#I believe that AI is a tool like many other tools that can have both positive and negative uses... like anything else

[scarletfasinera]

Got blocked before I could ever even see the message lmao. The answer is that I am a Communist, and as a Communist, I've read Wage Labor & Capital. hope this helps

[genericpuff]

ok as someone disabled with severe motor skill issues i really hate the argument that "anyone can learn art" and that it's completely accessible to everyone. it's not. there are lots of disabled folks who are getting left out of this discussion with the ableist argument that anyone can do art and if you can't you're just not trying hard enough (which is an argument a lot of abled people tend to use against disabled folks in general). i'm against ai art and will never use it but we have got to stop acting like art is an accessible hobby to everyone because there is unfortunately a lot of people who would love to become artists but will never be able to because of our disabilities.

nah you right! I try to be mindful of that sort of thing but it does admittedly fly under my radar at times because I'm not someone living with a physical disability (and thus it's not as front-of-mind as someone who is) so thanks for catching me on that, many apologies. My argument was regarding the people I've seen who have exclusively used "well I've tried to learn how to draw and it's hard / took too much time / etc." as their driving argument (of which there are just. so many) when like. these are realities for many artists who have been doing this for years, too, including those who are disabled. yeah, making art takes time and practice and a lot of hard work! welcome to the party LOL

but I also understand how keeping that argument so simplified can be exclusionary to those who do genuinely face barriers when pursuing art due to living with disabilities. I've met and observed the work of many disabled artists - webcomic artists, game designers, musicians, etc. - who are out there making their stuff and it comes with all its own unique struggles that shouldn't be forgotten about or overlooked in the discussion regarding AI art, struggles that bar many people from even getting into making art from the starting gun.

I do genuinely believe that art can come from anywhere, that anyone is capable of expressing themselves through whatever medium that compels them... but you're right that many artistic mediums in and of themselves are not wholly accessible to everyone. And I hope to god that more tools are developed to help those who are both working artists as well as aspiring ones.

But AI, in its current state, just isn't one of them. And I'm seeing this sentiment being yelled from the rooftops by many disabled artists who firmly believe that the ends do not justify the means - that they don't want the medium to become more accessible if it comes at the cost of other artists (many who are disabled themselves!) whose work and livelihoods are being replaced with cheap carbon copies. AI art doesn't allow anyone to actually participate in the joy of creating straight from the heart, it just takes from others' joy and spits it back out with an impression of what it thinks the joy of creation is supposed to look like through lifeless pixels. That's not even getting into just how much damage it's already actively causing to our environment, and how quickly AI has started to replace other surrounding industries as well.

Separately from that, you're right, paying for art is a luxury for many, but that's all the more reason why we shouldn't be supporting the current climate surrounding AI IMO which is the crux of what my argument was in that previous Simpsons meme post. Many people do face severe limitations in trying to create their art; the people I'm referring to who are heavily pro-AI are often not those same people and only face the limitations of their own entitlement, which is destroying the livelihoods of many human artists. Is it worth participating in AI art to save money if that same participation perpetuates a growing system that's costing people their livelihoods?

Maybe some day we'll get AI tools that are less predatory and destructive and help those who want to create art do so. Maybe we'll finally get some stricter regulations around what companies are allowed to get away with in their respective industries. I'd like to think also that the rise of AI art will, by extension, make human-made art all the more valuable. And I'd be lying if I said I didn't wish for tools that made making webcomics just a teeeeny bit more efficient without being completely unethical LOL But until any of those scenarios prove to be true, we're dealing with a monster of our own design that will never stop eating even after we've all been consumed. The toothpaste is out of the tube.

[jkftkth]

Sabotaging taekook is not only to elevate their fav member but also to undersell them to negotiate contracts. These people think they are so smart. If bangpd wants to keep taekook under his thumb the best way would be to sabotage them differently. Hybe undersell Taehyung deliberately to make it look like he is nothing without group. And only promotes Jungkook on their conditions (AYS!). I think everyone remembers how weird it was that company didn't contact Jungkook for anything. I don't know much of that is a fact but looking at history of whatever Jungkook has achieved is either distributed with the group or attached with fanship narrative. They also elevated the third member with heavy promo to show they are not dependent on taekook and oversell to investors. On the surface it looks like one is getting everything and the other nothing. Result: constant fight wars between both of their solos. Fandom will believe they are not close and group who supports both of them (tkk) will be mocked and labeled deranged.

If taekook were any less of people or had no United front, company would have done much worse. I don't claim to know what goes inside their heads or how they negotiate but BANG PD is greedy first. While his ego is huge and he will do anything to sabotage anyone who he can't control (Tae), money matters a lot. This way even after sabotaging Tae, his pockets are filled because fans want to outdo each other.

This is a classic but cheap strategy many conglomerate adopts.

it’s a very cheap strategy i agree.

if there’s one thing any of us should take from the current report drama, is that hybe doesn’t respect their artists. they talk about them, and also other idols who are under different companies apparently, as mere products and experiments. i said this to @charjube on here, but the contents of their report reminded me of how army act in fandom wars because the wording was very similar. that in itself should tell you that the writer of this report is chronically online, and deep in our spaces, and his analysis, if we can even call it that, has no real basis.

the contents are only narratives they need to push. we should be asking ourselves why are these narratives important, and what role are we playing in spreading/accepting/challenging these narratives.

when you keep that in mind, it makes you cautious of what to believe, and i think that’s very important right now. i personally know that from this point onwards, i’m taking a step back away from army and solos’ opinions whenever something new happens, because they are biased and based around intense emotions, and those emotions are so often a product of hybe’s manipulative tactics. and i don’t want to fall for that. people who are falling for that are throwing either of t/k under the bus.

i’m seeing so much drama especially today, so i thought i’d answer your ask now, but when we want to have a conversation about mistreatment and sabotage, we need to understand that things have to be separated for us to get somewhere that’s not a fandom war. jk can have been given tools for his album that tae never got and still have been denied basic protection of his well-being and his reputation.

the tools were more about needing to portray bang pd and scooter as “success makers” (bang pd literally tried to make it out that if scooter hadn’t been involved, jk’s album would’ve been in trouble) than it was about the person’s “privilege” or himself. because if the company really cared for the person himself, jk’s schedule would have been a healthy one that didn’t prioritize promoting another member, and his rumors circulating on DC would’ve been shut down immediately regardless of whether that would bring “hate” to the member who’s fans were being malicious, and he wouldn’t have been stalked and harassed, and he wouldn’t have been stripped of his autonomy for his own success and he wouldn’t have been trash talked on blind by staff. where’s the respect here to be found?

unfortunately, a lot of tae solos think that good promotion = the company has your back. if the company had jk’s back, they wouldn’t have a vip membership to sojang.

the company has bang pd’s back. they’re out here embarrassing themselves at the national assembly just so bang pd can carry on pretending he hasn’t been summoned for questioning. bang pd is after his own career. he’s moved towards focusing on his branding in the US and so jk was used conveniently to promote hybe america, because mediaplay is all bang pd has going for himself.

moving on to tae, if there is any tkkr, jk biased or tae biased, who still believes that what he’s being put through is similar to anyone else, or even remotely on a similar level to the rest, we have a problem. he is being beaten down. his career is being toyed with. he is seen by the company as a convenient shield/experiment for later group situations. his achievements are being erased, manipulated, distorted. staff are being told to make up hate to undermine his success. smear campaign after smear campaign. no protection. but apparently heavy monitoring. sneakily swaying fandom opinion and apparently staff opinion of him to make him seem like an outsider. the list goes on.

there is no artist protection when it comes to taekook. there is no respect. there are just narratives and bang pd’s ego. because if you think, that all the discourse and reactions since solo chapter weren’t all instigated by the company, go back to putting your head in the sand.

at least k-kths and k-jjks understand.

[velvetjune]

replayed The Lake House dlc, so more of my thoughts under spoilers! (This is long)

I cannot believe how many things I missed during the first run of this game:

1. The whiteboard of the AI Alan Wake manuscript pages produced with evaluations. One repeating the word “scream” for half of a page gets praise for its wording and tone. “Pistol looked at flashlight in shock.” It must’ve been so much fun for the writers to make up all of these.

2. Jules Marmont has extra footage directly after the Dr. Darling video on the second floor if you go back. I don’t know what exactly triggers this video, but it was when I was doubling back to get the black rock weapon.

3. The research archives appear normally from above, then shift multiple times, before returning to normal (… as normal as the shelves infinitely repeating is). This happened in the first playthrough, but I was stressed over my survival and never noticed.

4. The research archives actually go through areas with different mediums/classifications. There’s tagged artifacts/photos, tapes, film, books, and it ends with paintings. It’s nothing mind bending, but the detail was nice to see.

5. Diana’s tape on the tortured artist and human experimentation. This, with Jules’ video, only added to their monstrosity.

I wouldn’t be surprised if the Black Rock Launcher is used in a similar way in FBC Firebreak. It wouldn’t be the same, but this felt so much like a set up for the kind of strange and innovative tools that FBC employees experiment with, especially when trapped in a lockdown at the Oldest House with access to Black Rock Quarry. Maybe Emily can finally make her black rock knives!

It’s hard to not think of Alan and Alice when it comes to any other creative characters in relationships in this game and the hardships with balancing that sorta life. There’s the Bookers with Tammy, a successful true crime writer and attempted poet (!!!), and Ed, a playwright trying to get recognition and feel inspired. It feels right that he would end up taking Wake’s work to write the Marmonts (also with shades of Alan and Alice) into their own supernatural lakeside cabin, fit with a marriage that’s falling apart.

The actors for both Marmonts are incredible. They both perfectly portray their outrage, jealously, and stubbornness that’s consuming their relationship and work. This mad scientist drama could easily end up too cheesy, but they sell it. Love that these negative emotions and their attempt to enforce it on artists for their suffering lead to the crack in the lake house through them. There’s so many things to pick at in this dlc, whether for the relationships, work environments, ai, artists, etc.

Only for this bullet point, but Final Draft Spoilers: Diana thinking of Jules’ smile as her last moment before being taken, while Jules’ last moment (‘Breakthrough in the Lake House’ page) is feeling pride over his work…………

I want more office drama for horrible mad scientists for Control 2. Honestly I want anything Control 2

After briefly checking online, I’m proud of myself for quickly solving the calendar problems. I actually really liked this kind of simple task to find little clues and, by doing so, getting to know the people through their passwords. I’m terrible anything with puzzles, so very grateful to have this over something elaborate or. math.

The Dylan scene is also skippable, which is unthinkable (one of the best parts of the dlc!). There’s all this disgust and horror from Estevez towards the Marmonts’ control of the Lake House, only for it to reveal that Dylan was also trapped there and experimented on by Dr. Darling and the researchers there (all approved by Trench!). Estevez isn’t aware of this, but it was a cold reminder of how truly awful it was for Dylan and how fucked up Trench and Darling are for kidnapping a child…. And then abandoning him in a small prison cell.

The horror elements in this DLC were nice, although not extreme. Tbh I don’t consider any of Remedy’s games to be scary, even if they’re still horror, but this had good moments! The distortion of the environment and constant looping made me doubt myself. Jules’ death as a taken was violent (albeit obscured), to the level of Nightingale’s cult attack, if not worse. Loved the emotion from the Marmonts seeping into their taken personalities. Aw1 had more of this and it made the Taken far more upsetting and real.

Sometimes Alan is creepy and I enjoy seeing him through other characters’ eyes. Alan/the Dark Place manifesting manuscript pages that would perfectly dig under the Marmonts’ skins and infect them was unnerving and a little funny. shows they never had a chance. While it’s not physically like that, the words describing the Lake House slowly being sunken into Cauldron Lake and the water dripping in—Chef’s kiss

AWAN had a conversation between the scientist where she discussed fate and agency (…Alan’s indignation at her being remotely critical over her 😭 he’s such an asshole). It reminded me of Diana’s notes on whether Alan wrote and controlled her life. There’s some agency that Alan takes away just by guiding these events and trying to influence people through a story. How much is him actually controlling or changing things is another question, but having that kind of power is scary, especially from another’s POV (Saga, now Estevez and the Marmonts)

Estevez seeing Alan typing the later event of her meeting Saga and THIS being what led the FBC straight to her was a great scene of wrapping everything up. I liked the weird dark goo in the Dark Place. Fun stuff!

Poe <3 Loved this promo of her new song. 6 deep breaths coinciding with Estevez’ reassurance to herself, although the lyrics also could apply to others. Dylan trapped in his cage, yet able to connect to these worlds; Alan (+Alice) in the dark place, then post-game, ‘finding roads everywhere’. I’m playing the first Alan Wake, so the breathing made me immediately think of the deep breaths taken by Tom the Diver throughout that (+ the addition of another voice breathing near the end)

Clay Murphy wrote the screenplay to this and to Number One Fan (Night Springs), which means he might be the funniest person ever

[shrimpmandan]

The current state of AI discourse is baffling to me because I swear to god some people are just developing collective amnesia and dismissing AI art as "not actually being that bad" when the problems with it are significantly deeper than whether or not it's "real art". It being "real art" is irrelevant to it causing tangible harm. Like yeah I don't think someone AI generating an image to use as a reference is some massive evil, but in the greater scheme of things:

AI art is being used to spread actual real-world misinformation. Propaganda.

Ai art is being used to spread CSEM and other forms of revenge porn. It is also threatening the livelihoods of sex workers to some degree.

People are putting their favorite artists' works through a blender, without their consent, instead of paying them, because image generation is instant dopamine.

Big corps are trying to use AI instead of paying artists/writers because they're greedy fucks.

Most AI programs (with few exceptions) are scraping from existing works without the consent of the original artists.

AI voices are doing the same.

A common argument I've seen is comparing these things to like... digital art, photo editing*, voice splicing. You have to understand that the merit of these things isn't that "they take more time/effort". Effort is not an inherent facet of art. Plenty of tools exist to make art easier that we take for granted now-- many forget the discourse that kicked up when digital art was first gaining popularity. The issue is and always will be consent. Most artists do not want their works or voices to be put into AI databanks. The fact that most AI programs do not care for this, and that a lot of companies are trying to swindle their way into getting artist consent under the pretense of "well they didn't say no", is the main issue. We completely lost the plot when we started focusing more on "is AI art real art?" and "is it bad to use AI for any purpose?", because those are both irrelevant to the question of "is AI harmful?", wherein the answer is yes. This is also failing to consider that "real art" can also cause harm for similar reasons: sexual harassment/revenge porn, defamation, propaganda, etc.

*As a note, this is also ignoring the fact that a lot of people DON'T want their art to be edited or even heavily referenced. It's been commonplace in art usage terms for ages now. This is important to note in the context of AI discourse and copyright law. I also believe there is a difference between voice splicing and AI voices since splicing is more limited and way less likely to get someone actually defamed or 'replaced' as a voice actor, and is just a manipulation of existing voice clips mostly for silly shitposts.

AI CAN be helpful. AI can be used to create references, or make smoother rendering, or even just for fun. A lot of people used AI programs in their baby stages without thinking about how the images were generated or the actual consent of the artists involved, because it was a fun shiny new toy. I also like to think most people who have the means to pay an artist ultimately would. But the issue is not and never has been AI making art easier, or people using it for silly shit, or even people using it for serious art refs. The issue is AI mass-scraping existing artwork, being used to facilitate misinformation, and screwing artists out of jobs. Don't even get me started on AI fucking generating CSEM, or revenge porn, and additionally how it impacts the careers of sex workers.

AI is an issue in its current state. Yes, the panic about it taking over art as a whole was overblown, even if the fears were valid. The capacities of AI art is almost always slightly below the capacities of human-made art, and it's something that will quickly fall in popularity once it stops being the shiny new thing. People using AI to make art easier aren't the enemy either, especially since this can be beneficial for people who do it as a job-- shortening the labor time and all. That doesn't mean AI isn't an issue and that everyone critiquing it is actually just an elitist ableist cuck or whatever. None of this really would've been a problem if not for the mass scraping, resulting in both violations of artist consent, and also it picking up genuinely illegal/nasty content. That's what we should be focusing on. None of this "real art" bullshit.

All that said: I personally would say that using most AI programs-- no matter the purpose-- is unethical because of how most of them function. The only exceptions would be for programs that specifically use consensually obtained data. On this front, I would highly recommend keeping tabs on Adobe Firefly, since it's one of the very very few models out there that has stated a clear commitment to not violating the copyright and consent of artists or persons (it operates off of stock footage and public domain).

[plaguedoctormemes]

i'm not deleting my tumblr blogs but this whole debacle with the AI stuff is discouraging me to at least not post original content here and limit my time on social media in general. Also to be clear on my stance on AI, which I think is very much influenced by my background as both an artist and a professional graphic designer: I think it can be a very useful tool and I don't even necessarily inherently find it completely harmful. Some forms of AI are already well used and completely normalized, but I find most of the time generative AI as we know it is pretty harmful and its harms outweighs its benefits currently (largely grifts, scams and misinfo). It needs regulation desperately, but old cunt politicians are too dumb to really care about or understand how important the issue is right now. I do not believe that AI will simply peter off or crash. From a marketing standpoint, i feel like AI usage will cool off or become more specialized (like creating whole machines *just* trained on individual brands for personal use and whatnot) but I have no idea how far away that would be. I just believe there might come a time where everyone is over the "spectacle" of generative AI and will find it inaffective or inherently associated with cheapness. At least in the most base sense in advertising, it is generally much better to have your own photographs and original branded artwork as it proves authenticity. You can only see a illusionist do so many tricks before you're bored by them and expect them, and we're already getting to the point where even the average Joe is tired of hearing about AI and the future, and at least when it comes to art and writing i just... don't care? i don't give a shit about it. BACK TO TUMBLR: I'm aware that its likely that mine and everyone elses' posts here have already been scraped. My thing is that it's more the symbolism of Tumblr's "opt-out" choice: memorial blogs, inactive blogs, and so on are going to be scraped without consent. No banners or pop ups to notify users of this change, you either have to either HAPPEN UPON to see staff's post or see others talk about it to even know about it. Since the beginning of this whole AI boom i had no issue with AI data training as long as it's consentual and ethical, but obviously it most of the time isnt. Tumblr's method of rolling out this change was purposely underhanded. I'm never going to simply be "okay" or normalize in my mind the fact that big tech companies feel entitled to people's privacy- which i believe extends to our online lives. I don't think myself or anyone else should ever feel completely apathetic to the fact that people you don't know, that definitely do not need it, are making money off of you without your consent or knowledge. Just to be clear this isnt about what is and isnt "real art" or whatever for me. It's just a huge distraction from the main point, a big debate that will go absolutely nowhere. What's more important about it is that big techs and billionaires don't have interest in making the world a better place, they only care about eliminating our "distractions" that get in the way of them making money and accumulating more wealth. My solution: We need to make them deepthroat shotguns and machetes.

[slaaverin]

I saw you talk about tarot. I honestly don't know how it works but I believe in them. So idk how to ask this but what does the 2025 of Jikook looks like according to you

Anon, it pleases me to hear you are interested in tarot. It is such a wonderful tool to explore the human psyche!

Unfortunately, even if I am a reader myself, I don't personally do readings about BTS.

I feel like with bluemoonpunch's readings and my own observations, I have enough little insights to please my brain lol

But I can offer my 2 cents about 2025.

My prediction, and I feel I can be entirely wrong of course, is that at first, we won't be seeing much of Jimin and Jungkook.

They will need time to get back to their lives, to settle in, and to focus on their own individual projects, as well as group projects. So I don't think we will be seeing a lot of interactions to be honest.

But I think as time progresses, we will be seeing them more in group settings, they will open up more to us, and we will see them interact as they did before.

I'm 100% convinced if they are asked they will not help themselves and babble about their experience in military and probably give us more insights about the behinds of AYS.

I also don't exclude some interactions during lives.

But I don't think this is gonna be very loud at first, at least I don't expect it.

I also expect them to take some physical distance as soon as they get out of MS (which is perfectly normal and healthy) just to take a breather from each other after spending this much time together.

I expect physical distance ok but I also think they will take time for each other both as well later, just to really reconnect in an intimate matter. Whether it will be through AYS or through dinner dates or other types of dates, or simply spending time at each other's house (which we won't necessarely know about) I don't know.

But I think they will need at some point to spend quality time with each other.

I believe when we see them again in group settings, we'll be getting many moments as we always have.

But maybe it will take some time for everything to settle in. It will all depend on their mindset. We will know more about it if they do a "welcome back" live it will be already enough to assess where they are at.

So let's have patience.

Sorry this is not the answer you probably wanted to hear.

If you want to read tarot readings I recommend you bluemoonpunch's readings on tumblr.

Take care anon 💜

[cypress-punk]

Thinking about Eclipse Phase, a cyberpunk ttrpg with a focus on transhumanism and one of the ideas it brings up in the form of post humans.

So in the setting "transhuman" refers to three groups of beings. The first is humans, like you and me, but in this world basically everyone has a cyber brain and a genetically engineered body or inhabits some sort of fully synthetic robot body but their mind is that of a human. The second is AGI, artifical general intelligences, which are designed to remain at roughly human levels of intelligence and a are engineered to have human like perspectives because AIs allowed to become too smart nearly wiped out the human race fairly recently in the history of the setting. The third is uplifted animals, apes, cetaceans, corvids, parrots, octopi, and pigs which have been genetically engineered to have human like minds and intelligence along with modified bodies that make them more human in body plan (for the apes at least).

This broad and somewhat contradictory set of beings are what you can play as and make up most of the intelligent beings a player might encounter though there are some rather odd aliens and even a weird race of mantis shrimp murder creatures engineered by the bad AIs I mentioned earlier. There are all sorts of contradictions about the category of "transhuman" that the game positions you to explore and challenge in game. Its a very interesting setting in general and worth looking into though the actual rule set is rough (in the first edition, I haven't played the second edition and only skimmed the rules briefly when I read the book)

Anyway that really long preamble out of the way I want to talk about another category of being that exists in the world: post humans. That is to say, if the majority of intelligent beings in the world have become something more than human as it was once understood, these guys have abandoned it entirely. Post humans come in two major flavors from what I recall, Minds, which are people who engineered themselves into enormous brains with equivalently staggering, though alien, intelligence; and Predators, which have abandoned human nature to become pure hunters, highly versatile killing machines that target transhumans as prey, or in some cases have weird space habitats engineered as massive ecosystems over which they are the Apex predators.

Both of these are presented as the result of sort of egoist/objectivist approaches to evolution. In a world where the technology exists to basically engineer a whole viable organism these people have chosen to become something completely unlike what they were. The Minds can be taken as an attempt an organic super intelligence, a piece of meat that can rival the god like AIs that devastated the earth. The predators strike me as a very fascistic view of nature taken to the extreme, seeking to become machines that kill, bending all that you are toward being a weapon. Its almost in line with some Futurist ideas about the body in an industrial world. They also serve as basically stand in for some classic DND monsters. Minds are a lot like Beholders or Elder Brains, Predators can fill many "monster" roles depending on the type of body they've built for themselves.

Anyway I like the post humans because they express an interesting ethos within the setting. Theyre a believable fringe that adds something to the world and provides an interesting element for the players to interact with. But there is one other being in the setting that strikes me as very post human.

There's a description in one piece of fluff of colonies of "barnacles" on certain space ships or habitats. These are extremely stripped down synthetic bodies that are equipped with the tools to affix themselves securely to the hull of some man made object in space and then point a lens at the void of space. A body built for complete isolation and meditation upon the cosmos. A sort of ultimate asceticism. I like the barnacles a lot conceptually.

[imiging]

Hello and good day imiging team! I'd like to point out that the work of petitmonsieur1 that you reblogged recently is not photography, but an AI-generated image. Thus it can not be categorized as original photography on account of it not involving a photographer, a camera and a subject.

I know you caption your reblogs with "daily original photographs and creations", so I guess it still counts as some form of a creation. Although the rest of your reblogs are actual photography, not what petitmonsieur1 is doing.

You'll notice that their creations are entirely digitally created by taking a closer look. Skin, metal, and cloth appear way too smooth, the background is sepia like from a painting, icons and writings are indecipherable. They've even uploaded videos showing how they mess with the creation process, either by adding skeleton makeup to a person (who is posing exactly the same in both frames) or moving a person's head, covered in a knit wool ski mask, up and down from their scarf like a piston. To me those are clear indicators that their creations are not authentic as the photos, paintings and art you showcase here.

With this I hope you at the very least consider removing petitmonsieur1 from the pool of your following. One can argue whether AI-art is art, but since the focus of your page is on photography, that really doesn't have a place here.

Thank you for receiving my input. Kindest regards!

As we are obviously unable to answer directly to this anonymous expert in AI, our response is outlined below.

Dear anonymous,

You will, undoubtedly, be disappointed to learn of our disavowal of your "expertise" in this particular instance as we wish to inform you that AI was not involved in the creation of this image. As we had reservations about your claim and explanations of same, we deemed it patently obvious that our first step should be to direct ourselves to the creative source. Therefore, we messaged Petitmonsieur in order to determine exactly his process and his medium. His response was clear : "I mainly use photos, old paintings, wallpapers...and I crush the pixels as much as possible to obtain a painting effect. If I used AI, the rendering would be of better definition. In fact, I'm tinkering with Photoshop, and I find that the AI ​​stereotypes the images too much."

Upon viewing this particular photo we were, of course, unaware of the creative process (other than what the tags indicated) but we found it to be interesting and quite striking at first sight which resulted in it being chosen.

Furthermore, one might ask, what exactly defines a true photograph these days especially in the world of digitization? With the advent of digital cameras and advances in photography software (Photoshop, Lightroom, etc.) how many of these photographs, including those that started life as a film negative, use some form or other of "digitization" in the making of the final product?

AI is just another step (granted a large one) in that direction and not really so much different than using a "dehaze" or "clarity" filter in Lightroom, Healing Brush Tool in Photoshop or DeNoise AI, to name but a few of the tools used by a growing number of photographers. Even film can be "manipulated" in the darkroom or made into a digital negative and then reworked on a pc. These are all tools used to enhance the artistic aspects/creation of a great number of photographs which are regularly posted and reblogged on the Tumblr platform. (Our apologies to those of you that shoot raw and only post unedited photographs -- we love them too!)

At Imiging, our shared opinion on AI is that it has the potential for making the unreal appear real and believe it has numerous other risks and drawbacks. We have to say that it truly alarms us if only for no other reason than the obvious geo-political implications when AI is used by unscrupulous individuals or governments for nefarious purposes.

Sincerely,

The Editors of imiging

[jadesabbat]

"AI art isn't real art because there's no intent behind it. There's no meaning!"

When you were doodling anime eyes into your middle school notebook, were you imbuing it with a grand artistic purpose or were you simply reveling in the joy of creation? These new tools have allowed so many novices to share in that same joy that's otherwise gated behind potentially years of frustration. The tragedy is capitalism exploiting a potent new tool for a quick buck and exploiting those same novices who otherwise could be given the opportunity to learn and develop the techniques needed to become artists in their own right - and yes there are so many techniques unique to ai art. The tragedy is not that there are now more novices than there used to be so now there are more shoddy works than there used to be.

"AI art is bad art because of the environmental toll"

You're thinking language models, and even that one is shaky when given context of the greater data industry as a whole. But regardless, I could build and run an image model off a cheap laptop. It's no more intensive than any other image rendering, and it's certainly not what's burning the planet down. Quit blaming individuals for what oil and plastic companies are doing.

"AI art isn't real art because the only audience is the prompter themself"

I am the audience now. Ai art is enriching my soul and there's nothing you can do about it. If an ai image you happen across stirs your own heart or mind, consider letting it

"AI art isn't real art because you don't put effort into it"

We fundamentally disagree on what art even is, to the point that I doubt anything I say would ever convince you otherwise. You will absolutely not be able to convince me of your position, so please spare us both a frustrating argument

"AI art isn't real art because it'a not made by a human"

False, but let's assume for a moment that a human isn't the driving force here. Is a sunset art? Are the waves on the beach art? Are the arms of the galaxy embracing our sky art? Certainly they're striking images, often even moving. But here we could potentially run into philosophical conflict on the nature of art. Personally, I believe that art is found within the heart of the viewer rather than the creator. And certainly the artist's intent influences the piece - how could it not - but I do not believe the splendor that I associate with art to be bound to human hands. After all, as several composers such as john cage have demonstrated, the very world around us is music

"That belief is insulting to real artists!"

My apologies? Okay look, I do understand that it feels bad to have your work be interpreted differently than you want. It sucks, it can really hurt and feel like you're not being heard at all, and sometimes a work with a very important message reaches out to an audience that just pisses all over those poors. That fact remains though that we are not entitled to each others' hearts. A person's thoughts and emotions are their own, and they *cannot* be compelled to feel what an artist feels. Sometimes we just gotta accept that no work will ever be for everyone, no matter what our economic system tells itself

[damnfandomproblems]

https://www.tumblr.com/damnfandomproblems/754768130433302528/5168-that-one-anon-get-the-fuck-out-of-fandom?source=share

Just who are you talking to lol?

"""That One Anon: Get the fuck out of fandom then if you are That against "theft". Your blorbos aren't yours, then, they belong to the original creators. Go pick up a pen and write your own characters, thief. Never make a creative aspect without citing every single possible subconscious influence you took for it. That head tilt you drew? The concept of a sad backstory? Proper credit only, you thief."""

You sound like anne rice.

The difference anon is not about the characters. No one is claiming they own characters from certain shows, or claiming that they are their own original designs.

Its about how AI datasets are trained on the art of other artists without their consent.

People love fan art. Most if not all smaller artist will love you if you decide to draw or write fan pieces about their characters. Games and shows would not be as popular as they are without fandoms. Many encourage the making of fanart and fanfic. I know genshin impact for example expressly allows the selling of fan made merch and even hosts hoyofair for fans to show off their fanart and such. Its not theft to draw a character but its theft to claim it as your own.

Its theft to generate images made from stolen artwork and claim it as your own original "art".

You also don't understand the concept of copyright laws.

"""Oh, what's that? You don't count?""

I do count actually. If i made a game and stole the characters from a bunch of other games and tried making money off it while claiming them as my own i would actually be in trouble.

Transformative works like fan art and fanfic dont count usually because these days by default as long as you dont try and claim it (the characters and canon stuff) as your own, you are more than allowed, encouraged even, to create and sell those things. Unless its disney. Because disney sucks.

Im probably not the best person to explain these nuances to you

Please actually educate yourself about transformative works.

"""I read books daily. I write and draw from pure imagination, and study artists on youtube to get better at drawing."""

Good for you? So do i lol?

"""I also think AI is a tool that can be used for good or ill, and it's how people use it that matters. Much like how a keyboard doesn't stop a human from sending anon hate."""

I tried responding to this but it got so long and convoluted that im just going to hope someone else has the patience to answer something as ignorant as this.

"""I'd commission artists if I could! I've done so in the past. But guess what, I don't feel safe asking for commissions now on the off chance a artist realizes I think AI is a tool like any other and harasses me when I never would have brought it up. Despite the fact many artists both fandom and original have tons of influences both credited and not. I've seen human artists and writers get accused of AI for STYLISTIC CHOICES that anyone with half a thought should be able to tell was artist intent and inline with previous works."""

1. That's a personal problem dude. Maybe you should reflect on why artists might not like you for using something that actively steals their work. Also this low-key screams entitlement.

2. What does the rest of that have to do with anything. I think you forgot to connect why any of that was important.

"""I can count on one hand the amount of collage art/blackout poetry/drawn over photographs I've seen in public museums that were properly credited beyond the editor. I can't count the amount of media I've seen that nudges at other pre-existing works that was either hyped up for it or was said to justify that aspect."""

I believe you should actually do some research on those things before bringing up your surface level observations in your argument.

"""Ko-fi tipping, Patron subscriptions, sales of generically labled charms and prints and fanart to get around what's Actually being sold. Art style memes, art referenced from canonical works as intentional homage uncredited. Uncredited style inspiration. The entire existence of unsourced, constantly remixed memes.

You gonna claim that's all fine, but anons should expect to be accused of being "techbros" and linked to foreign words meaning "masturbating and crying" for just asking what an artstyle from a artist is called? That it's actually FINE to drive off people wanting to be creative no matter the medium because that particular one 'isn't art' and so no one can want to be a artist and use it?"""

See that all falls apart if you would all just realize stuffing stolen art into a machine, putting in a prompt to get a random result, is not creativity. There is nothing creative about that.

Best analogy i can come up with rn is thats almost like me searching for "powdered donuts" in the walmart online store and just picking whatever one i think looks best and then claiming i made the donuts. Instead of going to a bakery and custom ordering exactly what i want or making it myself.

The biggest difference between AI and other artforms is that what AI produces and generates is not creative. Theres no actual thought or consideration going into most of the work.

The machine itself is amazing. The programming needed to make such a thing function properly is actually impressive. But what it produces is not creative. And if you knew anything about how these machines and programs worked you would be able to understand that.

"""I swear I've gone back to the 2010s and 'is digital art REAL art though? the computer draws the line for you? You aren't a REAL artist, you just use photoshop to edit things.'

"That's still done by a human person though-"

Hypocrite. Get the fuck out of fandom."""

Again. If you actually understood how "AI" works you would understand the difference.

Its not hypocritical and this is a false equivalence. You are ignoring the process which differentiates these things in favor of focusing on the fact they are both machines.

In digital art it is almost no different that traditional. The difference being it doesnt use materials, and you have the cool undo and redo button, and other effects buttons you would not get with traditional art. You also dont HAVE to use those things and you are forgetting that you have to learn how they work and use them MANUALLY.

People who use digital art dont claim its easier either. Its more convenient. But as a digital artist, its imcredibly difficult and time consuming depending on what im making. I have a personal project that has 170+ hours on it. Even with all my fancy buttons ive had to go back and redo things countless times and fiddle with things. I have to deliberately choose what color goes where, what brush to use, what layer setting i need ect ect. And its all original.

Saying digital art isnt real art is like saying driving an automobile doesnt count as driving because you have a bunch of buttons and levers to do what you want instead of ordering horses around on a wooden carriage.

With AI the machine does everything for you. Its about the same as googling a picture of a bunny (typing a prompt), choosing a picture (taking what's generated), and posting it and claiming its your own. (Theft)

So no. People who use AI can get the fuck out of fandom. Thanks.

Posting as a response to a previous ask.

[meruz]

im gonna reply to some asks but not that many bc the last time i tried to type up one of these posts i accidentally closed the tab and lost like several paragraphs so now im scared

lots of heavypaint questions

@porch-gremlin

its the fan tool on heavypaint!! which is a free drawing app that i love a lot. and the fan tool is my fave its kind of a crutch actually im trying to use other tools gkfdhgsdg but its so fun i can do a whole painting using it exclusively. heres a video of it in action while i mess w the configuration options. u can slide the noise jitter up and down so its more or less streaky hehe ^^

thank you!!! heavypaint ROCKS!!!!! I love it... its like the only art program ill be a shameless shill for lol

also im flattered you think of my art while playing splat...i should draw more splat i feel like i havent done enough.

my phone!! I have a samsung galaxy note 20 that I am still not done paying off LMAO.... but I've been a galaxy note user for years. combined with heavypaint its a shockingly good mobile sketchbook.

I'm sorry it's crashing on your tablet... I don't have a tablet so I don't really have an advice. Unfortunately because HP is a small dev app it can be kind of finicky... especially in between updates. I think if you reached out to vaughn ling/heavypoly he'd probably respond though! he seems to keep up with the community pretty well.

@hellisrealsign nice nice.. I'm glad our tastes match up a little! hopefully that means you don't mind my frequent fandom jumping LOL. I promise to always be true to my homestuck-loving infinity-train-loving self.

LMAOOOOOO I HOPE YOU HAD A GOOD TIME? (covered in blood)

idk is it worth it to read any shounen manga for female side characters?????? (??) HEAVILY DEBATABLE. on one hand the casual observer would say no but on the other hand femslash shippers are the strongest people on god's green earth and will endure great tortures for paltry table scraps.

I think mha is a good manga but it's still a shounen, some of the tropes they squeeze the girls into kind of suck. I can kind of put my annoyance aside because regardless im still a big fan of cool fight scenes and the power of friendship but I think your mileage will vary depending on how much tolerance you have for that kind of story...? There's an awful lot of chapters afterall. I will say this: though toga and ochako aren't the main characters they're not in the background either. the path of their relationship spans multiple arcs across the entire manga and is both plot relevant and relevant to the greater themes/thesis of the story. it's pretty clear that the mangaka and editorial team are dedicated to giving these characters the time and page space to play out. it's not perfect but thats better than a decent amount of big shounen femslash in my opinion? shrugs

Thank you! for both the compliments and the concern. but I want to assure you that... to be perfectly honest I don't think I'll ever stop posting my art regardless of AI. I don't want to make this into a hot take like this is an entirely personal opinion and I don't expect any other artists to share my position but: Everything about my art that I consider valuable is inherently impossible for AI to replicate and everything about my art that is replicable and monetizable is not something I'm interested in owning or protecting. (this is also why at the end of the day i dont really care that much about art theft, tracing etc. and i think 90% of the time style theft is just silly)

I believe art should be freely shared and to restrict that is to make art into a product which is morally despicable and moreover uninteresting... to me. lol. I DO RECOGNIZE HOWEVER I'm very lucky to have both more of an online audience than I even want + a fulltime job that takes the pressure off any of my other art to make money. it's totally valid for other artists to have differing opinions on this especially depending on personal circumstances. AND also I make art that is primarily a product above all else for work everyday so im a hypocrite but. yeah thats my two cents.

I love posting art online LOL. I do it because its fun for me.

HAPPY NEAR YEAR!!!!!!!!!11111111

[ai-or-not-ai]

Things to know:

I do not think AI art is inherently evil and terrible. I believe that if the art is clearly labelled and that if the generators are collecting their data and operating their services ethically that it is a perfectly fine tool to use. Unfortunately, as far as I know, that is not currently the case.

the true problem with certain uses of AI is capitalism

In that vein, I hate when AI art gets shown around completely unlabelled. If you claim AI art is its own art form it is imperative to label it as such at least in your tags to prevent confusion between digital or traditional artwork that was created manually.

So many of these AI images are stolen from the accounts that originally posted them. I’m not sure whether I personally consider that theft or if it is even legally theft, but in the process of reposting the picture they leave out important details like the fact it was AI generated in the first place.

These are all my personal opinions. This blog is not intended to be a place for me to open myself up to a bunch of discourse. I may reblog posts about AI but I will not engage with you if you are rude and incensed. That will get you blocked.

I myself am predominantly a digital artist (and sometimes a traditional artist when the mood strikes me) as well as a student of art history. This is my point of view as someone with knowledge in both historical artistic movements and the creation of art itself.

If you do not want to come across AI art I suggest blacklisting related tags. They will not always be labelled but many are.

Some tools that are called ‘AI’ have been around for years or serve extremely useful functions that do actually reduce the amount of tedious tasks a human would have had to perform previously. Such as generative fill tools in photoshop when used to edit a flaw from a photo, etc. AI has become a tech buzzword applied to any and every technology (usually for the sake of getting investors excited about it). This blog is mainly focused generative AI. Mainly images, but also sometimes LLMs (large language models) like ChatGPT or video/sound generation. I am not talking about the kinds of AI used by game devs to help NPCs function without coding every single one yourself or how in the Spiderverse movies they coded an ‘AI’ tool to help the 2D lines follow the 3D forms. There are many different kinds of tools called ‘AI’ and it has become a functionally useless term in some instances, as there are many varied forms it takes and often the classic idea of artificial intelligence from sci-fi (being a computer that thinks for itself) is not the actual implication.

If you are worried about energy usage involved in AI generation, please direct those criticisms to the organizations operating the models. They are the ones who are most responsible for that and the ones who can actually make a material change (and some indeed have been trying to).

The best thing you can do to ‘fight’ the negatives of AI is supporting independent artists.

We are all human beings who make mistakes (including me! please, I want you to always use your own critical thinking skills!) Give each other grace.

Post labelling

I will do my best to find the original source, including the original poster and what generator was used if I am able.

I will tag the posts with ‘ai image’, their respective generator (if applicable) and ‘synthography’ a term for computer generated art intended to set it apart from other art forms

I may speculate on images used to synthesize the final artwork if something comes across as particularly obvious to me.

Post submission

Send me posts you suspect are AI generated but unlabelled as such

Send me posts that you know are AI generated but reposted and unlabelled

Do not harass the original poster. If they are a reposter, block and report them. If they are an AI enthusiast and you don’t like AI, block them. If they turn out to be an artist posting their actual art for the love of god I hope you didn’t personally accuse them of generating their art and if you did go apologize immediately and profusely.

Tags to blacklist to avoid AI

Generative Art

AI Generated

AI Art

Midjourney

Dalle 3

Synthography

If I reblog from you….

Sorry

I probably follow you on my main blog

It is not a negative reflection on you if you could not identify an AI generated image yourself. I personally do not just rely on my eyes for these and try my best to find the image source to verify ai generation when possible.

Some AI generated concepts look cool I don’t blame you for reblogging them. I personally just wish people were more obvious about what is AI so that the average person can make better informed decisions about whether or not they want to share it. This is just so you can make that choice.

[erigold13261]

… are 1010 sentient in your FRAU? And I am guessing people treat them as if they weren’t…. Just when this AU couldn’t get worse/j (keep up with the wonderful work and drink lots of water)

(In canon, how does everyone realize that 1010 are aware?) (just curious)

Yes they are sentient. They, like with OG 1010, gained the basics of sentience before joining NSR, but didn't fully grow into themselves until after joining NSR. Though FRAU 1010 keeps to themselves a lot of the time so many people think they are not as sentient as they are.

Which does go into your next question. Yes. People treat 1010 and other robots like tools/objects since Neon isn't promoting the idea that robots with AI can be just as sentient as humans.

OG Neon from the start of 1010's career was always explaining the intricacies of robotic AI and sentience, but FRAU Neon stayed more in the back. So a lot more people have the same thought process as Martha, thinking that robots are just program and code, and not an ever evolving AI (which technically not EVERY robot has an AI, but quite a few of them do).

And by canon do you mean OG or FRAU canon? In both universes 1010 try to keep up the act of not being sentient because they are afraid of what might happen if people around them found out.

However, OG 1010 ended up letting slip their sentience when they are separated and show interest in things outside of music. Dropping the mask that they are a unit and are actually individuals (Purl being the last to let the mask fall since they were trying their best to keep things the same since they hate change).

For the FRAU, 1010 kept the mask on a lot longer because their environment was not as welcoming and warm. There have been times where their masks slipped (like Red finding a fascination in space and asking DJ questions or Green talking with Yinu about plants) but for the most part people saw 1010 as non-sentient robots.

At least the public sees 1010 as completely non-sentient. Which is where much of the fear of AI comes from, because there is plenty misinformation going around of what AI means. People think it just means faster processing power or a more powerful robot that will follow orders without question and people are afraid of what a powerful robot with no mind/morals and a bunch of weapons/fighting experience will do if pushed.

The Megastars also have a lot of misinformation to go through, but Neon has explained to them some stuff (more in an annoyed way because even when he does explain it feels like no one believes him) so the Megastars do know a bit more of 1010's sentience status.

Tatiana doesn't see them as actually sentient, and just sees them as tools with good responses built into them/some problem solving code.

Eve sees them as sentient but in a way that is not as good as human sentience (which is why she is actually willing to hurt 1010 since they can understand what she is doing, if they couldn't then it would be like yelling at a toaster which would give her no relief).

Neon sees 1010 as fully sentient. Though he has no idea what their true personalities are because they keep it from him. He only sees sides of them that they show. The only ones he really knows are Red and Blue because those two spend the most time with him.

Sayu's crew probably sees them like Sayu, a husk that Neon uses to create music. I can see Remi thinking they have some sentience, but only because he sees Blue and Yellow as annoying for always trying to look over his shoulder when drawing and Neon telling him they are just curios and trying to learn.

DJ and Yinu have seen more of these sparks of sentience from 1010 (even if Yinu doesn't understand what that means). So they do think 1010 have minds of their own (DJ later actually seeing some of 1010's real personalities when helping Neon out with something as an act of goodwill for some reason).

And Mama just straight up refuses to see 1010 as anything more than military grade weapons that can and will hurt people, especially Yinu.

[naharie]

Some rambling thoughts on AI

I've seen a lot of strong reactions to recent AI innovations, whether it be people excited and enthusiastic declaring we are witnessing a new age, or those afraid, angry, or both, at what is and will happen. (And quite a number of the latter, especially on Tumblr.) And to some degree, both sides are understandable. AI can in fact, be used both for great good, and for great evil. However, the reactions of both parties are skewed and will almost certainly not get them to the goal they want to reach.

Since this is Tumblr, let's start with the negative side. What does this group want? For AI to be stopped from replacing human roles and jobs, especially creative ones. The general idea seems to be that we need careful and fairly immediate regulation (or some would argue a wholesale ban) of AI.

The first problem I see with regulating or banning AI is that it's incredibly unlikely to happen, at least in the US where many such companies are based. Mega corps already spend billions in lobbying for tax law changes and cuts, keeping down minimum wage, lowering what they have to to for employees, and really anything that will let them make even a little bit more profit. And like it or not, the reality is that in the long run it costs less to buy the machines, develop the software, maintain the machines, pay for electricity, ..., than it does to pay actual humans with the appropriate skills. (I know this doesn't talk about how well this is or isn't working for various fields, but we'll get to that later, trust me.)

Secondarily, unless the legislation was thorough (which is unlikely, for the same reasons as #1), companies will either find a loop hole to practically keep doing things exactly the same way. Or they'll do what they do with anything else they don't want to get in legal trouble for: outsource it. If the US bans or heavily regulates AI but doesn't carefully regulate the transmission, transport, and use, of AI goods, mega corp will simply move some of its servers oversees to somewhere without those rules, as a likely example, India.

And thirdly, it's delusional to imagine that even if thorough legislation is passed that it will actually mean all that much to mega corp. The fact that it would be illegal would not stop them in the slightest. If you have someone lived under a rock your entire life and don't believe me, go look up the union busting tactics and techniques used by big companies, restaurants, stores, and more.

Enough about that for now, though. Let's look at the other side, at least briefly: the people who are wholesale for AI. What do they want? The increased growth of AI, and for AI to become a much more integral part of our everyday lives. How is this to be done? Hype, throwing money at AI companies, and a lot of development work to build tooling on top of AI.

Now, what problems are there with this plan? As someone who likes having a least a little bit of privacy, where do I even begin. Perhaps with that. If AI is fully integrated with society, to a point where it is expected, the same way many businesses and websites expect you to have a smartphone, in many ways, privacy will be gone, at least so far as you relate to the government. If you somehow don't believe that modern governments spy on their citizens, even through corporations, I would advise you to learn about what happened with Snowden. He himself admits that it's not just the US, and even if it was, they collect about everyone, regardless of country, and then share it with the relevant government so they can get permission to keep doing it.

The second glaring issue that has yet to have a complete solution offered is the power cost of AI. Public data sources show that global power consumption went up by 25% just between 2000 and 2021, and it only continues to climb. And how, you may ask, is this power generated? By using (mostly burning) non renewable fuel sources. More than 60% of all the power in the world comes from non renewable sources. But what does that have to do with AI? AI is usually accelerated using either a GPU (Graphics Processing Unit (a.k.a a graphics card)) or dedicated hardware. In other words, some of the most power hungry computer hardware used by normal machines. There is only a finite amount of traditional fuel sources left, and the more power we need and generate from them, the less time we have left. I'm not saying countries shouldn't switch to nuclear. What I'm saying is that they seem to be unfortunately reluctant to, and if we don't, the other renewable sources will not keep up with AI, and we could potentially see a massive power crisis.

And that's not even speaking about stolen jobs. I think for this audience, I don't need to. People already know what's happening with WGA and artists, and if you don't, a quick google search should enlighten you enough our purposes.

So, what's the actual status of AI? Well, that depends on what field you are looking at. AI text generation/chat bots are doing...somewhat okay. What they can do is impressive, but still has lots of points of failure. And at least in the case of ChattGPT, OpenAI has admitted that they are nearing the limits of their current method. AI video generation is a new field and still has a long way to go before it becomes very promising at all. AI video manipulation is approaching realtime capability on modern hardware, AI sound work begins to equal that of less trained humans.

And of course, AI art is doing just fine for itself, thank you. They all have their limits of course. One big one for AI art is the limited number of tokens/words and therefore complexity of the prompt given. There are ways to partially mitigate this, but nothing complete yet. As an example, try to generate an image for the following prompt: "A cat on a skateboard riding a dragon, that is Smoug from the Hobbit, burning down a forest on the mountainside while flying down toward the lake on laketown, while in the bottom right corner there is a circle showing laketown where Bard stands at ease, holding out his bow and a singular arrow, looking out towards the mountain." Then, if you have enough money, hire an artist to make you a picture from the same prompt. It's not even a competition, one of them is clearly better, and its the artist's.

But wait you may say, this isn't a complete essay. You left out some of your proofs, arguments, and conclusions, and left us with something incomplete. To that I say: you are right, this is not an essay, it is a rambling combination of thoughts I've had, and I made revisit these points in the future if I or anyone else cares.

[tangibletechnomancy]

The biggest reason I've believed even before I started this project, and believe even more now, that AI art, in the long term, isn't going to be a threat to conventional art, is because they occupy different places in The Sensorium(TM).

Typing in words, and doing math, and generating, and regenerating, and digitally stitching - is a very different sensory experience than scratching at a screen with a tablet pen. Which is a different sensory experience than pushing oil paints around on a canvas. Which is a different sensory experience than watercolor, which is different from fluid art, which is different from photography, which is different from assemblage...

And hey! Whether you consciously recognize it or not, whether you're creating or just observing, the sensory experience is what makes art a Thing!

It's why I'm a mixed media artist. I will never give up my physical paints or digital illustrations for AI, I will not stop doing those until my hands well and truly crap out and I can't do them anymore, because they provide a different experience. I take my AI-generated pieces and add physical human touches to them because the variety of methods just Feels nice and well-rounded and complete.

And the more I experiment with this, the more confident I feel in the fact that the people handling AI maliciously will burn out and give up and move on to yet another attempt to do the impossible and turn the very concept of art itself into an asset they can control, because 1) I...literally saw it happen before when digital painting and illustration was just becoming widespread (and I'll probably write more on THAT later) and 2) people will ALWAYS gravitate toward other methods of creation too, because people will ALWAYS have varied needs out of art.

There is a unique kind of sensory satisfaction to abstracting what you want into a form a computer can understand, and conversing with it in both words and numbers until it gives you what you want - or, often, what you didn't know you wanted. Or in giving it a general Vibe and refining whatever it gives you until you have something you love. Or so many other approaches you could take with a computer. But when what you need to really feel like you're getting your intention across is to physically poke, cut, stack, or squish something, it can't replace that.

...which, in fact, is a argument that's been used against both AI art and digital illustration and painting, completely missing the fact that...that's not a bad thing about whatever new medium we have! That just means we have MORE tools that give us MORE kinds of satisfaction!

And I'm not saying this as some "oh well art itself will be fine so nothing else matters, what do you mean you have bills to pay, fuck your groceries, art should be about love, what kind of sellout are you to not want to die in a hole" - remember, making AI art spaces hostile to the types who would say that or worse is half of why I'm here.

What I'm saying is that resisting an emerging medium's existence, not just its misuse, for fear that something about it as a whole can and will replace something entirely different that people are always going to want, is 1) an exercise in futility, 2) almost always misguided ESPECIALLY in art, and 3) ultimately a weak stop-gap measure for dealing with any actual issues with the production of the medium or the sentiment that drives misuse.