I got curious how accurate aiornot website is.
These are my drawings.
People use this service against artists when results appear to be random.
Iām at a loss for words.
Itās an anti-art movement it seems.
1 Like
And we have a Culture Minister who thinks Picasso canāt draw faces ~ Stephen Fry, Absolute Power.
This seems like a relevant sceneā¦
In 2025, Sonnyās answer would probably be āYep, pick a styleā.
1 Like
If it makes you feel better, most of us arenāt using AI detectors because they donāt work (and weāre quick to tell people HOW to spot AI, and steering people away from the ādetectorsā). If anyoneās ever unsure if somethingās an AI generated image, itās really easy to sniff it out. ^^ Donāt worry that the anti-AI community might be anti-art, it really isnāt. So far I havenāt seen any backlash against anyone for a positive AI detector result - only confirmed use.
As an aside, Adobeās AI generators arenāt ethical. There was zero way to opt-out of it if you sell on the platform (they paid me more than Midjourney did which was a big fat nothing, but it was still peanuts). Just wanted to chime in with those two things, I leave you to your images now :>
1 Like
Youāre welcome to chime in.
There are a lot of valid topics to discuss regarding this technology.
These companies could 100% choose to pay creators to help them train an algorithm but it would cut into their profits so none of them have done this enough.
Iāve seen evidence already of someone training their own model without the backing of a corporate $$$. So thereās hope that things will improve. A different company. A new model made from scratch. Artists compensated. In the right hands, this will be the future.
Thatās the only good scenario to hope for since this technology is not going away. Itās too useful, too productive. It is efficiency at its finest.
For me the depressing AI reality is the degradation of web search. Crappy AI content has flooded image search, articles, blogs, books, social media, etc.
People have no conscience to not publish the crappy stuff. Theyāre mass producing noise that makes it hard to find something real.
I like the possibility this technology presents but the world wasnāt prepared.
Iām not so sure, not for still images anyway.
AI animation is close to photo-realism as well.
The Good, The Bad, and The Woof.
(direct video links donāt seem to work here)
1 Like
Unfortunately the markets of several industries will soon be filled with rubbish AI-related products looking for gullible investors. Buyer and browser beware.
But it could always be worse. Can you imagine such an abomination as a AI-generated NFT market, back in 2021 / 2022?
Anyhoot. I decided to experiment with my earliest Mid Journey prompts in Stable Diffusion XL, and my favourite SDXL Checkpoints. Stable Diffusionās results are probably better than what MJ achieved about eight months ago (MJ v4 / v5). Oh, no loras, not post edits, just copy-pasted promptsā¦back when I was still learning how to write promptsā¦
1 Like
Lol
The script writers didnāt see this coming.
Symphony too.
It was at least a year ago I heard an AI symphony. Iām sure itās even better now.
Do Ai Covers count?
Count as what?
1 Like
'cause Iām sure you can count them.
1, 2, 3 covers. Look at that, easy math.
Iām sorry, I couldnāt help myself.
ART
Oh, my. The big debate over the meaning of art.
Okay. Hereās my interpretation of the word.
I think that an image is an image at its core.
If someone sees artistic value in that image, then itās art to them.
Other people might look at it and say, what do you see in that? This isnāt art. And theyāre valid too.
One personās art is another personās trash.
Literally.
I remember a story not long ago, people were caught in a gallery critiquing a trash can, saying how it ties in with the other art pieces of the show, the meaning of that object.
It was just a gallery trash can.
The moment you see something as art, it becomes art to you.
Itās subjective and entirely dependent on the audience.
Regardless of the intention of the creator.
So can a book cover that uses an AI image be seen as art? Yes.
But it may also not be seen as art by others.
But I feel that way also about crappy covers that donāt use AI.
Regardless of whether people agree with me on the definition of art, the question of what art is isnāt the one that should be sparking debates.
We should be discussing āWhat now?ā
The technology is here. It will be used, no doubt. How we go forward is the big question.
1 Like
Does the following meet the criteria for art?
Art? Nah. Not to me. Maybe itās entertaining a bit but only because the original song is entertaining and this is a close replica of it.
1 Like
Have you encountered any publications by Robert Hughes?
Robert was a famous Australian art critic / art historian, and he despised āmodernā art. I remember in one of his documentaries, I watched eons ago, a gallery hosted a toilet as a modern art sculpture. Thereās a reason why the renascence and classical (and edo-era Asia) sections of a national gallery are my favourite places to roam around. If only I could take a shopping trolley into the brass and marble sculptures areaā¦doubt the fridge-in-a-three-piece security guard would appreciate my humourā¦
Oh, if you are having trouble resisting the urge to buy (more) lotto tickets as I am, do not watch any of the Impressionists or other Waldemar Januszczak documentary series.
1 Like
I actually wasnāt intending to come back, constant bombardment of AI (both sides of it, but mainly the whole āartists deserve to be displaced/starve/adapt or dieā mentality) is really heckin draining, lol. But, I think this could be a really interesting, informative conversation? If Iām overstepping please tell me to go away! 
Obviously not intending any of this as hurtful/inflammatory/rude, I really apologise if any of it comes across that way!
True. Capitalism at itās finest - they donāt want to. Midjourneyās founders brag at length in their Discord (which has since been scrubbed) about stealing from artists, and laundering the data. The companies know theyāre in the wrong, but that didnāt stop them. OpenAI was, last I heard, begging for copyright laws in the UK to not apply to them, because they know theyāre in the wrong. To me, it all boils down to consent in itās most basic form - did we agree to LAION scraping our medical records, our art, our designs? I was never asked, but my work is in the dataset.
I am aware you are also an artist, so Iād love to get your side of why youāre okay with your work being scraped (if it was), and what that means to you, both as an artist, and as an AI user! 
I agree that itās useful. Itās productive. ChatGPT, Midjourney, whatever else all have a place. In my ideal world, it would take over the jobs we donāt want, instead of taking the jobs humans genuinely crave. Unfortunately, itās just making life harder for the average person. With the world how it is right now, AI ātaking jobsā doesnāt free us up for a shorter work week or improve our standards of living, it just displaces people in those industries. Duolingo recently decided not to renew a bunch of their employees contracts and have instead gone with AI generated translations (RIP my Duolingo streak, lol), for example.
Iād be interested in hearing your (royal your) thoughts on how people are currently using gAI (specifically mass producing trash to flood markets, creating revenge porn, scams, marketing teams alienating their consumer bases i.e the Wacom/WoTC issues recently, mass layoffs as AI can be used to cut corners, etc), and how we can stop it, without regulating it to the point of making it completely illegal?
There are plenty of folks are using gAI in good ways, too! But I feel itās important to make a distinction between Joe Bloggs using ChatGPT to help him figure out what to cook for lunch, and Mary Sue generating 100 books in an evening to flood the Young Adult category on Amazon.
Just wanted to add that Iāve had maybe two images that made me think for a second before I could confirm it, but my friend who is pro-AI likes to shove AI images at me and see if I can tell. All AI has the same sheen over it as part of the diffusion process, no matter what āstyleā the generator is going for. The anime ones are getting a bit better, but still the same sheen.
The second video is all sorts of wonk. Ignoring the actual dogs, the perspective reminds me of those old After Effects plug ins that animate photos automatically, haha! Loved playing with those plugins - theyāre fun AF
Why I donāt have a problem.
Okay, letās go on a rant. Itās been a long time coming.
Iāll call this my great AI book of predictions. Buahaha.
Iāll preface it with the fact that I donāt make money off art so I may be biased regarding it.
I do intend to make money off writing but Iām not concerned about AI books.
On AI chat bots
I feel bad for readers that encounter AI books.
Iām annoyed with the flood of crappy blog posts. Itās harder to find useful information now. Iāve gotten better at spotting itās AI written though so I donāt waste too much time on it.
Why Iām not worried as a writer. Because Iāve seen what AI writes. Iāve tried to get it to write me something. Different bots. Different types of prompts. I hate the scenes it spews out. Theyāre boring, cliche, forgettable.
The only thing that Iāve seen a value in is summarizing. It writes decent loglines and blurbs. Itās good for brainstorming when you want to reword a sentence.
I remember reading an article which pointed out that the latest bots are actually worse at creative writing than the early ones. And an interview with a developer offered insight: theyāre training AI to be better bots - for businesses. No one gives a 
about books because thereās no money in it. Thatās not where the research is going.
So Iām not worried.
AI cannot recreate the human experience. And I honestly donāt think anyone is trying to do that.
At least not yet.
As for art.
About art
Even if my drawings or graphics were used to train AI, I wouldnāt care. It canāt replicate the artwork it learns from. Itās a derivative work, not a copy. I think people are committing bigger theft when they post memes than when using AI.
Looking at what Midjourney and others are doing, similarly to the point about books, the latest bots are more focused on photorealism. Itās actually harder to get a creative artistic style out of it.
And it makes sense. Thatās where the real money is. Not in people who are playing around, expressing their creativity, but in businesses which want to showcase their products, create demos, promotions, faster, better, cheaper. Thatās where the R&D $$$ are being spent.
So what this means for artists is that the world is changing. If currently your work ends up in corporate hands, thatās how you make your living, you better learn how to use AI to work more efficiently or youāll be left behind.
My photography predictions
For example, stock photos. All photographers need to get with the times and learn how to utilize AI in their process. It can save them a ton of time.
Businesses will start expecting them to use AI and will adjust their price + time expectations.
I think there will still be work for traditional point and shoot but it will be more specialized now. More prestige.
Human models that pose for stock photos? Hmmm. They might be in trouble. AI has gotten pretty good at replicating humans. Itās not 100% yet, but Iāve seen some amazing examples that I would not have known were not photos.
It again becomes a more specialized profession.
I think an opportunity could open up for unique human faces. AI so far has a strong bias. Pretty faces, young, mostly white. Itās harder to get a poc. Itās hard to get a range of body shapes and age. Human models are still needed for that.
It could change in the future though.
Illustration predictions
I think thereās a shift there certainly.
AI can draw better than the mediocre illustrator. Beginners are in trouble.
But in proper hands, AI can be a great tool. A skilled artist can take an AI generation and turn it into something awesome. It can cut down on hours or days of work.
I think thereās still a need for humans in the artistic process but the process itself is changing. Technical skills are needed alongside the artistic ones.
Why I don't think AI can replace human artists
I think the onslaught of the crappy AI images is the symptom of exactly that: the technology isnāt the end on its own. It has to be wielded in the right hands. And no, not everyone that can push the āsubmitā button will produce something worthwhile.
I believe that it takes an artistic eye to guide the AI to creating art. Art is easier to create with it, but itās still not a given.
Iām not sure how to explain this properly. I think youād have to be more exposed to it to see:
A) what an average AI user can create
vs
B) what an artist can create
Thereās a huge difference in quality. Theyāre all using the same tool, but very few create the cool things that make me pause and appreciate what Iām looking at.
I actually have more to say (these thoughts have been brewing in me for a while) but my eyes need a break.
Besides Iāve already given you a book to read here.
Sorry that it got so wordy.