FA+
Shop
A Non-artist's Opinion on A.I. "Art"
3 years ago
General
So, I've been sitting on these thoughts for quite a while now, considering things whenever I hear more about it, and I think it's about time I get it all out.
I was finally inspired to do this when someone I follow on YouTube, one who makes a lot of fantasy ambiences which I use for writing, announced he'd be holding an "AI art competition" on his Discord. When asked why not just host a normal art competition, he replied "because real art takes time, effort, and talent, and I don't want to have a real artist put in that effort for such a low reward." And, on the one hand, he's right. Real art does take a lot of talent and effort, compared to the minimal effort AI art uses. On the other hand, I don't think he quite gets the implications behind this and the potential effects it may have.
Now, I'm not going to go in-depth on whether A.I. is something to be concerned about or the exact effects it'll have, because I don't know enough about either AI or the art industry to give much of value. There's plenty of arguments both for and against AI being a real worry, and both sides make good points, I feel. But in the end, I do feel that the worry for AI's influence is rather well justified, especially for those in official art-related jobs such as concept artists.
No, what I want to talk about is the response of these AI developers. Or, rather, the lack of any response at all.
For the record, I don't think AI for art is a bad thing in principle. I can very easily see AI being used either to streamline the art process or to experiment without too much hassle. In fact, some artist are already trying that. AI has real potential as a valuable tool for artists of all kinds, from amateurs to professionals.
The thing is that these AIs were never designed with that in mind. They were never designed to help artists. Quite the opposite, there's a lot to suggest they were designed to replace them entirely. That much is probably news to very few. But consider this: the outcry against AI art is inescapable. No matter which corner of the internet you turn to, you're going to find a lot of people expressing concern and worry over it. There's no doubt that these developers have heard a good portion of it. And if they were in any way considerate of artists or had them in mind, they very well would've released statements assuaging their worries by now.
But they haven't. In fact, some (such as Musky boi himself) have even made clear how little they respect artists and the art industry.
I've heard at least one person (one of the artists mentioned experimenting with AI as a tool) explain how the AI doesn't actually use the art which acts as its training info, merely analyzes it and picks up on elements from that. In that case, there's three things I have to say on it.
1.) Why is this information not made publicly available by the developers?
2.) It's still a huge invasion to take someone's art as training data without their knowledge or permission.
3.) This still doesn't address the concern of AI replacing many art jobs, and being designed to do so.
I think it's pretty telling that the upcoming music equivalent of one of these AIs, from the same developers of Diffusion Models, will only be using public domain music as training data. Why? I imagine at least part of the reason is because music has a lot of money in the form of record labels behind it. And if one of them were to find out that a song under their name has been used as training data without their knowledge or permission, it's not hard to imagine them immediately filing a lawsuit over it. And potentially winning.
In the end, if you're not concerned over AI replacing you, that's fine. If you want to try experimenting with using AI as a tool to help your art, that's fine. But I, myself, really cannot support any of this art AI in its current form and usage. Not because it threatens to replace artists. But because it was designed to do exactly that.
Hopefully I covered everything well enough. If anyone has anything more to add, feel free to comment on it!
I was finally inspired to do this when someone I follow on YouTube, one who makes a lot of fantasy ambiences which I use for writing, announced he'd be holding an "AI art competition" on his Discord. When asked why not just host a normal art competition, he replied "because real art takes time, effort, and talent, and I don't want to have a real artist put in that effort for such a low reward." And, on the one hand, he's right. Real art does take a lot of talent and effort, compared to the minimal effort AI art uses. On the other hand, I don't think he quite gets the implications behind this and the potential effects it may have.
Now, I'm not going to go in-depth on whether A.I. is something to be concerned about or the exact effects it'll have, because I don't know enough about either AI or the art industry to give much of value. There's plenty of arguments both for and against AI being a real worry, and both sides make good points, I feel. But in the end, I do feel that the worry for AI's influence is rather well justified, especially for those in official art-related jobs such as concept artists.
No, what I want to talk about is the response of these AI developers. Or, rather, the lack of any response at all.
For the record, I don't think AI for art is a bad thing in principle. I can very easily see AI being used either to streamline the art process or to experiment without too much hassle. In fact, some artist are already trying that. AI has real potential as a valuable tool for artists of all kinds, from amateurs to professionals.
The thing is that these AIs were never designed with that in mind. They were never designed to help artists. Quite the opposite, there's a lot to suggest they were designed to replace them entirely. That much is probably news to very few. But consider this: the outcry against AI art is inescapable. No matter which corner of the internet you turn to, you're going to find a lot of people expressing concern and worry over it. There's no doubt that these developers have heard a good portion of it. And if they were in any way considerate of artists or had them in mind, they very well would've released statements assuaging their worries by now.
But they haven't. In fact, some (such as Musky boi himself) have even made clear how little they respect artists and the art industry.
I've heard at least one person (one of the artists mentioned experimenting with AI as a tool) explain how the AI doesn't actually use the art which acts as its training info, merely analyzes it and picks up on elements from that. In that case, there's three things I have to say on it.
1.) Why is this information not made publicly available by the developers?
2.) It's still a huge invasion to take someone's art as training data without their knowledge or permission.
3.) This still doesn't address the concern of AI replacing many art jobs, and being designed to do so.
I think it's pretty telling that the upcoming music equivalent of one of these AIs, from the same developers of Diffusion Models, will only be using public domain music as training data. Why? I imagine at least part of the reason is because music has a lot of money in the form of record labels behind it. And if one of them were to find out that a song under their name has been used as training data without their knowledge or permission, it's not hard to imagine them immediately filing a lawsuit over it. And potentially winning.
In the end, if you're not concerned over AI replacing you, that's fine. If you want to try experimenting with using AI as a tool to help your art, that's fine. But I, myself, really cannot support any of this art AI in its current form and usage. Not because it threatens to replace artists. But because it was designed to do exactly that.
Hopefully I covered everything well enough. If anyone has anything more to add, feel free to comment on it!
This is kinda the thing tho. It analyzes thousands of images that other people have drawn, taking elements from each and every one to design its own. This becomes especially clear when you give it a theme like "picasso" and it will generate art as similar to Picassos own as possible. Now imagine doing that but with big artists and designers today, such as SixthLeafClover. That's how it will "steal" and replace.
Also, I sadly have a self-proclaimed AI "artist" as a friend on Facebook, and she actually sees herself as a full-blooded artist. Which is rather depressing.
And oof. Self-grandeurization at it's finest.