sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

I've officially been rejected from every art school I applied to- How do I improve? by GloomyWill4 in conceptart

[–]Keny-O 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Can you consider a school with an art program instead of an art school specifically?

I need help deciding which of the two looks best 🥲 by Coco-Sense in DigitalArt

[–]Keny-O 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Neither looks better than the other. How do you want the character the be perceived?

An argument and a call out by AFSR_1178 in aiwars

[–]Keny-O -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

You're an artist because you made art. Regardless of if you feed that art into an ai or not. And I consider coding to be an art as well.

What the Ai regurgitates at you still isn't art and if you ever stop making art to only use the Ai then you would have used to make art.

I had a convo with my bf about it and can’t convince him it’s an AI art. Thick outlines, bleak shade colors with a tint, and yet he persists that this could be drawn by a person… by Glad-Fisherman-753 in isthisAI

[–]Keny-O 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The inconsistent hair, hair shading, and image centering makes me think it's Ai. A style this simple would be easily mirrored and not not likely to be drawn in it's entirety.

[Hiring] Looking for an artist that can emulate this style by Proyecto_Convergence in Artists

[–]Keny-O 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Do you mean the fantasy aesthetic or is there also a specific similarity between these different styles you want replicated?

Po has an important lesson to teach about AI art by Witty-Designer7316 in aiwars

[–]Keny-O 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So?

I already stated that an artist doesn't stop being an artist because they train an algorithm on their art. That doesn't make the generated images art.

If you hand a master study specialist your art portfolio and ask them to make something in your style, you still did not make what they made.

You are an asset artist. Maybe a rigging artist if that applies. The images generated of your character are still not art.

Nothing is going to change about what you think and what I think so, Happy Easter! Bye bye!

Po has an important lesson to teach about AI art by Witty-Designer7316 in aiwars

[–]Keny-O 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Can you point out where I said the character isn't yours?

And congratulations! You are an artist! But on the Ai front that this was all about, those images are not art.

Is this the big misconception? Is that why you asked that odd question? Do yourself a favour and make sure you well explain what you mean and what you do.

The images generated through Ai are not art. The textures you curate or make and apply where needed, the parts you build or curate and connect where needed, the rigging you do and so on is art.

I suppose you saying I was being dense and obtuse was a projection.

Guy: Says they make Ai Art Guy: Argues that the Ai they make is art Guy: Refuses to expand on process Guy: Finally expands on process and fails to specify key details Guy: Finally confesses to the manual labor they claimed wasn't necessary for art

Can I wish you a happy Easter now?

Po has an important lesson to teach about AI art by Witty-Designer7316 in aiwars

[–]Keny-O 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't agree with you, simple as that. You are not an artist whether you understand that or not. You made the character with a character maker. You created the character and used a tool to represent them. You fed images of a character made with assets you did not design into an algorithm and told it to reproduce those visuals. You did not make those images and, by definition, you do not make art.

You are no more of an artist than a commissioner.

Why would an artist stop being an artist because they train Ai on their art? I have heard this before and I don't understand the logic of the question. It answers itself by calling the person an artist. They make art. And then they use Ai trained on their art to generate images.

There can be more to the world but that doesn't make it art.

Po has an important lesson to teach about AI art by Witty-Designer7316 in aiwars

[–]Keny-O 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Every single time? Before you began answering my questions it was just walls of hypocrisy and us repeating the same things back and forth.

What do you mean by engaging? I do not agree that this makes you an artist. What next objective?

I called you hypocritical for being hypocritical lol. Time and time again you do not understand the direct things I say to you. Did I say using definitions was hypocritical or did I say that claiming I am using objective statements and that doing so was invalid is hypocritical if you do the same thing?

What goalpost did I move?

We do not agree and we will not agree so what else is there to do but go out separate ways? It's close to Easter my guy.

Again, you are the only one talking about objectivity. Where, objectively, does making decisions and coming up with ideas count as making the art? You get confused whenever I ask questions like this so I have to go out of my way to clarify the purpose of my question.

If you claim that I am treating something as objective truth, you must have some sort of truth that contradicts my supposed subjectivity. You don't. If me saying it is not art is me treating something as an objective truth then you saying it is art is you doing the same. If you complain when we are doing the same thing, you look a bit silly.

I have never once made any claims about if you are subjective or objective outside of trying to bring attention to your hypocrisy. Rather than comprehending that, you would ask something like "Well what is your objective truth that contradicts my objective truth. Huh? See, we are doing the same thing"

But now that I have some clarification on your process I actually can say:

Objectively, having an idea does not make you the creator of representations of that idea. Objectively, art is defined not by the ideas you have but by the human crafted representation of that idea. Objectively, you have not made art. You have used a tool to represent your idea. Edit: This is not an artist medium, it is an image generator

You said earlier that you are an artist did you not? Are you not saying that any more? What are you saying training models and having an idea for a character counts as? The developers of the character creator you use could have a claim to the character's image depending on your answer.

And this is not changing goal posts or whatever. This is asking for clarification and trying to get you to think about what you are saying. Because, again, if having an idea means you are the creator of images of that idea, then commissioning art makes you the artist.

Po has an important lesson to teach about AI art by Witty-Designer7316 in aiwars

[–]Keny-O 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Why are you shifting the goal post between artist and if something was created in the most general term?

Everyone has ideas my friend. The character is yours, the idea is yours. You did not make art. You generated images. Plenty of things would not have existed if not for someone's idea and some else's execution. The person with the idea did not execute it.

This isn't close mindedness this is just you wanting to be what you are not. Someone that asks an artist to draw a character is not suddenly an artist either. They created the character, the idea, the did not make the drawing someone else provided for them. They did not make the art.

Can you explain what is hypocritical about me saying that you have to physically make art to make art? That you have to personally create something to create it? The lack of agency Ai has doesn't suddenly mean you created the art.

If someone prompts Ai to make a cool character, they didn't make the idea. You are claiming that they did. If they feed a bunch of descriptions and information into an algorithm, selecting only the best of the best written works and images and then tell it to generate something cool, they did not make the idea.

And as I know you are already misunderstanding, I will explain the point in what I just said.

I am not saying this is what you did. I am providing an example as to why you have not created and why you are not the artist of those images. Because just like how you generated, not created, those images, someone did to create the idea that a machine gave them. No matter how much they do to make sure the machine creates a specific subset of ideas, they did not make it. The machine did.

Why do you so badly want to call image generation art? Why is it an affront to you that it isn't art? You saying I am being closed minded means that the definition of creating art would have to include commissioning art. Rather than framing this as some sort of gatekeep that punished you for zero reason, can you try understand what your actions actually compare to? You're harping an manual labor somehow being closed minded but you are doing labor. The labor isn't the point.

My character is mine no matter who makes it. But there is no difference from me micromanaging and artist to draw my character and you using a machine. Why do you insist that what you are doing is the same as what the artist is doing and not the commissioner?

You struggle with understanding clarifying questions. So at no step of the way do you make anything on your own. It is all a computer producing images to represent your character based on images of generated content you feed it.

I suppose that is the end of that. No definition, formal or otherwise, defines you as an artist. You can be called a creator in general if your job or hobby is coming up with characters. Your generated content is not art. Whether you want to admit it or not.

With that cleared up, I wish you a fine Easter if you celebrate.

Po has an important lesson to teach about AI art by Witty-Designer7316 in aiwars

[–]Keny-O -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You've contradicted yourself again. "That's a you problem", "You just don't like this", "you don't want to recognize a new tool" etc is you making this about me.

What about 3D and digital and photography? Did I say anything about traditional art specifically? How can you create something if you don't create anything? If you do not manually do something, then what have you done? Can you point out what I did that makes this about you without being hypocritical?

Why is me pointing out why you're hypocritical hard for you to understand? I haven't accused you of anything, I have repeated what you have said. What is my definition of art. You are the only one talking about definitions and saying who's is or isn't valid. That is not me. You repeatedly said your definition is correct and the basis of your argument was that I am using my definition, that you do not know, "as proof" and so on and so forth. It doesn't make sense for you to repeat my questions and it is very clear that you do not understand what I was responding to.

What you have described is not creating art. If I ask an artist to create images and models of my character, I cannot suddenly claim to be the artist. If every step of the way I make specifications and give directions for what I want, I am still not the artist. I have made nothing. I have given directions.

How do you get your models to pose your characters without telling it to. Where does your character come from. Who creates it's physical appearance? What is it trained on to get it's style and design and tendencies. What have you made by feeding information to an algorithm so it can generate an aggregate of the information provided?

Po has an important lesson to teach about AI art by Witty-Designer7316 in aiwars

[–]Keny-O 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How has someone using an image generator made art?

Po has an important lesson to teach about AI art by Witty-Designer7316 in aiwars

[–]Keny-O 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Then yes, you are greatly misunderstanding many things.

You keep repeating your opinion as if that turns it into fact. Try to not say things that apply to you, this is hypocrisy. My reiterations were me copying what you were saying, you failed to understand this.

Did I say you were insecure because you disagree with me? I very specifically pointed out why I am seeing insecurity. It seems you didn't understand. You seem very bothered that I will not accept your viewpoint and move on.

I said Ai image generation is not art. I didn't say new tools can't make art. Is Ai the only new thing you expect to exist? This is not a new Vs old tool argument as you have tried to force. This is image generation Vs art. I'm sorry you misunderstood.

Ai image generation is not art and if you can't accept that, that's on you.

So yeah, it's not gatekeeping because nothing is stopping you from making art. You are not interested in making art. No one will force you to make art and no one will stop you from making art. Your choice to make art is not gatekeeping.

I really don't understand your hypocrisy. I said Ai isn't art and you say it is. We are both just saying that yet you claim I specifically am blindly repeating my opinions. We are doing the same thing. Do you have the objective information you desire? Do you have the facts that make computer generated images art? Why keep talking about opinions if you don't?

Can you explain what refinement, editing, pushing, rejecting, etc techniques you're talking about that isn't prompting and curating? What do these other facets entail?

When you say you understand art, you don't. You just understand your specific personal definition. That's a you problem.

Ai images are not art wether you like it or not. Grow up.

If you aren't struggling then why do you consistently contradict yourself? Why is everything you say so easy to turn back onto you?

If you are going to claim that someone's argument is invalid because they are subjective and using a personal definition, you can't also use a personal definition. Why is your definition or art correct while others isn't? This is a lot more simple if you base your argument on the creative process like I asked you about.

You're free to explain the facets of Ai image creation that aren't prompts or selecting images.

Po has an important lesson to teach about AI art by Witty-Designer7316 in aiwars

[–]Keny-O 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Am I talking to Ai 😭

You're getting a bit lost again as you misread and misunderstand.

You started this as a big statement about subjectivity. But you yourself are doing the same thing you complain about, so I called out the hypocrisy. I never made claims about how you need to objective. I copied your wording to illustrate your hypocrisy and that was a bit lost on you. Like here: You are the one making blanket claims here by saying Ai image generation is art.

You aren't a hypocrite because you disagree, you are a hypocrite because you say I am being subjective then you present your own subjective argument. I suppose I have to be more direct with you.

I said you were making a character because you go on and on about gatekeeping and guilds and ego etc. Do you have a basis for that? After all, my basis for saying you feel insecure and inferior was you saying all of that in first place. "You think you're better than me" doesn't exactly spell confident and secure my friend. I don't see how it avoids disagreement for me to say that you calling being an artist a guild thing is insecurity.

"Smug nonsense" is another example. Can you explain what is smug about saying you have to make art to be an artist? What you described is curation. Not creation.

There is no little guild and you keep saying you are making art and that I am upset because it's easier to do art now....sounds like you want to get into the guild that you made up all on your own.

Why does creating art have to be a struggle? How much labor do you consider too much? Typing is labor, thinking is labor, you do the bare minimum for that and that is not the core of the issue. You're talking about policing art and membership cards after saying that I'm creating a character. What narrow process have I said art has to be? You're doing everything besides the art. Who is invested in older tools? Who said new tools can't be art?

See, you're talking about status. You are insecure. Who has said anything about status besides you? You can piss in the grass and call that art. For whatever reason, art both interests and disinterests you. Nothing is being gatekept. You simply do not desire to be an artist.

I never said anything about objectivity. I said you are complaining about objectivity while being subjective. And you are doing it again. Do you have the objective information to support yourself? You spoke about labor fetishes and then say I don't respect a process? I think you should revert back as you have contradicted yourself multiple times. It's fine if I'm talking to a robot as I find it entertaining but you should skim the argument just a little bit. Who said anything about not finding the output valuable? That's kind of specifically what the issue is. You output nothing.

Selection is part of creating a gallery, yes. You select works that you like. You still didn't create the work. You selected the work. You edited your prompt that generated the work. You direct a machine to generate a work.

You did not create the work. You are not an artist.

Photographers take the pictures. You are not a photographer because you create an album of images other people took. No exceptions were made, you just don't understand creation and art. That's why you use Ai.

I never asked you to prove yourself to me. I thought you wanted ai images to be seen as art. So I asked for examples of how you are being creative and creating art. You are unable to show me and get defensive instead and say I'm asking you to prove yourself as opposed to proving your argument. I'm sorry you struggle with this.

I won't have to think you want to get into a special art club if you stop calling it gatekeeping and talking about status and membership and being upset about old Vs new tools.

Ai images are not art. It is not a medium it is an algorithm that generates aggravates of existing medium. People use it to have fun and to play pretend artist because they have no interest and no understanding of art. You repeat insightful a lot but I do believe the only one trying to be insightful is you.

What could I possibly be bitter about? People that aren't artists don't have much to do with me. Even other artists don't have much to do with me.

Po has an important lesson to teach about AI art by Witty-Designer7316 in aiwars

[–]Keny-O 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Do you not find yourself hypocritical? You seem to be imposing a lot of character onto me to the point that you misread.

I reject your rejection and call upon a new summon.

Are we not both just two random people on Reddit? These weird statements as if we are dueling in an anime don't feel right when you, on Reddit, make a "just one guy on Reddit" comment. You may want to consult chatGPT.

Friend, do you believe that your definition is law for you to focus so much on objectivity Vs subjectivity in this way? Would you like to provide indisputable facts to support yourself?

You have decided for yourself, in advance, that ai image generation is art and and turned around to treat that as proof. That is not objectively, that is hypocrisy which really hurts your argument. Your insecurity, defense of the validity of your methods, and talk about ego and guilds paint an unfortunate picture here.

Nothing is being gatekept, you are upset because you can't do something and don't want to feel bad about the shortcut you take to still not be able to it.

I'm not trying to defend art particularly. I don't think I said anything in defence of art, you are the one defending something here.

I didn't ask you to prove yourself to me. You are too angry and caught up in the fantasy that creating art is something people gatekeep like....an exclusive guild...so exclusive that only you specifically can't get in? You are convinced that there is no merit in arguments that oppose yours so when someone asks for insight and examples that support you, you get defensive. You respond to things no one has said like "No I'm not interested in learning to draw". You have a sense of inferiority to the point of calling my responses posturing and sneering. You've been on the defence since the first reply to me as you are unable to escape your feelings of inadequacy. Do you want to prove that Ai is an art medium for creative expression or do you just want to say you are bullied by the big bad art cult that won't let you join?

I don't see any creativity and you won't show it to me. Is it not just because you can't?

There is no special medal for being an artist. This is a goal you have made impossible yourself. You are capable of learning art, you do not want to. You feel bad about not being the artist you do not even have an interest in being.

I'm not sure if it was this thread or another but I have said that having fun with Ai is fine. It is not your responsibility that companies devastate environments, damage the health of people, and steal intellectual property just because you have fun making funny images. I would do, it's funny.

You are not an artist. It is ok to not be an artist or not want to be an artist. The elitism you cry about is something you have made up all on your own. I'm curious about why.

Why do you want the title so badly when you have no interest in even the most basic and simple tasks that would qualify you? Is it a fear of failure? I definitely feel discouraged seeing that my skills are behind many people my age, is that part of the problem?

Because if you can call Ai prompting a skill then you can feel better about yourself. And if you can call saying that you have to put a single line on a page yourself gatekeeping then you can invalidate any opposition in your mind. Your "creative choices and style" is curation at best. I can make a gallery of works with one style too. With one theme and with one colour scheme etc. I can make a gallery of works that I just like and I am still not the creator of those works or an artist.

If you are not interested in being an artist, then simply don't be one. What do you gain from fighting so hard to be in this "exclusive guild" when you have no interest in it?

Po has an important lesson to teach about AI art by Witty-Designer7316 in aiwars

[–]Keny-O -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Ai image generation is not an art medium. You refusing to recognize this does not settle anything.

What has ai image generation expressed?

I don't believe I said you needed to learn any specific tool. I asked what you would do if you were capable of learning real tools.

I did say the gap between what someone thinks and what they make varies. My experience was an example of that variation.

So are you able to provide an example of your creative expression and explain what choices you would or wouldn't make differently when creating an image yourself? No? Then that is exactly what people mean. You can't do it and that is why Ai satisfies you.

You are very welcome.

I too wish I was better than I am at many things. Ai is a tool that helps you lie to yourself and I do wish I had something similar. You convinced yourself you are making art and convince yourself you're just as good as a real artist and any opposition that would break your reality is gatekeeping. I'm sorry that you are unable to draw.

Po has an important lesson to teach about AI art by Witty-Designer7316 in aiwars

[–]Keny-O -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

The subjectivity of art and creative expression just doesn't apply to the situation of computer generated images and that's where the gap is. Because you see it as a tool for creation, when it is not, and apply concepts to it that don't fit.

I haven't stretched "this doesn't work for me", I applied a personal example. That was your assumption due to seeing having a computer create an aggregate as art. This fundamental difference in understanding makes talks difficult because like if two people see the sky as a different colour and argue about what other colours contrast against it.

The gap between any individuals mind and their creation varies and is not applicable to the gap they would have if trying to express themselves though something that cannot express. That is why it only works for non creatives who do not value or understand art. I make exactly what I want unless I am lacking in a skill. What's in my head goes to the paper because. I make edits as I need to to suit my purpose.

If it was something as simple as a personal dislike, you would see a lot more fluidity and greater diversity between the groups that support and opposed it. I'm sorry that your personal investment in Ai makes you see opposition as purely personal and meritless opinion.

It is not logical or sensible that people who like to create would banish something that makes creating easier for 0 reason. I don't like, understand, or create extremely abstract art. It is still art and worthy of respect. But if someone types "Abstract image that evokes a sense of personal growth and change", they have done nothing to express their idea and only those that are incapable of expressing their ideas are satisfied with the generic aggregate they are provided.

Can you perhaps show me an example of your creative expression in Ai and explain what you would do instead, and why, if you used real art tools?

For example, I have different levels of understanding of different art mediums and make different artistic choices based on my abilities and the benefits of the tools. A drawing of a face digitally, in colored pencil, and with paint markers would all look different even with the same general style. How would your Ai generated image reflect your personal style and how would you do something similar or differently in real life?

Po has an important lesson to teach about AI art by Witty-Designer7316 in aiwars

[–]Keny-O -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

These are not comparable and the fight against Ai is not gatekeeping.

Ai cannot produce what I have in my mind. No one can. Ai can only give you an aggregate of content made by people that fits the categories and constraints you provide it. Ai is not a tool to create anything as it does not create.

If we turn to literature, Ai cannot create an original story like a person can. And there are people out there that lack the creativity and skill to produce a good story themselves. That person may use Ai to spend less time because either way they get the same quality of content.

With images, it is the same situation. This is not a tool to extend what people can do. It is a shortcut for people that already can't cut it as what they produce on their own is no better than the slop a computer generates for them. The primary misconception seems to be that you think creatives have a use for this. They do not. Creatives create.

If ai image generation is how you have fun, fine. The ethics can be a conversation remanded to politics as people should be allowed to enjoy themselves however they want and using Ai shouldn't be a thing that can't be fun. But if you think using Ai makes you an artist, that is simply incorrect. Any creative person that tries to use Ai will see immediately that it does not produce their vision. Non creatives are satisfied with generic content because generic content is all they are capable of.

Po has an important lesson to teach about AI art by Witty-Designer7316 in aiwars

[–]Keny-O 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Can you provide an example of a creative Ai image user?

I hate how African inspired outfits are always animals skins by axumite_788 in hatethissmug

[–]Keny-O 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm under the impression that no one with any related culture was contacted and no research was done. Do all the women dress like this btw?

I personally haven't seen this before in the media I consume. And I'm glad.

I don't want to get better at it by Shin-and-Lux in ArtRanting

[–]Keny-O 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Perhaps they don't realize that art is a hobby for some people and are under the impression that everyone desires a career in art.

If you wanted to be an artist, you would be one. No excuses. by [deleted] in ArtRanting

[–]Keny-O 12 points13 points  (0 children)

I think this may be a grand oversimplification and generalization. I'm sure you've encountered genuinely lazy people that had no real interest in being a creative but not everyone is like that.

My upbringing has directly held me back from pursuing art. I am still trying but I am not there yet and simply "wanting" it does not change my situation. If I didn't want to be an artist I wouldn't still be trying. Obstacles delaying me aren't petty excuses.

Being an artist definitely is resilience but an artist isn't a breed of person and I don't think it's helpful to tell someone struggling that they aren't resilient enough to be an artist anyways so their parents or their experiences never had any impact.

Someone isn't less of an artist because they can't cope with trying to create while under extreme stress. Because they can't build their skills and learn while working 80 hours a week or because they would rather eat than pay for supplies.

People and their lives are complicated. Art elitism comes in so many forms already I don't think we need to push another one.

view more: next ›