There will be an inflationary flooding of ai creations. Inflation means devaluation, that's also a rule of the market. And other mediums like design, music or even writing itself will follow. In fact there are already solutions out there, just not yet quite as good as this breakthrough in image generation. I am following the development for some time now. Just a couple of years ago Dall-E v1 was still super wonky, by no means close to what it can do now. Given the incredible speed things are taking off I am thinking the next years might disrupt not only the market, but us culturally as a whole. The arts always have been a reflection of us culturally throughout the ages. I do think this development will have a huge impact, but Pandora's box is open, time to adapt rather than complain, I guess...

@@Charles_Bro-son The Vector and Velocity of change you are suggesting is just an assumption. You are on a silicon valley slide deck hype train. Not the most reliable or proven mode of transport... The first movement of improvement is often fast, that does not imply a set speed or scale of improvement. I think humans have a tendency to worship other things (animals, objects, self creations) that can do human things. We give them a lot of credit for being like us. While underestimating the complexity and intuitive nature of everything we do. And the speed of technological improvement is a faith that many adhere to. If any of these AI scripts were my students I would not rate them at all. Even the better stuff that Midjourney creates which I find appealing... still is a one trick pony. Terrible at 95% of things artists do and need to do. With that said it is always possible they get there in the end. Perhaps really soon. If that happens the entire world will change so drastically (because it would signal overall improvement in all AI) that it will be impossible to predict. I would bet on art as a good way to separate yourself from an AI in that situation. Most other jobs are going to have a harder time proving their worth vs automation. Thanks for your thoughts!

@@TheDrawingCodex You added a new angle to think about this issue. I'll definately have to process still, not come to an ultimate opinion or conclusion yet. Cheers mate!

@@Charles_Bro-son There will be a flood of it, but it won't replace most art. It's going to be extremely good at certain things (particularly when it's heavily guided by an artist) but meaningful and powerful art, music, stories, etc have very human elements making them work. Human elements that AI won't be able to accomplish anywhere on our current roadmaps. If you've gotten far enough in your journey to understand the importance of level of intention put into a work then it's obvious that AI can't do that without actually being human-like. However I'm not saying that it won't be massively prominent, I believe it will find tons of uses.

@@TheDrawingCodex silicone valley deck hype train, I like that..

I guess you need to find the places to go where a real musician's touch is needed? There's nothing better than a good live show, people still want that human element / that connection.

There is still time to stop this change

@@cory99998 The market for Jazz, Rock, Math Rock, Metal etc musicians do still exist and we already get used to how shitty pop musics keep changing and devolving

The only right way to listen to funk is live. I love a good Spotify playlist, but that wouldn’t stop me from hearing you play in person, especially because it would be listening and vibing with other people. People getting married always want to keep the price down, but maybe your crowd is with people who don’t want to be alone and just want to jam out with others on a weekend.

​@@Window4503 Spotify is not stealing copyrighted material and making new music out with it, it is not a new way to consume art, it is a way to monopolize market, steal the production.

It can feel like that! But keep in mind society runs in cycles. If you are getting sick of it... other people are too. Once they stop buying it all changes.

@Arthur Brown The movie industry goes through cycles like everything else, you might need to look at earlier movies to see it.

I think we’re also worried about what happens when the images stop looking like a fever dream and become hard even for the trained eye to distinguish. Good to know not everyone is rooting the artist’s demise though!

I'm the same- I'm instantly bored when I see AI art of something 'complex'. It effectively did to hundreds of images what a blender does to vegetables, and the end result shows it.

Give it time. They're developing very quickly these days. I've been messing around with stable diffusion these last few days, and what amazes me is how effortless it was to get fairly good results, as long as you don't ask for anything too specific or weird. Sure most of the images show a little typical AI jank, but many of these images are good enough that I don't care. And crucially, once I've dialled some settings I like, I can have the AI crank out a 100 images in less than half an hour, of which 1/10 to 1/2 are usable. If my talentless ass can get this free AI working this well today, things are going to be really rough for mediocre professional artists in 10 years.

@@fnorgen I expect it's going to go the way of plagiarism. Studios won't touch it because they aren't interested in images that can lead to lawsuits, potentially owned by the company that made the AI.

There are many images generated by ai can not discern. Not to mention when artifacts and other inconsistencies have been edited away. You shouldn't infer general validity from the masses.

Awesome I’m glad this one helped out! Good luck! It’s a challenging journey to begin for sure. But worth it from my experience.

Yes! We need that right now! 💪

I think that's what's going to happen in the near future. More and more people are getting bored with the big budget movies and etc. Slowly there will be a very definite line between independent art industry and Corpo art industry

That is a fantastic idea...

I am working on a project for this.

So glad you said this! We have been building our own tools for this.

@Nila it is not legal for a commercial company to scrape the dataset so the commercial company created and funded a non-profit to scrape the dataset and then used the dataset for commercial use. Does not sound legal to me.

i love billionaires

Same like those NFT bros and crypto bros. "Hey, it's a new crypto that potentially gonna blow up! Let's all invest in it!" >the crypto starts to become less popular or crashing >every crypto bros rapidly sells the crypto and make quick money from it. > then they search for a new crypto and repeat the process. Flock, make money, leave. Is this some way of exploiting the capitalist system? This just strengthens my view that everything on the Internet is a lie. The only real thing is things that exist in the real world in a physical form.

They should be fined into oblivion frankly

I'm hoping that too. God ear you, what they are doing is completly illegal. Who knows they are using my art too. I heard that some lawsuit are coming for them.

True, I really dislike how AI is trained off of art and designs from various artists and creations without anybodies consent. When I tried creating an NGE like robot, it gave me something that undoubtely was trained on screenshots of the series... The AI benefits from that and it gets very powerful but how is that legal?

agreed. this serves as a new of commissioning any artists whose names are used in the prompts. considering some AI programs have paid services, it could be a good way to help out the artists involved. ironic how this whole AI fiasco is going considering it's supposed to "help" professional artists. but that's how the exploitation of any technology goes apparently.

That’s like saying that every person who has ever taken inspiration from another artist’s style should pay commission for their work. If the AI was basically photobashing Art pieces together I would agree with you, but in reality it is deconstructing the artwork by basically shredding it back and forth 5 times and then constructing something of it’s own from the shreds. If an artist ends up taking this to court it won’t make it far. If an artist believes that their style is all that makes them what they are then they should probably rethink their marketing plan.

Tell this to Greg Rutkowski…the most used artist name for AI Art.

@@AironyAi exactly, and it is becoming bland now that it is no longer a style, but instead a fad. Style isn’t what you should base your entire art career over. Rutkowski deserves every bit of praise for his work, but he needs to find something aside from his style that makes him valuable to a workplace. This is what will push creativity in a massive way if you adapt and use the tool. If you refuse then you will probably grow bitter and stagnant in the art environment. Adapt or Perish.

Great points Taylor! Yeah I remember mocap coming on the scene and freaking everyone out. Animation is a good example where I could see the tech replacing 90% of the work... and still there could be 10x jobs for animators. Because what most people don't realise about games etc is that the animation systems are a major limitation of the creativity on tap. So many design decisions get made due to rigging and animation reuse needs! If we could create and rig anything easily and get help with the boring bits of animation I think people would be surprised how much better games and film would look... and how crazy we could make the designs.

The day we're not constrained to a single rig set per skeleton and can cross-pollinate full animation sets through an ai that has a built in understanding of muscle structure and weight, is the day we can really go all out on our cooler moments and the more fun parts of animation like exaggerated follow throughs and overlap in our silhouettes. I can't wait!

Motion cap is still somewhat contained in the pipeline. Ai does feel less contained to me personally. AI (assuming it gets even better and why won’t it) can create any image- from scratch, in seconds. It could be hyper realistic, or hyper stylized. It could be characters or props or environments. It could be concept generation or final images. It could be black and white or it could have a gorgeous color palette. It could be logos or extremely detailed illustrations. All sorts of skill sets that no one person has could potentially be mastered by the AI. All parts of the process from the beginning of image creation to the end could be done by AI in seconds. AI.. does feel like it’s intended to be a replacement to quite an extent. But as Tim puts it- it could be put to use as a replacement in favor of individuals and small teams to create bigger projects on their own. I don’t quite know how market saturation and inflation would work if everyone did that but that’s certainly one way of moving forward. But if it learns to give itself prompts based on what’s popular on the internet- it could maybe also be a self sufficient and unstoppable content generation farm that takes over the social media market too. Because arent people who are giving AI prompts just another data set that can be fed to the algorithm to teach it what we like and don’t like? It feels sci fi and dramatic to say this stuff but so was the concept of AI creating appealing artwork at one point not too long ago. So I guess I honestly don’t know where any of this will go. *sigh*

I am also a professional, and i dont think you fully understand the scope of the tech that is rolling out right now, you are comparing apples to oranges or apples to thinking mechanical oranges that can do what we do vastly quicker and better then we do (for free) no comparison to old plug ins and "2007 era a.i." this new stuff is in a category humans have never encountered.

@lordvader3605 you think that is a good thing

@Lord Vader nah ai cant do shit on high levels. Profesional artists and independant artists will always make better products. Ai is just a tool for real artists, no artists wannabes

So what that a machine is better huh? Forklifts have existed for decades and we still watch strongman competition It's been more than 30 years since deep blue defeated the best chess player in history And there's still world chess tournaments every year Humans look for humans We relate to human struggle, and look mimic their efforts, get inspired by them to challenge our own limits That no machine can take away from humanity

@@z4ne695 >real artists >ai lmfaoooo

@@matheussanthiago9685 dude , chess is a competition.

Art in general will be the one field that will really survive AI and automation. A painter will always be able to put oil on a canvas, a musician will be always able to perform live in a concert. "Nobody should lose their job to automation" How many hand made items do you actually own? Look around you and see how many jobs have been lost, and consider paying 10 times for every single object/piece of furniture you own, not counting the Horse-drawn carriage's owner who was supposed to deliver that stuff to you :)

You find ai cool your stupid and lazy like the rest of ai artist

Programmers are already doing that themselves. AI is the future, and Programmers are making AIs to do their jobs as well. No job is safe from AI, and programmers know that better than anyone else. But thats also why AI can be such a positive influence if it ever gets advanced enough.

@@eragon78 Maybe you're out of date? Are you not reading the official statements of the manufacturers of AI mixers? ( They are not artificial intelligence, they are mixers). They withdraw the current development of AI mixers because these mixers don't really paint, they steal the selections of artists and photographers from the Web and combine them into "new" images. The accusations were of theft of intellectual property and the makers of the AI mixers apologized to the Art community. So stop dreaming, you're fooling yourself. Don't lie to yourself, AI is not the future. Programmers are not the future. This is a delusion. A false alarm. The world exists in its entirety and cannot exist divided. Everyone in this world does their own thing. Programmers do not have the spirit of art. Unfortunately for them, they are more like bio-robots. And a race without spirit is doomed to oblivion. This is how you don't appreciate the role of bees. But without bees, trees will die, and then people too. Without artists, spirit, art, humanity doomed to misery and oblivion.

@@eragon78 Everything around you is some form of art. Wherever you turn. The glowing billboards with chic inscriptions and beautiful photographs are made by artists. TV commershows are made by artists, websites, music, movies, games, everything. You don't realize it, but that doesn't mean it's not that way. Programmers simply convert this entire database into artificial, synthetic garbage and simply kill the spirit by turning the world into a spiritless mass of bio-garbage and plastic.

@@dark_king6512 Then those AI are stealing yea. But that is DEFINITELY not how most AI art programs work. Or at least not the big ones. The ones that are mixers are definitely just stealing art. The ones that are actual deep learning algorithms that dont have copies of the art in their database are NOT mixers and are genuinely producing new art, and a lot of the modern AI art softwares ARE doing this. As for your second statement, its completely nonsense. The spirit isnt real, magic isnt real. Humans are just biological machines ourselves. Our brains arent special, its just a series of chemical reactions that interact in a specific way which causes emergent consciousness. There is no reason why this exact same thing cannot be replicated with a complicated enough AI. Of course we're no where near making an AI as complicated as the human brain which is why these things are always just approximations and arent generalist AIs, but the point is the Human brain isnt special. its just a machine that recognizes patterns and can use those patterns in creating things. There is no such thing as "Spirit" or "Soul". Now obviously human art is still FAR better than AI art, and even if AI's do become capable of producing art far above human capabilities, its not like Human art has no place in the world or that artist arent important. Im not saying artist arent important. But Humans dont have a magical power that is impossible to reproduce. And AI is the future, everything humans can do, eventually AI will also be able to do once its advanced enough. This is a GOOD thing for humanity, not a bad thing. This means human labor is no longer required, and this bullshit capitalist system can finally become obsolete as the whole concept of money wont be needed anymore when everything is automated. Humans will be free to do whatever they want and enjoy, and any necessary labor to run society can be managed entirely by Automation and AI. That is why AI is the future, because it eventually will displace EVERYONE, not just some of us. Then Humans no longer have to work for money to survive, we can just do stuff we enjoy. Plenty of humans will still enjoy to create art for the love of creating art, and their works will be appreciated for what they are. But they wont HAVE to create art in order to put food on the table, because AI will provide any necessary labor.

@@eragon78 I always find it funny when people are too sure they are right for something that they don't really know for sure they are right. When we die we will see whether or not there is a spirit. However, perhaps I should paraphrase. I wasn't literally talking about spirit. But for a specific way, each brain approaches things. Because you talk about brains. And I'm talking about brains. There is something specific that makes one person become a doctor, another a physicist, a third a mathematician, a fourth an astrophysicist, a fifth an artist, and so on. It's a brain thing. This is how the specific brain of the specific person works. And not a random decision of the individual. Every brain has strengths and weaknesses. This is due to something specific. Honestly, I don't know programmers---musicians. I don't want to offend anyone. But all the programmers I know are very boring people. So when I speak of spirit, or the lack of spirit, I mean this horrible mechanical approach of theirs to things. When you go to a concert, you don't listen to the boring talk of programmers. You hear music, you experience an emotion. Honestly, the very idea of me going to an AI concert, like everyday life, shocked me. Machines should be given simple tasks, not to enter the territories of people, make music, art. What's the point, once you have a person doing a job, the second time you have a machine doing the same job? What is the value of this other than a person doing this loses his job, no one pays him? You are actually talking, whether you realize it or not, about devaluing the human presence in the wild. I have heard your position other times from other people. So I'm familiar with it. She is not new to me. But she is very superficial for me. I'm sorry. And I think she's seriously ill-conceived. So , a world governed only (or mainly) by programmers and AI?! Thanks, but NO thanks. Such a world can only be created by one single thing---mighty economic pressure, but not naturally. You are talking about utopia. How everything will be like in Heaven. This is a big conversation. A complicated topic. I won't spend too much time on it. But the world you describe has one major distinguishing feature for it to exist in the order you describe----low population. A small number of societies rule a world supported by machines. And btw, the main engine supporting the future development of artificial intelligence is the capitalist neo-liberal block. p.s On earth, at this stage, is no true artificial intelligence. Do you remember the Russia-America race to reach the moon? It's the same now. False start, but there's only smoke there. In 50 years, you'll see, there won't be any artificial intelligence on earth yet. But at least I hope there is still a working civilization.

There is AI that doesn’t trained on artist work, anyway it can learn and unlearn, some AI doesn’t need artist’s database to trained on and still more powerful than midjourney (not in public yet)

Right, the true Artifical inteligence would just wonder the world and see it for itself to create an art, not just relying at memorizing and make network from alrd existing art. Most AI we have right now mostly Top Down, being fed data and become exactly that. True AI would be Bottom Up, learning by using its own sense like a human baby would.

That’s a major dilemma because you can’t copyright claim a ‘art style’ , otherwise virtually no artist’s could profit off their work. These Ai generators are in a transformative works category because they’re not directly copying exact replicas of someone else’s art, only referencing the style. My own art style is a fusion of manga and illustrator influences I’ve been inspired by over the years, which is nothing unique, most of what we learn is done by referencing others, problem is it takes us humans years to master it whereas the Ai ‘learns’ in under five minutes. The only hope I see here is that artists could sue them for referencing their data sets without permission, but otherwise idk, Pandora’s box is open and we’re going to have to find creative ways to compete with this sooner or later😬😬

@@TheRockyCrowe Well, they are already in court. A class action lawsuit was filed. I don't think we'll have to deal with this AI. I have a feeling that everything will end well. This AI, it doesn't learn. What they say "learning" is a gallant way of saying theft. There are tons of examples of how AI remakes / recycles / text, pictures, photos, music and so on. p.s. Actually, my Art style is also manga but maybe combined maybe mostly with realism. 😁

@@stanimirgeorgiev.87 oh seriously? That’s great then! Still though, even if some basis of law codes is established Ai is going to affect the industry in some way, restrictions will limit its scope, at least for now. The incidences of straight up theft I think are coming from people using these generators in the laziest bare-bones copy/paste way possible because I’ve seen incredible Ai ‘artworks’ that weren’t stolen, just touched up in photoshop.

@@TheRockyCrowe I don't know man. The very idea that this software puts everything in everyone's hands is devastating because it upsets the natural balance----effort, will, persistence, love---on the part of the individual and puts everything in everyone's hands. It's natural when you get as much as you give. You gave 1%, you get 1%. I studied design, perspective, anatomy, I learned to make machines. I learned 3D, I learned to write. It has been an honest hard work over the years of my 30 year dedication and I am getting what I deserve through my dedication, dedication and love. Now these programs put it all in the hands of lazy, undeserving people. This is bullshit and devalues labor and effort. If it's up to me, I may sound mean, but I wish misery on all these individuals who develop these programs. To me these are individuals with evil intent and I am unwavering in my understanding. Now some guy is doing these "what would 80 years of movies look like" and he's doing a lot of these videos. Does he think that at this very moment he is giving hard work? When I see how intensely he releases video after video with these AI photos I understand 2 things: First: he takes these pictures very insistently. Second: Such a large amount is done very quickly in order for him to release such a large amount of videos. Therefore, I infer that he thinks he is putting in hard work now, right? Perhaps. But he has no idea what is called hard, hard work! I'm the one ho have put A HARD work over the years while during those same years he has been doing other things. Now he's on par with me. This is complete bullshit. And on top of that, they will be taking the work of dozens of artists who, until last year, were living hard, but at least they knew they would have work. Now this job was denied to them because the employers print their images themselves with this AIs. Everything is so messed up and wrong. It's all so unfair. Like the war. It's just that someone out there decides there's going to be a war today and you can't object. You'll just have to endure. You suffer the terrible consequences of some lunatic's decisions. I'm tired of someone telling me how to live, what I have to AGAIN adapt to, what NEW things I have to learn. Maybe my life is good as it is right now? Maybe I don't want changes? Maybe I've studied enough all my life and maybe now it's time for me to take the percentages due to me? But not! Now I have this AI challenge. Well, I don't think some asshole out there should be making my life and the lives of my co-workers miserable and unnecessarily difficult. So, basically, yes. That's it. He who has learned to draw, let him draw. He who has learned to make programs, let him make programs. But not for the programmer to meddle in the crafts of others by breaking the natural order of things in the field of those other crafts. If tomorrow I decide to carry out a revenge attack on this AI programmer by breaking his bones because of the damage caused by his irresponsible and reckless actions will he be content to spend the rest of his life in a wheelchair? Well, it's exactly the same with me, and I'm not content to spend the rest of my life constantly fighting and competing with unnecessary and unwanted by me, apparently by many other of my fellows, events like this AI. So I am angry at the very idea of this interference and the other things I pointed out. The very idea of this constant irritating misery that someone constantly (for unknown a reasons to me) thinks should happen. And don't let anyone tell me that no bad intentions out there . These individuals are perfectly aware of what they are doing. And what they are perfectly aware of what this program of theirs will do to dozens of artists! Oh, they know that! They have said this many times. With these programs, THERE WILL BE NO MORE NEED FOR ARTISTS! THEY SAID THAT! And they did that. I forgive only when the evil is not by intention but by accident. But premeditated actions costing suffering and misery I never forgive. These softwares deserve a complete ban. And if it were up to me I would delete them as if they never existed. Because who can give me guarantees that strict restrictions can be made there? Who can guarantee laws guaranteeing that an individual can train their PERSONAL AI only and only in their personal Art style and no one else's without the express permission of the other individual concerned? How will you know if I haven't secretly downloaded your pictures and "trained" my AI on them? You can not. There are so many things that cannot be guaranteed. But one thing is for sure, all this chaos is in a charge. But it seems the art community in the person of Guillermo Del Toro and a Japanese animator are also on our side. They spoke out against and against these AI mixers. So I'm hoping for a court ruling to remove these AI mixers or strong restrictions (again, I don't know what, I mentioned the difficulty in making any guarantees).

I appreciate the thoughts here. I feel you are not considering the actual market dynamics of supply and demand and why companies exist in the first place. Doing so is tricky, and I am not suggesting I am 100% right either. But you have to look at the different participants and think of their incentives. Not just one factor changes... ALL factors change once you add something like AI into the mix. And in the end the goal for creating the best product to remain in the top 5-1% of products will be all that matters for large companies. If a company can create a AA or AAA game at 10% of current cost that opens up the field for many other smaller companies consisting of far less people and far more AI to compete with each other. In the end there is still the issue of what will achieve the final 5% of quality that gives all of the money to the successful company. The payroll burn rate is only one factor here. I don't think it's necessarily going to be the best strategy to just fire all the artists... They might be doing different things than before... but who knows. Perhaps there will be more jobs. Perhaps less. The skillset might be different. It is likely that the lower level production jobs will disappear as they have been for the last 20 years... but teams have been getting way bigger even as those jobs are wiped out. The reason big soulless companies exist now is that they have the resources to bring many people together to create these products. Without that... you cannot make a AAA game right now. You need $$$. If you don't need the money to make a game due to AI, then the games will cost less to make. Thus there will be more competition. Think of how many indie studios have been created in the last 10 years to serve the Steam market and the mobile market. Creating games with this quality with smaller budgets was not possible earlier. Once it is... it happens. People replace coders with engines like Unity and UE. Are developers out of jobs? No there are more jobs and more opportunities than ever before. More games, more people playing games. More money being made. All though automation and replacing jobs with software. If a company can fire me and all the artists and replace them with AI... then I the artist can fire the company and replace them with AI. The Art requires at least as much skill and training as other jobs. AI for replacing middle management and a CEO and a marketing department and an accounting department will develop much faster and become much better than AI 'Art' because it will have far greater utility. SAAS companies are already doing this for accounting etc. And they are already adding AI to their services. If you are an artist then use your imagination. Build something! Get in early :)

Yeah good points. This is a common narrative that seems to be catching on(which I like, and sheds some light on the issues at play). It’s big companies that own the music who are complaining and filing suits. Musicians are some off the most abused and exploited artists on earth right now. Once we get AI lawyers we can fight back a lot easier!!

We got nothing to lose but our shackles Like literally nothing else to lose, the cumulative effects of two generations of corrosion of the consumer power is just starting to show up Millenniums are far far left and any previous generations across both sides of the Atlantic

No. That's basically the same concept as NFT's, and nobody, to this day, has really faced any major legal action for infringements where those are concerned. If something is digital, and is posted online somewhere, trying to convince a lawyer to run a lawsuit because someone downloaded a png off of twitter and threw it into their little toy would get you laughed out of the room. AI art makes the entire concept of "intellectual property" meaningless. Its not about how 'well' AI creates art or how 'creative' it is, its about anyone being able to get what they want without paying a dime, art included.

@@swiftpitty7045 ​ Everybody being able to make art for their ideas effortlessly for free seems like a good thing to me.

What’s tricky [and shitty] about this is that AI takes bits and pieces from various artworks from various artists and compiles them into a finished “AI-generated artwork”. So it’s very difficult for an artist to say “I drew that piece. It belongs to me”. AI could just as well extract just pixels from millions of artworks and compile them into a “masterpiece”. Nobody can prove that “this pixel belongs to me”

@@nikosp3156 it’s not really how it works. The dataset is used by the AI to learn concepts and abstractions from, but once the training is over, the AI does not have access to any of those images anymore, and it can not store them either, as you can’t store billions of images in 4GB. In other words, the AI doesn’t even use those images as references, it’s creating process is more akin to someone who draws by imagination, only based on previous knowledge.

the ai does not „learn“ it‘s copying and merging.

For sure. I think the ethics of these companies are very skynet. But not much point in crying over spilt milk I guess? Even without the training or with legal restrictions the tech will progress eventually. Still no evidence it will go anywhere or amount to anything. Some of the latest stuff looks better though.

@@TheDrawingCodex We can't lay down and accept our work being used for profit of corporations. If they want to "democratise" art they need to do it ethically. It's like me photobashing works from other artists and saying it's mine ? I don't see how this would fly if an individual did it. For me, this process needs to be restarted from copyright free sources and the current AI needs to be abolished.

@@Vaddmaiar0Forneus Yeah I hope the legal side of it can be sorted out. I find it hard to understand how the images created with these software systems can be used commercially in the end. So much money is spent in the entertainment industry proving that ideas used to build the big expensive IPs are created in house, and not swiped. The legal side of making sure your ideas are actually protected and not open for law suits is huge. The precedent is obvious. The utility really should be in helping artists to create their own work. I would love one of these things to help me do more of my work by training it. And retain the IP inherent in my style and process. I think ultimately this might be a better business case for the Skynet bros. But it opens up a lot of other ethical problems (replacing assistants with AI is the same problem)

@@TheDrawingCodex I just had the same conversation with a colleague. I'd love for this to be an offline software that I can feed my work into and it helps me with my creative endeavours. Hopefully that will be the route they take, but I seriously doubt it because that wouldn't be valued as highly as grabbing amazing artwork from the internet..

It will spread to 3D, animation, music, heck even writing itself. I imagine a period ahead being flooded with all these new creations, seemingly unlimited and peerless. But what will that mean for us culturally, aside from the market situation?

I think your mostly right but one thing that the ai can't do well is have a personality to market with. Sure it can churn out amazing work 24/7 and try to flood the market but if it doesn't have anything more than just the cool looking stuff its the exact same thing that's happening to a lot of Hollywood movies where they just make a shitty forgettable movie. It's also a lot less impressive to say hey here's this ai art that took no effort vs. I struggled for years and here's my story. There's a lot of facets to the issue.

@@booleah6357 Right, but the problem is that we will arrive in an era where you straight up cannot tell the difference anymore. Someone could draw like 10 sample pictures, and allow an AI to emulate their work from that point forward, and if they were to say they draw all of it themselves, it would be really hard to prove they're lying. And I don't think it would really matter even if you did. Sure, in a vacuum, AI can't really create anything that special, but the thing is: we are in anything but a vacuum when it comes to art in our culture. The problem isn't that there will be no more human visual artists. Instead, the problem is that absolutely anyone, regardless of creativity or skill, can become a visual artist and claim artistic ownership over something that was generated by an AI, or even claim ownership over someone else's work because they can produce something that looks aesthetically identical. Personality is only a boon if you have the work to stand out alongside it. Otherwise, if anybody can do what you do without lifting a finger, nobody, save for maybe other disgruntled visual artists, will really care. When you say its much less admirable to generate a piece using AI software, although I do agree personally, I think we're speaking from the perspective of people who love/respect the craft, and the people who partake in it. But the reality is that 90% of people don't really care about artistic 'legitimacy' or 'personality'. They just kinda want what they want when they want it, human costs be damned. And it only seems to be heading further in that direction.

​@@Charles_Bro-son It has already spread on music at least. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/p82glsahzt-9cYk.html Musicians might still have less of an impact from AI, as the imago of the band is still important for many, as are live shows.

@@swiftpitty7045 Idk. Even if someone is lying they need to be able to back up those lies which can only take them so far. What do they do when people start asking for advice on how to draw? Or if they want lessons? Sure the person can try and fake it. People always will but that comes with limits that those with the practiced skill will have. The AI will also need something fed to it to copy the style in the first place so if they want a more nuanced setup they won't have that without making something first. Also your really underselling personality by a lot. Look at every terrible work of art that gets big and people love to hate just for the creators. Sonichu and the movie the room comes to mind. People don't read and watch those for how good they are.

this is on freaking replay

You don't need AI to generate music, many bands are doing it fine for years with simple plagiarism. Using a DAW, samples, tuning, eq matching and quantization you can easly steal any band sound or style using just a laptop. Also, it's faster than any GPU :D

The music industry is way different and more established. One wrong move and you're in deep shit. Spotify was a pain in the ass to get going, and knowing how these programs work, it's not going to be so easy to commercialise, if it's even possible. Just take a look at the ridiculous lawsuits in that industry. It'd be the equivelant of someone suing you over painting something with the same composite as one of their paintings.

It does raise the level. But I still think we will have those artists in the future. The level has been climbing for the last 20 years in a really serious way. Due to readily available teaching and resurgence of good representational art education mostly. Totally agree with your sentiment about formulaic production though!

Great idea! I'll try to do some videos about that in the future. I'll have to think about which books to really recommend. My own knowledge base comes from so many different areas. I think one of the biggest problems today is that there is not a lot of basic advice or info on how business works. There are books on stock markets and self help... and how to be an entrepreneur etc etc. But what I often find is missing is just the basic stuff that helps people understand what they are doing when they get a job, and how that relates to the bigger picture. I'll see what I can do! Thanks for the suggestion!

Don't give up bro. Keep making your comics and keep practicing art. You are going to be really satisfied when you finish your work.

@@doomzier love your attitude man. Keep working towards your goals 💪

There is already AI generated comics, manga, & 3D

@@happyvibes2048 and those are terrible and uncanny as fuck

They can't seem to do action (or sex) very well.

Haha, oh man i feel like that's a landmine for me to step on and prove I'm a wistful old geezer in love with the past... when everything was golden and perfect :) But yeah ok... I think the interesting thing is that when I look on my feeds around the place the artists who are already good at art and comfortably employed create the most interesting AI art. A lot of it comes down to what you learn as you build the craft... developing your eye. Making good choices. etc etc. As you know many people want to think using tools will be easy, but when they try to tangle with something like 3D as a blockout for a painting... or using Daz 3D for figures... you find that if you are not skilled enough the tool the tool ends up using you... not the other way around. When the tool uses you...the results are better than you could have made without the tool... better than the average person can make... but still rubbish. And lacking all charm and uniqueness that might otherwise have saved your piece from being a pathetic dumpster fire of failure, unworthy of any attention or admiration. *BOOM* D:

Keep studing we can fight Ai, they dont have to replace us

You're still screwed.

Dude, c'mon. Are you really following the ai art scene? Even if what you said was true, it would not be for too long

As an artists you will notice all the little mistakes in every ai art. Wrong porportions, weird eyes, wrong perspectiv, wrong placed textures etc…

@@WildVoltorb I saw a beautifully rendered anime super heroine made by Stable Diffusion the other day. Pitch perfect colors, dynamic edges and contrast. Reminded me of old-school splash images made by Loish and Artgerm during their heyday. From the top up, the figure looked perfect, but when you scrolled down the image, the AI had added 2 additional, muscular arms and clavicles to her torso as if she were an alien centipede. If I zoomed in on her face, I noticed that her eyes were looking in two different directions and that the technicolor background of ghostly flowers and Grecian pillars looked like haunted spaghetti. In short, @Dungo Frungus isnt wrong.

@@AironyAi The hands for example lol

That's obviously gonna change

Seriously, these companies openly admitting to mine private datasets without consent for comercial usage Is a class action lawsuit waiting to happen, followed by regulations We seen in past years that big tech is not beyond jurisdiction, tesla, apple, meta and alphabet are being fine in hundreds of millions of dollars worldwide and obliged to operate under regulation We have just stop pretending that Tech is beyond the reach of the law And honestly it were about time

Yeah you are right the printing tech had a huge part in it! Digital totally took over production of animation. I remember 3d taking over and many animators were wiped out. Although today I wonder if there aren’t more 2D animation jobs than at the height of Disney 2D … Learning to animate on paper probably has a lot of advantages! awesome to have that skill set!!

That's a good idea for a video :) My advice is to try and look closely at what the day to day life of people in those specific roles looks like. Often the things that will make you suitable for a particular craft are connected to your personality... how much patience do you have... how much attention to detail do you have... How much do you like working with others vs working alone... Is story important to you... is creative control important to you. Some of these might seem obvious but everyone is different... other people will view those very differently. For instance I'm not very good at rendering and adding a lot of detail... I prefer to work alone by myself... Story is important to me... creative control is important to me... So comics are a good fit :) Other people really want to work in a team. Some people don't care about story... some people want to spend weeks on a single painting... some people cannot handle the constant change and revision that comes with concept art. But it is really hard to figure this out until you try it. Many people take a few goes to really figure out what they like. If you work on your foundation it will give you a bit of flexibility to try different things. (not over a one year period... but rather over 10 or 15 years of experimentation). Also keep in mind that experience in different disciplines will help you to be unique once you do find the thing you really love. So not all time is wasted time. As long as you are constantly trying to improve and get better at what you are working on... it will all help in the end (or at least I have found this to be the case) Let me know if that helps any!

@@TheDrawingCodex thank you for the help it does clear my mind alot ty

that's an amazing idea

Everything comes down to storytelling. If artists can craft a collective story that taints the idea of AI as Art it will take everything down for sure. But so far no one has listened to any of the dystopian fiction. Or at least the majority seem to think that despite the signs...it will never actually happen to them. Remember companies are made of people... and ultimately the decision is made by consumers in a capitalistic system. The fact that it is called 'Art' is GREAT storytelling by the people making this software to sell into a capitalistic system. And so far people are buying into that hook line and sinker. I can't create a video on it without saying AI ART because that's what people search for ;) Thus the dystopia of algorithmic (AI) information distribution is coming to fruition as well. The words define our reality.

Yeah I have found Art Teachers (or teachers in general) can be a mixed bag with career advice. Many of them have chosen to take a teaching role (in most cases very much a Job style role) in place of embracing the marketplace and understanding how to make money in it themselves. There is a tendency to doom and gloom the idea of an art career... even in art teachers. Focus on learning to draw and make art. The real challenge is that the art industry is very competitive. You need to work a lot to get your work to a professional level and find a place you enjoy working. I honestly feel that most of the AI and other doom and gloom career FUD revolves around people not wanting to focus on the task at hand... get good at art. They spend a lot of time not drawing... not making art... and these distractions make them feel better about their skillset. Most teachers at schools and most youtubers are barely past graduate level with their art (from my experience teaching at University/College level over the last 10 years and then comparing graduates folios (from good art schools) to people running youtube channels and giving career advice...) The level of craft people are achieving really quickly because of the internet means that the graduate level is a lot higher than it was 10 or 15 years ago. And it keeps getting better every year. Make sure you are taking advice from people who are actually doing what you want to do, and have a folio to back it up! Eye on the ball! You can do it! :)

No offence but your teacher sounds bad at their job if they're going out of their way to discourage their students from learning

Way better to feel discouraged now than to spend the next fifteen years training and suddenly have the rug pulled out from underneath you.

Yeah I agree with what you are saying here for sure. One of the interesting things to note is that most of the work being done is by engineering types. If you listen to someone like John Carmack talk about his ventures into AI and how fast he thinks it will happen... he seems to view everything in very computational terms. I suspect it is rooms full of people like this who are building the tech. They WANT to think that everything is logical and only comes down to code, because that's how they like to think about the world. The real danger these systems face is design by people with a very limited view of life... and product testing and development by a horde of not very creative artists (in the majority) trying to make pictures with AI because they haven't mastered their own creativity or craft. I don't think it's a good crucible for success. But you never know! :) Thanks for your thoughts!

Hey Pisey! The Line and Color Academy does not have a lot of basic how to draw info so might not be the best fit if you are trying to figure out the basics. I plan to make some more foundational how to draw courses in the future. Line and Color Academy is focused on the process that goes into the line and color style. It has a lot of advice for how to build an art ritual and stage your development. But not a lot of exercises for beginner drawing. The videos on my channel here are probably better for learning the basics right now.

@@TheDrawingCodex Thank you for your response. I’ll waiting for your basic courses.

And those 1000 products will be a bunch of trash compared to artists that put a lot of creative thought and process on their work. I’m not just talking about fence detailed illustrations. Narrative, artistic choice, cohesive panels, references etc. People will naturally look for the products that they will fill connected to, and only an artist (or team of artists) who mastered the creative process and are well versed in communicating through his/their work will be able to do that and shine in the entertainment market.

To use a human made piece of creative media as analogy Take the scene where SpongeBob makes one crustycrab in the same time that king neptune mass produces hundreds But the one crustycrab SpongeBob did was so much tastier that it made neptune eat it twice Anything that is in infinite offer, have lower value We don't fill stadiums to watch e-sports of bot vs bot

Thanks! I’m glad you liked this take :-)

Yeah I want to make some videos on this. I have read so many random books on business and marketing so is hard for me to know what to recommend exactly. I’ll try to come up with some simple recommendations.

@@TheDrawingCodex I look forward to your recommendations.

Awesome thanks for your thoughts! I'm glad this one was a bit more helpful. I think it's easy to be put off by these new technologies for sure. Best of luck!!

Forced watermarks are pointless with the existence of photoshop though. Would make more sense to have every AI generated creation published by the AI itself so you can look up if someone used AI if you're gonna go that route. Personally, I think it makes more sense for the AI to be forced to show the dataset it used though. I'm interested to know how close to the originals it actually is.

Agreed! Although as I pointed out elsewhere… The issue with music is mostly that the music is owned by large companies. Who are very litigious. The actual artists in the music industry get abused way worse than most visual artists. I think the best way to fight back with all this stuff is to control the narrative. I think as soon as this behaviour is described and advertised as it actually is… Stealing. then the narrative will change and maybe people view it differently. Hard to put the genie back in the bottle once they’ve actually trained all the systems though… This is all just the tip of the iceberg with AI and trying to replace people via automation though…

As a musician and a producer I don't really see the point in generating AI music. On one side, music production has become very simple and cheap, on the other the consumer will always want to see his favourite artist live in a concert. AI music is possible, but it's pointless.

@@ChristianIce exactly, the way I see the whole debacle with "creative AI" is that tech bros are (again) trying to solve a problem that does not exist In a world where fields like medical research and material engineering could be seeing exponential aid from AI systems, they instead went on to create a way to replace the human artist Fixing exactly zero problems, and raising a whole slew of new ones

For sure! Honestly, I think that intent is one of the things that has been missing from lot of “art“ lately. One of the things that AI could do… Is make people realise that just kind of creating things is not as important as creating things that have value and emotional significance and human intent… art that is going to influence other people in a positive or really important way. Everyone is really excited about the current crop of artificial intelligence… But I think once that shine has worn off everyone will get really really bored with what it’s doing. Perhaps they can overcome this, but perhaps not? I think that linking up the art and the intent and story and all of these things that people actually care about is immensely difficult. It’s also something that people developing AI are very poorly positioned to implement. They tend to be engineering focused from a mental/spiritual point of view. It will be really interesting to see :-)

you voiced my thoughts. if that's so easy to create something for everybody then who are you going to sell your bright ideas\stories? who is the audience if people get access to the hours and decades of your hard work just prompting your name next to their fantasies? why do they need you as a link? consistent ideas and solid stories that are interesting for most people are about the writers, and not average writers but a very good ones, not the visual artists(mostly). haven't seen an artist that works in the industry of visual arts and as a hobby creates stories and plots like Tolkien haha. and the amount of thoughts and ideas that artist CAN put in their images is easily stolen by prompting your name and training AI on your stuff again. AI is a replacement, not a tool (for the current state of laws).

Meh. AI art is just the new toy, today everybody wants to play with it, generating his Davinci thing, making a funny avatar or putting his cat in space. THe same happened with Deepfakes. It was big for a couple of years, now only few are actually using it. Sure, tomorrow a Death Metal band will make his CD cover using AI instead of paying a digital artist, but "innovations" is something AI is not capable of, in a very technical sense, it can only reproduce and mix up what was already done. Now, if I was a doctor knowing that in the near future an AI will just collect analysis and radiographies and make a better diagnosis, I'd be actually worried :)

Ok.

Yeah I can totally understand what you are saying here. Let me elaborate: Keep in mind I don't think much of the current crop of AI software. And I am projecting a lot further into the future when I think about a scenario where an AI could actually replace an artist and steal someone's job. Perhaps 10-20 years minimum. And I suspect it will take over jobs that people no longer want to do by that time. Jobs/roles will keep being lost due to automation. But if we look at something like the videogame industry... where tasks are always being re-deployed to software... there are more jobs than ever. More artists employed than ever. I think the creativity and humanity will the most important things. I am imagining in those situations creating a game based on something I have already created... and the process will still need a huge amount of input and direction. (Still very doubtful the tech will get anywhere near being able to just make a game of quality by some random person talking to it). Or for an AI to color a comic page it would need to know how I already do it to be useful. Otherwise my work would look like everyone else's... And I would have no way of editing it. It's also likely that the automation will only be possible with properly licensed AI models, or if it's derived from the same artist's original work. I don't see how the legal side of it can work otherwise. So I think doing the original art that can be a target for automation. Or adding value to a base set of legally derived standard content will still be the norm. The speed and quality will improve... but not much else. The USP (unique aspect of the product/art) will be you :) The ideas/story/humanity/experience/unique insight are what makes the difference now... and for the foreseeable future. Even if it includes advanced proper AGI.

Thanks so much for sharing your thoughts!! Everything you say here totally tracks with me. I’ve been around these technological revolutions for awhile. When I first started studying… It was just at the end of the paste up era when quark express and page layout programs were starting to come on board. I’ve seen the digital art revolution. The photo bashing revolution . The 3D revolution . Things like Diaz 3-D and older programs that create environments and worlds and characters easily. The bottom line is that there is no point stepping in front of this train. Like you say it’s pointless to shake your fist at the gods. The technology moves on whether people like it or not. It’s possible to market yourself in opposition to these technological revolutions. Branding yourself as traditional, or boutique, etc etc. But complaining about it has never done any good from my experience. Everyone right now is benefiting from technological revolutions that wiped out entire industries and jobs and made people‘s lives an absolute nightmare. It’s just the story of humankind. The story of evolution… that’s why I keep making these videos :-) but the negative response seems surprisingly strong!! Bottom line for me… Is to keep drawing. keep working on foundation and do you things that AI can’t. Or lean into it and use it much as you can.

Right on!

I agree 100%. I think this is a really likely way it will go. And I also think it will be great for artists, and creativity in general. I think it’s better to view the current crop of AI generative art as a tool for non-artists and people who will never and would never be able to muster the skill and dedication to develop their craft. I think this is actually not the worst thing. It allows them to be creative and do their thing. I think the problem is when they consider themselves to be “Artists“ it’s the tool that is being the “Artist“ not them. But it does give them an outlet. Which I think is important… I think it’s unacceptable and unethical to use the large data sets to achieve this goal however. Hopefully they can find a better way to do this in the future and avoid the plagiarism that is going on right now.

Absolutely. Thanks for sharing your thoughts! I feel that the technology and the legal/ethical side of it are best left separate. Once the utility is proven, they will find a way to make it legal and ethical (in the same way stock footage and concept artists stealing photos off the internet is ethical...). Then we are right back where we started...for better or worse. It's not the best hill to die on. The issue of ethical re-use and artists being exploited over the years is a much much bigger issue that has very little to do with AI.