"Now everyone can do art!" This always grinds my gears. Everyone can ALREADY do art, the people that think AI lets others do art just didn't want to learn how to draw.

I’ve said this in another comment section, and I’ll say it again: Honestly what I think we should do w/ ai art is have the generators put the generator watermark ALL OVER the image. Low opacity, 8-15 watermarks. They’d be transparent enough so you could still see the image, but they’re still noticeable enough that you would immediately know it’s ai. Artists could use it as inspiration, and other people can’t pass off the AI as their own work, and corporations can’t really use it for commercial gain. And removing it wouldn’t be an option. No paying for it or editing it out, otherwise there would be consequences.

Tbh people are too obsessive with AI art, and few even bash artists, saying that AI is better, and generates images in a few minutes. What they don't take into consideration is that actual artists' work is how AI art even exists and looks good. I honestly don't get it. (This comment was made before watching the entire video...) edit: THE LIKES- edit 2: y'alls replies are longer than my actual comment 😅

Art is already "democratized". It's called practicing.

What's even funnier is a lot of AI platforms are starting to charge for their prompting services. So much for democratizing lol.

Between programs such as Krita & Blender, the tutorials here on KZfaq & Skillshare and the low cost drawing tablets from brands such as Huion & XP-Pen, art was already well & truly democratised. Just combine all those with your imagination and boom! You have art.

"It makes me both sad and afraid to think of how many young aspiring artists look at AI Generated art and feel like there's no point in learning how to draw because they'll never be able to achieve those results". I know I'm just one person, but for what its worth, the influx of AI users and defenders has actually made me _more_ determined to learn how to draw, to prove that I can and that its still a skill worth learning. I've been working at Creative Writing for some years, but I've always wanted to learn how to draw, and with everything that's happening right now, I feel more inclined than ever to start practising. Even if it doesn't go anywhere on a professional level, at least I might be able to help show solidarity with painters and sketch artists. I know your fears certainly aren't unfounded. There will definitely be people discouraged from trying by AI. But I'm sure I can't be the only one being spurred into learning the actual skills by all this.

I think a good use of AI is applying it for very tiring, repetitive, boring, frustrating jobs that bring no value to the human experience. In an ideal world, this would mean an increased productivity done by the robots and shared among all the humans, who would have more free time to dedicate to their favourite activities. Unfortunatly in our capitalist system, robots (and the value they produce) are mostly privately owned by few emplyers, who not only don't share the increased value produced, but also fire actual humans that, even without enjoying the boring job, need its salary. Hopefully this system will crumble quickly when it tends too closely to a situation when a bunch of people own all the robots doing all the jobs and gaining all the money, but nobody can buy their products because nobody has a paid job. A sentence I heard often about Ai and art, and which summarises perfectly my first thoughts about this, is "I wish AI could carry out the job in my place so that I can dedicate to art more, not that AI makes art in my place while I work at my job".

This is an Art Thieves heaven. AI art goes way too far, and I swear art critics will take the AI and use that as a reason to say “DiGiTaL aRt iS nOt ReAl ArT” which is so dumb.

This is why I refuse to use ai to make art. I'm not good at drawing but I'd rather make it myself or commission someone to draw it rather than using a soulless machine that will make some rip off of someone's work

AI art is just the same as a translator or a calculator. You can use it to quickly translate a word in another language or to solve an equation, but you're not gonna learn the language or the process to solve that operation.

To people who think AI is democratizing art: Do you think AI companies intend to let you access their tech for free for forever? Social media that is free to use will use all the information it gets against you. Their business models rely on using others labor and information for nefarious uses. For AI companies to make their business model credible, they rely on using copyrighted material, but that is not the only cost.

Here, take a clear difference between artists and AI: Did you knew that the Anime we all know nowadays , was a japanese reinterpretation of disney designs? That's what happens when you feed humans with art, that's inspiration, But what happens when you feed AI with those disney pictures? It will give to you more disney pictures, That's why AI promotes stagnation, because in a world where there's no more artists putting their own visions on how to ilustrate something, AI will have less and less data to be trained on, so it will stagnate eventually, You don't see people using the models of AI we had a few months ago, because people just gets bored , it looses the magic on the oversaturation... They need something fresh, And i don't know if they would like a reality without new beautiful ways to illustrate something

The fact that I saw someone basically use "robots are humans too" reason for supporting AI images being claimed as art. This really is the beginning of the end of humanity

Writer here and solidarity with the artists fighting these so-called "AI" image generators is my top priority. We have seen plenty of proof that that same automation is going to target us next, and it's better to fight it together now than kneecap each other and both get rolled over by the machine.

The biggest issue as you mentioned, is that artists and general creatives are the 1st ones to be targeted, they always were the 1st people to be targeted later on it will be everybody else and thats when people realise the issue and realise "Oh crap it was right there". Also the general devaluation of art helps promote the idea that ai is better.For example, in 2022 my country, Greece, decided that art degrees, music, drawing, theatre, etc, were all lower value or similar value to a hs diploma. I see a lot of Greeks stating that "Oh ai is better artists are useless etc" which sucks. Not because the degrees are now useless but also because it discourages creativity, thinking outside the box, making something, expressing yourself. Idk what the future hold but I'm scared that I will never see my dreams become a reality :(

That "anybody can do it", is a massive dramatic exaggerated statement and easily a brand new modern myth..considering the subject.

I draw since almost 10 years. I've grown my community, I've started a Patreon right before AI came out to destroy everything it touches, I am glad my patrons still follow me for (their own statement) their interest into supporting me because they want art made by me. I feel bad immediately as I imagine kids today interested into learning to draw instead of go out and play football, usually the introvert, the "loser that likes to draw" (sorry for the term but that's exactly what I faced when I was in secondary school). Nowadays you'll get the bullies showing up with their smartphone and pull out an AI image generator. Underline how "useless" what you're doing is. That it is pointless to learn to make art because AI can do it "so much better and in seconds". Wouldn't be surprised if next generation will grow with barely anyone interested into making art, because "AI". Art saved me from depression 10 years ago, just few years after I entered the adult world. AI is giving people yet another reason to think artists are just "losers that couldn't find a better job". While simoultaneously thinking that artists are also "Self entitled rich people that wants to gatekeep art". Art exists since humans begun to live in caves. We had to invent the tool meant to bring it to its extinction this precise age, doesn't it? AI represents the very culmination of the depressing society we live into. No matter your interests, your hobbies, your passions, everything must be turned into mass produced fast food to generate profits for the big companies.

Uggghhh so true… i am tired of trying to explain it to people who try to convince me to “try it” but my hands work great, I still have eyes and ears. My brain is not a pile of mush and I won’t die the second I step into the woods. I am not glued to my office chair. while I do have Aphantasia which is a struggle I face in my work- it’s nowhere near enough to convince me to have an ai generate a shitty digital collage of stolen art from my favourite artists and artist friends. And even if I was paralyzed, brain dead, etc. i’d like to think I’d have enough morality to not use ai for art anyway. I get irrationality angry of course with this topic so i tend to avoid it, but we were all making swords out of paper towel rolls when we were kids, surely there are so many easy and free methods to learn, grow and experience life to input into art without being an asshole and just ripping from people without consent or payment.

The argument that AI art somehow democratizes art is an insult to everyone's intelligence. Democratize doesn't mean giving everyone the false ability to do something with no work or learning of skills. You cannot democratize reading and writing by taking the need and means to learn reading and writing away from people. Similarly with art, which isn't just about producing images, but is literally a form of visual communication. Removing the need to learn the principles and fundamentals of illustration doesn't democratize art, it makes art less accessible. AI will only make it harder and harder for new budding artists to learn how to make the art they want to make, feeling like their work will never live up to the predetermined standards set by AI's trends, and will never be seen or recognized amongst the ocean of AI generated garbage filling up the internet. Even more insulting, is the arguement this democratization will make art more accessible to those with disabilities, as well as to marginalized groups. This shows a complete lack of knowledge or care about the issue. These AI evangalists don't get a shit about disabled people. Disabled people and their caretakers have invented many ways allow them to make their art. AI was never and will never be one of these methods, as you can't make art with AI.

Engineers and doctors make our lives easier and longer, but artists make our lives more enjoyable. Think about this every time you listen to your fav song, watch a good movie, an awesome anime, read a great book, play a video game...

The foundational point of copyright is to make sure those who do work have priority to economic reward for the work they do, to reward and encourage hard work creativity and ingenuity. AI art takes other people's work and uses it in a way that it threatens to destroy that reward for the original creators' work and rewards other people for those original creators' hard work instead. That's the opposite of democracy and the opposite of fair use. Eventually AI will get better and be able to do this to anyone's work. Either we decide it's theft or we throw away copyright laws entirely since AI will eventually backdoor it into being entirely pointless.

We're seeing it with the writers and actors strikes, people don't care about art because to them, it's a HOBBY. They indulge in art, movies, shows, books, in their downtime from their day job. They enjoy the final product and judge how easy it was to create because it was so easy to consume, and therfore, they feel entitled to art "the artist would just be making anyway".

adding onto the argument of ai taking over other positions, if ai takes over medical fields such as neurologists (i think) that diagnosis people with things such as but not limited to bpd, autism, adhd, did, ect, there could be so many inaccurate diagnosis’ because ai’s wouldnt be able to comprehend and understand what those people are going through. whereas a real person would either be able to relate or not. and a real person would help a person get to fully understand what they are going through. An ai cannot go through an experience as a person due to so many factors, and feelings humans go through.

So many of these arguments are also used to justify piracy. I am a writer and draw for a hobby. People have said to me it is okay for them to download e-books for free because they wouldn't have purchased them anyways. But they still feel entitled to have them. I used to say "then you shouldn't have it" but I your point why is really good tbh

Well-said, and you laid out a lot of excellent points about people devaluing art/artists tying into why they're okay with grabbing whatever AI generates instead. I wanted to share my idea for why that "democratizing art" defense is, in my humble opinion, about neither art as a skill OR art as a product, but about art as a TALENT. In my several decades as an artist, I've realized that there are two kinds of people: ones who have some idea how to make art/have educated themselves a bit, and ones who cannot wrap their heads around it and think artists just make beautiful work appear like magic. The latter type of person tends to think of art not as a skill that can be learned, but as a talent, one that some people just have and some people do not. 100% of the people I've met who think artistic skill = inherent talent so far are people who are not artists, themselves, and who think that art is "easy" for people like me. They don't seem to acknowledge the decades of work I've done to get to where drawing looks "easy." Anyway, I think these are the sorts of people who think AI image generation is making art "accessible" to all, because they see being born with artistic talent as some innate ability that they were skipped over for, and being able to AI generate images makes them feel like an unfair situation where they were denied something artists got at birth has been equalized. Like artists have a privilege over them because they were born talented. This same attitude could explain why many people who can't make art don't want to pay anything for it, either-they think the innately talented artists can just whip up an art piece with ease and no work, so why should they pay much when it was so easy for the artist? I've absolutely seen the attitude that charging a lot for your art is arrogant, because you're somebody who can easily create artwork and you're holding that over the heads of people who were unfortunate enough not to be "born with art talent", so it makes you the bad guy for wanting to be paid decently since they genuinely do not believe that YOU had to work for that art ability. They think you just have it, not that it's a skill you worked your butt off for. I'm not saying this is all people who think AI image generation = "making art accessible to all", but I've met this sort of person time and again throughout my life, and it sure lines up with the attitudes I'm seeing about AI. It may also provide a reason why AI fans can also think it's no big deal to scrape billions of art pieces to train the AI generators, because they might secretly think artists are getting a "taste of their own medicine" by having others suddenly be able to "easily make art" like these people think artists have always been able to as an innate talent. Sorry for the essay, thanks for the video!

Anyone can already make art. That's the beauty of art. If you made something, even a stick figure, it's good art because it's yours. You made it. That's a lot more rewarding than watching an AI spit out a result in 20 seconds.

If AI was only limited as a tool, that's one thing. But if people want to replace actual artist how worked for many years on their skills, craft, etc. good luck having a TV show/movie/commercial with the most unholiest visuals you will ever seen.

Great video! AI only gives access to those priviliged with affordability to have access to subscriptions and/or high-end computer hardware. Creative democratization is a pencil and paper.

See, this proves our society is lazy as hell and we just don't care. We rely on robots for everything and it's starting to show. It was happening 10 years ago when Siri and all these assistants were introduced. Sure, it wasn't as extreme as today, but it really does show.

Would you play an AI generated game? Probably not. Would you watch an AI generated movie? Fuck no, I bet. Why is drawn art any different? Say no to the machines!

As a young artist im agreed with you

after all the movies abt ai taking over we STILL do this?! like omg.

I don’t want to live in a world where everything is done by AI. It sounds cold and depressing as fuck.

Its really weird and kinda ironic how in the past everyone thought ai and robots would replace all the blue collar workers and arts would never be capable of being touched cuz people couldnt imagine machines ever doing art. Yet here we are, and art is the first industry facing the actual threar of being replaced. Because like you said, people dont really see art as something important enough to protect. Bc yeah, most people really do care more about the end product more than the process.

Imagine walking up to a barista at Starbucks and saying you want a Frappuccino even though you have no money. You’d be laughed out of the store. And we can and should start laughing and shaming people who are pro ai

i am not skilled at drawing but i am learning, not because i think that i will be able to create art faster, or better than ai, but because i feel like it and i want to be able to have absolute control of the art that i create, not just a few words, that are then interprited by a stastical machine

Minor addendum: I disagree that the immorality stems *_entirely_* from the non-compensation of living artists; arguably, if the same AI was the result of training it entirely on non-surviving, non-contemporary artists, and it still produced the same kind of results, it would still really be depriving artists of the capacity to find a niche in the market. The immorality exists *_even in absentia_* of what's basically art theft, it's just that the latter made it so much worse.

As someone with very limited artistic ability, I will always appreciate actual human art more than machine generated images. The effort and passion that go into art is what makes it impressive to me. It's the same way I respect professional chess champions for being as good as they are at chess, despite almost all of them losing to computers.

This video is great. Furthermore, artists are behind much of the media people consume DAILY. Feeling entitled to art but not willing to value it means people dont deserve entertainment either. They fail to realize that.

problem with ai art is how it usually takes artist's art without consent, or is posted without the mention of it being ai. ai art can be genuinely helpful with the PROCESS of creation (getting an idea of what something could look like, general inspiration, among others) but a lot of times, people will just post it and claim it is theirs also- art doesn't need to be "democratized", art isn't an object for the elite, you just have to try, even if it's bad. if you aren't satisfied, the only thing you can do is keep learning. it's the same as any skill personally, i'll always prefer human services over robots. it may not be as fast, or efficient, but if, per say, i commission something from an artist, i'll feel more happiness from the fact that someone personally took time out of their life to do it, while a robot will just do it, there's no soul to it

Did you watch wall e? The facts that humans are gonna be more chubby and lazier because they rely on robots. We are gonna be wall e irl.

One good thing AI art is doing: with how much "aesthetic" art it is churning out, our drive to consume less traditional creations will grow. Being that art is not about how good it looks, realistically, but about how it resonates with people. People will adopt less "pretty" styles soon enough, and have a better grasp of protection over web scraping before that even, and a new movement will fill in the gaps where AI art will no longer be able to plunder. Adversity has always had this effect on art. We haven't given up on it for the entire time humanity has existed, and I don't think anyone will stop now.

[⚠️TW: talk of unaliving.⚠️]. I seriously feel that if the world is taken over by AI as in it taking all our jobs I would just kms. Like what would my purpose even be any more? Why should I be a writer singer and artist if people don’t value it enough to pay me fair wages and would rather have AI do it?

I actually have a character in a set for a series who developed an thereapy AI of sorts, but ultimately decided against distributing it to the public out of remembering that human psychology isn't as straightforward or simple as an AI could end up thinking it to be. While he didn't scrap the AI he had created, he just kept it around to help him with his daily life(reminders of meetings, when people should be visiting and why, and general daily stuff to list some things).

studying art and learning to draw has changed the way I look at things, I look for vanishing points now, before knowing what they even were, I didn't pay attention to a horizon, it was just part of the picture, and the more I look the more details I can see, AI art would not give you that knowledge, it would just give you the answer to a match question because its a computer program, it thinks with numbers and ratios, not with shapes and colors. You can kind of learn from ai art only if you understand the fundamentals of art and know that it was taking other artists' skills into its creation Also yeah, nobody cares about creatives, they never have and never will, only when the elites pay big money and show a product people only care about the product.

If people don't want to learn anything or have any real talent or skills in anything, I say leave them be and let life screw them over.

Ai really is just imitating real art.

Fuck AI. I refuse to use it. also the mention of 'wild thunder last night', as someone who lives in the same city, I know what thunder you're talking about and damn, that thunder was wild.

You know it's a good day when a duchess Celestia video drops

This isn't relevant to the topic at hand, but I wanted to say that your art is always improving and this image especially is stunning. Keep making gorgeous art!

I couldn't agree more. I've been drawing since I was a child, art was always democratized, everyone has a paper and a pencil at home, if those AI bros weren't lazy they could've just went get a pencil and watched a video and they would've learned! I recently entered an art college and before entrance I was so fucking scared that I would feel remorce and end up without a job because of what's happening with AI, I can't say that this feeling haven't gone away but, being surrounded with other artists and seeing how hard we work everyday made me more motivated to keep on creating. Even if everyone ends up using AI, I as an artist will always keep on making art even if it means I'm the only one making it Thank you for sharing your opinion so openly, it really helps to see other people fight against AI

I think we should call it AI imagery. It is an image. Not art.

The most disgusting thing I see with the popularization of ai image generators is the decay of culture. It's replacing artists, it's replacing voice actors (taking a valuable part of their identity, their voice), it's replacing writers, actors, coders, heck it's even starting to replace lawyers who specialize in contracts where they're being hired to write contracts to feed the machine that is supposed to take their job. And worst of all it's literally weakening culture. The basis of human cultural development has ALWAYS been through telling stories, something that most people aren't doing anymore. It's essentially programing younger generations to stop using critical thinking. And that's a dangerous and depressing concept to think about. All for the sake of a corporate tech bubble to line the pockets of shareholders. What a world.

I do hate that AI had to start out so strong with smearing art value. Why couldn't AI open up with something... helpful... not faux creative?

The entitlement bit really got to me. You explained something I’ve been trying to process for a while, but couldn’t find the words for. Why do people feel no shame in just stepping over each other to get what they want? Art, Education, Politics, you name it. No one cares about the consequences their actions have on others, so long as it furthers their own life. And then when those consequences inevitably happen, no one knows why. I see people complaining about how trashy movies and shows are getting now, but then get hyped over AI. Why can’t they connect the dots?

This is why SAG/AFTRA and WG are striking too. With you all the way, and you are an eloquent speaker! My first KZfaq of yours, definitely won’t be my last!

I strongly agree everything they said in the video. This needs to stop.

It's so strange how us humans are ruining our own future. We've advanced so far in technology that we might all end up jobless eventually. It's pretty scary.

Even with ai art I believe that human made art will still hold some value, simply because it was made by a human with a passion for creating art.

I really hope we just stop with AI

I think the fundamental problem with automating everything using AI is that when there's less jobs lest for people to do, the only way to make money is to already have things. But you also can't run an economy on just owning things, as this would lead to a severe imbalances between rich and poor that's not possible to overcome without some sort of interference, whether by government or other means. You can already see this gap widening and at some point the economy is going to fall into that hole. The question is just when it'll finally happen.

What is you guys' opinion on animation studios possibly using ai to create the in-betweens of their animation to speed up their process? 🤔(I am an AI hater, but I do like it for making some processes just a bit easier rather than fully taking it over)

11:29 as an artist myself, I completely agree. The sense of entitlement some ppl have to say, oh well I deserve x w/o payment is just beyond my understanding. Especially since these video games, if they aren’t in first person, need art, whether it’s character design, background design, etc. and yet people devalue that.

i've been drawing for 7 years now and just this year i've gotten to the level where i'm happy with my art and AI art just pisses me off i hate AI with a burning passion i learned how to draw because of my friends they inspired me and with AI ppl can't be inspired or want to learn art

I've been interesting in writing and drawing for such a long time now, but I was always afraid to start! For years I'd just dream about being an artist or a writer, but recently I've mustered up the courage to actually start! Don't be discouraged by the AI, guys! There will always be people who appreciate us.

I don’t 100% agree that people aren’t entitled to anything they can’t make or pay for themselves. Everyone deserves food and a home, after all. Otherwise, super good points. I admire your ability to lay out your arguments in all your discussion videos. Unrelatedly, a worry of mine is that AI users will suffer because they aren’t indulging in the creative process, which (imo) is so much more fulfilling than just having a finished product come out of the ether. Creating some form of art, be it visual or musical or something else, is essential to the human experience.

I mean, I prefer the ethical argument. The other arguement makes the sponsor kinda hilarious as it democratizes websites as a product. Usually you would have to hire a person to setup and maintain a server, and a person to handle the writing of HTML/CSS/PHP/Javascript/whatever-new-language. Squarespace gets rid of the need for the second while doing the first at scale with less owner control.

It's so frustrating, it feels kind of impossible to do anything about it too which is horrible. People are pretty heartless towards eachother they just don't care until it affects them. It bothers me that art is not valued they say it's talent and ignore the practice. I've had people say, Oh I wish I had time for that. When they go out drinking, go on dates, watch netflix and have extra work shifts to pay for brand name products. If you dropped a few of those things you'd have time for it too... I just choose to prioritise different things. Everyone always just expects you to draw stuff for them too and have no idea the effort that actually goes into it..😓

I plan to go back to 1993, when art was art. 30 years ago. 😎💜

I'm only about halfway through the video, so I'll edit this comment if I feel differently after hearing the rest! I just didn't want to lose my train of thought: I just disagree with one of the arguments in this video. To disclaim, I am overall staunchly on the side of artists. I'm a lifelong hobby artist, so I intimately understand and share in how deeply important art is to artists' lives and often even identities. And while I don't personally stand to be financially impacted by the effects AI has on the art market, I hold empathy/solidarity for artists who do. I have a personal goal of buying from/supporting human artists throughout my life, once I'm out of school and have a stable income. I'm against training AI on pieces without the artist's permission, compensation, or often even knowledge. I'm against exploiting artists via scams like paying less for a sketch to later finish rendering with AI. However, I think all those are completely separate issues to whether someone is inherently "entitled" for using AI. In a situation where someone wants to create something without paying for it or knowing how to do it themselves, and it leads them to feel like other people owe them their labor to make it happen, then THAT is entitled and disrespectful. This is the classic situation that happens all the time where people feel entitled to a particular person's labor for cheap or free. But this is NOT that situation. There is a huuuuuuuge difference between having a right to access something *in general* and feeling like it is actively owed to you. For example, I DO believe that all people have an inherent, natural right to access basic resources like food, clean water, shelter, medical care, etc. But I also agree that this does NOT automatically mean that any given farmer owes anyone else the fruits of their labor. I have a right to eat, but that's not the farmer's problem. If the only possible way to access food is by buying or growing it (which is mostly true for most people), and I'm unable or unwilling to do either, then that sucks for me... but it's not the farmer's problem. It's the same with art, yes? I think we all have a right, as humans, to experience/consume art *in general,* but if the only way to access that art was to buy or make it, then that sucks for us but is not the artists' responsibility to give it to us. But here's the thing that's different about this scenario... that ISN'T the only way to access art. The fact is, even without AI generation, the internet is absolutely drowning in free, publicly available, human-made art. I do not think it's any more "entitled" to forego paying one artist for their art, in favor of consuming a DIFFERENT artist's work they've made available for free. Not any more "entitled" than it would be to wander into an unowned field (if one existed) and take an unowned apple from a tree, instead of going to your local farmer's market to buy one and support them. Is it explicitly good to support artists, local farmers, etc? YES!!! Absolutely, 100x yes. But that doesn't automatically mean that NOT doing so, and pursuing alternative options instead, is explicitly wrong. If I am okay with not getting that specific farmer's apple, or that specific artist's work, then there's nothing inherently wrong with me going elsewhere for a different apple, or a different artist's work, for free. Main point being, I disagree that it's entitled to take advantage of free resources offered to you, just because paid options exist who are now not getting your business. You NEVER owed them your business to begin with, unless you SPECIFICALLY wanted their work. *Now, if no free alternatives existed, that would be a different story, and it would absolutely be entitled to stomp around complaining that no one will gift their labor or its fruits to you.* That's just not what's happening here, though. Like with the animation example (the one that sat wrong with me), you expressed the opinion that if a party can't or won't afford to hire someone or learn to do it themselves, they aren't entitled to create the thing. I STRONGLY disagree with this sentiment, for reasons coming. I can completely understand where it's coming from though, and even 100% agree with it *in the contexts* that it likely stems from, such as the classic scenario of a business not deserving to exist if it can't or won't pay its workers fairly. In that case, there are actual people whose labor is being exploited/stolen. That business doesn't deserve to exist because it *cannot* exist without exploiting that labor. However, I believe this does NOT carry over to businesses that can sustain themselves by implementing newer technology, or literally anything else that decreases the necessary number of workers (e.g. more efficient protocols, cutting operation hours, etc.), as long as they are fairly compensating the workers they do still have. *Basically, expecting someone to give you cheap or free labor is entitled, but choosing not to hire them in the first place is not.* Prior to initiating a working relationship or contract, no one owes anyone their business, nor the offer of employment. Just because you're creating something that has traditionally required hiring a skilled human to work on, doesn't mean that creating that type of thing always and forever inherently comes with a moral obligation to do so. If that necessity no longer exists (as frequently happens when new technology is developed), and a cheaper or even free option now exists, then why would it be explicitly wrong to take advantage of that option? It's not RIGHT, but it's not wrong. Of course the overall trend ends up hurting whole professions, and that majorly sucks (and I do NOT mean that insensitively). As a result, there are people like you and I and the rest of your audience who care, and want to actively support people in the profession. But again, that doesn't mean it's anyone else's inherent moral responsibility to do so... it is not a moral failing on their part to utilize a free option instead of hiring a human they never had any responsibility toward. It would be nice if they did, but they aren't "entitled" for not doing so, any more than the person choosing the free wild apple over buying the farmer's market apple is. So to reiterate, AI art generators suck. They suck for a lot of reasons, and I've agreed with literally every other one I've ever heard you talk about! I just don't think "entitlement" is one of them, and the reason I cared enough to comment about it is because the extended implications in this context make me uncomfortable. In a context where there's just an entity minding their own business trying to make a thing, and wanting to take advantage of already-available free resources to do it (i.e. not exploiting or feeling entitled to a specific creator's labor/work), I feel uncomfortable with the insinuation that they're entitled for not doing more to "earn" it (because that's the logical alternative implication of this argument, if it's not that we inherently owe artists our business). In this very specific context, it feels more like a boomer talking about the sanctity of work ethic and how people don't deserve to have anything, including basic survival necessities, if we don't work hard enough to "earn" it. As if there's some cosmic force arbiting whether we've worked hard enough to deserve a thing. No, this doesn't sit right with me. No one's keeping track of what we've worked/paid enough to morally "deserve" in this life. I take these things on a case-by-case basis. If you want a thing and the only way to get it is to obtain it from someone else, either fairly or unfairly, then you'd better get it fairly or not get it at all. But if there are other options, such as other people (or technology) choosing to provide it for free, then who made the rule that it's wrong to take advantage of those options? Who decided that we need to pay or work for every single thing even if that means observing a self-imposed moralistic barrier, when we never specifically owed anyone for it in the first place? Who's keeping track, and whose business is it, anyway? Sorry that was basically an essay of my own, again I had to just get it out, and before my ADHD brain purged it all by the end of the video lol. Again, overall, AI = bad, paying artists = good 😂 Just for every other reason *but* this one, in my personal opinion. Okay gonna finish the video now, then come edit if/as needed~ Edit: Yep, still agree with everything else you said to the end 🥰

I feel like the reason people turn to AI is the bullying of online spaces has gotten worse. They believe artists are evil and just trying to drag them down instead of uplift them since that's how some spaces are (TikTok, I'm looking at you-). But really, what we need to encourage is allowing people to make mistakes in art, and that even little doodles and even stick figures are art, while showing them things they can implement to slowly improve over time. Really, it is just that: making art "unattainable" because of ageism and "skill issue" mentality. It sucks its come to this. I even stopped drawing for the longest time cause no one irl and online seemed to care, until I found the fun in it again.

I just hope the whole ai art thing is just a trend and hope that these people will get bored and move onto the next trending thing like the nft stuff. But then again they are two different things so who know at this point

The music business has a similar problem with autotune, and it might be even worse because pitch correction to a perfect tone takes away the human feel of a performance in a noticeable way.

"Ai lets everyone do art!" Everyone could already do art to begin with??? All you have to do is draw something. It doesn't have to be a masterpiece, you just have to make it. It's still art either way.

I'ma be honest, a big part of me wants the acceleration to not slow down or halt, it wants it to reach it's logical conclusion in the fastest span possible, even better if it's within a year, so the consequences of the actions that the ideallistic techbros are trying to achieve are met with the reality that utopia can NEVER be achieved, no matter the model they use because of human nature, they're way too blindsided by both greed and lack of foresight to see the bigger picture. I'm just...tired of everything happening, that's just all.

This is why I’d recommend reading Lynne Kelly’s books, Memory Code and Memory Craft. An amazing insight into how ancient art was used to facilitate memorising encyclopaedic levels of knowledge by our ancestors. So when a solar flare takes out the world’s electronics, we’ll be prepared 😊

I disagree with your general position on AI art, but thank you for articulating your argument against this particular aspect of it so clearly. I didn’t fully understand why artists against AI art disagreed with democratization of art in this way, and you made it a lot easier for me to see where you and other artists are coming from

How do you convince people the value of something when they lack understanding of it? I think that for people at large.. art is a product. And since it is a product in their minds, then if they can get X for less $$ they will go with that approach. The idea that there is a great deal of time and effort required to create the art... isn't really taken into consideration as anything other than a barrier they personally can't overcome. I think that at the core of it, the technology that can absorb the styles of art and re-apply it... will probably always be at odds with content creators. You touched on, if the technology were trained with 100% legal/ethical/moral sources, it would still be a problem... because humans will be humans in how they use the tech. Ie, they will use the legit trained model to absorb styles without permission, so they can replicate the look and style, despite the artists' protests. Ie, SamDoesArts. The laws need to change. Protection of artists' rights with regards to NOT having their works being vacuumed up and used to train AI(s) for the purpose of incorporating their style and techniques. That is needed and that will create an odd sort of trainwreck because it touches on the topic of whether a look or style can be protected. And if so, what does it say for fanart? Re: democratising art... I really like your take on it. There are already technologies and services out there designed to bring the ability to gain the skills to produce art. People just need to actually make use of it. Thinking about it... what is the legal standing for having one person(a) liking an artists' work(b) and comissioning a third party(c) to replicate their style and draw illustrations in the style of b for a? There is a very real threat... ie, the death spiral of art. The demotivations of people going into art and the reduction in the number of artists... artists who would create new content. The technology will only get more powerful and more accessible. What one can do on their computer today is lightyears better and more controllable than what one could do from just 6 months ago. The pace of development of the underlying technologies is going to speed up because it is viewed as a goldmine for tech companies. I personally don't see any issue with using a tool to accomplish a task. There are quite a number of such tools that cuts humans out of the loop and deprives them of money. Those tools are either services that does all of the heavy lifting in a semi-automated fashion or are bundles of automation. It begs the question of... at what level of abstraction is it okay to? Take website design for instance. I could opt to do it myself(learn/build/etc), I could hire a web developer, or I can make use of tools that handles all of the heavy lifting. If I used a tool or service that cuts out the human web developer... is it okay so long as I pay for that service? This would refer to things like: WordPress hosting, Wix, Squarespace, etc. They are all platforms designed to allow people with limited computer skills make highly functional sites without hiring someone or committing a great chunk of time to learn things like webservers, hosting, server code, html, javascript, etc. Or the vigilence to watch over said things. Or, I do what I normally do... make use of open source code, make use of free themes and templates, and focus just on the content creation and let the heavy lifting of formatting and setting up the webpage be handled by toolsets. I guess the question is... how will Art and artists change in response to the pressures being placed on them by technology? AI or otherwise? From a personal standpoint, using the AI art tools, I find myself wanting to draw again and has me dusting of my Wacom tablet and ClipStudioPaint. I would really like to see a state where AI Art isn't a four letter word.

If the creation of digital art didn't make traditional art irrelevant, then I don't think AI art can make the need of human artists unnecessary. People don't work that way. We have diverse preferences, and sure, sometimes we like things when they're easy, but we get bored of such things easily too. Sure, some jobs would be affected, but as a whole, I don't think AI can completely displace all artists. As for humanity, it's already redundant.

If somebody went to an artist and said “hey i have __ idea!” and the artist draws it, does that make the person with the idea art? no! Also also whats happening with jobs is like this quote: First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out-because I was not a socialist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out-because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out-because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me-and there was no one left to speak for me. -Martin Niemöller

Ai art is completely banned at my school. It's considered plagiarism and if you get caught plagiarizing, you WILL be expelled.

istg its like us artists can't get a single break. we had the NFT thing, tracing and now ai. were literally telling people that ai is snatching from other artists and saying its theirs, honestly ai is getting out of control cause has anyone else noticed the absurd amount of ai apps on the play store/apple store??

With the corridor crew video the entire point of it was show what AI can do, not just to make a animated movie It was basically an experiment and exploring what AI could do, they didn't make it so they can say they made a movie

“now everyone can do art”. no. everyone CAN. ALREADY do art. What these people really mean is “lazy people can now conjure up the type of art profit-chasers consider sellable and algorithm pleasing without years of actually BEING an ARTIST and honing skill”.

calling someone’s argument “non biodegradable” is so funny lol. It’s like saying that bad take is going to stick with them forever and it’s never going away

But anyone can do art! Literally, just read Making Comics by Lynda Barry. Your drawings don't need to be 'good' to be art!

I literally used to be so afraid to do art until I started to practice. I became decent over one summer. In the immortal words of Keilin Quinn, "IT'S TIME TO FACE YOUR FEAR!!!!!!!" I'm also not gonna try to defend Corridor as a company but, their anime video was sourced from their own database with art that they made on their own. If anything, they used AI to impose their own art onto movements actively doing rotoscope in real time. They actually had to draw things from scratch like everyone else with AI being used as nothing mroe than a tool.

I don’t comment much but I feel you, I am young and I aspire to be an artist I wanted to be an animator so much I know I’ll never make it due to AI, everything will be AI when I get old enough I assume and I think it will ruin everyone I agree fully with you and hate how people say such things, I personally changed my art style to a simpler one that I can do faster purely so I have a unique style from AI I also kinda feel like it should start to normalize simpler art just so we artists don’t get confused for AI

Artists aren't the first people to be targeted with loss of job from automation. Engineers have massively lost jobs from other people reverse engineering their design and selling it, but Engineers are also given additional work being the ones who automate. I don't think fighting against automation is a battle worth fighting, you'll just lose. It's better to learn to use automation to your advantage even if you don't like it, it's here. You will only win if you learn to adapt to the new environment and use automation yourself. As a mechanical designer with a BS degree in Industrial Technology, I've always hated that I'm expected to only make minor improvements on existing designs instead of being allowed to produce my own designs, but when working for other people, If I expect to get paid, I have to give them what they want.

8:43 Just want to point out that Corridor actually acknowledged the ethical criticisms that Anime Rock Paper Scissors received and rectified them for the sequel. Anime Rock Paper Scissors 2 uses original art commissioned from a human professional artist as training data, instead of screenshots from an anime. I think that just goes to show that Corridor is still a team of _artists_ at the end of the day. They're not some soulless greedy corporate boogeyman like a lot of people in the art community seem to think they are, they're a group of talented and passionate filmmakers who at the end of the day just want to make short films with cool VFX stuff using tech that's accessible to the average internet user. They want to push the boundaries of what a small independent team is capable of creating, but they're also committed to honoring the work of other artists. And I think Corridor's pretty cool for that.

AI is so infuriating, and it's especially annoying how people seem to get so big-headed about it. It's fun to mess with, don't get me wrong, and good for art studies, but it honestly sucks if you're trying to get into the creative industry. Also, great video Glue Best Filibuster!

okay but I came here to comment on the thumbnail and title cause??? Everyone could make art if they wanted to anyway wtf is the comment talking about, how can you democratise smth that's already available to literally everyone, even cavemen could draw

As a disabled artist (i can draw on my own, but i also have occasionally used AI art) some people will never be able to draw no how hard they will try. They might be completely paralyzed. They might have neuropathy issues. They have no hands or feet to draw with. They have arthritis that makes drawing incredibly painful. Also, AI art is a skill in itself. My uncle (an AI art enthusiast) spends hours on a single piece. Corridor crew spent MONTHS making that animation you mentioned. Cameras made portraits more accessible for the common folk. People still draw portraits even because of cameras. Even if AI could do everything I could do I'd wanna draw. 🤷 I doubt the slippery slope you'd describe would happen.

Aight so while I am not an artist in the drawing sense (always been terrible) I do partake in a silly little bit of music production in my spare time, and I believe there's enough of an overlap to be able to comment on the AI art situation from a more "insider" perspective. And frankly, it scares me. While I do not actually know of how much time and effort it takes to develop art skills and finish a piece (all I know is that it takes a long time) I do know from my own journey in music that I've had fun developing my own style and messing with things to figure out what works and doesn't, looking at tutorials on certain things and incorperating them into my own style, rinse and repeat. But the idea that the years I have spent working on making music being undervalued because I can just type "trance song written in F minor yada yada yada" into some software/a website and have it spit back out a track that would've taken me a week/weeks to work on in just a couple minutes is not comforting. You're telling me that all of a sudden I'm useless because you can get something much quicker from a machine? And if you go posting said track around saying "look at this song I made!" my opinion on you will only sour more. Being able to type some words into a computer and get a good result quickly is not a skill. You are not an artist. You did not make that song. A computer following a set of rules did. Anyway, that's one of the key reasons I'll stand against AI art even though I'm not an artist (in the drawing sense.) I know that AI generated music will come around some day, and something similar that's happening in the drawing community will happen to musicians. If I hate the idea of someone being able to smash some words into a program and get a pretty good song outta it and using it to replace the years people have spent honing their skills in music, then I hate the idea of someone being able to smash some words into a computer and get a pretty good drawing out of it and using it to replace the years someone spends honing their skills in drawing. If you allow it to, AI will come after nearly all jobs that exist. AI is something that may not be in your back yard right now, but it sure will be in future. AI tools to assist creativity are great (I'll use Yamaha's vocaloid as an example here, and supertone AI are making tools that are great for music production.) But AI tools to replace creativity are not. I assume in the world of drawing some kind of AI critic that can point out ways you can improve your art would be great. Although we do need to be very careful about tools to assist creativity bleeding into replacing creativity. The barrier to entry when it comes to making great drawings and great songs has lowered a lot compared to what it used to be, but it doesn't need to be lowered into a free for all. So I'll end this saying that are we at a point where we care more about the end result than the journey to get there? Are we at a place where we only look at the end results of something and pay no mind to the attention to detail that has gone into it?

i watched a video of a professional saying the ai art boom will last 2 or 5 years, no more. Ai art is starting feeding from itself, instead of learning better its starting to downgrade even more. Furthermore, AI cant be copyrighted, so anyone can use it as public domain because it is. People are getting fired when they turn out to be ai prompters. The AI boom will stop because it will stop being profitable, because its not. it will eat itself to the grave.

So I don't know what exactly that "Democratize" means in this context, so I don't have an opinion about AI art calling it that BUT lots of your arguments seem really flawed to me (in the sense that they are hypocritical/double standard-y) If I understood correctly,, "democratize" means to make available/accessible for the general public, and for example tutorials (video/website/etc) already does that. But, only because on thing is doing it, doesn't mean the other thing is also doing the same? (not saying it is, just questioning it) 5:26 agree, ppl who don't do art are not artists. So if the AI does art, the AI is an artist. (not the person giving the commission/idea (aka prompts)) 5:55 I'd argue there are a lot more jobs that are not (at least in the near future) automatable. Only because those task might include things as plumbers and the ppl that change a light bulb on a tower that signal to planes, and those tend to be the "not so desirable jobs" doesn't mean there are none. Also, it doesn't take away from anyone to be able to learn or do art. You can still do it. Or what? Are you now getting lazy because you might not be able to do it for money? 6:34 yea it might be. probably also was when the "industrial revolution" happened. ppl adapted and kept living tho. im not sure if you are talking about "art as an artist" or "art as a worker(job)". 6:55 disagree. The aai is only the tool to do what ever idea (creativity?) the one putting in the prompt has. Skill, technique, knowledge etc has nothing to do with creativity. 7:07 disagree, there is no need for creativity to create art. (tho might be a question of the definition of art). 8:32 thin line with that "entitlement" topic. first of all, I agree younger generation feel entitled to have everything available for free. (which was not your point/waht u said, just sayin'). BUT I am asking you, how many "free" things do you actually use without paying or working FOR it? KZfaq maybe? did you ever use google? alt he information you find on the internet? Did u ever go out and learn all those things? research them? made physics or chemical experiments to get "basic information"? or do you exclusively use paid services to get any information at all. Even like, weather forecast?. Entitlement is also, feeling entitled to make money off of a skill you have learned (aka art in this case). Even if there is AI, noone is stopping you from doing art. If you are good enough in art(and marketing probably?), you may even continue to make money with it. If not, I guess time to "not be lazy" and learn something new, to make money in another way. 8:57 by that logic, if I have a nail that needs hammering in, but i don't have a hammer at hand. Instead of using the next best object in range to hammer it in, i should go through the the trouble of going out, spending money on a hammer, going back and using the hammer instead (instead of being creative and using something available to me). 9:50 with that logic: if you are unable to (aka to lazy to learn) all the necessary skills to make all the tech required and code all the code required, to create a video hosting platform (including internet, servers, hardware, software, etc.) then whatever you have to say/show, should not be on the internet at all. Since you are to lazy to learn all the tech stuff, the best you might be able to do, is go to your local market place and shout what ever you have to say in public. Maybe take a bell with you, if you have learned how to make one, so you are qualified to use it to garner attention. 9:37 I rly find it harsh that use "aren't willing" and "lazy". there are tons of reasons why something CANNOT be done or learned. but I guess I shouldn't be talking, I'm also harsh x: 11:47 agree, if u want a service, u have to pay for that service accordingly. But you can also chose who you want to the service from. If one prefers AI X art over your art, then that's that. If my budget only allows AI X art and now urs, than thats that. If whatever fits my needs better than your service, then I will chose the other one. If I want to drink I quick coffee, I will gladly chose the one gotten by clicking on a button, than one where a woman first has to do the beans, and boil the water, and let it drip and what not, until i get my coffee. So if you don't want to be replaced by automation, than whatever you offer needs to be better (can be quality, can be price/quality ration, whatever it is) more attractive, than whatever AIs can do. If not, u might need to learn new, different skills. Ya know, similar to, how the ppl who got replaced by machines in factories, are now the ones repairing the machines, or so. 12:34 this sounds super salty in my opinion. but lets compare. so, are you not using a plane, but swimming to the other side of the earth instead, because you did not do anything to learn about planes and flying and everything needed? or is the argument "well i paid for the ticket". So if someone pays for an AI art gen subscription, they also pay for it, no? or heck, if they pay someone for AI art on fiverr, they also bought it no? 12:56 u mean the team of animators that is generally underpaid/overworked and drops dead? 13:53 so TLTW, you don't feel needed anymore? 14:03 By that logic: artists within for example anime and game studios are required to draw in a certain style and draw pre determined things, that has nothing to do with creativity and "what is what a human artist is" nothing more than "factory" work in the end. also commissions make u also not an artist anymore, as someone else tells u what to draw 14:21 even if 2 ppl with the same skills and experience see the same thing, they won't necessarily see the same thing. And considering such a 100% matchup isn't possible anyways, so that doesn't exist in the first place. Also an artists "intention" and whatever they wanna express and what not doesn't mean shit to the general public/layman anyways. even before AI art, who cared about the purpose of that sunflower of van gogh? almost noone. Majority of ppl are only interested in the end product. Is it aesthetically pleasing? useful for whatever they need it for? affordable? etc. TLDR: Entitlement goes both ways and I prefer applying the same rules equaly. So I disagree with a lot things you said, purely on a logical basis.

AI "art" has really been a blow to my creative side. Many many times I just wonder what's the point anymore and I've been drawing for all my life. I loved it, but every time I go online to see what other people have made, I see so much AI garbage and I feel my chest tighten and all motivation to improve just goes out the window. I hate it so much. Art is supposed to be something that cultures share with one another, it's supposed to be something to bring people together with their interests. But AI is hollow...and makes me lose more hope in the future of humanity. Artists are going to lose their jobs because businesses are going to want to use cheaper methods, and what's cheaper than AI? And art is only the surface, machines are taking over the job force and there's no way to stop it. I can only imagine that in the future the only jobs humans are going to be able to have are jobs that involve repairing robots or AI, which could eventually be self-sufficient. I realize this is a huge "conspiracy theory" crap thing. But it just seems more and more plausible with how much we're replacing the things that humans love to do..

None of these people were EVER going to buy art and the people who can afford it still will because AI is too flawed for their needs. Wasting energy on people who were never going to be a useful contributor to the community is undue stress so try not to let it get to you

weird how people enjoyed artists work for centuries and now they are turning back and even insulting them sometimes