One of the big challenges of copying in art vs sports is that art relies on nostalgia and familiarity of the earlier work. A soccer player/footballer who kicks the ball into the goal using a technique developed by another player is using a better, more effective way to do the job. An artist or AI program that copies Monet's painting style wouldn't have the same effect if everyone wasn't already familiar with his work. Monet's painting style was considered strange when he first did it over 140 years ago, but now everyone knows and accepts his style, even if you haven't studied art or know Monet's name. Movie references would be meaningless if it hadn't be done before. The soccer player also had to learn and execute the technique, whereas AI and sampling doesn't require the same development of skills, and may not work without the earlier reference.
It doesn't make a difference, almost every artist traces OTHER artists to learn so a machine learning from more artists more efficiently than a human is not intrinsically bad
Basquiat could be an example, I believe he would find things and compile pieces together to create something new essentially. (I might be wrong/ don't know if this is considered stealing).
6:05 because uncreative people will use AI and profit from it, taking space that could have gone to actual human creativity. We will see how actual artists utalize AI but most are just gonna take advantage of it imo
Yeah i was just wondering (not hate) if he said that these people who steal fall off ,then how does this make you a great artist if it's not sustainable to do so? Is it that you don't straight up copy and paste without intention but copy and paste art with the intention and thought that it would elevate your ideas and way of conveying a message?!
I would say stealing isn't what makes a great artist. What makes one a great artist is in the human values that is ever changing. We humans easily recognize patterns and that is a sign of comfort, nostalgia flash and familiarity. I think that's a better way of saying than this "Stealing is what makes someone GREAT" phrase. All the originals are arguably more timeless for a reason, and it's because they paved a way that has never been done before, and after a while one will understand the perspective of the original and see what kind of gem it really is and then replicate then elevate it themselves, that's how it usually works. Stealing, personally, is justified when it is so impactful and adds a new color, and I think that's what this guy is trying to say. Also about the A.I section. I think the fear against A.I actually does matter for the future. I think the fear must exist so that it could be delivered better, fear that creates a meaningful impact that is. A.I takeover is inevitable, everybody have seen the A.I fear since the concept of A.I have ever existed, people have made works about it through many mediums. We already have a good understanding of it. All A.I supporters want art to be money free, and for a long centuries, art has typically been connected to monetization. Tech advancement optimist wants A.I to replace every human enjoyment because some of us humans are built to be challenged to keep us alive while doing our interests. That's why it's called soulful and humane. Furthermore, I think traditional art will never die. But who knows? I'm not a genius who could fix everybody's problem and I will never expect to be one 😂
@@tocideNo offense but there are tons of samples that aren’t as timeless. Chaka Khans career is proof of this. Her music isn’t bad and honestly is quite good, but her catalog has not aged particularly well. The very fact that most people recognize it as the song that sampled it proof in and of itself that. It’s a bit of a logical fallacy to assume because something came first or is the original that is better or more timeless, is the original ford model T better or more timeless than a modern car? Obviously not. There is a Pusha T song that was produced by Kanye that samples are random instagram live rant, does that make the incoherent rant timeless or better? No
One of the big challenges of copying in art vs sports is that art relies on nostalgia and familiarity of the earlier work. A soccer player/footballer who kicks the ball into the goal using a technique developed by another player is using a better, more effective way to do the job. An artist or AI program that copies Monet's painting style wouldn't have the same effect if everyone wasn't already familiar with his work. Monet's painting style was considered strange when he first did it over 140 years ago, but now everyone knows and accepts his style, even if you haven't studied art or know Monet's name. Movie references would be meaningless if it hadn't be done before. The soccer player also had to learn and execute the technique, whereas AI and sampling doesn't require the same development of skills, and may not work without the earlier reference.
It doesn't make a difference, almost every artist traces OTHER artists to learn so a machine learning from more artists more efficiently than a human is not intrinsically bad
27 views? This video definetly deserves a bunch of zeros after that number.
frrrrr
bless
Shame you couldnt find any examples of great artists who steal. Just popular producers of stuff.
Basquiat could be an example, I believe he would find things and compile pieces together to create something new essentially. (I might be wrong/ don't know if this is considered stealing).
Picaso stole African art
6:05 because uncreative people will use AI and profit from it, taking space that could have gone to actual human creativity. We will see how actual artists utalize AI but most are just gonna take advantage of it imo
randomly got this on recommended
nice video!
Thanks ;)
Great video!
🙌
some good example would be better than using small vauge parts of other TH-camr video...
great vid!!
this is such a dumb take, "Steal don't make something new and unique" we call that a CopyCat.
Yeah i was just wondering (not hate) if he said that these people who steal fall off ,then how does this make you a great artist if it's not sustainable to do so? Is it that you don't straight up copy and paste without intention but copy and paste art with the intention and thought that it would elevate your ideas and way of conveying a message?!
I would say stealing isn't what makes a great artist. What makes one a great artist is in the human values that is ever changing. We humans easily recognize patterns and that is a sign of comfort, nostalgia flash and familiarity. I think that's a better way of saying than this "Stealing is what makes someone GREAT" phrase.
All the originals are arguably more timeless for a reason, and it's because they paved a way that has never been done before, and after a while one will understand the perspective of the original and see what kind of gem it really is and then replicate then elevate it themselves, that's how it usually works. Stealing, personally, is justified when it is so impactful and adds a new color, and I think that's what this guy is trying to say.
Also about the A.I section. I think the fear against A.I actually does matter for the future. I think the fear must exist so that it could be delivered better, fear that creates a meaningful impact that is. A.I takeover is inevitable, everybody have seen the A.I fear since the concept of A.I have ever existed, people have made works about it through many mediums. We already have a good understanding of it. All A.I supporters want art to be money free, and for a long centuries, art has typically been connected to monetization. Tech advancement optimist wants A.I to replace every human enjoyment because some of us humans are built to be challenged to keep us alive while doing our interests. That's why it's called soulful and humane. Furthermore, I think traditional art will never die.
But who knows? I'm not a genius who could fix everybody's problem and I will never expect to be one 😂
@@tocideNo offense but there are tons of samples that aren’t as timeless. Chaka Khans career is proof of this. Her music isn’t bad and honestly is quite good, but her catalog has not aged particularly well. The very fact that most people recognize it as the song that sampled it proof in and of itself that.
It’s a bit of a logical fallacy to assume because something came first or is the original that is better or more timeless, is the original ford model T better or more timeless than a modern car? Obviously not.
There is a Pusha T song that was produced by Kanye that samples are random instagram live rant, does that make the incoherent rant timeless or better? No