Artists don't understand Ai art... yet

**EDIT - I know you can get Ai generative tools locally, where the morality of big business does not hinder what you make. I should have made this more clear in the video, my point is more regarding the gatekeepers of these tools.

Most Ai Artists can't make 'art' with ai generators as many are else still unable to wrap their head around Ai. I talk about how we historically approach new ideas and why there's a hidden problem with ai generators and digital art in general.

Timestamps
00:00 Ai Art & Futurism
01:00 The Ai Toolmakers are in charge
02:30 The concept of M.A.Y.A
04:15 Art vs commercial Art
06:04 How we access new ideas
07:37 Where are the artists?
10:33 Art must be allowed to shock
12:11 Why Ai art tools are limited
13:59 Conclusion

[samhamper]

A few people have commented that you can get Ai generative tools locally, where the morality of big business does not hinder what you make. I should have made this more clear in the video, my point is more regarding the gatekeepers of how the average person accesses these tools, eg midjourney and where they can share their work without censorship. I'm learning loads from comments as I'm a traditional artists trying to keep up with whats happening, so i really appreciate everyones input!

[GodOfMoxie]

Never mind your take on the AI stuff, you're also on point that the online markets are stifling creativity, be that books made to be within amazons guidelines or even something as niche as table top role playing game where in the 80s and 90s new ground was being explored but now almost everything is just a skin of dungeons and dragons. Movies and video games are also obvious suffering from that safety net the companies are afraid to risk going out side of like they use to do.

loving this channel, keeps me inspired to make something new.

[helldeirch]

I don't think ai art is a medium, people who type into prompts are not artists, they're more like clients, that person who paid you to make a painting is not the artist

[IlSinistero]

The problem I see with AI art has more to do with capitalism - take automation, in it self a good thing, ppl need to work less, could have more free time etc, but in our capitalist world it means a loss of jobs, ppl without money etc. With AI art unfortunately it will be the same, of course there will be ppl who will use it to make fantastic new art, but on the other hand, for corporations it will be another tool to get rid of „the cost factor of labour“…

[-by-_Publishing_LLC]

As an artist who creates mural-size oil paintings, I see the potential of AI-produced art, but it's only pulling from whatever information that's been made available to it. Many artists pull imagery from inside their unique, self-aware consciousness which can result in new styles of art. Until A.I. can *"pull something new out of its own self"* it will remain as random assemblages of images that mimic art.

[rocketbird]

Your video is of capital importance. As a digital artist, I've struggled all my life against the push for conformism enforced by online platforms. The result is a generation of artists drawing pretty girls or superheroes to get a couple more likes.
What's more, sharing ideas is very difficult: a person-to-person approach is what has allowed people to confront each other, critique and grow, while today's digital landscape is hyper-individualistic and opposed to the creation of an involved community of artists. The lack of "inherited spaces" is something I'd never thought about.

I would be tremendously interested in you expanding on the theme of the most popular trends in digital art not representing the human condition. I've never seen someone express this concept with such lucidity of thought.
I hope your next video treats the "Hyper-human fantasy art" and its pure aestheticism.

[cmilkau]

The German language distinguishes between artists and artisans, although their works are not always easy to distinguish from each other for the average spectator. Within these semantics, AI is merely an artisan and no artist. It still can, in cooperation with a human instructor, create works of art. This has happened in history before, where artists instructed other people to physically manifest their vision. There are also parallels to photography, which is now recognized as a tool for everyday use as well as creation of fine art.

[bongbonglelina]

Every Human being artist is "unique", "original", and with a "heart". That is beauty and "art itself".

[kenzorman]

Ai is not just another tool, or another just movement, it is pointless to make these comparisons, and fundamentally downplays what is about to happen.

[agaspversilia]

I see AI "art" as just decorative art, like those prints you purchase at a supermarket or wallpapers you use on your pc screen. They can be stunning, but they are not the real thing. What I mean is that a work of art is something unique, that exists in the real world as an object produced - crafted - by a human being after careful planning, reflection, introspection, exploration of own limits and hopes. A human being who has knowledge and the will to break boundaries and find ideas then put them on canvas or any other medium the artist uses as his tool and mode of expression.

Art is NOT typing a bunch of words in Midjourney and call it art, unless you are happy to call art an "human-inspired imagery fully created by Artificial Intelligence"

So art is what appears on my blank canvas after many hours of work, brushes and oil paints as my tools. Maybe my art is crap, maybe I'm a unskilled artist but what I paint is on my walls, unique and tangible, the product of my soul.

I'm already sick of the deluge of AI "art" that is now everywhere, smothering the work of people who spend countless hours in their studios until it's like they cease to exist. Too much background noise will kill human creativity, or just make it inconsequential

[hanh]

I'm severely affected by this mentally. This is more of a personal thing, but I put a lot of baggage to 'oh, i can draw cartoons' as part of my self-esteem, so when anyone can simply 'create' art, means my value diminishes. I need to learn to detach myself emotionally from art to pick myself up.

Objectively though, it's still sad that it comes to this. Pro-AI art will obviously be happy with this no matter what. It's like magic. I can imagine being excited with this if I can 'create' my own art, without learning how to create it conventionally. Imagine what you can do with it. Exploit it in so many ways. I've seen tutorials on Youtube on how to make money making AI generated sticker designs for example. I refuse to see AI artist as 'artists'. A new term/tag/category should be made for them. Like creative prompters, or AI maker, AI Art Creator, or something, anything. Just not artists.

Update Edit:
Hey everyone, I appreciate all the comments and I've read most of them. Some of them are information that I already know, some are an eye-opener, some are leaning more towards tough love, which I appreciate for being real. There's some comments that I disagree with but you know, agree to disagree. I do see the potential of AI art, it's an amazing and Powerful tool. I appreciate creatives or artists who use AI art to elevate themselves, as in, using AI art with a human touch. Like 20% AI, and 80% human skill, an AI-Human fusion. There are those who uses AI very productively as part of their creative workflow instead of just simply using AI art exclusively without any human touch (100% AI generated art, direct text to image only). And of course, obviously I don't have any right to define who should be considered as artists or not, this is just my OPINION.

AI art is here to stay. It will be the norm in the future. And there's nothing that we can do about it but to adapt and find ways on how we can leave a space for AI in our everyday creativity. Hope you guys have a nice day. God bless our AI overlords.

[Remington]

The issue is that it’s akin to ordering food at a restaurant, you can give the order but it doesn’t mean you made it

[dzibanart]

commissioners are not artists, if I request a painting with such and such requirements, that does not make me an artist, the same way an art critic or curator is not an artist, a person commissioning A.I. To generate images for them is not an artist.

Also A.I.generates imagery is not art. By definition art is a human activity is not just about the end result, but the cultivation of the skills necessary and the process that goes into the production of one piece, also the artist's thought process required to create the artwork and the message and story.

So yeah what makes art 'art' is human labor. But not just the hours that it took to create one piece, but all the hours that took to learn the skills to make that piece as well. Because of this, Ai generated Imagery cannot be copyrighted... So it has no comercial value.



Art is not just a pretty picture.

[achja]

I really enjoyed the two videos of yours on this topic that I've watched so far. I found the channel just when I became really fed up with all the angry or plain ignorant rejections I encountered on the one side, and the mindless hype on the other.

And while I don't agree with all of your takes, the new perspectives are very much appreciated. Thanks, I'm looking forward to more :)

[dragonslayer]

My main problem with AI art is the fact it draws from other artists' works to create something without any short of talent

It's basically just stomping on people's hard work to create whatever you want with the same effort a Google search would take
Like if I were to copy a piece of art by drawing it myself I at least put down the effort to do so and it will have my touch since it can't be the same since well I have my own art style "you get what I'm trying to say"

[walteralter]

What everyone seems to be missing in this AI vs. art discourse is that art, decent wall hanging art, is no longer rare or precious, it is not a scarcity, it is a surplus. Quality art and craft is bursting the seams at Etsy and other creative online outlets. This fact alone is what is going to make the segue from human made art to computer made art pretty effortless. The glut of art in the market is driving artists who want to "make it" into stylistic quirkiness. In order to do something fresh, the tendency is to unleash one's eccentricity in a realm of imagination that is already a dimension away from reality. The other problem artists are faced with in the world of surplus is that the insights art creates in the mind of the spectator are less than spectacular. As one steps into an art gallery from the street, the immediate impression is one of a "mismatch" between the tactile milieu of the street and a room filled with oddities that puzzle and confuse with bizarre juxtapositions, little isolate universes often surreal to the point of meaninglessness. The age or artistic "isms" is long gone. Trends or fads in art become impossible when the intensely personal aesthetic of the artist explores their subjective psyche for money. An AI made "photograph" has already won first prize in a prestigious photo exhibition. Art as a spectator sport is dead.

[mowensth]

I know this is just one example but it might help to explain why you don't see the fringe artists for AI atm. Me and a group of friends have been playing with it making art sharing ideas and experimenting for months now but we're all anxious introverted nerdy types and we would be terrified and unprepared to publicly share anything we make as there would be backlash. I'm not trying to point fingers, it's understandable at the minute, this is new to everyone. As I said it's just one example but maybe it points to the type of people who are generally experimenting with AI art atm

[SylvesterLazarus]

This will sound strange and maybe totally irrelevant. Apologies in advance due to the possibility that I might've missed something, my English is still not at the level I'd consider to be good enough for deeper conversations about art in genereal.

If I understand correctly you're saying that AI will fundamentally change what we know and think about art now. My biggest fear about AI is the infinite possibilities to take away even more value from art than how much it was taken by consumerism in general, until every form of human expression is going to be replaced with a piece of content that fills the same space, but is being created and curated by corporations. Fair enough 9 out of 10 people already don't care about art and about the artists who make them beyond knowing the name of the company who produced that piece of art or knowing the general name of the medium or artstyle, but I'm afraid that the 10th is about to be converted into that too.

According to how I see art now, it is something that is either partially or entirely a product that is used commertially or it is the more classic version which is an act of communication.. that sounded strange... the "piece of food for the soul" as you said it before in the other video. Now if I understand and interpret what you said correctly, are you saying that what you predict is that AI is going to fundamentally change this view of art and transform it into something that is so alien for all of us that we can't even comprehand it with our current understanding of the word? That art as we know it is going to be abolished to open up the way for something we've never seen before.

If that is the case can you honestly say that the reason why I think about it the way I do is because I'm unable to comprehand what comes next? Because the only possibility I see is that corporate AI created content is going to destroy art as a whole until everything in the world that could be created by a human is replaced with an entirely machine made product. If I understand correctly, you are claiming that this way of viewing it must be false due to the fact that I simply don't even know what the future of art is going to look like? I just can't convince myself that there is any sort of place for a human creator of art of any kind in the society of tomarrow. I feel like I wrote down this whole comment to cope with this fact and to seek comfort in someone's approval who thinks otherwise.

[artfx]

Imagine if... instead of working out, proper nutrition and effort, you could just describe what body you want and it would happen overnight? What do you think would happen to sports or beauty standarts of society? They would stop existing and wouldn't be appreciated anymore.
This will happen to art. Nobody will care about what you painted or generated anymore. It's dead.

[ctcjxos]

On one hand I agree with you. However current AI models are trained on almost "all" existing images on the internet - while training, the AI remembers the proportions and parameters most commonly used. The next stage is users (people) training/telling the AI which of the AI images work and which don't, training it further on what is important in an image - since most people who use it have no interest in art, it basically train it to be as commercial looking as possible .

The reason I find this problematic is because visual art is a universal language, not dependent on the era you live in or the location - you dont need that to connect with another human though out centuries or cultures. Its one of the earliest ways humans communicated and it deals mainly with existence and the human experience. Automating one of the earliest and most human activities really makes no sense to me, it seems very of cynical. What I've seen is mass producing stuff in the style of someone - commercializing further the voices of existing artist's, but not making something new. AI might be the newest and most complex medium ever, but at the same time its the only one in the entire human history which doesn't feel like it produced something which wasn't done before by other mediums, unlike any other medium it has no unique quality which distinguishes it - like marble from wood or digital from oils. Even the art movements you mentioned - they started with an idea which made them different and interesting from their very begging, AI image generators were funded by people who wanted to mass produce NFT's or overtake the most commercial sectors in the entertainment industry. In a sense AI art gives you ONLY the choices that were made so far by others, while robbing you from your own - which in itself is very anti-art on a level which punk or dadaism can't be compared to.