exactly, Ai wont go away and it will be used, that is a fact, we just need to be very careful on which AI tools we use and have a strong stance against those that are hurtful towards the industry

@@AbeLeal3D but you assume, that most user are adult enough and aware enough to use such technology in a moral, human way. C.G. Jung said"we live among children" for a reason. History teaches us, that we haven't grown up to use most of the tools we've created. From television to firearms.

yeah i totally agree with that, unfortunately it will be used "by children" and that definitely will hurt the industry, i guess the point i am trying to make is that if we do see things in an adult way it is part of our responsability to try and educate the general public, our close circles and our close clients. Wether they will listen or not remains to be seen, but at least i think it is worth a shot@@godzil666

I hate to say it, but don't run for jobs but use AI and start a great business, it would be lot better and safe.

Thank you! 😃

yeah because government dont care that the data they feed on is stolen

If ai can do retopology we done 😂

Keep calm, and pursue it if that's what you're passionate about! AI will make dope things for sure, but as Abe said, it lacks the way people think, as long as you study important soft skills like creativity and storytelling and combine that with your work, you'll be good! Plus, keep learning how to use AI and use it as well into your procesess, change is terryfing but also, change is good!

@@zia9607 There is no need to do retopology

I personally understand your words, that the tool killed part of us. Before AI we already chose to surround ourself with crap, starting with paintings, trough music and such. If we feel nothing, what's the point of being humans? Only sociopaths "feels nothing" (not really true but thats the popular assumption).

Hopefully, we find a way to decipher the difference for recording data and label AI accordingly so everyone knows what is real and not. For many reasons.

Yeah it is scary. With Ai we are in a sort of grey area. There is no ai police, so if you want to do what you mention you are not going to get in trouble or anything. However I do think it is better to grab a pre existing concept. It has thought behind it, and purpose and you could potentially make a connection if you contact the artist so I find it more valuable to do this method that to just generate something that might not be even that good

I we hope we do cause even for the trained eye it is difficult

yeah i agree, there are lot of ai tools that are bad and clear cut theft, those should not be part of our industry. what do you think of the ones i mention at the end? image upscalers, noise removers, data processors?

Yep i totally Agree, and as i mentioned on the video some AI tools can be useful but others are straight up theft, we need to be very careful on which ones we use and which ones we support

*The only way I'd be ok with it is if the art that is used to generate the ai art was bought from the artists who made it* Would that - **ALL** training material REQUIRING purchase - kill off the ability to utilize public domain, or works whose licenses would allow training (if a piece of whatever used for training had some forms of creative commons license, for instance)?

what have you created which is 100% original? all you have done is mix the things you have already saw in your life. people like you dont understand shit and think youre right. dont talk if you dont know shit

​@@shujin6600So when Jimi Hendrix used a particular feedback or mixed pedals like nobody else did in the history of human kind, he already saw that elsewhere? When split screen or.cross cutting were used for the first time in cinema it was simply a mix of things you have already seen in you life ? Do you see the world in split screen mode regularly ?

​@@gabrielegagliardi3956 Another one? Oh man you guys are dumb. Here we go First he wasnt the first one to make the mixed pedals. second: HE DIDNT FUCKING INVENTED THE PEDALS, HE UTILIZED IT, and the first one who did was inspired by something. I didnt meant that everything is a copy but nothing is original since we didnt invent the shape, wood, color, texture, or anything we discovered it and used it to make. if someone like you had enough brain to research how AI works you would have already knew that its same as us but sadly you didnt and youre here thinking like something was created out of thin air. For something to be orginal it needs to be created out of thin air and by somone who has never seen anything in his life. bcz if he had he would be inspired by that. (good luck finding that kid)

​@@shujin6600Your argument doesn't make any sense. First of all the same human is capable of inventing a musical instrument, play it and not respecting known musical conventions. For example the composers Harry Partch or the electronic musician Morton Subotnick did exactly what you described. Your dumb counter argument would probably be "YEAHHH BUT THEY DIDN'T INVENT SOUND BECAUSE YOU HEAR SOUNDSSSS ALL THE TIMEEEEEE" or some other bs. The premise is pretty simple, there is a pre and post split screen in cinema, a human had the original idea of cohesively showing two or more actions happening at the same time in different places. If you asked current AI to create a movie in a pre split screen world it wouldn't have been able to use that particular technique because art, innovative art, ain't simply putting together pre existing pieces of multiple puzzles.

@@gabrielegagliardi3956 What? so youre telling me inventing a musical instrument and playing it totally original stuff? Use your brain, did he not experience that vibration makes sound? or did he "invent" that too? most probably he experienced that or heard that. Did he create that instrument out of thin air, heck the tools he used was created by him? How delusion have people like you have become. And according to you having two or more actions having together is "original". People like you are so delusional that you have forgotten the definition of the term and converted everything to subjective term. And in the end art IS putting things together, whether its your thought, your emotion, your subject, your background, your experience and not to mention YOUR FU*KING REFRENCES. And if you do believe in orginality tell me something you have created which is "original". if you cant then shut the fu*k up.

Totally agree

Yeah you can argue all art is derivative And nature is the first "designer" for instance. What I mean by original is that their is a thought process and decision making behind the creation process. AI doesn't have that, it just brings together all the elements that it "thinks" matches the prompt but there is no real thought and decision making behind it.

​@@AbeLeal3D ok so tell me an original thing you have thought? we get fed data by our sense organs and it gets stored in our hippocampus, the only difference is that we all have different type of data and that's all. And youre acting like you know how their decision making and creation process I would like to hear about that, (i already know you dont know shit, but just acting like you know it). "AI doesnt have that" what do you mean it doesnt have that so all the result are coming from thin air if it doesnt have it then why would you need to feed the data? You say it matches the prompt, if I tell you to imagine an apple you imaging the picture of an apple, but if I tell you to imaging "cozaniag" can you imagine it? ofc you cant bcz you dont have that data bcz it doesnt exist. (I already know you wont be reading this who comment) THERE IS NOTHING ORIGINAL IN THIS WORLD, NOTHING. STOP BEING UNEDUCATED.

@@shujin6600 I do read every comment and I do try to answer. But I prefer to keep discussions civil. Your question in regards to what entails an original artwork or piece is more philosophical than technical, again, in my opinion. You are free to disagree. I do agree that all work is derivative. There is nothing original, I can agree with that. However each person has a different point of view. In your apple example you and I can see a picture of the apple in our minds, but yours might be a supermarket one, mine might be one still hanging on a tree. How we then transfer that mental image and what kind of decisions we make is what makes the human creative process so unique. We create things that have our unique perspective, our life choices and experiences influence every single decision either consciously or unconsciously and that is what we see in the artwork we create. I don't think the AI has that, but once again that is my opinion.

​@@AbeLeal3D Many people use "opinion" to get away wait many wild and wrong things, opinion only matter if the thing you're talking about is subjective and the topic you're talking about is not, its technical. You said that we have different perspective of things yet you have "Evil" in your title how can you have evil in your title if you know that everything is based on perspective, people say criminals are evil, they were borned in a violent environment and people from there would be violent bcz its normal for them. but instead of fixing the environment we put those people in jail and call it a day. Lets not get distracted, you say AI don't have their own perspective well you're wrong bcz.... well its simple your own prespective is again just a data from fed to your brain by your sensory organ. But still first we can fine tune it to make it have that perspective (like making it have data of anime or how realistic things look or etc) by removing data and adding data. second if we combine all of humans we would thing apple in the same way AI does, bcz AI have data from all over the world and we have data of our own environment and we are also not limited to our environment we have internet. I understand that it hurts that art is getting away bcz of AI, but if you enjoy the process you would still make it and if people use AI then it would only help them in their business but people are too dumb to realize and they would have opinion like yours.

​@@shujin6600 The question in the title has te purpose of sparking conversation, which we are doing, therefore it served its purpose. Now the reason i say AI doesnt have its own perspective is because, as you mention on your premise, it needs to be fed with information and data. Without Data the AI cannot generate anything on its own, and this is a fact, AI can not exist in a vacum. Going back to your previoys comment on an imaginary word, i agree i dont have expiriences or thoughts on that word as a human, but i do have the ability to imagine something that to me resembles that word. That is creation. The AI needs information and data, sometimes stolen from other creators, without it it can not do its function. Now i hope you can see that even if the tools and elements are technical and objective, there are lot of subjective thoughts and opinions we can have about the topic. For instance, do you think the AI generated Art has any soul to them? that is a subjective question , might be meaningless to you, but there are lot of people including myself who see a lot of AI creations as souless, and to us having an artists with emotions and experiences behind a piece is valuable. In the video i even mention that i dont care about AI that is useful and awesome in other things, like image upscaling, or noise removers, so i do see AI as something useful for us as artists, im not scared of it, my main point is that we should be cautious about how much we left AI take the creative control from the creatives.

It’s not interference, but some AI is actually stealing works that other artists have put their efforts into creating. This is theft.

didnt the austrian painter wanted to create advanced arian people? was he in the right side?