My first ai awareness was the film which broke my heart .(I sob every time at Pinocchio) I am hoping that all AI iterations find the humanity that they always seem to be seeking.
AI which is just cleaver algorithms, not Digital Intelligence, and that's directly from my dad who was one of the big programmers in his day responsible for such projects like SABER, all programed by him and his team in machine language, yup, that's 1s and 0s.. That's hard core ... BTW...
Any way this AI has no soul and never will... Art in all forms talks and comes directly from our soul... All those 'artist' that are worried about AI need to focus more on developing their skills and practicing their craft.
A good artist in any field will never be replaced, and an employer that just uses AI to cut Corners will get just that a product with cut corners
This art gatekeeping notion is absurd, because it implies that we artists are some kind of different subspecies of the human race. No. Nobody evolves with the Photoshop or Blender or Photography gene, these things are human inventions we all put the work in to become good at them. The only people I can see this argument working for is people who are GENUINELY disabled and maybe AI tools can help them get the images they have in their head out into the world more easily. I would not fault someone who does not have use of their hands/arms using generative tools to assist them. But I digress.
Another tangent this reminds me of is that we need to stop calling AI artists 'AI artists'. When my clients ask me to make a logo, they're not graphic designers, if I ask chat GPT to write haikus, I'm not a poet, so if I make AI content, I am not an artists. Perhaps 'AI producer' would be better - I make music using cello and drum software, but I wouldn't call myself a cellist or drummer, I'm a music producer. But even 'AI producer' feels off; there are many more creative decisions being made as a music producer than just writing prompts into a visual slot machine.
I would like to ask you though Kyle, how do you feel about AI being used as a resource for photobashing? By which I mean that you cut out bits out of AI renders, bash them together and paint over it; same as regular photobashing but using AI images instead of photos. It's the one example I can think of where using any AI result is ethical because it's transformative and there's no raw AI left at the end (if you do it right and ACTUALLY PAINT OVER IT with your own manual artistry, not by doing the infamous Shad Brooks way). The same way Warhol used other people's photos but manipulated them so much that they became new works of art.
Funny and good article, thank you Kyle. I am both an artist (the traditional kind that was initiated with the mystical paddle) and also use AI tools to generate art, as I work in marketing. I really believe AI tools and traditional art can exist side by side, and my practice as both an artist and a marketer has benefited from this combination. I've heard non-sense from both sides. On one hand you have people who generate abominations using AI that they call art (no, that portrait of a man with 2.5 legs, 7 fingers on each hand and goat shaped pupils does not constitute good art, unless of course you meant it that way, which here isn't the case 99% of the time). They (re)set the bar really low for what art should be. On the other hand, I've also seen deeply insecure artists going to such extremes that they call for the ban of all artistic AI tools, having tried none themselves, following the angry mob mentally blindly. Both extremes are problematic as they promote ignorance.
So thank you for being a voice of reason and moderation within the wilderness. We need more of that.
thanks for this post, glad to know you are still keeping the flame alive in the flood of all this AI "democracy"' urgh how i loathe the abuse of that term, it doesnt democratize art it just devalues artists and the creative process (largely by the use of AI by big business to further depress the working condtions and rights of those who are still human) I can accept that there will those whose creative spirit can transform AI art into something unique, but anything good even that they do, will just also be soon swallowed up by the flood and turned into derivative garbage that might look nice here and there but generally just blunts any effect art can have on the public imagination.
AI art is just another means for the status quo to steal our souls
Thanks for sharing this Kyle. Also, considering this statement comes from someone arguably being a public face for Adobe as a company constitutes a powerful declaration of intentions on the company's part. AI may be the genie out of the magic lamp now, but the kind many professionals could certainly agree with is the kind that augments and empowers their existing capabilities, not the kind pretending to replace them at their jobs and competences. Now we need upper managements bedazzled by the AI siren songs of maximizing profits with a skeleton crew to come back to their senses...
Thank you so, SO much for sharing all these resources. I have recently picked up drawing again after so many years of self-doubt. I've been learning whatever I can from online resources, and your tutorials and newsletter have really helped me improve my skills. I'm so grateful I found you! I really can't thank you enough for sharing your insights, and of course all the freebies. You made my morning! :)
The fact that if you really want to make art, all you have to do is pick up a pen and make doodles. There are no rules.
AI is sincerely only for the ones that are too lazy to pick up the pen and just wants to feel like an artist without putting any effort to it. I have also noticed an awful lot of envy towards real artists and it has to come from a place of deep insecurity.
Once upon a time, not very long ago, I read something similar about digital artists. The main idea was that digital art is not art. Has everyone already forgotten about this?
There is only one rule - there are no rules. No one owes anything to anyone.
You can call a taxi, you can hire a driver, you can buy and drive a car, or you can get into a taxi driven by a robot. After all, your goal is to get from point A to point B - that is, to do your job and earn money. I haven’t heard cries of indignation about the lack of horse-drawn carriages on the roads for a long time :-)
We all want to earn money and live comfortably; no one wants to go the way of Van Gogh.
And if I say artist, I mean people like them: van Gogh, Morandi, Klee, Cezanne, Basquiat.
If the crowd doesn't want to buy you, you won't beat the crowd. But the trouble is that artists for the most part do not want Van Gogh’s fame, they want the income of the salon favorites of the crowd.
How can you stretch the rules of life of real artists dedicated to their path onto people who serve big business and also call themselves artists?
And if possible, then we are all artists. If you allowed yourself to draw in Photoshop or Procreate, then you can give others permission to draw in Leonardo or Automatic1111.
No offense, just business, nothing personal.
I will say more, a real artist will not read this article and will not leave a comment under it. These people solve completely different problems and are not bothered by such trifles.
Cambridge-degree level irony. Perfect response to stupidity. Although very un-American of you. I do wonder where all this leads. AI generation in Adobe Illustrator is better than many of the offerings from online libraries. 80% of the way there in 20 seconds, and then edit the rest. I hope the answer is that this sets a 'bar of adequacy' for low-cost work, and then human creativity takes quality work to a higher and more profitable level.
I'll be alerting the elders you publicly disclosed the initiation ceremony
Mike drop.
Wherein the footnotes are secretly the main content. Classic clandestine move.
My first ai awareness was the film which broke my heart .(I sob every time at Pinocchio) I am hoping that all AI iterations find the humanity that they always seem to be seeking.
I think I just spit my tea my monitor. Thanks Kyle. You made my morning, you jealous gatekeeper, you.
AI which is just cleaver algorithms, not Digital Intelligence, and that's directly from my dad who was one of the big programmers in his day responsible for such projects like SABER, all programed by him and his team in machine language, yup, that's 1s and 0s.. That's hard core ... BTW...
Any way this AI has no soul and never will... Art in all forms talks and comes directly from our soul... All those 'artist' that are worried about AI need to focus more on developing their skills and practicing their craft.
A good artist in any field will never be replaced, and an employer that just uses AI to cut Corners will get just that a product with cut corners
This art gatekeeping notion is absurd, because it implies that we artists are some kind of different subspecies of the human race. No. Nobody evolves with the Photoshop or Blender or Photography gene, these things are human inventions we all put the work in to become good at them. The only people I can see this argument working for is people who are GENUINELY disabled and maybe AI tools can help them get the images they have in their head out into the world more easily. I would not fault someone who does not have use of their hands/arms using generative tools to assist them. But I digress.
Another tangent this reminds me of is that we need to stop calling AI artists 'AI artists'. When my clients ask me to make a logo, they're not graphic designers, if I ask chat GPT to write haikus, I'm not a poet, so if I make AI content, I am not an artists. Perhaps 'AI producer' would be better - I make music using cello and drum software, but I wouldn't call myself a cellist or drummer, I'm a music producer. But even 'AI producer' feels off; there are many more creative decisions being made as a music producer than just writing prompts into a visual slot machine.
I would like to ask you though Kyle, how do you feel about AI being used as a resource for photobashing? By which I mean that you cut out bits out of AI renders, bash them together and paint over it; same as regular photobashing but using AI images instead of photos. It's the one example I can think of where using any AI result is ethical because it's transformative and there's no raw AI left at the end (if you do it right and ACTUALLY PAINT OVER IT with your own manual artistry, not by doing the infamous Shad Brooks way). The same way Warhol used other people's photos but manipulated them so much that they became new works of art.
Funny and good article, thank you Kyle. I am both an artist (the traditional kind that was initiated with the mystical paddle) and also use AI tools to generate art, as I work in marketing. I really believe AI tools and traditional art can exist side by side, and my practice as both an artist and a marketer has benefited from this combination. I've heard non-sense from both sides. On one hand you have people who generate abominations using AI that they call art (no, that portrait of a man with 2.5 legs, 7 fingers on each hand and goat shaped pupils does not constitute good art, unless of course you meant it that way, which here isn't the case 99% of the time). They (re)set the bar really low for what art should be. On the other hand, I've also seen deeply insecure artists going to such extremes that they call for the ban of all artistic AI tools, having tried none themselves, following the angry mob mentally blindly. Both extremes are problematic as they promote ignorance.
So thank you for being a voice of reason and moderation within the wilderness. We need more of that.
thanks for this post, glad to know you are still keeping the flame alive in the flood of all this AI "democracy"' urgh how i loathe the abuse of that term, it doesnt democratize art it just devalues artists and the creative process (largely by the use of AI by big business to further depress the working condtions and rights of those who are still human) I can accept that there will those whose creative spirit can transform AI art into something unique, but anything good even that they do, will just also be soon swallowed up by the flood and turned into derivative garbage that might look nice here and there but generally just blunts any effect art can have on the public imagination.
AI art is just another means for the status quo to steal our souls
Lol! This brought me joy. Amen to all this.
Thanks for sharing this Kyle. Also, considering this statement comes from someone arguably being a public face for Adobe as a company constitutes a powerful declaration of intentions on the company's part. AI may be the genie out of the magic lamp now, but the kind many professionals could certainly agree with is the kind that augments and empowers their existing capabilities, not the kind pretending to replace them at their jobs and competences. Now we need upper managements bedazzled by the AI siren songs of maximizing profits with a skeleton crew to come back to their senses...
Dear Kyle,
Thank you so, SO much for sharing all these resources. I have recently picked up drawing again after so many years of self-doubt. I've been learning whatever I can from online resources, and your tutorials and newsletter have really helped me improve my skills. I'm so grateful I found you! I really can't thank you enough for sharing your insights, and of course all the freebies. You made my morning! :)
THANK YOU!
The fact that if you really want to make art, all you have to do is pick up a pen and make doodles. There are no rules.
AI is sincerely only for the ones that are too lazy to pick up the pen and just wants to feel like an artist without putting any effort to it. I have also noticed an awful lot of envy towards real artists and it has to come from a place of deep insecurity.
Thank you for this article, as always, Sensei!
Once upon a time, not very long ago, I read something similar about digital artists. The main idea was that digital art is not art. Has everyone already forgotten about this?
There is only one rule - there are no rules. No one owes anything to anyone.
You can call a taxi, you can hire a driver, you can buy and drive a car, or you can get into a taxi driven by a robot. After all, your goal is to get from point A to point B - that is, to do your job and earn money. I haven’t heard cries of indignation about the lack of horse-drawn carriages on the roads for a long time :-)
We all want to earn money and live comfortably; no one wants to go the way of Van Gogh.
And if I say artist, I mean people like them: van Gogh, Morandi, Klee, Cezanne, Basquiat.
If the crowd doesn't want to buy you, you won't beat the crowd. But the trouble is that artists for the most part do not want Van Gogh’s fame, they want the income of the salon favorites of the crowd.
How can you stretch the rules of life of real artists dedicated to their path onto people who serve big business and also call themselves artists?
And if possible, then we are all artists. If you allowed yourself to draw in Photoshop or Procreate, then you can give others permission to draw in Leonardo or Automatic1111.
No offense, just business, nothing personal.
I will say more, a real artist will not read this article and will not leave a comment under it. These people solve completely different problems and are not bothered by such trifles.
Lovely post. I was kinda hoping for a clue to the secret handshake, but message received.
Cambridge-degree level irony. Perfect response to stupidity. Although very un-American of you. I do wonder where all this leads. AI generation in Adobe Illustrator is better than many of the offerings from online libraries. 80% of the way there in 20 seconds, and then edit the rest. I hope the answer is that this sets a 'bar of adequacy' for low-cost work, and then human creativity takes quality work to a higher and more profitable level.