AI vs. ART

Brianvds, you are even more pessimistic than I am! LOL

I do like really GOOD reproductions in book form, but those are always with permission and it's clear that they are only what they are, not originals. My truck is with the cheapness of actually expensive volumes from art exhibitions that poorly reproduce the works, when today's photo and printing technology would make a slightly more expensive book so much more faithful to the original.

But then, I like holding a physical object to read/view more than these effing computer monitors. So I'll just ride off into the artificial sunset on my brontosaurus, if you don't mind. ;-)
I can see both sides, I mean, not exactly "both" sides. I see the side of it never really taking off for people who truly appreciate art and so I don't think it's something to worry about so much, and I see the side of being very angry about it and it feeling "unfair" to humans. Where I actually stand on it remains to be seen because it still seems like a dumb trend to me at this point in time. It falls so flat that I can't take it seriously.
even before discovering the existence of an artificial intelligence already so advanced for various situations I thought who knows the extraordinary Philip K. Dick who would think of the world we are creating, it seems that every nightmare has come true.

I don't know if my worries are exaggerated or there really is a reason to be desperate and think, I just wish I knew earlier, I don't want to try to learn to draw anymore, I actually wish I'd never started doing it, at the end of that time I would have I could have tried to use it to learn to cook, or sing or play, I wouldn't have been better able to learn but at least I had no alternatives, in the next 10 or 20 years it will still not be possible to press a button to get free food as good as a plate for 5 stars, or almost, nor could I press a click to hear new guitar pieces played like Santana, but made by a computer, music technology would be able but the lobbies of music and chefs, i.e. record companies, the market culinary know how to protect better so it will last a little longer while for art and design it is possible to take any design or work of art produced and have it reproduced by a machine without having to ask for the co No sense to the artists who are alive and can give you permission, in my opinion they are making app programs in a dishonest way and that cheats, distorts the game, and therefore makes me feel bad.
I'm talking above all about apps like LENSA or similar where man doesn't have to do anything, now this is for portraits, for art but for writing and the rest, for various things there is similar technology.

I don't know the problem, as mentioned, if it's exaggerated or really just the tip of the iceberg, of what will happen shortly, therefore something demotically that steals the work of many people, for no reason, regardless of the quality because someone has to save money and because everything is starting like a game that will soon evolve and we will find it, we will incorporate it, we will get used to it (perhaps not us but future generations) like a computerized MCdonald of every type of art.

edit:art at every level I thought was a way to communicate and that it didn't even matter the result but the path, but I think this is wrong because current technology approaches giving an infinity of results in an instant because then these things have never been the most importantly or they risk not being anymore
Last edited:
making a fan art or taking a selfie in front of the effeil tower is forbidden
Joe , just for info: that is only true for large commercial project. Here's what's in the Tour Eiffel web site: Views of the Eiffel Tower taken by private individuals for private use do not require prior agreement. However, professionals must contact our teams, who will inform them of the conditions of use governing images.
Well, the human destiny seems to be the relentless pursuit of economic growth, which have we been told so is infinite :ROFLMAO: Any economic decline will be severely punished ! ☠️ So, whenever a human being can be replaced by a machine to produce something, shareholders are happy and the zillionaires even more.
This being said, the use of AI for making 'art' will I think force us all to redefine what art is; art is about creativity and finesse, imagination, values, guts, instinct, soul, knowledge, craftmanship, ... all things that are far out of reach for the so called AIs.
Brian, any of your children book is a million times better than this 'AI thing' you mentioned above. (I've looked at it, it's like plastic you know...) Without talking about Joe sketches ... these are full of your minds and soul ...
I'm not pessimistic, let's just avoid calling art any product that is the result of some algorithms put together ...
Wow, Joe, I feel bad that you feel so strongly about this. I really do see your views. I wish I had the solution. I know there's nothing we can do about it, however. The train keeps moving no matter what we do. I guess that's why I try not to worry about it because it's out of my personal control. It is not true about music. There are computer programs that do the same thing, but I feel people prefer them to only be incorporated into creative endeavors. But when computers first came onto the scene, many people were up in arms about it. I don't think people got "used to it," but instead knew the difference of how it all got used: creatively by artists, or non-artists. For now, we have to see what happens, I guess. There doesn't seem to be a way to make laws to differentiate these things. Not yet.
the use of AI for making 'art' will I think force us all to redefine what art is; art is about creativity and finesse, imagination, values, guts, instinct, soul, knowledge, craftmanship, ... all things that are far out of reach for the so called AIs.
I'm sorry to quote myself. Not sure you've seen my post above but I think AI might push artist towards better / more creative art ...
Erik, I really hope it's as you say, but this time I'm really afraid it's the end of art, that getting something as soon as possible at the lowest price will make it impossible or more difficult for a considerable number of people to live on art (q ) or other , for other fields in which Ai will be massively used in the future .
I just saw the video and spammed it with a comment

interesting video but I personally find AI for immoral and depressing art, not a medium, a medium is a pen or photoshop, something where man decides for 90% at least, etc .
perhaps a common front would be needed between those who make comics or work in animation (but maybe there isn't a real risk or with big positions taken maybe people would really require the work or maybe they are accelerating on AI and that one doesn't complain) municipality to have a minimum of protection and clarification; in music perhaps they could do the same but if they don't do it because the music market doesn't want to collapse or in any case for how it is protected it tries to continue, makes rules, rights that protect the big fish but somehow also allow the small fish to keep making music
or maybe I just need to stop looking for excuses not to draw anymore and go back to drawing by stopping staring at this thing which in reality as brianvds says I don't know what will happen or what is happening , honestly , I just know that it is a topic which creates confusion for me, I am sorry because it seems to me that there are obvious injustices about which perhaps nothing can be done.
I started watching this video, always on the subject.
video I think interesting anyway regardless of the video, the art of this artist is wonderful
so far, I had had my say on the subject, but in a pessimistic, destructive, nothing constructive way, I read this, about a tag that threatens some sites, in the link it explains better than I would do

write about it, bring back the link to Ayin to Hannah and to anyone who may be interested or has a site, I think it's more useful than my previous posts, talking about similar initiatives seems to me something more useful and constructive than what I've done so far, I put the link, I was undecided on where to write it, I'm writing it twice, I hope it goes well.
The debate continues. I think this bloke is rather naïve - any and all attempts to define what "real art" is tend to fail:

In the meantime, a whole new industry of AI-produced children's books comes into existence:

Will all of this mean the end of human illustrators? It's actually impossible to say with certainty. It is even reasonably foreseeable that it might increase the market for human-produced art. We don't know, because the real world is too complex to predict.

And thus, my own reaction to AI art remains one of non-reaction: I basically ignore it, partly because there's nothing I can do about it anyway.
Three experts try to decide which of four pairs of paintings are AI-generated:

I have seen several such tests online. With the abstracts it can be particularly difficult to tell. In this particular case I liked the AI-generated one better! :)

But with all these tests, they tend to use rather small and blurry images, and it's not too clear whether they are using whole pictures or details from pictures, so the test itself is perhaps a bit loaded. On the whole I fared at least as well as the art experts here, if not better - perhaps I should become an art historian... :)