I keep thinking that if they really didn’t want to take the photo-to-photoshop approach to those Civil War posters, they could literally have made them in those 3D programs. It bothers me so much.

@@thedumbstuff4170 EXACTLY WHAT I WAS THINKING ‼️

This!!! I think there's so much new and exciting potential but it's just being used to do things we already Can do just quicker.

They whole reason why they pay more than a million dollars for an actor is not for their acting skills. There are some great stage actors out there who would do anything for a film credit. They pay for the face power. Believe it or not, many movies sell just for the dumb faces in the posters.

@@millthor That's true for posters that have faces on them but the ones discussed here don't. (Although even just a big name written on the poster can mean a lot for the box office)

Don’t say that… don’t make the execs laugh.

Maybe I should get an interview with a hollywood executive to get their take on this

The problem is that people mix art with industry, and they have nothing to do with each other; they are opposites. If you start designing something on your computer right now, you do it without pressure and with all the time in the world. In contrast, a movie production company is a business that is not dedicated to art; it invests and generates content according to what the market orders. People are the market; they don't invest 200 million dollars in a movie for the "art"; they invest because they want to generate income and profits for the investors. Hollywood doesn't make art; what it does is generate content that leads people to watch its content, no matter what. The poster, to me, is not really important; there are hundreds of movies with bad posters that have been successful, and nobody cared about the poster

It’s been like that for years now they just have the proper excuses

This development cannot be stopped. It's pointless to defend it or to codemn it - in the future a lot of aspects we thought are genuine human territory will move to AI.

@@_angstlust_with this mindset of “accepting our fate”, for sure

Thank you for the support. Almost every comment that is challenging my point of view missed the most important parts of the video - that my main issue with AI is that in its current state it is art theft. And that it lacks humanity. Majority of arguments vouching for AI seem to completely ignore these arguments for some reason.

@_angstlust_ ok and? You still haven't made any point at all.

​ @artorhen The only comment _angstlust_ posted makes a very clear point. You're complaints about all this will have exactly 0 effect on AI and how it is trained and used. Google scale companies don't care about your opinion, privacy or values and you have no influence over them.

Always means a lot coming from you, thank you!!!! They do, don't they :(((

my editor is to blame :p thanks Billy

I agree

@enraegen561 I mean, the whole ai generative art invention was likely just made to have people talk about AI so that Open AI gets investors.

If the movie had to do with AI (like ex-machina), that concept could work, otherwise you’re reaching

Apple bought A24?

@@thedumbstuff4170no Apple made a huge multiyear deal with A24 to produce exclusive content for Apple TV

Well u just explained why we should make piracy legal...

@@avisheksingh558 what I explained is that copying a JPEG is completely different than taking a piece of art from a gallery

​@@Invictus_MithraI get what u mean...but the point being made was about unethically and illegally acquiring content... So the example of the art gallery might not be accurate in some other context but it does work in this context..

@@avisheksingh558 The point was just because it's public does not mean you can steal it and then she mentioned the public art gallery but like I'm saying this isn't stealing

Yeah... progress is not something that we should be against.. I get your perspective... However it is kinda messed up that it was achieved unethically.. Even tho it could've been done in a better way as to not blatantly steal people's work

@@avisheksingh558 the dilemma is in if AI is stealing work. Humans do it all the time and then mix styles and create new things. Now it’s different if you use ai to create a fake copy of someone’s art. Idk I feel it’s a lot more complicated

It depends where you use it. If you use it to save lives, then it is good, if you use it to reduce art to meaningless garbage, when it was already polluted by capitalism and overconsumption, then it's a bad use of it. You should think of it more like me using a used toiled brush cleaner as a paintbrush instead of a proper ustensil.

Thinking this is progress is the issue. It is "regress". Most people are so deeply confused. They don't understand what gives them an actual sense of meaning in life. They're incredibly simplistic and believe that any and all increases in efficiency - "numbers go up, yay!" - is equivalent to a bettering of their life. It is not. Struggle is part of the human experience, it gives us a sense of purpose and makes us feel needed by others, and without it we wither. Someone who thinks life is about min-maxing everything like it's some simple video game will continue to make ignorant choices that are against their own self-interests until they grow wiser.

@@hillehai finally, someone says it

Image generating AI is still in his infancy. I tested it for half a year now and the development of the technology is enormously fast and I don't see a reason why it should stop.

@@_angstlust_ people say that but. there must be an upper limit to where it'll go, right? right now, it doesn't understand things like anatomy and perspective. it might be good enough for some people, but it can't even draw the same character twice. it can't get details right. it doesn't know what anything is

@@_angstlust_ but. if we are to consider this sci-fi idea that we will have endless and perfect media generation, which i don't think is true, what we are talking about is the end of human culture as a whole. media will become cloud-like. there won't be just one version of a movie, but rather infinite reiterations of it

@@helenawave based on what I played with so far, it will learn and all the flaws that there are visible now, will be gone. And some day it will get even hands right 😄

@@_angstlust_ what i think is actually happening is that executives somewhere get real excited about this prospect, like any tech bubble, like a get rich quick scheme. but there is no space for art in any of this, and anyone who wants to create something that resonates with people will have to face this fact. we have to consider actual machines vs fucking magic. people are considering a sci-fi version of what it is, rather than what the thing itself is capable of doing, yknow!!

God, you're so wrong. AI is not a tool. You'd have to be a tool yourself to believe that. It's very clearly a replacement as there is no creative process. You sound like yet another person who won't put in the time to become competent at something and are angry at and envious of people who have done so. Artists aren't full of themselves, they just put in the hard work and effort that you refuse to invest.

Did you miss the part of the video where I explained why I am against it? The whole video explains why….

AI art is also lazy. Lazy art for lazy people who don't want to learn or improve a skill

I'm a 90's kid that grew up with a vivid fascination for the internet and software, in a family with many professional artists. My father was a teacher and later became the director of a fine arts school, while two of my uncles were professional artists, one was an oil painter and the other was a graphic designer and digital artist. I grew up surrounded by conversations about art and culture, and started using PS when I was about 10, so in the early 2000s. I've genuinely never heard someone say that PS was meant for scamming people. In fact it was the complete opposite, PS and the Adobe suite have always been a hot commodity(probably one of the most pirated softwares in the history of the internet) and regarded as a professional tool. In the early 2000s, just saying that you knew how to use PS or Illustrator would make people think you were some kind of tech genius or professional graphic designer. It was adopted in every field of visual arts and while it took some time to get in curated art galleries, the 2000s had they fair share of respected digital artists. Nobody ever doubted that the artistic nature of the skill needed to DRAW shapes and utilize color theory was the same regardless of whether the medium was charcoal, ink, or pixels. Before I talk about the problem i see in using AI as part of one's workflow, I want to quickly talk about AI as a medium. The crucial point is precisely in the nature of the skill that is honed. I'm not a beginner when it comes to Midjourney. As a software engineer first and artist second, I wanted to understand it just as a matter of principle. I went through the entire documentation to understand how the syntax of a request worked, how arguments worked, how the variability levers, word placements, punctuation, and choices of aspect ratio would impact a specific request, talked with enthusiasts to learn what the META was to obtain certain results and I've written hundreds of prompts throughout that learning process. The process of crafting a successful prompt is as artistic as debugging a piece of code, it's a technical process. A successful prompt isn't an act of self-expression nor is it a creative one, it's a rigorously technical process of selecting the correct words, positioning, and arguments to produce the hoped result, and this is most evident by the fact that the best prompt patterns are the most consistent ones, the ones that can produce the most deterministic result. GenAI models don't reward unique approaches, individuality or self expression, they reward in-depth knowledge of their input systems. For that reason, both the terms AI artist and prompt engineer are misguided, because calling someone an AI artist is akin to calling a programmer a Code Artist, and because calling someone a prompt engineer for reading and understanding through a few pages of documentations would be akin to calling someone that has learn to use any moderately complex app a [app's name] engineer, especially since even with all the knowledge that's available, it's still impossible to obtain consistent and accurate results. Finally, and glossing over the fact that genAI was built on top of the stolen labors and intellectual IP of thousands of artists through a combination of legal loopholes and lobbying, using AI as part of one's creative workflow is the last thing a junior professional artist or someone that's looking for an accessible way to learn art should do. Firstly, art is accessible but mastery isn't, and will never be accessible. I really struggle to understand this notion that a complete beginner "should" be able to do the same thing that someone that's been training 1000s of hours can. There's no other craft that I've seen this reasoning extended to, should we make an AI for music production, film making, and architecture aswell ? Most importantly, what value is there in someone that took no effort to create ? The frustration of playing midjourney lottery is hardly something I'd call effort, there's more effort in learning to properly use it so you're not shooting in the dark hoping for the best, but even if it took a month to craft a prompt, the value would be in the prompt, not in the image that's generated. Secondly, using AI as a means to gather reference 1) hurts one's ability to do proper research 2) hinder's the process of using that reference because prompt results are always very opinionated. All in all, I think artists that use AI as part of their workflows should have more consideration for the livelihoods of their fellow artists, and for their own craft.

@@tokki03 like photography to painting. These damn photographers should learn to paint properly!

You really think you said something lmfao.

@@20000dino i only spoke truth. Welcome to the new ai revolution

bro is gonna adapt into being a plumber

@@jibxjib a viable solution maybe