I don't think that scraping art from artists without their written consent should be legal. You shouldn't have to "opt out" of it, you should have to "opt in", and see how many artists sign up. It's one thing for a human to be influenced and learn from another artist's style, but for a machine to copy it for the intent eliminating the need for human artists is just not something that we should put up with as a society. We don't need AI art, we functioned perfectly fine without it. We shouldn't stand for it.
@bluewren65 Bull narrative l, driven by greasy techbros and alike. Just include training data in classic copyright laws and the problem is solved. You would wonder how many djinis you can force into a bottle with proper legislation and a bit of public outrage.
@@bluewren65 That's literally not true at all dude. How much about artistic copyright law do you know and use in your life? If you aren't involved with this professionally, you probably don't know enough to have a real conversation with about it.
@@davorp8248 Sites like "HaveIBeenTrained". Some sites allows you to check whether your data is in LAION-5B database that they used to train StableDiffusion. And I found a lot of people I know in it, so much for "We value your data privacy" and "GDPR" on Europe.
Gosh, how did you check & find out please? I want to check now. I’ve had my suspicions for a long time because whenever l take a photo of my artwork with my phone, up comes the immediate link to view whose art & what paintings online ‘the web’ considers is similar to mine! It’s never yet got that ‘right’ but seems to link colours more than style…& with individual flowers ’made up & painting created’ by me…eg. Roses..it names & identifies & supplies photos of real roses ‘it’ considers my roses look like-ie. specific botany l have not copied/considered or tried to paint
this is why i pursue teaching children drawing and painting. introducing local young generation to the joy of creating art while getting better at art myself. i wanted to try my luck on picture book or commercial illustration at first but since AI, i started to have doubts bc i'm new to the industry. hopefully it'll take turn for the better for us artists as long as we try find ways around it
The situation sucks for digital art due to the rise of AI. However, many applied artists that are honing traditional skills are experiencing growth. An example is collectors increased demand for original artwork such as inks, etc. by comic book and pop artists. Original high-quality handmade products are expected to rise in value as public backlash against AI intensifies due to job losses, privacy concerns, and other issues. A friend who is an illustrator/graphic designer has used her skills to design and market handmade toys and her business is booming. Artists collectives are also experiencing a rise in attendance and sales, as people seek authenticty.
Hello - unfortunately these spaces are being invaded by AI as well : people getting AI to spit out an image and then porting it to canvas with a "paint-by numbers" approach. Now that said I'd love to see the store page of your friend though !
@@piorism I was referring to high quality originals that collectors purchase. The paint by numbers approach preceded the rise of AI and has been around for about a decade, it is hardly a threat to authentic art and says little about the people that puchase it or feel threatened by it's existence. My friend sells her work at a collective called the Abbortsford Convent - you can Google it
@@mariomills sure for commercial stuff, but I am referring to art where a more refined aesthetic sensibility is at play. I think you missed the point and may need to get someone to explain it too you
AI costs a huge amount to run, someone will have to pay down the line - investors will need repaying. As artists are already underpaid, it won't be long before AI 'art' will cost more than actual artists. Keep on arting, our time will come.
The problem with this argument is that as far as I know the real costly part is the training, once a model is ready it doesn’t require specialized computing power anymore. Sadly our best hope seems to be legislation and general public backlash, both of which aren’t promising prospects… (apologies for the pessimistic take).
It probably would not make it cost more than hiring an artist, but it does suggest many of the current free access ones will need to start charging. That will reduce the numbers using it.
Unfortunately this isn't the case, local machines with a graphics card with 8gb VRAM or more can run local Models of AI tools based on Stable Diffusion which are already trained on the scrubbed data.
@@sweetnerevar3509 yes, in fact I think I mentioned that elsewhere myself, but it requires people to have one and increasingly people do not - the desktop and laptop market is mostly business or gaming and has been declining for years. Plus it requires a bit of technical confidence to setup most people dont have. Huge numbers use AI on webpages or apps on tablets or their phones. Because Stable Diffusion is not limited to local installs ad is used by most of the companies that r web and app based AI its hard to see how many are using apps and webpages compared to local installs. The difference in the technical demands is inevitably going to mean most will be going for the route that costs them least and is most convenient. Especially with a form of image making that is actively promoted as removing time and effort.
AI Bros™️ will say that GenAI images are making art creation more accessible but that's a nonsense statement. We no longer live in a world where only certain people can pursue art. Anyone can choose their preferred medium and create. What AI bros are really saying is that they can get praise now, too, for not having to put in any of the same amount of work. We already did that for them!
Exactly, that statement is a beacon of entitlement and laziness. Art has never been about speed or ease but of passion, determination and dedication often of a lifetime pursuit.
Ai bros have a point (I’m not an AI bro). It’s the same point artists can make when they use their fancy new watercolor brush in photoshop. Or photographers use filters that replicate thousands dollar lenses. Should the manufacturers of paint brushes and photo gear raise a stink because computers are stealing their “look”? Many artists have conveniently forgotten the technologies that gave them access to techniques that were previously cost prohibitive. It’s easy to forget when you’re on the beneficial side of a technology revolution. By the way, watercolors and brushes are still being sold and camera gear industry hasn’t disappeared.
Nightshade, Glaze and watermarking are becoming the new ways to lock your doors after leaving your art house. And machine learning works by associating captions with images - your alt text can remain useful to humans, but less valuable to machines, if you add a bit of extra conversation that doesn't include what is seen in the image, in the mode of the XKCD alt texts.
@@ekozoidmajiker6186 It's said that AI is evolving too fast for it to keep up with being effective most of the time and that it only works with certain AI models. Something like that, I beleive.
One thing to keep in mind, AIs already scraped almost the whole internet worth of content and its starting to self reference itself for terrible results.
This.... everything that can be fed into the A.I. has already been fed... the end result is A.I. is very good at making "P0on" and pictures of Cats but is lackluster at everything else. A.I. really needs an army of Artists/photographers to keep feeding it new data and it needs A LOT of data now that just doesn't exist. Like 3 hour videos of camera rotating around a specific type of tree getting it from all angles and at different times of day. So unless A.I. companies and artists are willing to work together, A.I. is going to destroy itself consuming it's own generated data... and since companies seem to only want to use A.I. to replace us, the trend for A.I. is inevitable model and industry wide collapse that will thankfully also cause all these companies that fired their artists to go bankrupt.
I’m not an artist but I think it’s really important to listen to different experiences and perspectives so that we can understand the implications that AI has for all of us. Thank you for such a thoughtful and educational video. I’m a school teacher - sixth form - and sometimes my own job feels like an exam factory production line. To this end, AI is offering alternatives to human-led education and intervention, and these alternatives are in line with the aspects of the current system that worry me most.
I keep seeing professionals from other fields like programming and writing, and the common idea among them is that so called ai solved zero problems but created tons of them instead
I met a person who told me: "because of AI I can now make art and illustrations, me that have no talent! Isn't it amazing, what a huge step forward this is for mankind. I have made thousands artworks the last year. It takes me three seconds to make one". No. The things AI produce are not work of art at all. It is a rendering tool based on internet archives and algorithms. True art is coming from the human spirit, a result of years and years of being alive and having passion.
@@Clara-ow6wz Firstly: most people can't Secondly: Having a 'fair trade' mark for human created works is an ethical statement not a visual one... because whats happing now isn't in any way ethical --- Our work is being taken and sold back to us for a monthly fee. We can pretend that 'everything will work out' , but every year the situation just gets worse.
Wow Holly, great, great video!! Those last words were the kind of words I was looking for. I have been demotivated to continue or re-start my illustration career. But like you, I have tried to see the way we, as artists, can stay alive in the market competing with AI. And you couldn’t have said it better, our stories, the experiences where our inspiration is drawn from cannot be replicated and it is what will make human art super valuable. Thank you, thank you for sharing and always inspiring so much!
I wish videos like these would the norm of TH-cam's Top Ten videos (rather than click baity Mr. Beast challenges and pranks). I appreciate the thoughtful research you put into this video Holly.
I'm not an illustrator, but I think out all jobs that had been affected by AI, with no doubt Illustrators had been the most unlucky ones. I just hope you guys are able to use it in your own benefit and make your work more quickly keeping your clients, I think at this point the most safe jobs are who can make sculptures and more physical forms of art.
AI is being used to write entire books too, with a persons name as the author attached. I’ve seen both artists and authors throw in the towel and quit creating because of unwillingness to compete so unfairly. Keep in mind many authors were already only selling their downloadable books they worked on for a year or more for 99cents BEFORE AI entered the scene. It’s such a shame.
Thanks so much, Holly, for your thoughtful and intelligent response to this challenging situation. One thing that I know is true is the universal need that all of us have for connection. (Yes, even those of us who are introverts.) Sharing our stories of being, process, experience, and place is something that only we can do. I'm looking forward to hearing even more from you. Thank you for finding ways to communicate with us from your mobile home and studio!
Thanks for mentioning the human aspect on all of this Holly! I think above all we need legislation that prohibits scraping without consent, and a model that allows artists to receive compensation if their art is to be used for training AI. Plus we probably need a new internet at this point because the current one is already full of AI slop, bots talking to bots, and unusable search engines.
@@NatureSketchbook Yeah, what you said!! :D I agree about needed legislation changes and taxation. I don't think a "new internet" is really possible without that, in the capital-driven age we're currently in.
Indeed, they do. But also - their AI does the dirty work for them and they can spend their time on what they like, including arts and music (TNG being an excellent example of this, having scenes with painting and playing an instrument (Data plays violin).
@@marikothecheetah9342 Yep, they live in a post-capitalist society without money where everybody is taken care of and is free to do whatever they want to do. Unfortunately, they had to go through a few very bad things that lasted for very long time to get to that point (ie world war III and a second dark age) 😑
Machines have been taking creative jobs since the industrial evolution. Pottery is an example. Manufactured garbage is everywhere, yet the art of making pottery still exists. People will pay high price tags for beautiful handmade pieces because they know a human made them. I agree that the human connection is the way forward.
Yes, but you are talking about physical pieces. It's like 0,1% of what artists and designers do nowadays - 99,9% of creative jobs are digital. And most of them are doomed. I myself work as a graphic designer and while I still am impossible to replace by ai, i don't need to buy mockups or stock pictures anymore - ai does that for me for free. I also work much faster due to ai tools in adobe - our team is smaller than a year ago, but just as effective. And in few years ai will do for free what I do now. So eventually we are all going to lose our creative jobs...
@@deszczoviec Im not convinced by the idea that AI will just keep getting better. At least not what we are looking at today. There are fundamental aspects of both the concept and the technology that create limits for it that we may already be getting close to hitting. We may need a completely new idea of fundamentals such as what a computer is and how it works before we can get something thats going to not have those limits - for instance organic and quantum computing. We may get those one day, but then there are also issues of resources that are already starting to crop up that might not only do what we are already to see which is bottlenecks and problems in computing, but also stop us getting viable alternatives.
@@deszczovieci hardly think AI will replace you. True clients might buy generic work. But so do people today buy cheap stuff from Temu. But we as humans can create which is what AI cannot. AI recycles.
@@deszczoviec i agree that so many jobs in so many industries, especially digital ones are gonna be replaced and lost to time. Its just like when computers showed up in the first place and took away many jobs in factories and phone operators and others that no one even thinks about now. Those jobs were lost to time and technology, and new ones replaced them in industries no one had imagined at the time. When I was a little kid there was no "web" to be a web designer for. It's painful and scary to lose entire industries but they will be replaced with a future thing of some sort or another. as humans, we are creative and adaptable. I think artists are tops in that category! We have to use our creativity and skills to create the new industries we will have in the future. That's why i embrace the idea of AI (not necessarily all practices people try with it) but AI itself. The world was better when computers were added, and it will be better with AI too, but we have to adapt to it and that's hard.
As a children’s book illustrator I can say AI has taken over a lot of that work. Hard enough to get a decent pay from freelance work (most writers think they have the next bestseller and want only to pay in royalties which never pan out). For non-artists, I know beginning computer programmers have also been hurt by AI--if oversee programmers weren’t already taking jobs, AI has slammed the opportunities away. But can AI work be copyrighted? I would think that would be a deterrent.
Im not a copyright lawyer, though I have studied the subject and follow it fairly closely. In the US you cant currently register AI works for copyright, its against the US Copyrights Offices internal rules. You can register parts of works that used AI that were not produced by the AI. Under Federal law you cannot bring a work to a US federal court unless it has been registered. In the Andersen vs Stability AI case most of the works presented in the case were rejected by the judge as they had not been registered. Elsewhere in the world copyright exists on creation with no need for formal registration in most countries ad the merits and degree of protection any works enjoy are decided by courts on a case by case basis. Some countries do apply legal precedent others dont, but so far I dont think there is much precedent to apply. In China a copyright case did come up where someone who used AI claimed their AI work was copied/infringed, ad they won the case, so in theory AI works are protectable in China, though that does not mean all AI works necessarily are. In the UK the 1988 Copyright Act explicitly gives copyright to computer generated works but with a reduced duration of 50 years from creation. This includes works with no direct human interaction, but its not clear if something like a prompt based one that has some human interaction is covered by that aspect of the act or can have protection for the longer duration. There are also some who question who holds the copyright, though it looks likely its the person who was the most proximate to the specific piece existing, which would be the user. Many AI companies explicitly assign copyright to users anyway though, which would mean legally that even normally the devs would hold the rights they have passed those rights to the user. It can and probably will increasingly vary from country to country at least for some time unless international copyright agreements get adapted and that take ages. Its always best to check copyright issues with ones own countries national bodies and legal experts. I hope that helps answer your question.
AI is almost a bit like the beginning of the end of the world type theory. I’m definitely a fan of the slower pace of lifestyle. I think the quote rings true. Works of art, books, these will be luxury items of our future. Craig’s narration was excellent! Informative vlog. Big hugs to all! 💜💜💜💜
Holly! This video was so interesting! I really like the idea of attaching more of our stories as artists to our art. It feels like another task to add to our workflow, which is a bit overwhelming on top of everything else. However, I feel like it is worthwhile to protect and valorise our work as artists and humans! I will probably need to think on this and on ways to do this that are authentic and interesting. So much to think about! Thank you for making this video! I'm excited for you next Island Vlogs too!
I definitely agree with you about the human element and story behind the art. I bought the Match a Leaf Memory Game, not because I saw it and thought is was pretty (although it is), but because I watched your videos and saw the story behind the art. That made me want to go out and buy it. xXx
I just realized that professional art galleries, showing their art inventory online on their websites, are putting their artists originality in jeopardy. I now wonder if the one really good painting I bought (a photo of it is still on the gallery site) might have had its ideas and images already scraped. Very intriguing to me since this painting has some very unusual ideas and images in it.
Semi-pro musical artist here - excellent video with some very good ideas. I agree that custom hand-made work will have value in a future where the machine can spit out a knockoff of human art. Bringing people along on the journey is a really great idea.
I don’t want an allowance from the government. I want them to ban the automation bs that’s ai. Also if the story telling is in the painting, doesn’t that mean that ai is also scrapping the meaning as well?
It’s strange that artists are crying about Ai automation now. Were you crying for the clay modelers when CAD took hold? Or the photographic lens makers when photoshop duplicated their work with filters? Or is it just when technology affects you personally that you suddenly want everything banned?🙄
@@bad_uncleBuddy there has been outcries from those technology. The difference is no one was getting their artwork stolen in those cases to train their replacement. Copyright still matters in this day and age and I'm tired of AI bros acting like it doesn't apply to them
@@randomtinypotatocried The current phase of AI just crawling the internet will pass. AI models are already having difficulties with the degrading quality of internet data caused by themselves, so the next step will be specialised AI tools working from closed, curated databases. But that will still sieve out a lot of mediocrity from the pool of working artists, as innovation always does.
Me either. It’s scary to think AI will change humanity. Even a hairstylist might be replaced someday-who knows. I think there will still be interest in original and copied original art.
I make teeth for a living. To be specific I make hand made dental crowns/veneers, mostly cosmetic Smile Design. Most of my industry has gone to CAD designed then machine milled crowns but I still do it the old school way. Now I see Ai companies launching where software completely designs the crowns eliminating the need for a dental CAD tech. This will decimate my industry Yet here I am with no worries cause again, I make everything by hand and consider myself an artist. I charge 3 to sometimes 10x what some other labs charge yet I have a loyal customer group and even a waiting list of new customers if I slow down. If you keep quality at the forefront and find yourself a niche, you can survive as tech threatens almost every industry.
I'm curious what the benefits of hand made teeth would be over AI generated ones. I can imagine myself paying extra for some cool hand made fangs but I am unsure of what the average "make my teeth look perfect" consumer sees in hand made teeth. Why do your customers choose you over a machine?
Superb video! One I will be sharing. I love the idea of "creative ecosystems"...so true. Its refreshing to hear an intelligent perspective on AI. Like you, I am a firm believer in the importance of connection; people buy into artists as much as their art...even if they don't realise it. I feel certain this has to continue; it's a lifeline to our sanity! As someone else has mentioned within the comments...those that matter will appreciate the real thing and have the desire to invest in, and support, both the art and the artist. Our society needs soul! Keep being amazing Holly. 💛
Thank you for the positive thoughts at the end! This topic is so depressing. When the AI craze started last year I got bummed so much I stopped creating for a while bc I felt robbed and cheated. Thankfully I got back to arting and now I always Glaze and poison my pieces - if they want to steal from me they might as well get it with a bit of extra spice.
It takes creativity to understand that AI can precisely do in the future what a washing machine does for us today. Do you really think that a computer algorithm is more creative than you? I’m not the least bit threatened. At best, it’s a shadow of what I did yesterday. Ai will be a helper for me. Like a master worker, it will carry out my will and nothing more, for it can do no more. What it does and how it does it will always be in my control and reflect my unique taste. I’ll be able to multiply my workload and raise my creative ceiling. I don’t see why all these mid artists are wetting their pants.
These few, who will and already do benefit from AI, don't want any more money, they can print it or simply press extra zeroes in the computer. What they want is even more control, total control. And an UBI will be essential for this control. Here's your money, take it, you just need one more shot of this or that, but it's for your own good! So, no, I don't agree with UBI and I think they want us to promote it. Now, I do agree with all the rest about man-made becoming a luxury item and such.
Thank you for making this great video - with very good takes on the present and the future of artist and AI. And I tend to agree, human made content, storytelling and craftsmanship will become the new luxury - but also a must have for businesses for example. Maybe AI will be a modern Shutterstock or Clip art (at least that’s my hope). Because we need to have human creativity and human storytelling with empathy, learning and personal growth. And you did excellently even though you’re an introvert. Good job🙌
One thing I can affirm is that at the present moment, AI art CANNOT generate highly complex scenes as a requirement. There is NO engine that can yet do this. In other words, it can indeed render highly complex scenes, but NOT a huge list of mandates. If I say "generate a painting in old world realism style, as if painted in oils, of a red haired goddess holding the book of time, with long flowing curls and a braid descending from her left ear, with a crown of lilies and butterflies, with a serpent rising in front of her torso, with the head pointing to the viewer, with her feet clad in leather roman sandals, standing within a pavilion that is roofed in a gold arbor, with fields of heather in the background, with the rising sun behind her left shoulder....." and so on, there is currently no way any AI engine can do this mandated all-inclusive complexity. It will only do a small part of these requirements (to match a story for example). And giving huge lists can in fact make it generate a mess of only one of the commands. Simple illustrations such as "a cedar tree in the fall on a hill" is no problem. THUS: Artists can define themselves with complex imagery.
There are hard limits conceptually and practically with the technology. Prompt coherence tends to breakdown the longer and more detailed a prompt is - the language part (the LLM) works by grouping text into 'tokens' ad each token uses memory resources - the more tokens the more resources its using ad the more resources it uses the less coherent it becomes as it starts to drop parts of the prompt, essentially 'forgetting' them. Eventually it hits a point in that slope of prompt decay where it falls off a cliff and stops rendering additional text. Devs can allocate more resources and find ways to improve coherence (and accuracy) but they normally carry a cost they will at some point need to pass onto users. Plus the physical availability of those resources is limited anyway. The AIs also struggle with things like counting, spatial directions ad have o actual understanding of things - they are actually doing pattern recognition and learning visual patterns of pixels that represent subjects as linked to any text descriptions and tags with the training images. If something is not commonly enough found in those texts the AI cant follow an instruction to create an image of it, so its hugely dependent on how people tagged images. Most images online are simply not tagged i ways that are really useful to people using AI so the training is in a sense fudging it. Theres lots in that example you gave that an AI would really struggle with. Roughly half off it would fall off that cliff and just not get created at all by many AIs. Half of what would be intermittently rendered as its in the slope of coherency decay. 'a serpent rising in front of her torso' will be hit or miss as AIs struggle with 'in front of' kinds of spatial commands. For instance as most images of people at desks they are trained on will have people sitting behind a desk it will simply put them behind it even if you prompt that they are sitting on it, because it does not really know what behind or on are. I could go on - but yup, you are quite right thats a nightmare prompt for an AI. Interestingly though '2 yellow cubes one in front of a green pyramid with a yellow sphere on top of it' would also be a nightmare prompt. As would ' a horse with eight legs'. What it means in practice is that AI is simply not a reliable enough technology to replace an artist for anything requiring a detailed brief or very specific images. It might sometimes get what a client wants, but you cant guarantee that. If you can guarantee that it means if you get a job where you hit something it cant do you are simply unable to complete the job unless you can use other tools because, well, you are an artist... so in effect while AI can be a useful tool for an artist, its an unreliable one if you are not an artist. Therefore you really need an artist still if you dont want to risk your project... I came at AI as an illustrator and have been exploring it using it with how it takes direction and might fit into commercial illustration work to see if its really a threat to me. Im not convinced it is - after several years exploring it I actually think the real people its a potential threat to are clients. We already often have to deliver to tight deadlines with detailed or very specific briefs because thats often what clients need, so failing in that threatens those deadlines or even the project itself. Ive picked up work before when trad artists fail to deliver either to a deadline or a brief, ad when those clients have come to me they have been in a panic!
*Technology is amazing* & _anyone_ with a *creative mind* and *a smartphone* can *now make a wonderful story and share with the whole world* *Before* internet - _Only a few limited people could distribute their artwork_ . & Now - everyone can share to a huge audience.
Modernity has brought this upon itself, labelling any artistic representation as art. Furthermore, if AI is compelled to pay compensation for learning, this could have a spillover effect on the education industry and even on future artists. Did Andy Warhol pay copyright fees for his screen paintings or his collages? Probably not. Adapt and outpace the AI-make it your competitor and your servant because this genie cannot be forced back into the bottle.
This is so new and so unfair there probably needs to be new software to track what is used and who it belongs to and new laws to limit use of AI. AI in general should not be used to make anyone lose their career
First off, great video. You made some excellent points. There are way too many interesting comments fr me to keep commenting on here! I loved your point about storytelling. It actually applies to an extent with most art - ive seen lots of talented artists who struggle to put their self forward with their art or tell a human story with it simply because they feel uncomfortable, its too personal, they dont feel able to communicate it. Ive been at art fairs where ive been teasing people in to look at my art, telling them about it and myself, sharing stories about or in my art - that creates engagement and invites the person to identify with it as part of their story. It sells art. In contrast ive seen other artists struggle to even look at people, let alone engage with them, and they sell nothing. So if I can I try to talk with the artist about themselves and their art either to encourage the conversation so people passing by can jump in or just so I can have a go at selling it for them (I hate seeing great art not selling). With selling online its already distant enough - connections are harder to make, attention spans short and its harder to get people to engage. With AI (at least the way most people are using it) there is literally nothing of any substance to engage people with. There can be, but you have to approach it with that in mind and really push it. AI has some serious limitations that I think make it far less a threat to us artists than we often think anyway. Its been massively over hyped ad there are things it cannot do well or in some cases even at all - and probably ever will be able to (at least not with the kind of technology we have now). Artists are still needed if you actually want specific images reliably delivered. If you just don't care, sure AI is fine, but then so is stock or public domain or getting your three old niece to do it. I think there are ways to approach using AI that can be more creative, more personal and more human, but they involve approaching it with that in mind ad creatively experimenting with it. You end up wrestling with it like a bag of live cats. That in itself ca be a very human story! So im looking at in another way - not how might AI threaten me, but how can I can encourage people using AI to start creatively wrestling with it. To see it not as a thing you simply surrender over to the AI (some people are getting AIs to create the prompts for them, thats what Dall-e is about these days) but something yo get creatively funky with, What if you draw something, feed it into the AI, feed the output back in, the print it, transfer it to a ground then paint on it? Then feed that into the AI? What if you observe what it does with that first input, reflect creatively on how the AI interpreted what you did, and apply what you saw to a painting? etc etc. So im basically at ways to encourage people to do more than just see it as a simple magic wand that makes pictures for you, but something you can really engage with in creative and very human ways. Its not going to just go away, so instead of letting others dictate its use to us artists, lets take control and use it to encourage people to engage with art?
I love that this video went to Universal Basic Income...I am all for it! I hate that creativity and commerce gets conflated, and I wish dividends upon all traditional artists!
Holly, you pack a lot into this video. I've worked with creative teams in publishing for over 40 years. I am myself a traditional artist but have spent most of my career introducing technology to art teams and media companies. Generative art has been on my agenda for seven years, but it is the last two years that have caused me the most concern. The A.I. we are seeing today will be considered laughable compared to what the near future holds. I would compare it to a seismic shift in human activity similar to the shift from hunter gather communities to the farming agricultural world. Every aspect of our lives will be impacted. It is impossible for us to assess what that may be because we have no point of reference that comes even close to what a super intelligence will bring. Yuval Harari refers to A.I. as alien intelligence and I think he is correct. A.I. will bring an entirely new way of finding solutions to problems we humans present it with. This will have enormous benefits to humanity, particularly in medical and scientific developments, but will bring the same volume of threat against our current way of living. This level of power should be held and controlled by democratically elected officials and not private companies and individuals, this much is clear to me. What does this mean for the creative communities you have mentioned? I believe you have come closest in respect to the human to human interaction. In the same way that one human chooses another human over others my hope is that people will choose each other over A.I. entities. More importantly, is that the creative communities come together to elucidate their fears and do not become isolated and depressed by this existential threat. I am not advocating a ban A.I. force or even a hate A.I. approach. I am advocating that creative people come together to influence the development and implementation of these new structures, that we join forces with others to make sure that all aspects of A.I. are for the benefit of mankind and for us (artistic people) we become the guardians of the creative world. In simple terms, if a certain aspect of A.I. does not benefit humanity, there should be a unilateral ban on further development. The current ownership of A.I. development does not allow for this. It is hard to end on a positive note, humanity will very soon unleash intelligence far superior to that of humans. It will lead to either a dystopian hell or a utopian heaven more likely, if history is anything to go by, a messy mixture of both. All I will say is that we artist have been around a very, very long time, at least fifty thousand years according to archaeologists. I don’t see that changing anytime soon. Art, creativity and adaptability are enormous parts of being human. Thank you for a thought provoking video and for keeping the debate in all our minds.
These are all such great points! Humans have been telling stories since the beginning of humans, and our desire to connect to each other through storytelling cannot be replaced by AI. I loved what you said about of localizing work, showing one's growth as an artist, and having unique conversations with the viewers of your art. Your zine video actually inspired me to make one based on the unintentional adventures of my life in the town I live in. Thank you!
If I were to make anything that required a ton of art (e.g. a board game with a bunch of cards, or a video game with character portraits etc.) then AI art will likely be super useful to get a working prototype off the ground to see if it works, but I'm pretty sure I'd then hire an actual artist with a distinct style that I love and that fits my vision to make all the artwork. Like, it's becoming an advertisable thing, even more so than before, to say you you're using real artist's work. Of course, most board games won't sell thousands of copies. I can see, how spending up to $20k on geourgeous art is probably not a wise business decision, when selling even 1000 copies of your game would be big success. But at this point, if you're going to release another board game into the sea of already excellent board games, it's more of a passion project anyway.
@@hollyexley I can talk big words but I also haven't designed a game yet so I realize that whatever I have to say about the issue doesn't carry a ton of weight. 😅
I thought this was a really thoughtful piece and an interesting take. Found myself agreeing with pretty much everything. Wishing you the best with the evolving situation and hoping that we as creatives can continue to flourish and prosper in a world where theft of our work has become completely legal.
I don’t worry about it because AI is more complicated than working with a real artist. I can tell the difference with AI mages because the images look strange. A persons inner artistic voice can never be taken by someone.
The images may look strange to us artists, but I already see people wearing the AI „art” on tshirts, and they don’t care. Also people who are not artists struggle to see that 3 second long cute and cozy animations flooding Instagram are made by AI cause they don’t pay attention, and therefore share the videos and make them popular. That’s horrible.
@@nataszakura1432 Yep, its a combination of social media destroying our attention to detail, and AI being normalised throughout our cultures. I suspect a lot of people dont even consider it's AI.
AI art does look strange and it always gives me a weird, negative feeling that I cant describe. I think it makes me feel like our connection to each other is slipping away. Thats what AI art means to me, its just one less way we are communicating and expressing ourselves to each other.
@@nataszakura1432 which begs the question - whats wrong with our arts education and do artists need to do more to encourage people to be more discriminating. The flip side of this for us artists is that if people do become more discriminating how many of us will fall short of their new discriminating standards and will AI get genuinely better than us? I think there are already some artists who are being out performed by AI or AI can create works to a similar level.
@@hollyexley there are some artists you really wont even notice are using AI. Check out Maggie Taylor. Ive been interested in her art since before these new AIs. AI art actually having been around since the 1970s, but she only started using it with the new types. I can see some slight differences now she is using AI but I think most would struggle. Though a caveat on that - Maggie is a digital collage artist, and she is using AI to generate collage assets she can use instead of public domain art in her collages. It gives her more control of subjects she can collage. There are a number of artists I know now use AI but most use it with other processes as well. The ones I see using AI alone tend to be photographers, though they also tend to crack using AI fairly invisible pretty quickly ad it can be hard seeing its AI with some of them as well. There are also some who deliberately exploit and push that weirdness for creative effect. It can be used expressively btw, its just most people using it dont know how and usually dont even think of trying.
what a fantastic video, Holly. thank you so much for making this video and ending on such inspiring and uplifting points. as a creative, i feel a lot lighter
More artists should speak up about this. Thank you Holly for your very well composed of argument on this. Ai should not be allowed to take honest work away from people.
There is a nuance to this debate that is often missed, which is that AI doesn't make everything for everybody that uses it. Some uses of AI still require a considerable amount of knowledge, skill, creativity, and time. The fact is that if traditional art is superior, then it need not fear us AI bottom-feeders. At the end of the day, all artists and creators have a creative voice, and they want to share it, with the help of AI or not. I would never let AI do all the work for me...there is no pride in that!
I don't think paying royalties to the artists behind the training set is a real solution. You would be the first and last generation of the artists who would get that. Just a couple years and AI will outperform all of us. What's with everybody else? It's again just about picking a few people who were at the right place and the right time. But I also think such a compensation never ever will happen, because art is theoretically limited by the total attention of all the us. When you produce some kind art and you get money for that, you basically capitalizing some of our attention. So the human artists vs AI game is a zero sum game in the long run. Companies are grabbing that many to finance other ventures, not to pay out the profit as royalties.
I found it hard enough to get jobs, as an artist, when I was going up against other actual artists... Now we have HAL to contend with! I can only hope that Eh-Aye will be considered theft and banned from commercial use. But that means putting my faith in the government 😢
I just wanted to say that I'm very happy for you that this video is going "better" that the others regarding views. You always have something interesting to say. Thank you for sharing this very value information and reflections.
Same process is happening now to illustrators that happened to potters. They used to be highly skilled artisans until technology created mass produced ceramics. Now there are only few potters that can live on their art. Mostly it has become a hobby.
I can see a future where there may be a term for human made art such as 'Biological Art', sounds terrible when I put it down. But I CAN see a premium for human made art in the future, especially if it becomes more scarce due to AI prolifcation
I work in online advertising and our algorithms are AI. My job consists of ad copy writing, keyword lists, making optimizations based on the data, presenting. I know that from a creative standpoint (production) it will definitely affect the industry and it could replace jobs. I could see it being helpful when it comes to making last minute changes or creative variations. But at the end of the day, clients will want to work with humans, know there's control or monitoring by humans, and companies will need human representation. I truly hope it doesn't replace us but is used in ways to make tasks easier.. 😢 I don't have the answers at all..
😮 companies would let you starve in the street if it means that they can get three more pennies so really ask yourself if robots start showing up😮 like open AI is working on automated agents and the other day they announced strawberry that they achieved human-level reasoning so if you achieve human level reasoning and you have automated agents like and we're very close to this if you pay attention around the time that I can tell an AI to make a whole video game or a movie and it makes a whole 6 hour game or a whole 2-hour movie 😮 with characters and everything and visually it looks like something that I really would just watch and enjoy for 2 hours😮 no one's going to pay you to do anything creative because they're not going to care people don't actually care about human touch they care about what humans can do if a robot can do things that a human could do we wouldn't talk to humans anymore that's actually human nature😮
The thing I don't hear a lot of people talking about is the fact that ai art is not covered by copyright, only human made art can be copyrighted therefore companies who want to protect the art they use they will want a human to create the art. UBI is not a real solution it will just be more money printing and will make the rich richer and the poor poorer, imho.
You can't copyright the output of a model to a prompt as it is. But you can use AI as a part of your creative workflow (and you can even create your own AI models if you have the proper technical knowledge) and then combine many outputs in your own collage or build an entire new work based on it. The result of that labor is something that can be copyrighted, because it involves a substantial amount of human work.
To counter this, I'm changing my art style. From now on, my specialty is to produce hand created drawings and paintings in the style of bad AI art. I think it will make me stand out and look creative. It also has the advantage of giving me an excuse for why my hands look weird. At the same time, no AI is going to train on my art because companies want to avoid training AI on AI content. And any AI that can mimic my art style will look like bad AI which is not a good look. Seems like a win win situation.
It’s sad to see how my niece shares the same interest in drawing and art as I did as a kid, to think that creativity skills like hers won’t be appreciated in the (near) future. If the future of art is dominated by AI, it just makes it all even sadder to see her taking art so seriously and with pride every time she shares her finished works to all of us.
This was a tough video to watch. As always, I really appreciate hearing your perspective. I think the 99% want real art from humans. The only people that like this AI garbage are making a profit from it. I am a professional calligrapher. I remind myself constantly that computers came for this artform already, and it survived. Your art will survive, too. I think you are spot on, the key is our humanity.
@CantonWhy I am hooked up with a number of stationery studios and wedding planners that feed me business. I don't make a large income, but it is possible. It is mostly wedding work and commissioned poems.
Gosh, this is such a well thought-through video, Holly. As a sculptor, I've often wondered (well, feared really) how long it'll be before anyone can easily 3D print any sculpture, in any style, they fancy. It's depressing but I sincerely hope AI 'art' follows the same trajectory as NFTs, even if it takes a while to get there (it's interesting that almost all of the OpenAI co-founders have left the organisation this year). Human artists FTW! ✨💪✨
Yes, I loved the fall of NFTs - how satisfying that was! The community cared so little for artists and their rights and livelihoods, and unfortunately I see some of the same attitudes in pro-AI communities.
I'm not a visual artist and maybe not an artist at all unless one considers writing _art._ I'm pretty sure the main difference between AI and artists is that AI sucks, and artists sometimes don't. This has happened before. Decades ago, sequencers and drum machines were disruptive technologies. I attended a panel discussing this. The most interesting comment was that drum machines are great if a good drummer programs them. See also Zappa's comments about the Synclavier. He said the machine was not devoid of expression, but he really had to type in a lot of numbers in to get the expression he could get from a well rehearsed orchestra. Over time, he has been proved right. We're in a transition period for AI visual art, where the low cost of not paying people for their work is so appealing. Your strategy is a good one, but I predict that after a few years, the trend will end as it has with drummers. Also, inasmuch as I understand visual art as a connoisseur, it isn't so much about cranking out visual depictions as it is about perceiving what is important to depict.
Honestly, a big part of my approach to combating "AI art" is to be relentlessly hostile to those using it. Most of them are just spammers or entirely uninsightful business guys at the end of the day, and for them it's just another way to use art without having to pay an artist for it, or to even put in the bare minimum level of effort required to make something themselves. I feel it should be something stigmatised in its current form, and the people using it against us made to feel as unwelcome as possible. Thanks for the vid, appreciate your insights and optimism in this area.
I've been doing well as a freelance illustrator since 2017. But in the last two years, this new technology has changed the scenario for creative professionals here in Brazil. Unfortunately, I had to choose to change careers in order to adapt to this new reality and survive. Currently, I only produce art as an author. Furthermore, I agree with you that AI has incredible potential to promote positive change: Helping to combat global warming, bringing cures for diseases and performing high-risk jobs. But in capitalism, bad decisions that make people's lives worse always predominate.
Some very insightful and valid points made here. I often attend craft markets and there are still plenty of people who are very interested in and purchasing original art. Hopefully this trend will continue as people seek authenticity.
maybe it's cope, but I feel there will still be art jobs out there especially in the entertainment industry, even if they get more competitive and change in unpredictable ways. Concept design for example, is not about making a pretty picture, but designing something, laying out the blueprint for a 3d artist to follow. It has to follow certain rules and be understandable, while also following specific prompts and allowing for changes based on an art director's feedback. Similarly, tech art jobs require artistic and technical knowledge that allow someone to bridge the gap in a way that generative models couldn't do on their own. There will be ways to survive as artists, but we need to be willing to not only adapt, but protect each other, and fight for fair treatment by these companies that want to exploit our work.
I do not like how this is inevitably going. For me AI creativity may be seen as fantastic, it actually leaves me feeling cold. It is clinical and soulless, be that art, poetry or music. Nothing can replicate that. I know which I prefer.
I like critiques against the current use of AI, I like them even more when they expand and critique capitalism too:) artists with class consciousness are among my favourite people
What a good video! So many points I have never considered, even as an artist myself! On a side note, I stopped posting my art on IG once I learned that most people who opt out of their art being used to feed their AI model have got theri plea rejected, so de facto it was just a pure illusion of choice or democracy for people. IAlso, what I'm trying to do now i focusonly on selling original works, since AI is indeed a bit of a thread to artists...
This is an excellent overview of what’s happening right now. I am a programmer living in Silicon Valley/San Francisco. These AI/tech companies are my neighbors. The wealth coming into this area is incredible, but it’s not necessarily benefiting many of the people living in Silicon Valley (let alone everywhere else) because prices and other expenses are rising very quickly here. While many of the executives in Silicon Valley are liberal and want equality for all, the very nature of technology concentrates wealth at the very top. Unlike in previous generations, if you work in an industry, which is being replaced by technology, there is no way to escape this time. In previous disruptions, farmers replaced by automation could work in factories, factory workers replaced by technology could work in offices, etc. Now, there is nowhere to go. As of now, I use AI every day in my programming job. It makes my work go much quicker and more accurately. However, I know my days are numbered in the programming industry. FOBO is a legit fear. I wish I had a solution because I’m not sure if Universal basic income is it. The money does have to come from somewhere, so Tech companies would have to contribute their profits in some way.
Great video, it's really given me some perspective as someone who is just thinking about embarking on a journey to make money from art. I have been having a lot of doubts about wether it's a sensible course to take especially as I have a decent job already. But art and creativity is a real passion of mine and has been since I was a kid. I also just read an article predicting that AI art is on track to cannabalise itself; the internet is flooded with AI images now and the more these generated images start to feedback into the system the worse the results are.
As a sociologist and lifelong artist, I tend to think of the problem as one where we shouldn't have to do drudgery to prove our right to exist under a system of abundance. It includes not viewing art as a commodity, as I have been told I'm not a 'real artist' by those selling their art, because I have generally had a day job, but have always made art because I needed to grow my soul, so to speak. We face problems in education with the advent of AI, but don't tend to view it in terms of competition, so much as a matter of adaptation. Obviously have supported what you've been about for years, and don't want you to be vulnerable, but I trust you to adapt, as you are more established than I am from what you have represented on your channel.
lol I heard the opposite, people who sell art are not really artists because they have to pay attention to what the clients and trends want instead of their inner voice. Just don't pay attention to that crap.
@canobenitez the irony is I have been chatting with AI about a performance art piece regarding embracing the identity of being a cockroach since the bureaucracy dehumanizes us anyway 🪳 🤷
@@canobenitez Well... According to that criterion, Renaissance artists were not authentic artists because they were under the patronage of their Maecenas and listened to them. Right? :]
This is definitely a time where we need to show our human selves - a terrifying prospect for those (including me) that have avoided showing ourselves in any way on camera. I even cringe if my hands are in shot, let alone talking or showing my face. But if we don’t do somehow show up as real people with a story to tell, it seems like AI will make us obsolete. There are even AI created videos of hands drawing and paintings, which is just nuts. It’s hard to feel positive, honestly, but we need some kind of artist community revolution or overhaul in the way we approach our careers. You seem to be doing everything right, Holly ❤
As soon as you started talking about this subject I thought of the lecture I'd heard earlier this week by Meredith Whittaker...and then you used a quote from her and her colleagues. Whittaker really lays out just what a dystopian con is AI. To see how these large data set models (I can't call it AI, there is no intelligence involved, just training on huge data sets) quickly fall apart you only have to instruct the to create an image, then, tell it no, that's not right. Do that again and again and the image soon degrades into something bizarre and completely incoherent and the machine scrabbles to interpret the instruction. Really dreadful. And yes, UBI NOW! Unfortunately, corporations and governments both are much more enamoured of a world of wage slaves.
Some artists I know (who have been artists before using AI btw) deliberately push AI to breaking because they are creatively interested in those bizarre images. Cycling them through the AI repeatedly does not generally break them down though, in fact its sometimes used as a technique to remove issues.
@@hollyexley Unfortunately. Your comments on UBI were some of the most interesting ive seen on the subject. I think its actually important to have even if AI never existed, and its more important for some forms of work affected by AI like say call centre work than art.We artists can and will find creative solutions to the challenges AI presets us with that people doing jobs like that just wont be able to. Call centre work was my go to second income to support my art for years though... AI was already being introduced there years before it became an issue. I think the with UBI it can be a reflection of artists being seen as a culturally important enough to support. Arts in general bring a lot of money into economies but often depends on a cushion while creatives build their skills, gain experience and establish themselves.
Last week i watched an episode of Diary of a CEO (Steven Bartlett) that he titled Emergency: The impact of AI (or something like that) where he talks to an Ex Google AI guru who helped develop it but has become so horrified by what he saw and how its developing he walked away and now talks and educates about this and what we can do. Worth a listen. Ive also other people referring to this time as a race to the bottom with everyone scrambling to give their autonomy to AI. I spend a lot of time now questioning what the point of it is. I gradually stopped making art as i don't want to share it for it to immediately turn up an ali express or Shien, and now wondering about all the money and time ive spent learning branding design, website design and coding recently as this will all be replaceable very soon by AI and it feels pointless. I do agree with your point of needing that human connection though snd hope that this backlash proves the value of human made rises to the top again. Though i worry about the generations below us and what the world will be for them. Thanks for sharing, you're always very eloquent and your videos are well thought out and discussed.
This is how civilization will end, AI will make humanity as stupid and unskilled as mud, and when the last tree is burnt as a sacrifice to the machine,
There is a huge difference between art and illustration. One is made for a client who decides whether the work is acceptable or not. The other is made by an individual who decides what they want to express visually and how. Yes there is overlap but the creative purpose is different. Illustrators are toast. Most clients will accept “good enough” AI to save time and money. Artists however, have a human ability to explain why and what they put on the canvas as well as depicting taboo subjects or art styles the AI’s corporate masters won’t touch. I suggest taking a look at the art of Robert Crumb (if you’re not easily triggered) to understand that humans can put their full and sometimes twisted souls into their work in a way the AI never can.
I love the idea of attending paint and sip type of art sessions. I think a lot of people who don't do art on their own love those too. If artists are open to hosting those types of events, I think that's one of the ways that artists could earn income and it can't be replicate by AI.
Urgh. I can't fathom buying a board game with the 'AI look.' I expect board games to be delicately crafted and very human works. The illustration is so important to this, and while I'm sure some examples of this 'art' will pass under the radar, I just don't see how you can automate the kind of authentic design that breathes life into board games. Since the 'averaging amalgamation' learning models are so inherently limited even with such an enormous set of training data, someone still ultimately needs to design the thing if you want to avoid inherently uncreative images.
I started to get into digital art 20 years ago but quickly realized over time that digital art could be created by non creative people so I jumped ship and went traditional oil painting for rich clients. Its a nice side hustle.
I'm not sure if something like this already exists in Adobe or similar software, but there needs to be a more advanced watermarking tool perhaps embedded in metadata of an image /illustration/animation. There should be a way to encrypt your images to specifically prevent them from being used by Ai tools or by anyone without usage rights. Or...better yet, for artist who for whatever reason may want to "Opt-In" there could be encryption methods which offer parameters to allow the publisher to decide what specific AI tools, individuals, or organizations are allowed to use their images, for what purpose, and to what degree. And the ONLY reason one might "Opt-In" is because maybe they're a part of some Publishing Right Organization who can monitor/track the artists work and pay them appropriate royalties anytime their work is used. Similar to what ASCAP/BMI does for musicians.
If the people selling AI programs had to pay even one cent for each of the art pieces their algorithms need to train, AI image generation would disappear overnight. It only exists as long as they're allowed to continue getting away with theft.
I love you for talking about this in a realistic context! Even mentioning environmental issues or the rise of facism in this day in age is algorithm suicide. ❤you are so on point about everything here. Thank you for spreading the word.
Also, if you give everybody a "living wage" every month, suddenly a "living wage" will be worth nothing and you'll need at least twice as much as that to survive. As long as greed exists, none of these problems can ever be solved, and greed will exist as long as humans exist... 🤷
😮 companies would let you starve in the street if it means that they can get three more pennies so really ask yourself if robots start showing up😮 like open AI is working on automated agents and the other day they announced strawberry that they achieved human-level reasoning so if you achieve human level reasoning and you have automated agents like and we're very close to this if you pay attention around the time that I can tell an AI to make a whole video game or a movie and it makes a whole 6 hour game or a whole 2-hour movie 😮 with characters and everything and visually it looks like something that I really would just watch and enjoy for 2 hours😮 no one's going to pay you to do anything creative because they're not going to care people don't actually care about human touch they care about what humans can do if a robot can do things that a human could do we wouldn't talk to humans anymore that's actually human nature😮
It is a bit depressing to see AI take over jobs, but even more depressing is the number of people who just don't care that a slew of professions (careers that people have spent years on) go down the drain, some even gloating openly (granted, these are probably trolls). Now, it is not all bleak. You can turn around and look at AI as a tool to help you, but atm, for me, this option is in the future. I do think a solution is to find other venues to earn money until we see a clear path for artists to take. I also agree with you and many others who think that human art will be a thing people might pay extra for in the future. The problem is, of course, to earn a living until then.
A very insightful video Ms Exley, thank You. I'm not afraid though. I certainly felt the dread that most did with A.I's rise but realised it will only make physical art more impressive and expensive.
I'm an artist and I've been following the AI art explosion pretty closely. For artists right now, the kind of mass produced art factory type art really is what is getting replaced first. Looking at the examples in this video, these are very easy to replicate at a similar quality on a home computer. Artists making this sort of thing are going to be the most effected by this new technology. Or at least, they 'll be affected first. My area is in character design. For the moment, character artists have the edge of being able to add meaningful details to a piece. For customers who want a character holding a specific item or in an interesting pose will still need to hire an artist for that, but blended artworks are making their way into this corner of the industry. Music is a really interesting area though, since a lot of the most popular music sounds pretty similar already an AI can replicate a lot of the steps and produced a finished product that is comparable to what you hear on the radio is a few minutes. The real threat though is that with the low investment required on the musical elements, prompters can instruct the AI to produce original ideas like "a song about beer for breakfast" and end up generating something which sounds more innovative than 90% of popular music simply by not being one of the four rehashed themes that most songs follow. It'll be interesting to see if human creativity can keep up when so much of the mechanical art that humans were producing was the bulk of the demand previously.
I am planing to never again post anything artwork rolated to the internet because of AI, i dont want it to be scraped i rather just keep it to myself. It's my feelings, emotions, journey of my life, dreams, ideas that im strongly connected toward, basicly me, music and drawings and sculpting of what i specifically have in mind, full emiotion slowly transformed into senses like, sounds, visuals, touch. I don't wanna have that "me" aspect to get dissolved and taken from me and turned into something like abominatiobn of me, stolen me idk. I hate AI and i alyways will.
I think there is gonna be still credits for illustrators but not is the same way that we see it today. With the ai mutation, I think the prompters's gonna be credits (or a term like "human+IA) cause you're always need to lead the machine in a certain way to have the end results
The exact same forces that offshored tech and manufacturing jobs to countries without worker protections, that abused the h1b worker visa system, that were regularly caught colluded on prices and wages, is at play here. None of the customers said "no" to the companies engaged in these tactics, and I'm sorry to say that those same customers won't stand up for the artists either. People will say they prefer human made art, but in the same way they purchase mass produced prints over individual works, the cheapest option will be the one they pick. Most of these people also think the suffering artist is a romantic ideal. While the timing could be arguable, there's a capitalistic singularity looming. There will be no job retraining when the machine is faster, cheaper, and more consistent in all human endeavours. There will also be no customers when nobody has an income. If we don't have UBI in place prior to the singularity, it's going to be a very bumpy ride.
I agree, and under neoliberal capitalism, UBI will be a very hard win for workers indeed. A revolution required. I do agree, hard times are ahead, for many overlapping reasons.
I don't think that scraping art from artists without their written consent should be legal. You shouldn't have to "opt out" of it, you should have to "opt in", and see how many artists sign up. It's one thing for a human to be influenced and learn from another artist's style, but for a machine to copy it for the intent eliminating the need for human artists is just not something that we should put up with as a society. We don't need AI art, we functioned perfectly fine without it. We shouldn't stand for it.
Too late, the horse has bolted and it began not years ago, but decades ago.
@bluewren65 Bull narrative l, driven by greasy techbros and alike. Just include training data in classic copyright laws and the problem is solved. You would wonder how many djinis you can force into a bottle with proper legislation and a bit of public outrage.
100% this yes.
@@bluewren65 That's literally not true at all dude. How much about artistic copyright law do you know and use in your life? If you aren't involved with this professionally, you probably don't know enough to have a real conversation with about it.
Every artist gave their consent. They signed a TOS that explicitly informed them that every one of their posts would be scraped for machine learning.
I just checked my old home improvement website and they've scraped nearly every image from it. Wow, how dystopian.
Im so sorry. I know the feeling. It’s a violation.
How do you now when they do that?
@@davorp8248 She gave us a link in the Show Notes for a website where you can search an artist’s name and see if any of their art shows up.
@@davorp8248 Sites like "HaveIBeenTrained".
Some sites allows you to check whether your data is in LAION-5B database that they used to train StableDiffusion. And I found a lot of people I know in it, so much for "We value your data privacy" and "GDPR" on Europe.
Gosh, how did you check & find out please?
I want to check now.
I’ve had my suspicions for a long time because whenever l take a photo of my artwork with my phone, up comes the immediate link to view whose art & what paintings online ‘the web’ considers is similar to mine! It’s never yet got that ‘right’ but seems to link colours more than style…& with individual flowers ’made up & painting created’ by me…eg. Roses..it names & identifies & supplies photos of real roses ‘it’ considers my roses look like-ie. specific botany l have not copied/considered or tried to paint
this is why i pursue teaching children drawing and painting. introducing local young generation to the joy of creating art while getting better at art myself.
i wanted to try my luck on picture book or commercial illustration at first but since AI, i started to have doubts bc i'm new to the industry.
hopefully it'll take turn for the better for us artists as long as we try find ways around it
Make a zine - you can tell the story and illustrate it yourself.
Thats wonderful, thank you for teaching the next generation! Keep the hope and faith that us artists will be able to carry on regardless.
The situation sucks for digital art due to the rise of AI. However, many applied artists that are honing traditional skills are experiencing growth. An example is collectors increased demand for original artwork such as inks, etc. by comic book and pop artists. Original high-quality handmade products are expected to rise in value as public backlash against AI intensifies due to job losses, privacy concerns, and other issues. A friend who is an illustrator/graphic designer has used her skills to design and market handmade toys and her business is booming. Artists collectives are also experiencing a rise in attendance and sales, as people seek authenticty.
Hello - unfortunately these spaces are being invaded by AI as well : people getting AI to spit out an image and then porting it to canvas with a "paint-by numbers" approach.
Now that said I'd love to see the store page of your friend though !
@@piorism I was referring to high quality originals that collectors purchase. The paint by numbers approach preceded the rise of AI and has been around for about a decade, it is hardly a threat to authentic art and says little about the people that puchase it or feel threatened by it's existence. My friend sells her work at a collective called the Abbortsford Convent - you can Google it
Ha good luck, people want authentic? No they don't. They want result, doesn't matter if it's AI
@@mariomills sure for commercial stuff, but I am referring to art where a more refined aesthetic sensibility is at play. I think you missed the point and may need to get someone to explain it too you
Yeah, digital artists are basically Ai artists anyway. Traditional artists/craftamen will be fine.
AI costs a huge amount to run, someone will have to pay down the line - investors will need repaying. As artists are already underpaid, it won't be long before AI 'art' will cost more than actual artists. Keep on arting, our time will come.
The problem with this argument is that as far as I know the real costly part is the training, once a model is ready it doesn’t require specialized computing power anymore. Sadly our best hope seems to be legislation and general public backlash, both of which aren’t promising prospects… (apologies for the pessimistic take).
It probably would not make it cost more than hiring an artist, but it does suggest many of the current free access ones will need to start charging. That will reduce the numbers using it.
Unfortunately this isn't the case, local machines with a graphics card with 8gb VRAM or more can run local Models of AI tools based on Stable Diffusion which are already trained on the scrubbed data.
That's just wrong. You can run AI on your average gaming PC without an internet connection.
@@sweetnerevar3509 yes, in fact I think I mentioned that elsewhere myself, but it requires people to have one and increasingly people do not - the desktop and laptop market is mostly business or gaming and has been declining for years. Plus it requires a bit of technical confidence to setup most people dont have. Huge numbers use AI on webpages or apps on tablets or their phones. Because Stable Diffusion is not limited to local installs ad is used by most of the companies that r web and app based AI its hard to see how many are using apps and webpages compared to local installs. The difference in the technical demands is inevitably going to mean most will be going for the route that costs them least and is most convenient. Especially with a form of image making that is actively promoted as removing time and effort.
AI Bros™️ will say that GenAI images are making art creation more accessible but that's a nonsense statement. We no longer live in a world where only certain people can pursue art. Anyone can choose their preferred medium and create. What AI bros are really saying is that they can get praise now, too, for not having to put in any of the same amount of work. We already did that for them!
Bingo.
When everyone is super. No one is.
Exactly, that statement is a beacon of entitlement and laziness. Art has never been about speed or ease but of passion, determination and dedication often of a lifetime pursuit.
Ai bros have a point (I’m not an AI bro). It’s the same point artists can make when they use their fancy new watercolor brush in photoshop. Or photographers use filters that replicate thousands dollar lenses. Should the manufacturers of paint brushes and photo gear raise a stink because computers are stealing their “look”? Many artists have conveniently forgotten the technologies that gave them access to techniques that were previously cost prohibitive. It’s easy to forget when you’re on the beneficial side of a technology revolution. By the way, watercolors and brushes are still being sold and camera gear industry hasn’t disappeared.
@@bad_unclethe difference is that nothing else completely replaces the artist unlike ai does it
Nightshade, Glaze and watermarking are becoming the new ways to lock your doors after leaving your art house. And machine learning works by associating captions with images - your alt text can remain useful to humans, but less valuable to machines, if you add a bit of extra conversation that doesn't include what is seen in the image, in the mode of the XKCD alt texts.
I read somewhere it doesn't work
@@ekozoidmajiker6186 It's said that AI is evolving too fast for it to keep up with being effective most of the time and that it only works with certain AI models. Something like that, I beleive.
One thing to keep in mind, AIs already scraped almost the whole internet worth of content and its starting to self reference itself for terrible results.
This.... everything that can be fed into the A.I. has already been fed... the end result is A.I. is very good at making "P0on" and pictures of Cats but is lackluster at everything else. A.I. really needs an army of Artists/photographers to keep feeding it new data and it needs A LOT of data now that just doesn't exist. Like 3 hour videos of camera rotating around a specific type of tree getting it from all angles and at different times of day. So unless A.I. companies and artists are willing to work together, A.I. is going to destroy itself consuming it's own generated data... and since companies seem to only want to use A.I. to replace us, the trend for A.I. is inevitable model and industry wide collapse that will thankfully also cause all these companies that fired their artists to go bankrupt.
I’m not an artist but I think it’s really important to listen to different experiences and perspectives so that we can understand the implications that AI has for all of us. Thank you for such a thoughtful and educational video.
I’m a school teacher - sixth form - and sometimes my own job feels like an exam factory production line. To this end, AI is offering alternatives to human-led education and intervention, and these alternatives are in line with the aspects of the current system that worry me most.
I keep seeing professionals from other fields like programming and writing, and the common idea among them is that so called ai solved zero problems but created tons of them instead
Thank you for sharing your perspective in your own field, I appreciate it!
I met a person who told me: "because of AI I can now make art and illustrations, me that have no talent! Isn't it amazing, what a huge step forward this is for mankind. I have made thousands artworks the last year. It takes me three seconds to make one". No. The things AI produce are not work of art at all. It is a rendering tool based on internet archives and algorithms. True art is coming from the human spirit, a result of years and years of being alive and having passion.
Keep crying Luddite. You sound like every Horse Owner when the first Car made its way to the street.
You will be replaced.
@@BlargvsBlorg Aww. Just so you know, no matter what it tells you, chatGPT isn't your friend and doesn't care about you, honey ❤️
@@kumada84 Your IQ is definitely lower than AI. Makes it easier to replace you these days.
There needs to be a 'made by humans' mark like the 'free trade' mark
@@Clara-ow6wz Firstly: most people can't Secondly: Having a 'fair trade' mark for human created works is an ethical statement not a visual one... because whats happing now isn't in any way ethical
---
Our work is being taken and sold back to us for a monthly fee. We can pretend that 'everything will work out' , but every year the situation just gets worse.
Wow Holly, great, great video!! Those last words were the kind of words I was looking for. I have been demotivated to continue or re-start my illustration career. But like you, I have tried to see the way we, as artists, can stay alive in the market competing with AI. And you couldn’t have said it better, our stories, the experiences where our inspiration is drawn from cannot be replicated and it is what will make human art super valuable. Thank you, thank you for sharing and always inspiring so much!
I'm so glad you liked this one!
I wish videos like these would the norm of TH-cam's Top Ten videos (rather than click baity Mr. Beast challenges and pranks). I appreciate the thoughtful research you put into this video Holly.
Thank you!
I'm not an illustrator, but I think out all jobs that had been affected by AI, with no doubt Illustrators had been the most unlucky ones. I just hope you guys are able to use it in your own benefit and make your work more quickly keeping your clients, I think at this point the most safe jobs are who can make sculptures and more physical forms of art.
AI is being used to write entire books too, with a persons name as the author attached. I’ve seen both artists and authors throw in the towel and quit creating because of unwillingness to compete so unfairly. Keep in mind many authors were already only selling their downloadable books they worked on for a year or more for 99cents BEFORE AI entered the scene. It’s such a shame.
Thanks so much, Holly, for your thoughtful and intelligent response to this challenging situation. One thing that I know is true is the universal need that all of us have for connection. (Yes, even those of us who are introverts.) Sharing our stories of being, process, experience, and place is something that only we can do. I'm looking forward to hearing even more from you. Thank you for finding ways to communicate with us from your mobile home and studio!
Thanks for mentioning the human aspect on all of this Holly!
I think above all we need legislation that prohibits scraping without consent, and a model that allows artists to receive compensation if their art is to be used for training AI.
Plus we probably need a new internet at this point because the current one is already full of AI slop, bots talking to bots, and unusable search engines.
Forgot to add: Also, let's just tax those billionaires and AI startups bros into the ground.
Oh my god yes
@@NatureSketchbook Yeah, what you said!! :D
I agree about needed legislation changes and taxation. I don't think a "new internet" is really possible without that, in the capital-driven age we're currently in.
@@user-yv6xw7ns3o Yeah I too think it's not very likely, but one can dream! :)
In Star Trek they have replicators, but still they value a good old bottle of wine 😊
😁💞
Indeed, they do. But also - their AI does the dirty work for them and they can spend their time on what they like, including arts and music (TNG being an excellent example of this, having scenes with painting and playing an instrument (Data plays violin).
@@marikothecheetah9342 Yep, they live in a post-capitalist society without money where everybody is taken care of and is free to do whatever they want to do. Unfortunately, they had to go through a few very bad things that lasted for very long time to get to that point (ie world war III and a second dark age) 😑
@@kumada84 One thing is sure: we are closer to a dystopia, than utopia. ;/
Most likely we all die
Machines have been taking creative jobs since the industrial evolution. Pottery is an example. Manufactured garbage is everywhere, yet the art of making pottery still exists. People will pay high price tags for beautiful handmade pieces because they know a human made them. I agree that the human connection is the way forward.
Yes, but you are talking about physical pieces. It's like 0,1% of what artists and designers do nowadays - 99,9% of creative jobs are digital. And most of them are doomed. I myself work as a graphic designer and while I still am impossible to replace by ai, i don't need to buy mockups or stock pictures anymore - ai does that for me for free. I also work much faster due to ai tools in adobe - our team is smaller than a year ago, but just as effective. And in few years ai will do for free what I do now. So eventually we are all going to lose our creative jobs...
@@deszczoviec Im not convinced by the idea that AI will just keep getting better. At least not what we are looking at today. There are fundamental aspects of both the concept and the technology that create limits for it that we may already be getting close to hitting. We may need a completely new idea of fundamentals such as what a computer is and how it works before we can get something thats going to not have those limits - for instance organic and quantum computing. We may get those one day, but then there are also issues of resources that are already starting to crop up that might not only do what we are already to see which is bottlenecks and problems in computing, but also stop us getting viable alternatives.
@@deszczovieci hardly think AI will replace you. True clients might buy generic work. But so do people today buy cheap stuff from Temu. But we as humans can create which is what AI cannot. AI recycles.
@@deszczoviec i agree that so many jobs in so many industries, especially digital ones are gonna be replaced and lost to time. Its just like when computers showed up in the first place and took away many jobs in factories and phone operators and others that no one even thinks about now. Those jobs were lost to time and technology, and new ones replaced them in industries no one had imagined at the time. When I was a little kid there was no "web" to be a web designer for. It's painful and scary to lose entire industries but they will be replaced with a future thing of some sort or another. as humans, we are creative and adaptable. I think artists are tops in that category! We have to use our creativity and skills to create the new industries we will have in the future. That's why i embrace the idea of AI (not necessarily all practices people try with it) but AI itself. The world was better when computers were added, and it will be better with AI too, but we have to adapt to it and that's hard.
Yeah, but not many and still they balk at paying what they are worth.
As a children’s book illustrator I can say AI has taken over a lot of that work. Hard enough to get a decent pay from freelance work (most writers think they have the next bestseller and want only to pay in royalties which never pan out). For non-artists, I know beginning computer programmers have also been hurt by AI--if oversee programmers weren’t already taking jobs, AI has slammed the opportunities away.
But can AI work be copyrighted? I would think that would be a deterrent.
Ugh, I'm so sorry to read this.
Im not a copyright lawyer, though I have studied the subject and follow it fairly closely. In the US you cant currently register AI works for copyright, its against the US Copyrights Offices internal rules. You can register parts of works that used AI that were not produced by the AI. Under Federal law you cannot bring a work to a US federal court unless it has been registered. In the Andersen vs Stability AI case most of the works presented in the case were rejected by the judge as they had not been registered.
Elsewhere in the world copyright exists on creation with no need for formal registration in most countries ad the merits and degree of protection any works enjoy are decided by courts on a case by case basis. Some countries do apply legal precedent others dont, but so far I dont think there is much precedent to apply. In China a copyright case did come up where someone who used AI claimed their AI work was copied/infringed, ad they won the case, so in theory AI works are protectable in China, though that does not mean all AI works necessarily are.
In the UK the 1988 Copyright Act explicitly gives copyright to computer generated works but with a reduced duration of 50 years from creation. This includes works with no direct human interaction, but its not clear if something like a prompt based one that has some human interaction is covered by that aspect of the act or can have protection for the longer duration. There are also some who question who holds the copyright, though it looks likely its the person who was the most proximate to the specific piece existing, which would be the user. Many AI companies explicitly assign copyright to users anyway though, which would mean legally that even normally the devs would hold the rights they have passed those rights to the user.
It can and probably will increasingly vary from country to country at least for some time unless international copyright agreements get adapted and that take ages. Its always best to check copyright issues with ones own countries national bodies and legal experts.
I hope that helps answer your question.
@@thesaladczar join us in PauseAI!
AI is almost a bit like the beginning of the end of the world type theory. I’m definitely a fan of the slower pace of lifestyle. I think the quote rings true. Works of art, books, these will be luxury items of our future.
Craig’s narration was excellent!
Informative vlog. Big hugs to all! 💜💜💜💜
Holly! This video was so interesting! I really like the idea of attaching more of our stories as artists to our art. It feels like another task to add to our workflow, which is a bit overwhelming on top of everything else. However, I feel like it is worthwhile to protect and valorise our work as artists and humans! I will probably need to think on this and on ways to do this that are authentic and interesting. So much to think about! Thank you for making this video! I'm excited for you next Island Vlogs too!
Thank you so much Ann! I'm SO glad you liked this one :D
I definitely agree with you about the human element and story behind the art. I bought the Match a Leaf Memory Game, not because I saw it and thought is was pretty (although it is), but because I watched your videos and saw the story behind the art. That made me want to go out and buy it. xXx
Thank you for supporting my work!
I just realized that professional art galleries, showing their art inventory online on their websites, are putting their artists originality in jeopardy. I now wonder if the one really good painting I bought (a photo of it is still on the gallery site) might have had its ideas and images already scraped. Very intriguing to me since this painting has some very unusual ideas and images in it.
Semi-pro musical artist here - excellent video with some very good ideas. I agree that custom hand-made work will have value in a future where the machine can spit out a knockoff of human art. Bringing people along on the journey is a really great idea.
These topical videos are very interesting, and you have good insight. ❤
I don’t want an allowance from the government. I want them to ban the automation bs that’s ai. Also if the story telling is in the painting, doesn’t that mean that ai is also scrapping the meaning as well?
It’s strange that artists are crying about Ai automation now. Were you crying for the clay modelers when CAD took hold? Or the photographic lens makers when photoshop duplicated their work with filters? Or is it just when technology affects you personally that you suddenly want everything banned?🙄
@@bad_uncle I hope you have your popcorn ready so you can fully enjoy the moment when your job is replaced by a machine.
@@bad_uncleBuddy there has been outcries from those technology. The difference is no one was getting their artwork stolen in those cases to train their replacement. Copyright still matters in this day and age and I'm tired of AI bros acting like it doesn't apply to them
i don't think the meaning besides a paint can really stay when its ai output, like is a mashup of lot of art, the meaning is probably lost
@@randomtinypotatocried The current phase of AI just crawling the internet will pass. AI models are already having difficulties with the degrading quality of internet data caused by themselves, so the next step will be specialised AI tools working from closed, curated databases. But that will still sieve out a lot of mediocrity from the pool of working artists, as innovation always does.
I am not fan of AI either
But unfortunately, AI is quite a fan of yours.
Me either. It’s scary to think AI will change humanity. Even a hairstylist might be replaced someday-who knows. I think there will still be interest in original and copied original art.
Wonderful video, thank you ❤ As an illustrator , you’ve filled me with some hope!
I make teeth for a living. To be specific I make hand made dental crowns/veneers, mostly cosmetic Smile Design. Most of my industry has gone to CAD designed then machine milled crowns but I still do it the old school way. Now I see Ai companies launching where software completely designs the crowns eliminating the need for a dental CAD tech. This will decimate my industry Yet here I am with no worries cause again, I make everything by hand and consider myself an artist. I charge 3 to sometimes 10x what some other labs charge yet I have a loyal customer group and even a waiting list of new customers if I slow down. If you keep quality at the forefront and find yourself a niche, you can survive as tech threatens almost every industry.
I believe this too - a niche is so valuable. I'm so glad you found yours, your job sounds extremely cool and interesting I must say!
Your work changes lives profoundly. 🌺
I'm curious what the benefits of hand made teeth would be over AI generated ones.
I can imagine myself paying extra for some cool hand made fangs but I am unsure of what the average "make my teeth look perfect" consumer sees in hand made teeth. Why do your customers choose you over a machine?
Superb video! One I will be sharing. I love the idea of "creative ecosystems"...so true. Its refreshing to hear an intelligent perspective on AI. Like you, I am a firm believer in the importance of connection; people buy into artists as much as their art...even if they don't realise it. I feel certain this has to continue; it's a lifeline to our sanity! As someone else has mentioned within the comments...those that matter will appreciate the real thing and have the desire to invest in, and support, both the art and the artist. Our society needs soul! Keep being amazing Holly. 💛
Thank you for the positive thoughts at the end! This topic is so depressing. When the AI craze started last year I got bummed so much I stopped creating for a while bc I felt robbed and cheated. Thankfully I got back to arting and now I always Glaze and poison my pieces - if they want to steal from me they might as well get it with a bit of extra spice.
Haha love it, well done for persevering 💪
I have said for a while, please could AI do the laundry, housework etc and leave us more time for creativity.
Yes exactly! Free us into having more enriching and creative lives pleeeeeeaasssseee
that laundry AIs still not coming. That robots that suppose to be coming in the year 2000, we were told in the 80s.
yessssssss
It turns out that folding laundry is actually really difficult.
It takes creativity to understand that AI can precisely do in the future what a washing machine does for us today. Do you really think that a computer algorithm is more creative than you? I’m not the least bit threatened. At best, it’s a shadow of what I did yesterday. Ai will be a helper for me. Like a master worker, it will carry out my will and nothing more, for it can do no more. What it does and how it does it will always be in my control and reflect my unique taste. I’ll be able to multiply my workload and raise my creative ceiling. I don’t see why all these mid artists are wetting their pants.
Authenticity will become gold. AI will be common. Knowing the difference will become the new art dealer skill.
These few, who will and already do benefit from AI, don't want any more money, they can print it or simply press extra zeroes in the computer. What they want is even more control, total control. And an UBI will be essential for this control. Here's your money, take it, you just need one more shot of this or that, but it's for your own good! So, no, I don't agree with UBI and I think they want us to promote it. Now, I do agree with all the rest about man-made becoming a luxury item and such.
🎯
Thank you for making this great video - with very good takes on the present and the future of artist and AI. And I tend to agree, human made content, storytelling and craftsmanship will become the new luxury - but also a must have for businesses for example. Maybe AI will be a modern Shutterstock or Clip art (at least that’s my hope). Because we need to have human creativity and human storytelling with empathy, learning and personal growth. And you did excellently even though you’re an introvert. Good job🙌
One thing I can affirm is that at the present moment, AI art CANNOT generate highly complex scenes as a requirement. There is NO engine that can yet do this.
In other words, it can indeed render highly complex scenes, but NOT a huge list of mandates.
If I say "generate a painting in old world realism style, as if painted in oils, of a red haired goddess holding the book of time, with long flowing curls and a braid descending from her left ear, with a crown of lilies and butterflies, with a serpent rising in front of her torso, with the head pointing to the viewer, with her feet clad in leather roman sandals, standing within a pavilion that is roofed in a gold arbor, with fields of heather in the background, with the rising sun behind her left shoulder....." and so on, there is currently no way any AI engine can do this mandated all-inclusive complexity. It will only do a small part of these requirements (to match a story for example). And giving huge lists can in fact make it generate a mess of only one of the commands.
Simple illustrations such as "a cedar tree in the fall on a hill" is no problem.
THUS: Artists can define themselves with complex imagery.
Interesting! Thank you 🙏
There are hard limits conceptually and practically with the technology. Prompt coherence tends to breakdown the longer and more detailed a prompt is - the language part (the LLM) works by grouping text into 'tokens' ad each token uses memory resources - the more tokens the more resources its using ad the more resources it uses the less coherent it becomes as it starts to drop parts of the prompt, essentially 'forgetting' them. Eventually it hits a point in that slope of prompt decay where it falls off a cliff and stops rendering additional text. Devs can allocate more resources and find ways to improve coherence (and accuracy) but they normally carry a cost they will at some point need to pass onto users. Plus the physical availability of those resources is limited anyway.
The AIs also struggle with things like counting, spatial directions ad have o actual understanding of things - they are actually doing pattern recognition and learning visual patterns of pixels that represent subjects as linked to any text descriptions and tags with the training images. If something is not commonly enough found in those texts the AI cant follow an instruction to create an image of it, so its hugely dependent on how people tagged images. Most images online are simply not tagged i ways that are really useful to people using AI so the training is in a sense fudging it.
Theres lots in that example you gave that an AI would really struggle with. Roughly half off it would fall off that cliff and just not get created at all by many AIs. Half of what would be intermittently rendered as its in the slope of coherency decay. 'a serpent rising in front of her torso' will be hit or miss as AIs struggle with 'in front of' kinds of spatial commands. For instance as most images of people at desks they are trained on will have people sitting behind a desk it will simply put them behind it even if you prompt that they are sitting on it, because it does not really know what behind or on are. I could go on - but yup, you are quite right thats a nightmare prompt for an AI. Interestingly though '2 yellow cubes one in front of a green pyramid with a yellow sphere on top of it' would also be a nightmare prompt. As would ' a horse with eight legs'.
What it means in practice is that AI is simply not a reliable enough technology to replace an artist for anything requiring a detailed brief or very specific images. It might sometimes get what a client wants, but you cant guarantee that. If you can guarantee that it means if you get a job where you hit something it cant do you are simply unable to complete the job unless you can use other tools because, well, you are an artist... so in effect while AI can be a useful tool for an artist, its an unreliable one if you are not an artist. Therefore you really need an artist still if you dont want to risk your project... I came at AI as an illustrator and have been exploring it using it with how it takes direction and might fit into commercial illustration work to see if its really a threat to me. Im not convinced it is - after several years exploring it I actually think the real people its a potential threat to are clients. We already often have to deliver to tight deadlines with detailed or very specific briefs because thats often what clients need, so failing in that threatens those deadlines or even the project itself. Ive picked up work before when trad artists fail to deliver either to a deadline or a brief, ad when those clients have come to me they have been in a panic!
Correct. It cannot compose narrative.
@@PeterHollinghurst excellent technical breakdown, thank you
@@heavenseek with images it can barely put two different objects next to each other without leaking characteristics of one onto the other.
*Technology is amazing*
&
_anyone_ with a *creative mind* and *a smartphone* can *now make a wonderful story and share with the whole world*
*Before* internet - _Only a few limited people could distribute their artwork_ .
&
Now - everyone can share to a huge audience.
Modernity has brought this upon itself, labelling any artistic representation as art. Furthermore, if AI is compelled to pay compensation for learning, this could have a spillover effect on the education industry and even on future artists. Did Andy Warhol pay copyright fees for his screen paintings or his collages? Probably not. Adapt and outpace the AI-make it your competitor and your servant because this genie cannot be forced back into the bottle.
This is so new and so unfair there probably needs to be new software to track what is used and who it belongs to and new laws to limit use of AI. AI in general should not be used to make anyone lose their career
First off, great video. You made some excellent points. There are way too many interesting comments fr me to keep commenting on here!
I loved your point about storytelling. It actually applies to an extent with most art - ive seen lots of talented artists who struggle to put their self forward with their art or tell a human story with it simply because they feel uncomfortable, its too personal, they dont feel able to communicate it. Ive been at art fairs where ive been teasing people in to look at my art, telling them about it and myself, sharing stories about or in my art - that creates engagement and invites the person to identify with it as part of their story. It sells art. In contrast ive seen other artists struggle to even look at people, let alone engage with them, and they sell nothing. So if I can I try to talk with the artist about themselves and their art either to encourage the conversation so people passing by can jump in or just so I can have a go at selling it for them (I hate seeing great art not selling). With selling online its already distant enough - connections are harder to make, attention spans short and its harder to get people to engage. With AI (at least the way most people are using it) there is literally nothing of any substance to engage people with. There can be, but you have to approach it with that in mind and really push it.
AI has some serious limitations that I think make it far less a threat to us artists than we often think anyway. Its been massively over hyped ad there are things it cannot do well or in some cases even at all - and probably ever will be able to (at least not with the kind of technology we have now). Artists are still needed if you actually want specific images reliably delivered. If you just don't care, sure AI is fine, but then so is stock or public domain or getting your three old niece to do it.
I think there are ways to approach using AI that can be more creative, more personal and more human, but they involve approaching it with that in mind ad creatively experimenting with it. You end up wrestling with it like a bag of live cats. That in itself ca be a very human story! So im looking at in another way - not how might AI threaten me, but how can I can encourage people using AI to start creatively wrestling with it. To see it not as a thing you simply surrender over to the AI (some people are getting AIs to create the prompts for them, thats what Dall-e is about these days) but something yo get creatively funky with, What if you draw something, feed it into the AI, feed the output back in, the print it, transfer it to a ground then paint on it? Then feed that into the AI? What if you observe what it does with that first input, reflect creatively on how the AI interpreted what you did, and apply what you saw to a painting? etc etc. So im basically at ways to encourage people to do more than just see it as a simple magic wand that makes pictures for you, but something you can really engage with in creative and very human ways. Its not going to just go away, so instead of letting others dictate its use to us artists, lets take control and use it to encourage people to engage with art?
I love that this video went to Universal Basic Income...I am all for it! I hate that creativity and commerce gets conflated, and I wish dividends upon all traditional artists!
Holly, you pack a lot into this video. I've worked with creative teams in publishing for over 40 years. I am myself a traditional artist but have spent most of my career introducing technology to art teams and media companies. Generative art has been on my agenda for seven years, but it is the last two years that have caused me the most concern.
The A.I. we are seeing today will be considered laughable compared to what the near future holds. I would compare it to a seismic shift in human activity similar to the shift from hunter gather communities to the farming agricultural world. Every aspect of our lives will be impacted. It is impossible for us to assess what that may be because we have no point of reference that comes even close to what a super intelligence will bring. Yuval Harari refers to A.I. as alien intelligence and I think he is correct. A.I. will bring an entirely new way of finding solutions to problems we humans present it with. This will have enormous benefits to humanity, particularly in medical and scientific developments, but will bring the same volume of threat against our current way of living. This level of power should be held and controlled by democratically elected officials and not private companies and individuals, this much is clear to me.
What does this mean for the creative communities you have mentioned? I believe you have come closest in respect to the human to human interaction. In the same way that one human chooses another human over others my hope is that people will choose each other over A.I. entities. More importantly, is that the creative communities come together to elucidate their fears and do not become isolated and depressed by this existential threat. I am not advocating a ban A.I. force or even a hate A.I. approach. I am advocating that creative people come together to influence the development and implementation of these new structures, that we join forces with others to make sure that all aspects of A.I. are for the benefit of mankind and for us (artistic people) we become the guardians of the creative world.
In simple terms, if a certain aspect of A.I. does not benefit humanity, there should be a unilateral ban on further development. The current ownership of A.I. development does not allow for this.
It is hard to end on a positive note, humanity will very soon unleash intelligence far superior to that of humans. It will lead to either a dystopian hell or a utopian heaven more likely, if history is anything to go by, a messy mixture of both. All I will say is that we artist have been around a very, very long time, at least fifty thousand years according to archaeologists. I don’t see that changing anytime soon. Art, creativity and adaptability are enormous parts of being human.
Thank you for a thought provoking video and for keeping the debate in all our minds.
These are all such great points! Humans have been telling stories since the beginning of humans, and our desire to connect to each other through storytelling cannot be replaced by AI. I loved what you said about of localizing work, showing one's growth as an artist, and having unique conversations with the viewers of your art. Your zine video actually inspired me to make one based on the unintentional adventures of my life in the town I live in. Thank you!
Aw I am so glad to read that, thank you!
If I were to make anything that required a ton of art (e.g. a board game with a bunch of cards, or a video game with character portraits etc.) then AI art will likely be super useful to get a working prototype off the ground to see if it works, but I'm pretty sure I'd then hire an actual artist with a distinct style that I love and that fits my vision to make all the artwork.
Like, it's becoming an advertisable thing, even more so than before, to say you you're using real artist's work.
Of course, most board games won't sell thousands of copies. I can see, how spending up to $20k on geourgeous art is probably not a wise business decision, when selling even 1000 copies of your game would be big success. But at this point, if you're going to release another board game into the sea of already excellent board games, it's more of a passion project anyway.
I hope so!
@@hollyexley I can talk big words but I also haven't designed a game yet so I realize that whatever I have to say about the issue doesn't carry a ton of weight. 😅
I thought this was a really thoughtful piece and an interesting take. Found myself agreeing with pretty much everything. Wishing you the best with the evolving situation and hoping that we as creatives can continue to flourish and prosper in a world where theft of our work has become completely legal.
I don’t worry about it because AI is more complicated than working with a real artist. I can tell the difference with AI mages because the images look strange. A persons inner artistic voice can never be taken by someone.
The images may look strange to us artists, but I already see people wearing the AI „art” on tshirts, and they don’t care. Also people who are not artists struggle to see that 3 second long cute and cozy animations flooding Instagram are made by AI cause they don’t pay attention, and therefore share the videos and make them popular. That’s horrible.
@@nataszakura1432 Yep, its a combination of social media destroying our attention to detail, and AI being normalised throughout our cultures. I suspect a lot of people dont even consider it's AI.
AI art does look strange and it always gives me a weird, negative feeling that I cant describe. I think it makes me feel like our connection to each other is slipping away. Thats what AI art means to me, its just one less way we are communicating and expressing ourselves to each other.
@@nataszakura1432 which begs the question - whats wrong with our arts education and do artists need to do more to encourage people to be more discriminating. The flip side of this for us artists is that if people do become more discriminating how many of us will fall short of their new discriminating standards and will AI get genuinely better than us? I think there are already some artists who are being out performed by AI or AI can create works to a similar level.
@@hollyexley there are some artists you really wont even notice are using AI. Check out Maggie Taylor. Ive been interested in her art since before these new AIs. AI art actually having been around since the 1970s, but she only started using it with the new types. I can see some slight differences now she is using AI but I think most would struggle.
Though a caveat on that - Maggie is a digital collage artist, and she is using AI to generate collage assets she can use instead of public domain art in her collages. It gives her more control of subjects she can collage.
There are a number of artists I know now use AI but most use it with other processes as well. The ones I see using AI alone tend to be photographers, though they also tend to crack using AI fairly invisible pretty quickly ad it can be hard seeing its AI with some of them as well. There are also some who deliberately exploit and push that weirdness for creative effect. It can be used expressively btw, its just most people using it dont know how and usually dont even think of trying.
what a fantastic video, Holly. thank you so much for making this video and ending on such inspiring and uplifting points. as a creative, i feel a lot lighter
More artists should speak up about this. Thank you Holly for your very well composed of argument on this. Ai should not be allowed to take honest work away from people.
Thank you!
There is a nuance to this debate that is often missed, which is that AI doesn't make everything for everybody that uses it. Some uses of AI still require a considerable amount of knowledge, skill, creativity, and time. The fact is that if traditional art is superior, then it need not fear us AI bottom-feeders. At the end of the day, all artists and creators have a creative voice, and they want to share it, with the help of AI or not. I would never let AI do all the work for me...there is no pride in that!
I don't think paying royalties to the artists behind the training set is a real solution. You would be the first and last generation of the artists who would get that. Just a couple years and AI will outperform all of us. What's with everybody else? It's again just about picking a few people who were at the right place and the right time. But I also think such a compensation never ever will happen, because art is theoretically limited by the total attention of all the us. When you produce some kind art and you get money for that, you basically capitalizing some of our attention. So the human artists vs AI game is a zero sum game in the long run. Companies are grabbing that many to finance other ventures, not to pay out the profit as royalties.
I found it hard enough to get jobs, as an artist, when I was going up against other actual artists... Now we have HAL to contend with!
I can only hope that Eh-Aye will be considered theft and banned from commercial use.
But that means putting my faith in the government 😢
Its "AI" not "Eh-Aye".
I just wanted to say that I'm very happy for you that this video is going "better" that the others regarding views. You always have something interesting to say. Thank you for sharing this very value information and reflections.
I doubt that universal income will save us illustrators.
There really is no reason why A.I. "art" isn't illegal. It only harms people.
Same process is happening now to illustrators that happened to potters. They used to be highly skilled artisans until technology created mass produced ceramics. Now there are only few potters that can live on their art. Mostly it has become a hobby.
I can see a future where there may be a term for human made art such as 'Biological Art', sounds terrible when I put it down. But I CAN see a premium for human made art in the future, especially if it becomes more scarce due to AI prolifcation
As artist we just need to go back to the canvas so it separates the real artist from the prompters
It's a delaying tactic, but not really a long term solution as robotics technology is also catching up.
Really appreciate your knowledge and optimism on the subject. Its nice to hear hopeful perceptions of what the future may hold for creatives.
You're very welcome :D
I work in online advertising and our algorithms are AI. My job consists of ad copy writing, keyword lists, making optimizations based on the data, presenting. I know that from a creative standpoint (production) it will definitely affect the industry and it could replace jobs. I could see it being helpful when it comes to making last minute changes or creative variations. But at the end of the day, clients will want to work with humans, know there's control or monitoring by humans, and companies will need human representation. I truly hope it doesn't replace us but is used in ways to make tasks easier.. 😢 I don't have the answers at all..
😮 companies would let you starve in the street if it means that they can get three more pennies so really ask yourself if robots start showing up😮 like open AI is working on automated agents and the other day they announced strawberry that they achieved human-level reasoning so if you achieve human level reasoning and you have automated agents like and we're very close to this if you pay attention around the time that I can tell an AI to make a whole video game or a movie and it makes a whole 6 hour game or a whole 2-hour movie 😮 with characters and everything and visually it looks like something that I really would just watch and enjoy for 2 hours😮 no one's going to pay you to do anything creative because they're not going to care people don't actually care about human touch they care about what humans can do if a robot can do things that a human could do we wouldn't talk to humans anymore that's actually human nature😮
any new artists, i think moving to traditional art and crafts would be a smart move as ai is only going to get more powerful
The thing I don't hear a lot of people talking about is the fact that ai art is not covered by copyright, only human made art can be copyrighted therefore companies who want to protect the art they use they will want a human to create the art. UBI is not a real solution it will just be more money printing and will make the rich richer and the poor poorer, imho.
You can't copyright the output of a model to a prompt as it is. But you can use AI as a part of your creative workflow (and you can even create your own AI models if you have the proper technical knowledge) and then combine many outputs in your own collage or build an entire new work based on it. The result of that labor is something that can be copyrighted, because it involves a substantial amount of human work.
@@CodexPermutatio correct. I think we are on the same page. This will keep artists employable into the future, I believe.
To counter this, I'm changing my art style. From now on, my specialty is to produce hand created drawings and paintings in the style of bad AI art. I think it will make me stand out and look creative. It also has the advantage of giving me an excuse for why my hands look weird. At the same time, no AI is going to train on my art because companies want to avoid training AI on AI content. And any AI that can mimic my art style will look like bad AI which is not a good look. Seems like a win win situation.
It’s sad to see how my niece shares the same interest in drawing and art as I did as a kid, to think that creativity skills like hers won’t be appreciated in the (near) future. If the future of art is dominated by AI, it just makes it all even sadder to see her taking art so seriously and with pride every time she shares her finished works to all of us.
This was a tough video to watch. As always, I really appreciate hearing your perspective. I think the 99% want real art from humans. The only people that like this AI garbage are making a profit from it.
I am a professional calligrapher. I remind myself constantly that computers came for this artform already, and it survived. Your art will survive, too. I think you are spot on, the key is our humanity.
The slow life is the best life!
Genuinely curious, I hope this doesn't seem disingenuous - how do you maintain a professional career as a calligrapher?
@CantonWhy I am hooked up with a number of stationery studios and wedding planners that feed me business. I don't make a large income, but it is possible. It is mostly wedding work and commissioned poems.
@@marjoriebd3326 Thank you for letting me know!
Thank you. Long may your profession live! I hope we all find a way to survive.
Gosh, this is such a well thought-through video, Holly. As a sculptor, I've often wondered (well, feared really) how long it'll be before anyone can easily 3D print any sculpture, in any style, they fancy. It's depressing but I sincerely hope AI 'art' follows the same trajectory as NFTs, even if it takes a while to get there (it's interesting that almost all of the OpenAI co-founders have left the organisation this year). Human artists FTW! ✨💪✨
Yes, I loved the fall of NFTs - how satisfying that was! The community cared so little for artists and their rights and livelihoods, and unfortunately I see some of the same attitudes in pro-AI communities.
I'm not a visual artist and maybe not an artist at all unless one considers writing _art._ I'm pretty sure the main difference between AI and artists is that AI sucks, and artists sometimes don't.
This has happened before. Decades ago, sequencers and drum machines were disruptive technologies. I attended a panel discussing this. The most interesting comment was that drum machines are great if a good drummer programs them. See also Zappa's comments about the Synclavier. He said the machine was not devoid of expression, but he really had to type in a lot of numbers in to get the expression he could get from a well rehearsed orchestra. Over time, he has been proved right.
We're in a transition period for AI visual art, where the low cost of not paying people for their work is so appealing. Your strategy is a good one, but I predict that after a few years, the trend will end as it has with drummers.
Also, inasmuch as I understand visual art as a connoisseur, it isn't so much about cranking out visual depictions as it is about perceiving what is important to depict.
Honestly, a big part of my approach to combating "AI art" is to be relentlessly hostile to those using it. Most of them are just spammers or entirely uninsightful business guys at the end of the day, and for them it's just another way to use art without having to pay an artist for it, or to even put in the bare minimum level of effort required to make something themselves. I feel it should be something stigmatised in its current form, and the people using it against us made to feel as unwelcome as possible.
Thanks for the vid, appreciate your insights and optimism in this area.
Someone posted A.I art in a Facebook forum today. Claimed it was his oil painting, and most people couldn't tell that that's what it was.
@@RedArtistxbecause users on Facebook are old and don't know what AI is probably
Do you consider what you do "art"? Lmfao
Great, succinct video! Down with AI art theft and up with human creativity being valued 🙂
I've been doing well as a freelance illustrator since 2017. But in the last two years, this new technology has changed the scenario for creative professionals here in Brazil. Unfortunately, I had to choose to change careers in order to adapt to this new reality and survive. Currently, I only produce art as an author. Furthermore, I agree with you that AI has incredible potential to promote positive change: Helping to combat global warming, bringing cures for diseases and performing high-risk jobs. But in capitalism, bad decisions that make people's lives worse always predominate.
Some very insightful and valid points made here. I often attend craft markets and there are still plenty of people who are very interested in and purchasing original art. Hopefully this trend will continue as people seek authenticity.
maybe it's cope, but I feel there will still be art jobs out there especially in the entertainment industry, even if they get more competitive and change in unpredictable ways. Concept design for example, is not about making a pretty picture, but designing something, laying out the blueprint for a 3d artist to follow. It has to follow certain rules and be understandable, while also following specific prompts and allowing for changes based on an art director's feedback. Similarly, tech art jobs require artistic and technical knowledge that allow someone to bridge the gap in a way that generative models couldn't do on their own. There will be ways to survive as artists, but we need to be willing to not only adapt, but protect each other, and fight for fair treatment by these companies that want to exploit our work.
I do not like how this is inevitably going. For me AI creativity may be seen as fantastic, it actually leaves me feeling cold. It is clinical and soulless, be that art, poetry or music. Nothing can replicate that. I know which I prefer.
Yes, soulless, I totally agree!
I like critiques against the current use of AI, I like them even more when they expand and critique capitalism too:) artists with class consciousness are among my favourite people
Ahh best comment, thank you 💞
What a good video! So many points I have never considered, even as an artist myself! On a side note, I stopped posting my art on IG once I learned that most people who opt out of their art being used to feed their AI model have got theri plea rejected, so de facto it was just a pure illusion of choice or democracy for people. IAlso, what I'm trying to do now i focusonly on selling original works, since AI is indeed a bit of a thread to artists...
This is an excellent overview of what’s happening right now. I am a programmer living in Silicon Valley/San Francisco. These AI/tech companies are my neighbors. The wealth coming into this area is incredible, but it’s not necessarily benefiting many of the people living in Silicon Valley (let alone everywhere else) because prices and other expenses are rising very quickly here. While many of the executives in Silicon Valley are liberal and want equality for all, the very nature of technology concentrates wealth at the very top.
Unlike in previous generations, if you work in an industry, which is being replaced by technology, there is no way to escape this time. In previous disruptions, farmers replaced by automation could work in factories, factory workers replaced by technology could work in offices, etc. Now, there is nowhere to go.
As of now, I use AI every day in my programming job. It makes my work go much quicker and more accurately. However, I know my days are numbered in the programming industry.
FOBO is a legit fear. I wish I had a solution because I’m not sure if Universal basic income is it. The money does have to come from somewhere, so Tech companies would have to contribute their profits in some way.
Great video, it's really given me some perspective as someone who is just thinking about embarking on a journey to make money from art. I have been having a lot of doubts about wether it's a sensible course to take especially as I have a decent job already. But art and creativity is a real passion of mine and has been since I was a kid.
I also just read an article predicting that AI art is on track to cannabalise itself; the internet is flooded with AI images now and the more these generated images start to feedback into the system the worse the results are.
no AI will EVER be as cool as me therefore my art will always be cooler and more valuable. THERE IS ONLY 1 WAVYPESO!!!
As a sociologist and lifelong artist, I tend to think of the problem as one where we shouldn't have to do drudgery to prove our right to exist under a system of abundance. It includes not viewing art as a commodity, as I have been told I'm not a 'real artist' by those selling their art, because I have generally had a day job, but have always made art because I needed to grow my soul, so to speak. We face problems in education with the advent of AI, but don't tend to view it in terms of competition, so much as a matter of adaptation. Obviously have supported what you've been about for years, and don't want you to be vulnerable, but I trust you to adapt, as you are more established than I am from what you have represented on your channel.
This is a really interesting perspective, thank you so much for sharing it. I will be thinking on what you've said.
lol I heard the opposite, people who sell art are not really artists because they have to pay attention to what the clients and trends want instead of their inner voice. Just don't pay attention to that crap.
@canobenitez the irony is I have been chatting with AI about a performance art piece regarding embracing the identity of being a cockroach since the bureaucracy dehumanizes us anyway 🪳 🤷
@@canobenitez Well... According to that criterion, Renaissance artists were not authentic artists because they were under the patronage of their Maecenas and listened to them. Right? :]
@@CodexPermutatio nobody is an artist confirmed.
Thank you for this very informative video about such a disturbing subject, especially the “positives”!
This is definitely a time where we need to show our human selves - a terrifying prospect for those (including me) that have avoided showing ourselves in any way on camera. I even cringe if my hands are in shot, let alone talking or showing my face. But if we don’t do somehow show up as real people with a story to tell, it seems like AI will make us obsolete. There are even AI created videos of hands drawing and paintings, which is just nuts. It’s hard to feel positive, honestly, but we need some kind of artist community revolution or overhaul in the way we approach our careers. You seem to be doing everything right, Holly ❤
It is really hard to be positive. It really does feel like it's snowballing. I hope we survive.
As soon as you started talking about this subject I thought of the lecture I'd heard earlier this week by Meredith Whittaker...and then you used a quote from her and her colleagues. Whittaker really lays out just what a dystopian con is AI. To see how these large data set models (I can't call it AI, there is no intelligence involved, just training on huge data sets) quickly fall apart you only have to instruct the to create an image, then, tell it no, that's not right. Do that again and again and the image soon degrades into something bizarre and completely incoherent and the machine scrabbles to interpret the instruction. Really dreadful. And yes, UBI NOW! Unfortunately, corporations and governments both are much more enamoured of a world of wage slaves.
100% - something tells me we’re not going to get UBI just by asking
Some artists I know (who have been artists before using AI btw) deliberately push AI to breaking because they are creatively interested in those bizarre images. Cycling them through the AI repeatedly does not generally break them down though, in fact its sometimes used as a technique to remove issues.
@@hollyexley Unfortunately. Your comments on UBI were some of the most interesting ive seen on the subject. I think its actually important to have even if AI never existed, and its more important for some forms of work affected by AI like say call centre work than art.We artists can and will find creative solutions to the challenges AI presets us with that people doing jobs like that just wont be able to. Call centre work was my go to second income to support my art for years though... AI was already being introduced there years before it became an issue.
I think the with UBI it can be a reflection of artists being seen as a culturally important enough to support. Arts in general bring a lot of money into economies but often depends on a cushion while creatives build their skills, gain experience and establish themselves.
Last week i watched an episode of Diary of a CEO (Steven Bartlett) that he titled Emergency: The impact of AI (or something like that) where he talks to an Ex Google AI guru who helped develop it but has become so horrified by what he saw and how its developing he walked away and now talks and educates about this and what we can do. Worth a listen.
Ive also other people referring to this time as a race to the bottom with everyone scrambling to give their autonomy to AI. I spend a lot of time now questioning what the point of it is.
I gradually stopped making art as i don't want to share it for it to immediately turn up an ali express or Shien, and now wondering about all the money and time ive spent learning branding design, website design and coding recently as this will all be replaceable very soon by AI and it feels pointless.
I do agree with your point of needing that human connection though snd hope that this backlash proves the value of human made rises to the top again.
Though i worry about the generations below us and what the world will be for them.
Thanks for sharing, you're always very eloquent and your videos are well thought out and discussed.
This is how civilization will end, AI will make humanity as stupid and unskilled as mud, and when the last tree is burnt as a sacrifice to the machine,
we all go back to neanderthal....(see, I'm already not the stable geneous I claim to be! It - has - started!)
That's what was described in "The Machine stops" more than a century ago.
Really appreciated this very honest video, Holly! Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
There is a huge difference between art and illustration. One is made for a client who decides whether the work is acceptable or not. The other is made by an individual who decides what they want to express visually and how. Yes there is overlap but the creative purpose is different. Illustrators are toast. Most clients will accept “good enough” AI to save time and money. Artists however, have a human ability to explain why and what they put on the canvas as well as depicting taboo subjects or art styles the AI’s corporate masters won’t touch. I suggest taking a look at the art of Robert Crumb (if you’re not easily triggered) to understand that humans can put their full and sometimes twisted souls into their work in a way the AI never can.
I love the idea of attending paint and sip type of art sessions. I think a lot of people who don't do art on their own love those too.
If artists are open to hosting those types of events, I think that's one of the ways that artists could earn income and it can't be replicate by AI.
Exactly - I do think offering creative experiences will be appealing to a wide audience. Thats a great idea.
We do art camp -outs on a farm. It’s a relaxed atmosphere in a natural setting.
@@LilyGazou That sounds so idyllic!
Urgh. I can't fathom buying a board game with the 'AI look.' I expect board games to be delicately crafted and very human works. The illustration is so important to this, and while I'm sure some examples of this 'art' will pass under the radar, I just don't see how you can automate the kind of authentic design that breathes life into board games.
Since the 'averaging amalgamation' learning models are so inherently limited even with such an enormous set of training data, someone still ultimately needs to design the thing if you want to avoid inherently uncreative images.
I started to get into digital art 20 years ago but quickly realized over time that digital art could be created by non creative people so I jumped ship and went traditional oil painting for rich clients. Its a nice side hustle.
I'm not sure if something like this already exists in Adobe or similar software, but there needs to be a more advanced watermarking tool perhaps embedded in metadata of an image /illustration/animation. There should be a way to encrypt your images to specifically prevent them from being used by Ai tools or by anyone without usage rights. Or...better yet, for artist who for whatever reason may want to "Opt-In" there could be encryption methods which offer parameters to allow the publisher to decide what specific AI tools, individuals, or organizations are allowed to use their images, for what purpose, and to what degree. And the ONLY reason one might "Opt-In" is because maybe they're a part of some Publishing Right Organization who can monitor/track the artists work and pay them appropriate royalties anytime their work is used. Similar to what ASCAP/BMI does for musicians.
I think this kind of thing does exist! I read a bit about it. Very much not a perfect solution unfortunately.
I paint in rude words in foreign languages- very subtle.
You bring up some really interesting points. Thanks for this!
If the people selling AI programs had to pay even one cent for each of the art pieces their algorithms need to train, AI image generation would disappear overnight. It only exists as long as they're allowed to continue getting away with theft.
I love you for talking about this in a realistic context! Even mentioning environmental issues or the rise of facism in this day in age is algorithm suicide. ❤you are so on point about everything here. Thank you for spreading the word.
U.B.I will not solve your problems, it never will be "unconditional". There are always conditions attached to the money received.
Also, if you give everybody a "living wage" every month, suddenly a "living wage" will be worth nothing and you'll need at least twice as much as that to survive. As long as greed exists, none of these problems can ever be solved, and greed will exist as long as humans exist... 🤷
😮 companies would let you starve in the street if it means that they can get three more pennies so really ask yourself if robots start showing up😮 like open AI is working on automated agents and the other day they announced strawberry that they achieved human-level reasoning so if you achieve human level reasoning and you have automated agents like and we're very close to this if you pay attention around the time that I can tell an AI to make a whole video game or a movie and it makes a whole 6 hour game or a whole 2-hour movie 😮 with characters and everything and visually it looks like something that I really would just watch and enjoy for 2 hours😮 no one's going to pay you to do anything creative because they're not going to care people don't actually care about human touch they care about what humans can do if a robot can do things that a human could do we wouldn't talk to humans anymore that's actually human nature😮
It is a bit depressing to see AI take over jobs, but even more depressing is the number of people who just don't care that a slew of professions (careers that people have spent years on) go down the drain, some even gloating openly (granted, these are probably trolls). Now, it is not all bleak. You can turn around and look at AI as a tool to help you, but atm, for me, this option is in the future. I do think a solution is to find other venues to earn money until we see a clear path for artists to take. I also agree with you and many others who think that human art will be a thing people might pay extra for in the future. The problem is, of course, to earn a living until then.
A very insightful video Ms Exley, thank You. I'm not afraid though. I certainly felt the dread that most did with A.I's rise but realised it will only make physical art more impressive and expensive.
I'm an artist and I've been following the AI art explosion pretty closely.
For artists right now, the kind of mass produced art factory type art really is what is getting replaced first. Looking at the examples in this video, these are very easy to replicate at a similar quality on a home computer. Artists making this sort of thing are going to be the most effected by this new technology. Or at least, they 'll be affected first.
My area is in character design. For the moment, character artists have the edge of being able to add meaningful details to a piece. For customers who want a character holding a specific item or in an interesting pose will still need to hire an artist for that, but blended artworks are making their way into this corner of the industry.
Music is a really interesting area though, since a lot of the most popular music sounds pretty similar already an AI can replicate a lot of the steps and produced a finished product that is comparable to what you hear on the radio is a few minutes. The real threat though is that with the low investment required on the musical elements, prompters can instruct the AI to produce original ideas like "a song about beer for breakfast" and end up generating something which sounds more innovative than 90% of popular music simply by not being one of the four rehashed themes that most songs follow.
It'll be interesting to see if human creativity can keep up when so much of the mechanical art that humans were producing was the bulk of the demand previously.
I am planing to never again post anything artwork rolated to the internet because of AI, i dont want it to be scraped i rather just keep it to myself. It's my feelings, emotions, journey of my life, dreams, ideas that im strongly connected toward, basicly me, music and drawings and sculpting of what i specifically have in mind, full emiotion slowly transformed into senses like, sounds, visuals, touch. I don't wanna have that "me" aspect to get dissolved and taken from me and turned into something like abominatiobn of me, stolen me idk. I hate AI and i alyways will.
I think there is gonna be still credits for illustrators but not is the same way that we see it today. With the ai mutation, I think the prompters's gonna be credits (or a term like "human+IA) cause you're always need to lead the machine in a certain way to have the end results
The exact same forces that offshored tech and manufacturing jobs to countries without worker protections, that abused the h1b worker visa system, that were regularly caught colluded on prices and wages, is at play here. None of the customers said "no" to the companies engaged in these tactics, and I'm sorry to say that those same customers won't stand up for the artists either. People will say they prefer human made art, but in the same way they purchase mass produced prints over individual works, the cheapest option will be the one they pick. Most of these people also think the suffering artist is a romantic ideal.
While the timing could be arguable, there's a capitalistic singularity looming. There will be no job retraining when the machine is faster, cheaper, and more consistent in all human endeavours. There will also be no customers when nobody has an income.
If we don't have UBI in place prior to the singularity, it's going to be a very bumpy ride.
I agree, and under neoliberal capitalism, UBI will be a very hard win for workers indeed. A revolution required. I do agree, hard times are ahead, for many overlapping reasons.