawing and knows where they stand on it lol. @@laurentiuvladutmanea3622
Per statistics, at least 82% of high schools in the US have multiple art classes available. 85% of all elementary schools have mandatory art classes. So a bit lower than what I guessed at, but not by a huge margin. Most people in the US know how hard it is to draw and have tried making art. @@laurentiuvladutmanea3622
@@TheTeddyGuy28alright but ai artist just using words to create an art its fine if the ai use arts that was paid by the company for an example and still get hated because you can cook breakfast or study while creating ai art with just some clicks
Ive stopped posting my art on public websites our of fear it will be stolen by these algorithms. There is something so anti human about how people react to these things. Its so sad. Humans are ment to be creative, to write and tell their own stories. Im not against progress but this is how things have been for millions of years. It's how we bond. 😢
Sam, I am with you. I am a writer, an independent publisher, and an activist.I will support my fellow creatives in every way I can. I am not on social media, but I am sure my artist friends are. I have sent your video to my four artist friends and asked them to share the video. The struggle continues, but we will prevail.
I hope your writings get eaten up by an AI
🙌💪
AI is also scraping writing websites and books now too. (Not that I like it, but it’s also taking fanfiction and I find that hilarious) AI is just taking over every creative thing we have.
@@royalecarmen9837 because it's better. Modern 'artists' are LESS talented than renaissance artists 300 years ago. Art hasn't advanced and now you pay the price
@@royalecarmen9837 I notice creative writing, poetry, and lyrics are not activities ai can do well
I’ve spent 12 hrs on a single drawing, for someone to say I don’t have a right to speak against big companies profiting with AI art is ridiculous
Time and effort are not valued in art. The time you spent is not an argument
@@reefa4655 If effort is not valued, then what is valued in art?
@@reefa4655 bro have u watched the video
@@reefa4655those two things are literally the most valued in art? That as well as the creativity (which translates to time and effort put in thinking and creating art). The aesthetics is just a side product, for consumerism, not for meaningful art
@@tigress0076 You couldn’t be more wrong. Those are the exact 2 things that nobody values in art. Proof is that a painting you would spend months to paint will never be as valued as a little drawing Picasso did on a napkin to pay for his meal at a restaurant (true story). As a matter of fact, even the signature of Picasso alone would be valued a million times more than any of your art. What’s valued is the artist. The value of a painting will go from 5 dollars to several millions, depending on who painted it. In both cases i’m talking about the exact same painting. People don’t buy/admire a painting, they buy/admire a name, a signature.
HI! I wanted to write you a comment because I saw your entire video, I also found the fantastic video you recommended by Steven Zapata's. I also love drawing, although my passion is more for fetish drawing, and I too felt bad when the AI arrived. DeviantArt was filled with images from "artists", who churned out hundreds of images in just a few weeks. I, on the other hand, have created only about 100 images over years of effort and improvement, but I am satisfied with my progress. So I wanted to write to you. I'm glad our opinion maybe counts. I would hate to see my little progress eaten and spat out to please people without even having asked me. My progress compared to yours is little, but I can understand how much this has affected you. A hug, your videos are always very entertaining. I hope that many will start drawing, rather than relying on these disrespectful methods of generating art.
AI art is so pretty and so impressive but I do not want it to be harmful for actual artists.
The hypocrisy in AI Artists complaining about not being credited rattles my brain.
@@seagoat1918youre an artist until ur wifi goes out 💀
@@seagoat1918 ah yes because the art of typing in “cool space monkey smoking big cigar” is truly something only a genius could master
@@deadmemer You are just jealous of the fact that we AI artists possess a wider vocabulary on average than you do.
@@seagoat1918 nice troll tho almost fell for it
@@pointless.videos1 if you took the time to learn about ai, you'd know that you don't need internet to run stable diffusion on a local machine.
I'm an artist and I work as a graphic designer. Like a month ago, when Lenza hype started, I had a huge mental breakdown because of it. I really tried to talk to people online about this issue but man yes, there's SO much of toxicity in AI community. Most people just laughed at me. Told me things like my job is useless, that I should just go work to McDonald's and if machine is better than me it means I suck at what I do. There were very few people who wanted to really talk about this and hear my out. I just don't understnad where this hatered towards (especially visual) artists come from. I feel like visual artist are very underappreciated and now with AI they will be even more because everyone can create a nice pricutre.
Shocking. I don't think they realize their jobs are next on the chopping block. I am not a designer myself, but find a lack of empathy concerning. Machines and ai will be better than humans in everything at some point. It is only a matter of time.
@@pavel9652 They aren't human, empathy is believed to be what makes someone human. As such take away their human rights.
You talked with wrong people. The AI can enhance your workflows. It can help you do your work more effective. Give you inspiration, etc. You just have to adapt, but that is part of life. Cheers!
@@nemhauser This is exactly what the ai folk is saying and want him to think. Some of the ai tools are marketed as direct replacement for artists, not to mention IP theft an masse. Not sure if you are just short sighted or part of the problem.
you gotta find peace and learn to work with it, because photoshop has sided with Ai. don't let it ruin your day, we just have to evolve with it.
Sam, thanks so much for speaking out! Great video! -Herb
I’m not a visual artist, I’m a writer but I can relate although there’s seems to be way less fuzz about my field in AI. Sure, I can sit down to craft a complex world and intricate characters, unlike AI, but at the end of the day, how can I compete to a bot capable of generating tens of different ideas in a couple of seconds and develop a full story in a morning (and you don’t even have to pay it)? I think the problem we are facing is not even the one you talk about. I think the problem is that today people are uneducated to the point of not being able to distinguish between a piece of work filled with passion and talent and a cold imitation of it. Somebody may argue that it’s because AIs are so good that you don’t notice, but the reality is that they are as shallow as the art they like.
after hearing about AI, my mom told me I would have no chance in this industry.this video made her understand the situation, thanks sam
She's absolutely right. Except, it's not "you having no chance in this industry" it's "no one has a chance in any industry". It's only a matter of 5-10 years before 95%+ of jobs are taken over by AIs and robots. The only industries that is going to hold out longer than others are ones where the point is being personable, like KZheadrs, but even those will be replaced in 10-15 years. It's best to not view art as something that you're going to make a living off of. When there aren't any human jobs left, your art will be a hobby, and that's fine. If you enjoy art, you'll keep doing it even when no one is getting paid for work anymore.
@@jagger1008 just from what u said,it's pretty obvious that your not an artist,just because AI is here doesn't mean we are gonna get replaced ever. Companies don't hire AI,they hire artist with experience and skill to get the work done,Art is something that evolves with us humans. No matter how great AI is,it's still not close to an actual person skill,just take WLOP art,an AI can replicate that art but won't be as beautiful and masterful as WLOP artwork.
@@avyukthsanthosha2885 You're mistaken. I predict that 95% of intellectual and creative jobs will be taken by AI within the next 5-10 years. You're under the mistaken impression that you or any other human will be able to compete with future AI. You can't. The AI is going to be a million times the artist you are, and a million times the software developer I am. There will be no reason to hire people anymore in the near future. We're not going to be competing with AI on an even playing field, AIs will develop godlike intellect and creativity, we're only just seeing the start.
@@jagger1008 what are we ALL gonna do if computers and robots will do everything? 😂 Living like cats?
In many words: We're not mad about the fact that it can eventually make BETTER art. We're mad that it's taking OURS.
It really is not taking your art and that’s the problem. If people actually research how this AI works and how the code works this would not be a problem. The AI is TRAINED on others artwork. That is the key word here TRAINED. It then learns what certain things look like and learns what certain styles are like. After it dose this and it is trained it no longer pulls these images from the internet. It is not stealing art it is simply learning from it and making blended art of many different styles.
@@reese457brother I dont see any credit in the footnote of every image that an ai art generates. Aslong as it's taking direct assets from existing files without the original artists consent its stealing. You cannot defend this.
@@reese457 Dude AI is not a human it's a software made by a company and even if it's not creating the exact art that someone made, it's used to recreate those arts, AI is not a centient being, someone had to do it ( using art that was copyrighted ) and that someone is using it to make money. Do not think that AI is a person dude, it's just a bunch of estatistics.
@@reese457 It uses the art in the first place without artists’ consent. The stolen artwork is still in the database, and future AI will probably still use it. It might “learn” it, but how was it learnt in the first place? Think of it as a mosaic. The AI kind of rips apart pieces of artwork and is trained to learn how it looks so it can “paste” it onto a new “canvas”. So technically, it still does “use” artwork. Even if it doesn’t as heavily rely on it like how it did in the beginning. Artists aren’t angry at AI being used, but rather how artwork is taken WITHOUT CONSENT to help train AI. And on top of that, some AI “artists” have applied to companies with portfolios full of AI generated work. Are you starting to see the issue here? They mostly have been caught because obviously they cannot modify artwork properly for the company’s need, but the fact that another artist’s job was taken in the first place is frustrating. Please watch the entire video to actually understand how frustrated artists are.
@@reese457 Yeah... That's not how training algorithms work. That's the cutesy buzzword PR stuff the marketing team feeds you to make it sound like magic. They don't just magically stop pulling from their database of training. The way it "learns" is by copying what it has been fed with a preset amount of variation and mutation. It then takes successful pictures and keeps those in its weighting. Depending on the algorithm, it will also randomly "forget" pieces to avoid being affected by things outside the normal. In a broader sense, it is just copying and pasting a greatest hits of other works it has seen and smudging them a bit. People like to say human artists are also inspired by other works and trace elements all the time, but their transformative elements have intentionality. The AI is faking this by grapeshotting variation until it hits something, because it can do millions of variations a second. It never "learns" anything that's more aesthetically pleasing though. It just learns to hit the widest possible audience.
The thing is that "law" don't say us where is the edge between copy and original work in this specific case. Сorporations actively take advantage of this loophole.
The difference between music vs visual artists, is the big record labels and music has big money invested compared to regaular artists.
I think a pivotal issue with the fight against AI is how undereducated most people are on copyright issues. Many people aren't aware of how important copyright is and how important that artist's works are their intellectual property that is supposed to be protected by law. I think more people should learn about it.
And while learning about copyright, make sure you learn about fair use and transformative work and why AI isn't theft even if you really wish it was. :) Making transformative work illegal will severely backfire on millions of artists and youtubers who literally rely on "stealing" other people's work. They just never see it at theft because it wasn't theft, up until now apparently. Now artists are desperately trying to kill fair use and artistic freedom out of some bizarre and misplaced anger.
@@vulcanh254 Your jealousy is really pathetic. You'll never be able to make anything of real value and instead of writing gleeful comments with misplaced arrogance, you could have picked up a pencil and started studying how to draw. But you never will, because it was just too hard for you.
@@vulcanh254 Do you know how fair use works? Do you know what the 4 points of evaluation of fair use in the US are? I invite you to actually read through it before you spew nonsense about fair use. Because then you would actually see how, despite it being transformative, AI models break all 4 points of fair use.
You silly artist who feel attacked with some form of software, you should care about why the elite promote and finance an agenda that makes it possible to automate everything and desolve artists, writers and all other forms of AI that is created by big tech.. there you find the real problem of you complains, not people who make use of something that is promoted by big tech companies. If you are a good artists you never can be replaced by some software.. only mediocre artist will feel compromised by it. Its just another toy for now, but it has a darker kind of agenda called Transhumanism.
@@59Magma I noticed you fail to provide any actual argument. If you did make an argument I would easily obliterate it and school you with hundreds of legal cases setting fair use and transformative work precedents. So pretty wise from you to avoid a debate you can't win. :) You didn't even argue your own point because you know it's nonsense and you can't actually prove it to me without making yourself look ignorant. So you just went with "nuhuh". Classic.
I really wanna thank you for enlightening me. As someone from the IT segment, I wasn't really aware of how messy the situation is for artists. I regret being the "artists need to adapt" person after knowing about all this. Thank you.
The best kind of person. I’m happy people like you are around. There are unfortunately people who will learn about all this and still stand by AI and it’s unethical uses
time to ban machinery and let people create houses the old way since using tools to improve human work is so frowned upon
@@zlkanglwrth2776 if you're being serious then you're grossly misrepresenting the arguments.
@@zlkanglwrth2776 If that is your take, joking or not, then there is no saving you.
@@zlkanglwrth2776 Clearly you haven’t even watched the video before commenting. Automation isn’t the problem here, it is about consent and protecting the artists from theft.
If I have to be honest i'm happy more and more people talk about it. I practicly graduated from art school last year. I did my dyploma with thanks from the president of my city. Now i'm at uni and want to continue my art future but ai makes me dougtfull. I feel like I did it all for no reason whatsoever and all people around me that aren't artists themselves also get angry because they know how much time it takes to be a full time artist and get through. Currently im thinking about my bachelor degree and i think I will write about the topic of coppywrite and AI because it's what hurt me most. We should not stop it. Ai helps a lot with reasearch of art and documents but seeking fraud and using it, signing and saying it's your art just hurt. Reason is not only because of coppywrite but aso misstratment of ammount of time spent on art we create. I'm still scared of the future but our community gives me hope.
Perhaps creating more opt out petitions would prove an effective counter measure against the theft problem. More awareness of the problem could be brought to light through speaking about it at art events. A mass automated email opt in system may be the way to go.
I was just starting to see the improvement in my art skills, but after reading about the damage AI is currently doing; it felt like as if someone just walked right in, smacked my head and said "we don't need people like you anymore". I really had a hard time drawing consistently after that, but after seeing the Artstation protest and then watching this master piece; It feels like we art babies have a chance to follow the footsteps of our art gods and make a career out of something we love to do. Thank you for this, it really means a lot :)
Do you think AI will get worse in art somehow? or how else you have any chance?
@@deltaxcd it will once regulations are placed. It won't be wild west of art theft forever. 20 years ago art wasn't even close to the diversity and quality it has today. And its all thanks to the huge amount of artists creating tirelessly over the last 2 decades. Ai art can spit out what it has consumed. If we stop putting our work out there or if we choose to opt out... well the Parasite will die if you don't feed it. Once we get it retrained with legal stuff and only those who choose to be opted in will remain in datasets then the situation will be quite different. It will be the tool it is supposed to be not some magical box spitting "original" art because it's not. What we have today is a machine thats standing on the shoulders of all the artists whose works have been fed in without consent. Machines do not reference or get inspired, overfitting, generating, filtering.. maybe but definitely not drawing and painting, if anyone is trying to convince you they do they LIE.
Honestly I’ve loved making art my whole life, and I consider myself to be pretty good at it too. But this AI situation has made me loose all of my motivation to draw,, it’s sad how those assholes who are too lazy to do anything for themselves think they are so much better than actual artits
@@linschannel_ assuming that it will happen as you say, which I highly doubt, what Ai does even now is already enough to destroy concept art as carrier. So washt I ask is do you expect that all progress will be erased and all ai apps will be banned and we will go back in time? and you don't fully understand how it works as you don't need to feed it it that much art it is learning on real world data and photos. art is only needed for style and otherwise it is absolutely useless to AI for any real training. yes some models are trained on art rather than real world data and in that situation yes it can't produce anything new what it did not see already but that i more of limitation for the use of AI than some copyright infringement because it is so horribly limited in what content it can produce that it is next to useless (but not totally useless.) All the current fuss is mostly about concept art which is nothing else that photobashing of ideas and that area of art is done for artists. You can forget this topic. it is already fully automated and artists no longer needed. I never liked concept art anyway so don't care about Ai or artist who make it. But in areas of meaningful art AI cannot do much at least yet. I guess it may learn to do it some time later bit it will be different than just feeding example and writing prompts.
I don’t really have anything else to say that hasn’t already been said, so I’m just commenting on this video for the algorithm because more people need to see this and educate themselves.
I've posted this on my FB page. This is the most intelligent PoV I've seen to date. I'm "old school" from the 70's - 90's, pre-digital for most of what I love. I own over 400 art books. I own many posters & prints. I'm not anti-digital. I used to love Googling images of specific artists, spending hours on Deviant Art. I'm a fan, not an artist, and I wholeheartedly stand by you Sam.
Sadly it is spreading disinfo tho. The 1:1 replicas that are shown are fake. These are not direct outputs of the trained latent space. These are done with Image2Image mode. So basically you can input any image that the model has never seen before (even a selfie of you that you jsut shot a second ago) and let the model alter it very slightly. This is comparable to applying a photoshop filter. The mob never states this fact tho to make it more convincing to get their biased argument across. These models are way way more transformative than a lot human output. If not all of human output. Since The output of these models is an amalgamation of many millions of learned concepts. That is also the reason why the finetuned models that are trained on the KZheadrs artwork is looking way, way better than his original artwork. They do not use stencils or snippets of existing artwork as most antiAI-people say. This is not how this technology works at all.
@@pbhandsdown1046 Okay, you dissproved one argument. But artists aren't mad that AI will become better then humans. Artists are mad that AI is taking their copyrighted work without ANY permission or ANY credit. I would have been cool, even honored if AI took my art, if it had something like a list of credits. I like AI art, just not how it's made. I think it's a VERY fun idea. But, can't they use work that isn't copyrighted? Or, again, atleast give credit. Maybe you can dissprove more points? (Im sorry for my english, but im Polish.)
@@ThatWeirdGuy43 no not really true if i look back. Dall-E 1 took the same type of scraped data and noone cared. Why did noone care back then? becasue it looked like crap. But now it looks very legit and in some/many cases even better than human output. This is why there is NOW outrage and not a year ago. I would bet an eye that if the models outputs would look like garbage noone would care. To give you another argument. Everything is remixed and sampled in some way nowadays. Do you like hiphop? well it is based on using breakbeatsections of old funk tracks from the 70s and Turntablists (DJs) using two of the same record and loop them via crossfading. This whole genre (the msot popular genre in music rn) has sprung into existence out of sampling others work in a transformative way. Sure training the Image models is in so far different as it is way way more efficient at iterating and blending between different learned cocnepts, styles and motifs. But in it's raw principle it is not really different than hiphop. Especially since ti is sparking new forms/media of art. For example AIanimation or using reallife footage as inputs to dream over and making animated dreams of that data. Or if you want to think a bit further creating full feature lwength movies out of a vast latent space being the result of all of humanities publically avaliable data. "but wait so it is the work of others that created this right?" no it is not. You need 5 thousand A100 GPU's to train these models. These GPUs cost about 20k - 30k dollar each alone. Running them takes a lot of money to spend. The data that has been consentually shared on different platforms such as instagram, deviant art and co falls under fair use as long as you use that data transformatively. Since thsoe models DO NOT CREATE ANY SORT OF STENCIL of the original imagery and do not use a single bunch of pixels from the originals but instead learn (yes jsut like a human brain) visual concepts and have them embedded together with their Text description ( collected via webpage metatext) into latentspace. Latentspace is a sort of visual library similar to a mindmap ot a plot of concepts where similar concepts or visual characteristics are closer to each other and form clusters so to say. These do not contain the input images as i said but instead learned cocnepts on what are the characteristics of those images. How is a sky shaded, how is an eye drawn, how is a cute cartoon dog stylized. That is pretty similar to the internal images you see in your mind when imagining something (unless you have aphantasia) If i tell you to imagine a picture of an anime boy fighting a dragon you have an fuzzy image in your mind right? You see things like how an eye is drawn or how the boy is smirking while grabing onto his sword to slay the dragon. This is pretty much how these models work. Just as you have seen a lot of anime that tought your brain how anime is looking those models do similar connections and form their visual library. Sure they are not making creative decissions other than interpolating between those concepts to match a given input prompt or input image by the user to generate the best fitting output corresponding to a position in that multidimensional latentspace(for example crude painting you made in paint and load into the model of a pose with a prompt like " knight holding a sword" I do not mean training tho just using the model.) So as an artist myself that worked traditionally, digitally, in 2d and 3d and with AI I can tell you this is extremely transformative. Maybe more transformative than anything i have ever seen tbh. Sure it uses the dataset to learn concepts right. But the output is still not the input. So banning this would mean to have consistency you would need to ban all of anime (same style) all of fanart and cosplay (design and style of private IP) all of reviews for movies and games (copyrighted material is being used without consent- sometimes to critique/discredit the reviewed product) and tbh the most scary part... research of other AI modfels such as large language models like gpt-4 which could ultimately solve many humanitarian problems and make humanity way more productive.. or even algorhythmy like AlphaFold which is currently being used to create a lotz of medical advancements and was just exactly like those image models trained on data of individuals that have not given SPECIFIC CONSENT to be trained into those proteinfolding systems. So if we would heavily restrict datascraping we would ultimately not save as many lifes as we would otherwise since we would slow down progress and 10 million die yearly of cancer alone (which might be curable thru those technologies) Do not forget that Art is one of the smallest parts of AI research. Who says that text data like the scraped data used to train language models is not as well fair to use for research after the artists-against-art mob has their say in a trial. I fear we are not doing the right thing in combatting this to save the old status quo but are in fact delaying necessary reformation of our whole system since those algos are coming FAST. and any month not spent on makin our society future proof will cause much more devastation and chaos later when the majority of people WILL BE AFFECTED by automation and us not having mechanisms to combat this systemic problem in place. Honestly a big disservice to humanity if you ask me. And I am an artist that studied contemporary arts at a acedemy (painting) and works since a decade in the entertainment industry as a creative. So I am well aware about the disruption and pain this causes to artists. but still this is a necessary evil thinking about climate change, world hunger, cancer and so on. We wont be alone as creative workers. This will hit MOST industries sooner than most people might think. Hell I am heavy into machine learning since a decade and it hit even me out of the blue how great diffusion models became all of a sudden. Hope this brings you a bit of my perspective on the subject and why i have this opinion. I want the best for all of us. And the current situation (pre AI) is not it. in fact its a living hell for many people on this planet.
@@ThatWeirdGuy43 yo switzverrhika
Same
Years ago, I started doing digital art using my Wacom tablet. Lots of people, including other artists, criticized me, saying that what I was doing wasn't real art or that it was "easier," therefore less valuable. Now, AI has appeared, and I've been experimenting with it as a time-saver for sketches. I do a prompt with the idea I have in mind, and what comes out always looks unfinished and messy. So, what do I do? I make my art on top of it, using what the AI created as a base just to make my workflow faster. I've been doing art for about 15 years now. I'm used to a multitude of techniques - realism, cartoon, manga, surrealism, perspective, and all that shit. I've done oil painting, graffiti, clay sculptures, 3D art, charcoal art, watercolor, and, to be honest, anything the AI does, I'm able to do by myself. So, why did I start using it? Because I'm fucking tired of doing boring shit! I want to focus on the things I like drawing. So, when AI appeared, I was happy about it because I knew it could help me make my workflow faster. Instead of working on the boring stuff for hours and hours, I can focus on the things that are my specialty - the things I actually like doing. In my case, it's the human figure. I don't really like doing scenery and stuff; it's boring and time-consuming. But even if I'm using AI to help me with it I still need to touch it up and fix a lot of crap because I'm never 100% satisfied with what the AI gives me. So, in the end, the final result, the art looks absolutely different from what the AI did. I don't hide on my social media the fact that sometimes I like using AI to help me, but when I say that, people don't believe me. They say the art I made is 100% AI and that I didn't draw anything, and that simply isn't the truth. They demand me to do fucking videos showing my process. They start to literally interrogate me as if I needed to prove anything! And shit, most times, the AI only does about 20% of the piece and i don't even use it in all my drawings. As I said before, I only use it as a base, a sketch. Shit, people are accusing me of using AI even in the art where I didn't use AI at all. People are crazy about that shit. They say I'm stealing art; they say I'm not a real artist; they say I'm lying. Shit, even when I show proof that I can draw and that I've been doing it for ages, people are still nagging the fuck out of me. Like, leave me alone! Let me do my fucking art in whatever way I like doing it! If you don't like it, don't fucking look at it and go fuck yourself. Fuck, people are really annoying about it. I just want to do my shit in peace. Fucking hell. it's the same crap from when i started doing digital art all over again. i agree when people say that if someone just did a prompt than this person isn't really an artist, youre right they're just prompters and it's worse when this person doesn't even use some photoshop to make it look better or something like that because in the end it's something 100% made by the ai, no soul in it, but not everyone uses this technology the same way, people like me do exist. even if you don't believe it.
*Artists:* I can't draw hands *AI:* I can't draw hands
Something I've found very interesting is that Wattpad, a writing website FULL of young teens, are outraged by this. I'vs seen so many people on there talking about this, supporting each other, and in general pushing back against AI art. So what does that say, when a website not even made for art, is so upset?
It's not just visual art that is being threatened by AI. Even *writing* is being done by AI. It's literally coming after any creative medium in existence. They can even do it with peoples voices and faces! Look up "Joe Rogan on AI Artstation Boycott" if you don't believe it. Eventually, we may live in a world where we can't tell if we're talking to actual people across the internet or an AI bot designed to act like a real human in order to steal personal information and blackmail you. A "following" could just be bots to keep one addicted to the platform. I feel like the ultimate goal is to get as many humans as possible to just end themselves out of despair and hopelessness. Diluting artistic expression of people will definitely lead to such an outcome. The powers that be want us too poor to have families and homes and too distrusting to have friends. Sounds a bit like a conspiracy theory but when you look around...it starts to feel very much like reality. I say fight back and resist.
I find it funny its Wattpad of all places but good to see they dont support ai art
bc there's a possibility that AI could one day write stories too. just like what it does with art. just throw in some plot there and it'll do the job for you.
@@larapaulyn1488 Ai did, ChatGPT can write story now and it's actually not bad. It can answer compicated question too.
@@lamthach3263 it's been banned from q and a sites because it does such a bad job. And its writing is incoherent. It's a grammar bot but only third grade grammar.
( Edit: Thank you so much for all of your kind words in the comments of this comment, Thank you all so much. I wont give up. I just hope that AI art phases away sooner rather than later, or me and many others do not stand a chance. ) ... Im too young to get an art related job, but by the time i can get a job, there will be none for me, because Ai apps wouldve taken them all ive been drawing for my ENTIRE life, and its the only thing that i am capable of setting my mind to. Artists are geting their art stolen, and others have been put out of a job Im devastated, because the only thing i can do well is being done better by a computer via theft, and people are loving it. I cant express how upset i am.
i feel that, man. im in the same situation and honestly it scares and upsets me so much that the only freaking thing i want to do with my life i might not be able to do. its just awful.
Do not ever give up. Continue to do what you love, and hope and work for the best possible future for you.
@@RedFromTeaWars first get so good that ai people want to steal your art, not literally but, people only steal that which is good
I feel the same. Feels like we're all living the age of dystopian cyber fantasy except it's happening now. I'm honestly anxious but I don't really want to give up on it.
the first part isn't a valid reason to hate AI art. i despise how they use copyrighted material in the dataset, but the AI itself is only a tool and it's inevitable. it's simply progress. heck i'm a programmer and AIs are getting *really* good at my job too but i'm glad about it. i think of it as what a sewing machine would be for seamstresses. people will probably lose jobs because of it (maybe even me), but it's a necessary step
I don't think a lot of people are going to see this, but I hope it helps! There are ways to actually both protect your work from being used for image generation AND poison the ai art pool! It's actually quite amazing, especially since it shouldn't change how your image looks. One of them is called nightshade! So, don't worry, you don't have to give up your art without a fight!
news:yeah it does not work like intended to work, it is just a annoying at most, but it is not gonna prevent anything.
Tbh this is really a huge issue bc a piece of art and a whole style is the very soul of an artist. The things people say is basically saying ”you are not special”. No one wants to hear that. People are just jealous at our work and don’t see the blood sweat and tears we pour into it, thinking that it’s fine cuz it’s talent which is untrue. Imagine learning something since you were conscious and then being replace by someone who just started and cheated their way there. That does not feel good
I use Pinterest all the time for references and just save any art I like, but recently I've been clicking on a LOT pieces, thinking it looks nice and wanting the credits, just to see someone who says it's 'ai' and gives pretty obvious proof I wouldn't have noticed before. It's flooded everywhere on my homepage, and it just makes me furious at ai!
So when the artist taking others artists artworks and create in the same style somme realy similar art it is not stealing it is ok ? but when AI creates similar artwork it is stealing ? I definitely understand when AI is making olmoste 1 to 1 work and the persone use it to make money from it , yea it is stealing but if it is not 1 to 1 or olmoste 1 to 1 it is not stealing. SO the problem would by solwed if AI generators would hawe the program that can chek in the % how generated work is diferent in ewery whay from already existig images in database and let to take only if it less then 50% similarity otherwise it would be illegal to use it in commercial ways
@@jykox using artwork as reference and just copying it ant putting online as your own is very different!
@@bobans Fundamentaly different ? are u shure ? are we talking abouth the samme media DIGITAL ART ?, couse i know u can just coppy paste someones art and it is 100% samme , u can take someones art and just paint a bit on top, change somme details and at the end it is the samme shit - stealing , so the real problem is not the using someones art without asking or feading AI with it for learning purposes ,couse ewery art online can be taken for learning purposes without using it to make money or geting agreement, it is abouth the end product it is copy paste or olmoste copy paste, works made with AI or with human hands it is the samme shit stealing if finished result is broking the red lines, so the real problem is not agreeing with the red lines on how much similarity is ok in % finished art to become yours to use ( no mather what is made people or AI) . SO the best way to solw a problem would be regulation if all AI generators would hawe program that shows % similarity to original art works in the generated images and do not leting use those images if similaryti is more then 50% or it can be 30 - 20% range
Is the art good?
No problem with AI. The problem is with the people using copyrighted work with no permission. This has the same vibe as those people who steal art for youtube thumbnails or profile pictures and then refuse to remove it when requested to do so by the artist, saying that because it's online it's free or some BS.
This is exactly the problem, well said and good analogy. I personally love AI's for their massive potential and how many things it has already accomplished in science but the way it's being used commercially, stealing copyrighted images for art, is appalling and disgusting.
If you post it online then the AI is allowed to use it as reference. Same works with people.
@@SpinoSam You are incorrect. Watch the video he explains why this is the case for AI and not for people who use other artist's works as reference.
@@SpinoSam In short, people can innovate and add their own creative touch to what they reference, and AI can only take exactly what it has access to and algorithmically put the pieces it was given into a composition
@@expertbean101 Except it's being taught in the same way that a human brain is taught. The newer methods don't copy-and-mix, they understand the parameters, why human brains like whatever is displayed and then it just produces art within its own rules. It only learns the variables the same way an artist that goes to a museum does.
Maybe. Artists should unite and start massive class action lawsuits against Ai art models. And demand a cease and desist on use of any of their art.
The lawsuits are actually ongoing now.
@@laurentiuvladutmanea3622wow, and most of stuff that was brought forward was dismissed.
This transition is sort of like how textile industry was split into cheap machin cloth, and expensive handmade clothes
Very well put, Sam. It’s honestly sad and scary how some of these people who side with the AI generators are acting. Their toxicity and lack of understanding of the situation and why artists feel the way they do looks like insanity to me. Hopefully in the near future we can have more open discussion about where we’re all coming from and this issue can be resolved. Merry Christmas, Sam & all.
merry christmas Fred , Hope u have a good day💙
Most artists are very entitled to begin with. They act like they're owed a job in the industry. News flash: You are not owed a job in the industry. It is no one's job to pay for your career. It has always been like this. Throughout human history, only a small fraction of artists land a job in the field. Most of them do not get a career because they don't adapt to new technology OR their art never had market value to begin with. If your job is so disposable that an AI could learn it in seconds, why would you feel entitled to other people funding your career? The art world has always been about theft/ stealing from other visual inspirations. Every artist steals, and AI just happens to be the ultimate thief. This is not a fight that artists can win, because AI art is considered transformative art at the end of the day. As soon as it borrows from multiple art styles, it is considered transformative enough to be its own. Artists must learn to adapt and create a style that cannot be replicated. It's up to artists, complain and trauma-bond for sympathy, or get to work and learn to adapt to the industry. You cannot stop the progress of new technology just because you feel entitled to a job. The needs of the many far outweigh the needs of the few. Also, if AI was stopping you from being an artist, I question if you ever really cared about making art to begin with. Seems more like you just want people to fund your career.
Sorry man, AI artists DO understand the situation..it is people like you who don't understand and don't want to understand the reality 👍
@@canadianturtle7240 someone didn't watch the video and just decided to comment nonsense lmao
i didnt notice the ai community acting toxic until artists being typical elitists start saying ai art has no value
My stepfather was an artist before he passed away. I miss him so much but I'm so glad that he never had to witness this, it would have broken him.
This is hilarious, remember when people say "the ia and machines can replace all, but not the art of the human!" And the first thing being replaced is the art, the music, the singing, the drawing, i am a artist too, but this still ironically hilarius 😂
Ikr. They will tout the supremacy of human creativity in one sentence and complain about ai replacing them in the next
I sincerely pray for those working in the art field. Most people underestimate the real concern, which isn't just the current capability of AI art generation, but the alarming pace of its progress. It has evolved from simple text to images, to text to videos, dream booths for consistent models or characters, and the latest development involves incorporating data from mocap for stable diffusion to produce animation and using stable diffusion for 3D model painting. All of this has occurred within a span of months to years. When changes unfold slowly, we have adequate time to respond appropriately, but with such rapid advancements, will art community able to react swiftly and accurately? I hope for a better future for artists, and simultaneously, I am thinking the potential impact on my own field of work in future. Thank you for sharing the video.
I'm a professional artist, even though I don't post much online. This whole AI debacle has made me incredibly depressed, but at the same time I started to feel immense comradery with other artists, even those much, much bigger than me.
" I started to feel immense comradery with other artists"-same to me.
I don’t really have anything else to say that hasn’t already been said, so I’m just commenting on this video for the algorithm because more people need to see this and educate themselves.
How do you even know if someone drew an image with your style? how do you know if it was AI or person? What if I draw your art by hand and put years into it and then upload my art of your style into AI and then generate more of them you will claim copyright for them? when I made my art with your style and allowed it to be used in AI? Wake up
@@w2lf That is if you actually put years into it. Artist's look up with each other all the time and on years of practicing most of them eventually grow out and develop their own style taking inspiration. Of course if you at least do and know art seriously you would know how this works. I suggest you look more into this issue because you're basing on ifs without knowing more about why artist's are really against ai.
@@amateurbarnaby looks the same to me
This literally made my heart ache. As someone who've been part of a journalism organization (/who writes), and who has passion for art, it is really frustrating when dealing with intellectual property issues . There's nothing more upsetting than seeing something you create with your whole heart and pure passion to get exploited or your efforts be taken for granted. Hope this video will raise awareness for many people. Thank you, Sam!
Agreed
In a much older video speaking about the emergence of AI and automation and how its gonna make human unemployable, There are a few analogies that represents situations like this: "perhaps your barista is the only one that can make your mochachino caffe latté just the way you like it, but most people won't care and just want a decent cup of coffee."
Thanks for giving this topic it's attention
The renAIssance continues! The Joker was just overlayed on top of some rapper’s footage at a concert. Sure, it isn’t perfect but it’s making improvements day by day!
Sounds personal. Show me on the Picasso painting where the meanie artists hurt you.
As a photographer, since the 70s, I always had a battle with people, stealing my photos. I totally understand what you’re saying.
Get better locks
@@isodoubIetnot that kind 😂of
I think it’s insane how artists have to explain the unjustness behind a mass copyright infringement. I think you’re very strong for experiencing this on a mass scale. I know that I and many others like me will always fight for our rights on this issue, as many of us trusted the system with our income to feed our families.
This is the thing, I've been discussing this with a few people who're all pro-AI generation and they all have the same delusion that they are creating something- that they're artists. I've been as polite as I can be to explain how that doesn't make sense, comparing it to claiming you ordered food at a restaurant and claim you made it to even how I take commissions from people. While it's their idea, they ultimately rely on me to create their vision. They disregard this and insist because they are telling the AI what to do, tweaking it, that they are an artist, that artist's referencing is the same thing as the AI being fed art from others. It's remarkable how much these people have fooled themselves into thinking the above, how you can lay out what artists have to study, practice and ultimately use these skills that we've learned to create something- and they will insist that they do the same thing. I saved a convo where a pro-AI guy said "It's like claiming you aren't driving a self driving car when you give it directions" "SELF" driving car- it's in the name! He said these words in defense of AI and I was stunned at how dumb this has gotten.
@@Snotnarok The difference is you're seeing the AI as an entity while others are seeing it as a tool. A tool has no free will, it does nothing without a human operator. That human operator is responsible for the outputs as he has actually done the actions that result in the outputs. If you use an espresso machine, CNC Lathe, 3d Printer, or Fractal Art program you have still created something, even though your input - to some - would be "just changing some settings and pushing a button."
It isn't copyright infringement. Outputs are what matters. As long as the result is different enough you're in the clear. That applies to non-AI art, so it also applies to AI art.
There are multiple layers to the arguments against AI art. 1. It is copyright infringement? do you know the legal definitions of what constitutes copyright infringement? Learning 2 or more styles and blending them together doesn't constitute copyright in fringment in the vast majority of nations. 2. It leads to less human creativity? the same argument was made against the camera when first invented. Like cameras, artists will find ways to use Ai as a tool to improve the field of art.
@@RealLifeIronMan Your points are good but the fact you're using Elon's face and name means people probably won't listen to you.
Thank you so much for helping me understand the problem!
This needs to be seen so much more ! I even see more and more of your art delivered by AI... :( Thanks for this vidéo, Sam, you educate people in a very calm and clear way. You should be a teacher ! (said by an animation teacher) Love your work and your personnality ! Would love to be as talented as you, but you help us getting the motivation !