#you can't automate someone's artistic vision
Explore tagged Tumblr posts
Text
The last post I reblogged made me want to ramble about AI art, but I realized that it probably should be its own post, so here:
If the way you look at art is that its only purpose is to convey a specific idea, then generating art with AI would seem like the natural conclusion of that process. But AI takes the process out of your hands, and robs you of the satisfaction of having toiled on your own work. The art is no longer something you spent time with and can feel pride in; it's a product. Something mass-produced for the sole purpose of consumption. But you can't mass-produce your artistic self. Even if you trained an AI on your own work and asked it to generate more art, you didn't put Yourself into those pieces of art. You weren't the one to make all of the micro-decisions that go into art. The colors, the lines, the brush strokes, the shading, the characters' positions... all those small choices that can personify a drawing, they were taken out of your control.
As someone who always feels like their work is not interesting enough to get people's attention, and who wishes it could be more spectacular and eye-catching, the temptation of having an algorithm generate more interesting pictures has slipped into my mind a few times. But I refuse it every time. To accept the notion that I need to make my art more appealing to wide audiences is to accept the thesis of capitalism, that what I make is only as good as how many people it reaches. It's the thesis that social media and "content creation" algorithms, as well as all those analytics tools try to make us buy into. And if we buy into this idea, it can be easy to be pulled towards the suggestion of having our "content" be mass-produced by a machine. I want my art to reach many people because I want it to have a positive impact on more people, BUT I don't want that to be done at the expense of being the one in the driver's seat of the art process.
So I'm going to pull up my trousers and keep at it. Because one of the best things about art is the process. It's the joy of seeing something complete and knowing you were responsible for making it. It's looking back on old art, comparing to your newer stuff, and thinking "damn I got good". It's about having fun with it, it's about feeling that sense of accomplishment. You don't get any of that with AI art.
So if you're someone who uses, or thinks of using AI art, realize you're robbing not only the audience of your authentic expression, but you're also robbing yourself of one of the greatest joys of making art. And you'll never be an artist as long as a machine is doing all the hard work for you. You'll only be equivalent to a shitty commissioner who passes off someone else's work as your own.
#bulletbilltime rambling#god this got away from me#but I had to let this out#AI frustrates me a lot#especially when people claim it can replace humans in art#I don't think you can though#you can't automate someone's artistic vision#no matter how good the AI is at making art#I think AI as a TOOL has uses#but not as the sole or major means for creating an art piece
6 notes
·
View notes
Text
Let's do another once-over of the Robot Lab, this time in stealth-o-vision.
This sounds like we're supposed to hear it and go "OHHHHH Maybe he did it." But we already know he loathed Huesca. This is a perfectly reasonable thing for him to be saying.
By all accounts, everyone hated Huesca. He was a disgraced misanthropic shut-in running questionable experiments for weapons research, who was chomping at the bit to see his beloved security system kill a man. If we soul-reaped everyone who might have had a motive, we could fill a cemetary.
Oh, whoops. It's still over in the lab with its arm on the button that disarms security. You're only supposed to press it, not hold it, so I hope that doesn't accidentally re-arm security at any point. That'd be awkward.
OKAY BUT WHY THO.
You are a weird little dude. But you're not Fink, 'cause you definitely don't have his chiseled jawline. Or his height.
That's horrifying, Vivia. Specifically, the fact that you're so comfortable with this is what's horrifying. How often do you spy on people?
I've been jumping down Desuhiko's throat since the day we met. Were you actually the team pervert this WHOLE TIME!?
Not much to find in the Robot labs. Makes sense. We already got the run-down on Ama-Pal in person when we were here with Desuhiko.
On to Central Lab. If Jawline is still on this floor, this is where he's going to be. He was wearing a lab coat under his cloak. It makes sense that he might blend in with the researchers.
Makoto also didn't seem to want us looking around in here too much. When he was taking us on that weird roundabout route to Huesca, he was getting snippy with us to keep up and not wander off. He was taking his sweet time while also urging us to rush through this room.
Under the "Yakou did it" theory, this could be explained by Yakou wanting the blame to fall somewhere other than on the Nocturnal Agency. Just because he was planning to kill himself, doesn't mean he didn't care what happens to us.
The other option is that Fink wanted to increase security around the lab. It would reduce security elsewhere. But that seems unlikely, given that he seemingly was down here and did kill Huesca. And Yakou for some reason.
Yakou Did It theory intensifies. But does not solidify, as the fatal flaw in Yakou Did It is obvious: If Fink wasn't here then who is Jawline? And if Jawline is Fink then why was he here?
Wouldn't matter if someone was. He hadn't received a food delivery recently. He was considering going with us to try and restock himself when Fink/Yakou got him.
The most esoteric piece of our puzzle. The blackout has to be related to... something. But it's hard to imagine what.
We were with Yakou at the time of the blackout. No idea where Jawline was, of course. It's hard to imagine how useful a blackout would even be. Huesca's systems are on a separate power grid and were unaffected, and you can't use a blackout to unlock a door; Without power, fully automated doors turn into walls.
Everything is more locked when the power's off than when it's on. So what good is a blackout?
Ooo, maybe she ran into Jawline. Do tell.
That sounds like Jawline. It wasn't Yakou; He was with us when the lights went out. Jawline was down here sabotaging the power systems to put us on backup power. But to what end?
We've picked up a lot of additional What, but we're missing huge swathes of How and more importantly Why.
Yeah, we've been over every room with a fine-toothed comb. Unless we want to levitate upstairs and rub our ghost butts in Yomi's face, we're out of avenues to explore.
I mean, I'm down for spirit-mooning Yomi. Everywhere he turns, there will be a ghost butt. I will fill his existence with spirit ass. I. Just. Don't think it would be conducive to our investigation. So I understand if you do not want to, my friend.
That's not true. I can tell you in full certainty that either Yakou did it or it was a man with a jaw. If we find the jaw, we find Fink the Slaughter Artist.
He keeps security logs of his deathtrap corridor, so there may be something interesting on there. All he confirmed for us was that its independent power grid wasn't affected by the blackout. There may be more information to find.
I'm curious to know if he has activation records for his traps. We may be able to confirm whether the gas chamber activated at some point prior to us sending Ama-Pal in.
At this time, my leading theory for how the killer beat the gas chamber is still "He didn't."
You're going on the spirit-mooning list, Desuhiko.
...why? Shinigami's circling something here and I don't know what. She's confident that this is critically important to our case.
While Projecting, you cannot be heard and you cannot possess people. Why does that matter? What could have gone unheard or unpossessed?
Yakou was able to talk to us while on death's door, while we were Projecting. We heard his voice, which you'd think would mean he's dead but he's still hanging in there. Is Yakou Projecting? Can he do that? Is his not-Forte talent something like Yuma's Coalescence? Or am I barking up the wrong tree?
Something about this has flipped Shinigami's OH FUCK radar but I can't for the life of me see what she's seeing.
In any case, we need to access that computer. The problem is that there's a bunch of cops between here and there. The solution to that problem is named Halara Nightmare. And also apparently Vivia Twilight. They both enjoy a bacon-rich breakfast.
But Halara's going to be indisposed because Yakou's heart is going out. Shit. Well, Vivia's still--
Is that the plan!? Yuma's going to solve the Peacekeeper Problem by winging it, then?
Okay. Into the deep end we go.
Don't anyone help me or anything. Halara's doing chest compressions but Vivia's standing around like a useless ponce, and it's not like my Timey-Wimey Bestie's contributing much to this CPR effort. Guess I'll go get shot now.
Don't see what the big deal is about letting people help you when you need it. Humans are social animals. There is no problem-solving resource in the world more valuable than another human being.
"Our hands are full" says the only two hands out of eight that are doing anything. Okay.
THANK YOU. See, Bestie's got a clue. What's she going to do here? Unbreak Yakou's ribs if Halara presses down too hard?
...wait, that is a viable consequence of chest compressions, and Halara's got that cop-chucking strength. Shit. I talked myself out of taking Fubuki with me.
Meanwhile, Vivia refuses to help because he didn't want to investigate this case to begin with. He has been extremely generous for how much he's gone along with it anyway. He's done.
That leaves Desuhiko, who's useless without his bag, and Halara. Emergency CPR seems like a waste of Halara's ass-kicking abilities given the circumstances but. Like. Who else would do it? We want Fubuki or Desuhiko to perform life-saving emergency treatment on the boss man?
*sigh* I can't believe it's come to this. Four able-bodied Master Detectives and not one of them can come pitch in.
FUBUKI!? You think Fubuki is complicit in this? How!? Why!? How!?
She was with us when both murders took place. And her rewind is a full rewind. It doesn't offer any kind of special shenanigans like "The things that took place still happened" or "You stay in one spot as the world rewinds around you" or anything like that. It's a flat time-reversal, no bells or whistles.
She has, by her own admission, done some rewinds that we didn't get to ride-along. Most notably, after we found Yakou's body, Fubuki mentioned that she'd done some rewinding to try and save him but nothing worked out.
At some point during those trips, it's possible that she might have seen Jawline more clearly than we have? That's all I can think of. I can't imagine that Fubuki's complicit but I can imagine that she knows things she hasn't come forward with. Depending on what she's tried, maybe she even got to see Yakou and Jawline fight? I dunno.
13 notes
·
View notes
Text
The issue with AI "art" generation isn't rooted in the fact the creators of the AI "shamelessly" build it using other artists work to form it's understanding of art and it's basis of image generation. It's no different than what a human would do; referencing artwork, and extrapolating across multiple pieces to create something new. After all, you can't copyright an art form.
And as far as I've looked into these systems, the AI doesn't store the artists images but rather a textual breakdown to later generate images in a similar style. Arguably, and from a legal standpoint, the human brain does more raw image storing than the AI does. The AI simply isn't "stealing" art. It's generating a text reference. A non-visual description it can understand.
The issue is mass production and the devaluation of artwork.
These AI can functionally create images on the same level of artists who take years to perfect their craft, some their entire lifetimes, and perform it en mass in a matter of minutes or moments. Art that would take weeks or months to complete, can be initiated in moments with a prompt, and tweaked to the requestors satisfaction where otherwise the commissioner of the work is left with the artists vision of the prompt given. Art has always been a reflection of the artist, and it is being cheapened by mass production.
Quality can now be achieved at the speed of quantity, at the low cost of humanity.
There are art AI's you can pay for instead of an artist that depends on their work to make ends meet. The AI analyzes someones hard made, soul poured work, deconstructs it to a description, and pumps out facsimile's for cheap. This is the problem.
AI's are cheapening art.
Mass manufacturing has it's place in making the harder aspects of survival more convenient. Making raw materials, foods, and "to be assembled" general components for construction and creation easier to obtain and less of a struggle. It does this at the cost of employing less people, but the general consensus is the easier the harder aspects of labour are made, the better off people are. However, art isn't one of those "necessary labours" that could be benefitted from by complete automation. It's not a need we need filled en-masse, not in a society that holds homelessness and starvation over the heads of everyone should they not "benefit" society in what the richer elite deem "enough". All AI does in this case, is attack the livelyhoods of people on the bottom end of society. Big name artists won't feel the pressure, but smaller artists doing profile picture and OC commissions to pay bills will suffer.
This "advancement" is harmful.
To get plain: The issue of AI art and AI story generation is the devaluating nature of mass manufacturing and the impact it will have on artists who already struggle to get by. AI generation harms people. And if you build an AI that does any of this intentionally, you are deliberately harming artists, writers, and creators to the point of pushing them into a worse financially precarious state. You are intentionally harming human beings. And if you use these AI, or pay for them, you are supporting harming hardworking people who's lives depend on their work.
Stop. It's not a fun project. It's an attack.
Think: How would it feel, programmers of AI, to have an AI that could write code equal to or greater than you with the typed prompt of a corporate executive? If 5.99 a month could replace you, how would you live, how would you make ends meet?
#ai art#ai art generation#art#artificial intelligence#art theft#copyright#ai writing#ai story generation#mass manufacturing
4 notes
·
View notes
Text
I worry that I'm not really making the case I'm angling for (mainly because of a reblog on the original art contest post that seems to be arguing against a point I didn't think I was making) and I'm not sure if I'm gonna get there by just beleaguering it more... like it feels reductive to say "I think the problem is actually capitalism" but that's really what it boils down to. I'm about as pro-technological-advancement-making-creativity-more-accessible as they come, and I really don't want to assign any moral judgement to the pure process of someone being able to make an image in their mind reality via a sophisticated computer program, because if we go down that path then we have to debate about like, whether paint and charcoal imitation brushes in CSP make art that looks traditional but isn't "less valid"... the biggest issue I have with "AI art" is really the fact that I genuinely believe it is going to take opportunities from artists who are already undervalued and underpaid for their skills.
Like I'm entirely sure there are people making the argument that AI generated images aren't "real art" because they weren't like... hand-crafted by a human being with a soul or whatever, but that's not really where I'm coming from. I think AI art is just yet another symptom in the ongoing process of human skills being automated into obsolescence without any societal changes being made to compensate them. Even if the purely well-meaning intention of training these neural networks was to give more people the ability to create artistic visions, you can't ignore the fact that the end result application was always going to be to remove as many people and labor hours as possible from the process of creating visual art in a commercial context. If the marketable skill I had dedicated my life and career to was pattern-making and sewing, and someone invented an incredibly cheap and accessible machine that could generate a full costume from a photo reference and a few yards of fabric, and anyone who owned one of those machines could call themself a costumer, I'd be pretty put out.
#AI art#[edit] ah okay looking back at the contest post I realize the person /above/ me was making the 'it's soulless' argument lmao#so I guess that's what the reblog was responding to and I'm just out here on a tangent for my own entertainment#rom speaks
35 notes
·
View notes