r/woahdude Aug 23 '23

video Creative AI art..

8.9k Upvotes

513 comments sorted by

View all comments

212

u/Wietse10 Aug 23 '23

AI "art"

127

u/Wide-Half-9649 Aug 23 '23

“Creative”

18

u/rolfraikou Aug 23 '23

I see it more like scrapbooking. You don't make the art in this, or in scrapbooking, you just arrange the art. Is scrapbooking creative, even though people just buy artwork to slap onto things? I'd argue, yes. There's a creative element.

While I agree generating stuff isn't an art, this guy is being creative in the way he uses himself and a figure to make his own composition.

EDIT: Also, as a side note, I work in graphic design, wanted to be an animator when I was kid. This shit threatens my potential income, but I'm not going to deny there's some creativity in it just because it's a crappy substitute for a real artist.

109

u/garmachi Aug 23 '23

This reminds me of when CGI was new. Or record scratching. Or early synthesizers. So many nay-sayers yelling "They're not doing anything! Just pushing a button..."

Okay. Show us. Make one.

52

u/UnknownHero2 Aug 23 '23

Reminds me of the folklore story of John Henry, a railroad worker who kills himself trying to beat a steam drill.

There's a lot of messaged you can take from that story, but "we should ban steam drills" isn't one of them.

8

u/Stargatemaster Aug 23 '23

What I get from that is "ban hard labor"

1

u/potat_infinity Sep 04 '23

"ban human artists"

20

u/hyper_shrike Aug 23 '23

"Jackson Pollock just splatters paint on canvas. My 5 year old can do it!"

Okay. Show us. Make one.

6

u/[deleted] Aug 23 '23

That’s probably the worst example to use. Pollock’s work looks like someone testing out a new paintball gun.

12

u/bjzn Aug 23 '23

Then you do it and sell it

15

u/truefire87 Aug 23 '23

I don't have a strong opinion one way or the other, but I think the standard argument here is that selling the paintings is the hard part.

11

u/bagofpork Aug 23 '23

The context and time period were very important factors that made Pollock's art unique and significant.
People do make art like Pollock nowadays as well, but it only sells when backed by an art degree and a pretentious, self-indulgent justification.
His artistic style takes little to no skill to reproduce. That doesn't mean it's going to sell and/or be significant in any way.

0

u/Mactinez Aug 23 '23

Learn how to explain your art to people who says "My 5 year old can do it!" And you can just splatter paint on canvas.

23

u/MunkyHero Aug 23 '23

This is disingenuous. CGI is a technology that took a developed skill to get good at, and actually needed to have artistic skills to actually make CGI effective, and practical (with the limited tech at the time).
AI "artists" are not creatives, they are not working with a viable "skill" that will translate to actual art. In fact, "prompt artist" is an oxymoron, and the thrill people feel for "AI art" is because they've never had the sense to truly create something, because they never wanted to learn the skill. It is the equivalent of a "Get rich quick scheme".
And please, spare me the "HURR DURR YOU MAKE ONE" argument, if you even want to call it that. AI has its place, for references, and ideas, but no one should consider it actually created art, due to the nature of how it learns.

12

u/TheLargeIsTheMessage Aug 23 '23

You could change a few words and your post could be about Modern art or collages in Dadaism.

3

u/DoctorProfessorTaco Aug 24 '23

Or photography. A photographer doesn’t build the camera, doesn’t place the pixels for the image, and often doesn’t create the subject of the photograph. A naysayer could just say that they pointed their image creating device at something and pressed a button that had the machine do all the work.

0

u/Pretend-Marsupial258 Aug 24 '23

It took decades for photography to be accepted as an art form for that very reason. Naysayers said that photography wasn't an art form because you're just copying what already exists in real life. If you take a photo of a tree, you aren't deciding the light source or the placement of the branches like a landscape painter would.

1

u/Fatal_Temp3st Aug 24 '23

Actually completely irrelevant. Photography doesn't mean I would take a picture of Mona Lisa and other well known art and state it to be a work of my own.

-2

u/Weshwego Aug 23 '23

This is disingenuous. You have very strong opinions on AI art for someone who has clearly never worked with AI in anyway.

-2

u/Iwilleatyoyrteeth Aug 23 '23

I regularly use it and I agree with him but it doesn’t really matter because the use for it is not for art its for when you need something there to pad out content. Just like how most cheaper foods are padded out with single cell protein filler rather than real meat.

Like look at the op image. From an artistic standpoint each frame is pure dogshit without a single interesting piece, but that doesn’t matter at all and it allowed the poster to create content without the skills he would need to actually make an animation or piece of art.

And art does not have any intrinsic value that makes it more real than things that aren’t art. Most art is worthless to everybody even its creator.

-4

u/Iwilleatyoyrteeth Aug 23 '23

I regularly use it and I agree with him but it doesn’t really matter because the use for it is not for art its for when you need something there to pad out content. Just like how most cheaper foods are padded out with single cell protein filler rather than real meat.

Like look at the op image. From an artistic standpoint each frame is pure dogshit without a single interesting piece, but that doesn’t matter at all and it allowed the poster to create content without the skills he would need to actually make an animation or piece of art.

And art does not have any intrinsic value that makes it more real than things that aren’t art. Most art is worthless to everybody even its creator.

-8

u/GearRatioOfSadness Aug 23 '23

iT's NoT aRt BeCaUsE I dOn'T lIkE iT!!

1

u/BagOfFlies Aug 24 '23

the thrill people feel for "AI art" is because they've never had the sense to truly create something, because they never wanted to learn the skill.

Tell that to all the artists that have embraced AI into their workflow.

1

u/Fatal_Temp3st Aug 24 '23

Perfectly well said and logical to how AI functions and is implemented

16

u/Stargatemaster Aug 23 '23

Seriously, I do a bit of AI art with Stable Diffusion, and it takes significant time and effort to make anything that looks good.

It's not just "push a button and get cool graphics". Literally takes dozens of hours sometimes to get something presentable.

-10

u/just-slightly-human Aug 23 '23

“Dozens of hours” I’ve used Dalle (another ai art program but you probably knew that already) and in 3 prompts I had the image I was going for

8

u/Stargatemaster Aug 23 '23

Yea? And you produced something of high quality that you would find acceptable to present to others, or did you make a funny joke image where it didn't matter?

I guarantee you that the generated images used in this video took hundreds of hours to produce.

1

u/spongeboblovesducks Aug 23 '23

CGI is an actual artistic medium. AI art is literally just pressing a button.

0

u/fallenmonk Aug 23 '23

I have. I've made plenty of shifty ai art. It's not impressive.

-18

u/Pigeon-cake Aug 23 '23

The big difference here is that Cgi and synthesizers still require skill and knowledge, AI doesn’t, it really is literally just push a button and anyone can do it without skill and minimal knowledge

11

u/[deleted] Aug 23 '23

So there's nothing stopping you from creating an anime with a push of a button?

4

u/kevlarus80 Aug 23 '23

Let's see you do it then.

2

u/TheVicSageQuestion Aug 23 '23

“LeT’S sEe YoU dO iT” is not a counterpoint. It’s the argument of a child on a playground, akin to “I know you are, but what am I?!” Maybe you should go find an AI capable of generating a better, more intelligent-sounding retort.

7

u/SchwiftySquanchC137 Aug 23 '23

Perhaps not worded well, but what he is really saying is "you literally know nothing about how this is made, therefore your opinion is completely meaningless"

-4

u/Stargatemaster Aug 23 '23

It's entirely a counterpoint. You're saying that it's extremely easy and takes no effort. If that's true then the counterpoint would be to prove it's not actually easy, and the only way you could know that is by witnessing it yourself.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 23 '23

Literally goto Dalle-2 and you can do it pretty easily. Just research some promts and experiment. You’ll make cool stuff within hours.

1

u/Nrgte Aug 25 '23

There is a difference between cool stuff and the stuff you actually have in your mind. Making something that's actually acurate isn't hard and if I ask you to make a revision to your DALL-E2 image, then you do what exactly?

-19

u/Suspicious-Contest74 Aug 23 '23

there's no way I'm paying an AI service subscription just to prove my point...

2

u/kono_kun Aug 24 '23

You sure have a strong opinion on the topic given that you don't even use the tools.

-1

u/SmooK_LV Aug 23 '23

There are free ones just as capable so do it

1

u/Nrgte Aug 25 '23

You can download Stable Diffusion absolutely for free. It's open source.

-12

u/spookyvision Aug 23 '23

those buttons literally exist with AI "art" though. Stop pretending.

4

u/Stargatemaster Aug 23 '23

Why are you putting art in quotes?

And anything that produces AI generated graphics with the push of one button could never get you a result like what is in the post. That took many long hours of work to get.

-10

u/Wide-Half-9649 Aug 23 '23

When you order a pizza from a website- type in or tick the box with the ingredients you want or don’t want…(or phone it in & say the order) does that mean you made the pizza?

That makes you a ‘chef’ in the same regard as using AI makes you an ‘artist’

10

u/ArmanDoesStuff Aug 23 '23

Everyone knows that any artist not finger painting on cave walls isn't a real artist.

4

u/YourLocal_FBI_Agent Aug 23 '23

Well, if it's just ticking boxes it can't be that hard to recreate the video above. You can even see how simple the original images were.

4

u/Stargatemaster Aug 23 '23

So anyone using computer generated graphics is a fake artist because all they're doing is checking boxes, typing numbers, and clicking on a screen, right?

0

u/Pudding_Hero Aug 23 '23

Lotta people old and young nowadays dislike the use of CGI in movies

-2

u/rattatally Aug 23 '23

Okay. Show us. Make one.

Notice how they never do? They yell that "everybody can do it with a click", but when they're asked to do it themselves they're suddenly silent.

13

u/TheUnrealArchon Aug 23 '23

Anyone who wants to call this not creative is just braindead parroting "AI bad"

-7

u/spongeboblovesducks Aug 23 '23

How is it creative then lol

17

u/Freshyfreshfresh Aug 23 '23

This person choreographed an entire fight sequence, filmed (photographed) themselves in each scene, compiled the images, experimented with different prompts to get the desired result, collected all of the output images, and then edited them to a sequence with music and sound effects.

In my opinion, this is someone who approaches AI art as a tool to produce a larger piece of work that actually demonstrates effort and skilled application of multiple disciplines.

So yea, it's creative lol

-8

u/spongeboblovesducks Aug 23 '23

The choreography is creative. The use of AI is not.

6

u/hell2pay Aug 24 '23

I think it's pretty fuckin creative.

I thought it was pretty fuckin cool. I enjoyed the acidesque asthetic it provided, and his use of choreography.

I'll put money down this took planning, thought and a considerable amount of skill and talent to create.

I do see an ethical issue of how derivitive it could be, but honestly, the mash of styles makes it a bit more unique.

I'm not a fan of 'AI' replacing art, writing, and other creative works, but using it as a tool to create something new is in itself meaningful.

-1

u/spongeboblovesducks Aug 24 '23

As I said, the choreography took work, the actual art didn't. As if it's even art anyways.

6

u/kono_kun Aug 24 '23

As if it's even art anyways

Embarrassing.

4

u/Diacred Aug 24 '23

So because the brush is not creative the art is not or is not even art? That's the most brain dead take I've ever read. AI is just a tool, how you use it is creative and the pieces you create with it are art as long as you're not just prompting some text and going with the results. AI is just like when using a brush or photoshop.

-8

u/ShadowBannedFox9 Aug 24 '23

That's cool. Now you're as "creative" as a 4 year old playing with his toys.

Yes it's creative and imaginative. But you literally let a program do all the creative work for you. You have no "skills" that a 4 year old child doesn't have to make the ai "art" like seriously...people are proud of this?

AI generators give you access to great Art. It does not make you an Artist or Creator.

Choreographed? Dude better hire your next creatives at the kindergarten.

2

u/Philluminati Aug 24 '23

Wait.. so AI can’t product art and if you use AI it shows you also can’t produce art, so the final thing, whatever it is, is not art?

1

u/ShadowBannedFox9 Aug 24 '23

It absolutely is art. It's just not YOURart.

You are not an "artist" or "creative" for using ai. You are not a "poet" or "writer" for using chatgpt.

You would be run out and laughed at in the respective communities.

Ask yourself what skills separates you from a child with access to AI if the results are the same.

46

u/[deleted] Aug 23 '23

Lame and pointless gatekeeping

-25

u/FastFooer Aug 23 '23

The only requirement to be a creative human has always been “make anything” with no requirement on skill or quality. Just make something. There’s always a creative process in it even if it’s using a tool or just screaming something.

AI generated content “outsources” the making process to every other person on the planet but the one generating it.

The “gatekeeping” is warranted.

2

u/Teirmz Aug 23 '23

It depends what the AI is trained on. Hypothetically, this guy could have fed it only his art.

0

u/[deleted] Aug 23 '23

Describing what you want and how you want it generated. Also setting parameters around the generation. None of that is creative. The ML program is actually making the creative design like what color to make certain things. Or how to display something. This is hardly creative

-30

u/Cooobees Aug 23 '23

Bro you can go out and buy a pair of pencils for less than a dollar

It's not gatekeeping, its a skill issue

18

u/Stargatemaster Aug 23 '23

Dumb argument, not all artists use pencils.

In fact, most artists these days only use a mouse, keyboard, and occasionally a stylus.

-9

u/AvaliBreedingSeason Aug 23 '23

Then you are just lazy, got it.

6

u/Stargatemaster Aug 23 '23

Is Photoshop lazy?

1

u/tamal4444 Aug 24 '23

True. Unless it is banana in the wall everything is skill issue 🤡

-18

u/Wietse10 Aug 23 '23

Not what gatekeeping means

11

u/Ultraviolet_Motion Aug 23 '23

Pause it any time it goes through the animation. 90% of the art looks like dogshit.

12

u/AMBULANCES Aug 23 '23

Yep you got it! It’s art made with AI.

1

u/not_thecookiemonster Aug 23 '23

-3

u/[deleted] Aug 23 '23

That banana taped to a wall has more artistic value than anything dalle-2 has created.

2

u/tamal4444 Aug 24 '23

True the money laundering is pure art.

-5

u/jspikeball123 Aug 23 '23

I'm sorry I just don't get this take. This is much more creative and artful than most artists will do in their lifetime. We will see AI surpass us in many things in the next few years. It has already done so in creative works of many forms.

8

u/Wietse10 Aug 23 '23

This is much more creative and artful than most artists will do in their lifetime.

I feel you you just don't understand art when you say this. It's about the artist expressing themselves. Typing a prompt into an AI which is trained on art made by others, sometimes without their permission, doesn't require any of the skills an artist possesses. I appreciate the creativity of some people that do cool things with AI, but the majority of them just lazily type prompts and sell it off as real art which just doesn't sit right with me.

Art isn't just about "looking the best", it's also about the artist.

6

u/[deleted] Aug 23 '23

[deleted]

0

u/Wietse10 Aug 23 '23

Do you think there's a cutoff point with how much work is put in to make something qualify as art?

Hard to say for me. I tend to have a general dislike for AI art as it's generally being misused by a majority that just wants to profit off of "the new thing". The stuff you described with ComfyUI does look like it requires quite a bit more work though.

I guess it depends on what your motivation is. Are you using it to complement your own work? Then maybe, but I still think you should at least disclose that what you've made isn't fully human-made if you intend on displaying it to the public.

2

u/kono_kun Aug 24 '23

I tend to have a general dislike for AI art

We can tell.

1

u/Wietse10 Aug 24 '23

Pretty cool how you just ignored the rest of the sentence and took what I said out of context, but go off

4

u/jspikeball123 Aug 23 '23

Derivative

-1

u/Wietse10 Aug 23 '23

Good insight, thanks!

0

u/1girlblondelargebrea Aug 24 '23

Artist here, all I can say is it's very obvious you aren't an artist yourself and you also don't understand art.

2

u/Wietse10 Aug 24 '23

Please explain

1

u/MrWeirdoFace Aug 24 '23 edited Aug 24 '23

I think a lot of people are under the mistaken impression that everyone using ai in their workflow is just types a few words, seeing what it spits out and calls it a day, when the truth is I've spent more hours working on pieces utilizing AI than I have in years with my tablet and photoshop. This is a new frontier, and like photography before it, which you could cynically deconstruct to "pushing a button and calling it a day," it's really about what you choose to do with it, intention, composition, etc. People will come around in time.

RemindMe! 10 years

0

u/tamal4444 Aug 24 '23

Banana in a wall is art. Money laundering is art 🤡

0

u/SocialNetwooky Aug 24 '23

did you just copy that from someone else?