I love all your videos, it's amazing to watch you paint. And I can always go back and watch again and learn something I missed the first time. Thank you for everyone you have made and or will make.
This is a fantastic painting demonstration - a beautiful example of tonalism. The subject is by no means strong compositionally, but the colours and values work together to create an incredibly evocative scene.
Was in bad very tired but couldn't stop watching from beginning to an end. Yoyr videos are Hypnotic. Thank you very much for all the effort, teaching and generosity ❤
Mark is in step with technology but the painting is still very much the same. Love your painting and thank you so much for generous sharing-so grateful!!❤
I guess I am more fortunate than I realized ... I live in a state that's full of incredible scenery. Some of my favorite reference photos were taken from my own porch!
Hi Mark, Anil here. Great work! I’ve started doing something similar. Using Midjourney to generate reference images and taking those to produce a painted work. Glad to see that your are exploring this new space.
I wonder if the proliferation of AI art will add value to human / kinetically painted work. I don't know, either way, nothing replaces painting! Thanks for sharing I value your videos. also- great tone on that canvas as a starting point.
Some of the comments here are brutal - too many karens Mark - keep doing what you’re doing, you’re a great artist and teacher. All great artists get inspiration from somewhere.
magniifique , beaucoup de présence ce paysage. Pourrais je savoir la marque de vos peinture , je trouve qu 'elles ont une brillance et une onctuosité incroyable. Merci isabelle
Hey Mark, 10:10 onward, It seems to me that your sky color on the palette was spot on in value with the sky color from the source AI painting, but when you went ahead and put that sky color on the canvas itself, it seemed much lighter. I don't know if its just me, but it seems that your canvas camera is exagerating the values is a little bit. It seemed more subtle on the palette, but then on the canvas it seemed brighter. Does that make sense? Thanks for the video
It's quite similar to the old painting by numbers method, except you have to do the underdrawing. But you could even do that stage with tracing paper and pounce or charcoal
I’m interested in AI. I use it in music post production. I understand some people oppose it, but really it’s another tool in the tool box. Great demo ❤
I messed around with one of those image sites that way. I had some luck with it, making it create woman or men playing the guitar. Norman Rockwell and Winslow Homer worked well for that.
You can always make anything in the style of anyone else. A style cannot be copyrighted. Only individual works can be copyrighted. So if you are painting from an AI reference and the AI reference is not a legal copy of any existing works (and it almost never is) then you can paint from it as a reference and sell it. If you ask it to give you an image of the “Afghan Girl” and it makes something that looks like the famous Afghan Girl Time Magazine cover…then you could get in trouble. Because that’s an actual work that is copyrighted. Essentially…if you create an AI image and run it through a Google reverse image search and it comes back clean…no other exact copies out there…then you’re in the clear.
Would this AI approach work for Still Life and Portraits? I can see it having value if one wanted to learn portrait painting by asking the AI software to give you a Sargeant-esque portrait in modern dress to copy.
I wish there was a way for there to be some livestock in there. like some sheep, but getting that to go right isn't worth the risk of a bad result here.
Love the finished piece. I too try to be abstract. My wife like realism and never likes my work. She is not an artist. I always try to tell her we are not photographers. Sucks she is clueless about art. Just sayin.
Does anyone have thoughts on whether an artist should disclose that their painting was derived from an AI generated image? There’s almost always a source an artist is working from whether it’s real life, photographs or other paintings. However, using AI cuts out a lot of work for someone who just wants to churn out paintings to sell.
@@dmurray2978 thanks, I get that. I’m a long-time fan of Marks, but for me, the idea, composition and style of an artwork are key parts of it, no matter its source of inspiration. And art is something created by artists (=humans) for the sake of themselves and other humans. Leaving it to AI because it’s quicker somehow erodes the whole experience.
It needs to be renamed “Synthography”. Because that is what it is. AI Art implies that the mindless computer software is a person. It is not. But we are anthropomorphizing it. We essentially have a situation where the magician in Vegas is so good that people are starting to actually believe he has supernatural powers. It’s really an illusion. A trick. But people are thinking it’s real. Same here. People are actually believing that the dead machines are “creating” things. They are not. They are just machines that sit there until fed some input. Then their inner electronic gears and pistons and spammers and gyroscopes whir and spin and spark and out pops a penny smashed to look like an old train. Or rather…an image of a penny smashed to look like an old train. It’s a dead machine. Nothing more. If you believe that “it” is creating anything rather than just following software code…it has tricked you into believing that the magicians magic is real.
I have another comment about this approach: using this AI technology to generate an image that is a composite of the features of stored images to create a wholly new image, the AI could also be programmed to apply oil paint to canvass to reproduce the image. Since the AI image is itself entirely original, the work could be sold under an artist's signature since it is the artist who inserted the parameters that produced the unique art work. That way, an artist could conceivably produce multiple originals daily - each with unique and original parameters. Machines can then mass produce art for the masses. Even where the artist takes the AI-produced image and uses it to paint from, the artist seems no more than a highly skilled technician but not really an originalist nor a creator of art.
- The "AI" in "AI Art" is a misnomer; it's much closer to Google than HAL 9000. Use "Stable Diffusion" instead. - The most common dataset used for training stable diffusion programs violated the consent of millions of artists. - Multiple stable diffusion operators are currently being sued for mass copyright infringement. - Stable diffusion often generates images identical to those in its dataset.
The courts will work that out. I disagree that any copyrights were violated. Transformative use is fair use. Fair use is legal use. What could be more transformative than taking a billion images and “showing” them to a computer in order to create what is essentially…a digital brain? Because that’s what the training “model” is. Also…SD does not “often” generate images that would be considered by most to be a copy. It is extremely rare for it to do so. Probably less than 1/10,000th of a percent of all generations. And I would be willing to bet that nearly all of those were intentional. That is…the person was trying to recreate something as a copy to prove that it could be done. The rest of the instances are likely people trying to mimic something that has nearly no other images for the keyword. So “Afghan Girl” produces imitations of the famous time magazine cover…because almost all images on the internet associated with the words “Afghan girl” are that cover image.
I'd prefer it if you don't use AI, generally. Because it strikes me as greatly unethical and immoral. But I have to say, this is one of the better ways I've seen of using it. Using the AI image as a prompt for you to then paint from, that is.
The main thing thats unethical about it is that it's stealing other peoples artworks and generating artwork from them. I don't even see this technique as being interesting. He's basically copying the copier.
@@dmurray2978 So copying AI stolen artwork that has been collaged and manipulated is keeping with the times? Hopefully Mark at least gives credit to the designers of the AI software since without them to program the software and create the algorithms that manipulate the copied artwork in it's database, Mark wouldn't have anything to copy. What the software doing is illegal and they already probably have a ton of lawsuits being presented against them. It reminds me of what happened when music producers and rappers started to use music from other artists to create their own. It ended up being taken to court and banned unless you could get permission and/or paid the musician/band/label. I would be VERY surprised if what these software's are doing is allowed to continue to on years from now.
How is using an AI painting for a reference any different than using a photograph or using a drawing from another artist as a reference? It's not a copy, it's a reference. That's just a silly closed minded comment.
So weird seeing a real artist use AI as a reference. Not sure about that. But I guess it's the end result that matters. I feel as an artist though we much go out and take our own pictures etc.... But maybe for practice, this works too. And like you said, not all people live in beautiful places.
you are a perfect mixer , but none of your paintings strike me , there is just nothing in them , this is a perfect example . Spot on values , but the image if it was music would be muted . it does not speak . The only thing i am getting the only vibe is some sort of loneliness. Its just a shame , you are a perfect painter but a machine . If you have to take AI generated images , and even they are dull , i just dont get it . Its a medium , powerful medium , image . When Dali does his Clocks , values are not what its important , not even color , could be black and white still be fantastic art . Or if you do such good mixing , maybe get some happiness some nature in to it .I dont know a waterfall , forest , mountain kind of thing ,spring ,autumn , take your pick . Or you did it and i didnt see it . I dont know , but i thank you for showing me mixing and values , that you do very good . I will take it from there . Thank you .
Bro, we don’t care about your landscape painting . We want portrait paintings . You did still life painting really well. Now we need portrait lessons . come on listen to your viewers
AI productions by their origin have no artistic merit and the finished painting here is nice but I guess you have to ask where does art come from, not from an artificial generated source. Compare an AI image to an Arthur streeton. But if you can sell this for your asking price the best of luck to you.
The AI one has more clarity in the background where the water is. And, it has more depth perception where the hills are in that the ones that are closer are brighter at the front whereas yours just all merge together. Also, the AI one is less linear across the hills and sky which is more realistic and adds to its character. You say your aim wasn't to copy it, but this is a copy, only the AI one is actually better... This is lazy use of AI.
Your ability to listen is lacking. He never said "this is me, this is my work". He said that he was trying to create a piece of work in the style of an artist that he likes, and that he used AI to generate an image similar to that artist's work, and that he settled on an image that he liked. Clean out your ears.
Masterful. Love it, please keep these landscape series going!
I love all your videos, it's amazing to watch you paint. And I can always go back and watch again and learn something I missed the first time. Thank you for everyone you have made and or will make.
This is a fantastic painting demonstration - a beautiful example of tonalism. The subject is by no means strong compositionally, but the colours and values work together to create an incredibly evocative scene.
Was in bad very tired but couldn't stop watching from beginning to an end. Yoyr videos are Hypnotic. Thank you very much for all the effort, teaching and generosity ❤
What I love about Arthur Streeton is the fact that he captured the heat and haze of a hot Australian summer in his paintings. Hard to do.
Mark...your painting is 1000 times better than the reference 🎉👌👌👌
Mark is in step with technology but the painting is still very much the same. Love your painting and thank you so much for generous sharing-so grateful!!❤
I guess I am more fortunate than I realized ... I live in a state that's full of incredible scenery. Some of my favorite reference photos were taken from my own porch!
Awesome work as always, Thank you!!
Great to be able to watch someone paint in oil, professional artist that is! Looks wonderful.
Outstanding art, presentation, content, influence and class. Thank you.
This demonstration of landscape painting is incredible, keep it up!
Thank you for sharing your skill and insight.
Thank you for including the price in there. It’s always good to see how others price their work
Great piece!
Love work good to c an artist painting in a painterly way 4 a change,the sign of a true artist
Great points about color and how "values do the heavy lifting".
Hi Mark,
Anil here. Great work! I’ve started doing something similar. Using Midjourney to generate reference images and taking those to produce a painted work. Glad to see that your are exploring this new space.
Using Midjourney is genius. I love Arthur Streeton, Australian Impressionism hooked me in high school.
That was very informative. Thank you😊
Bellísima y estupenda lección sobre pintura de un paisaje en tonos poco saturados. Muchas gracias por este video.
Very fluid work. Fantastic. Hugs from Porto-Portugal.
Holy shit. This is beautiful.
Always nice to see a video from you!
Superb demo, a truly enjoyable one to watch. Thanks.
Amazing .. like how you matched the temperature . Thanks
gorgeous painting mark! looking forward to your next one :)
Love it thank you so much ❤
Awesome, teaches me to be careful when applying paint and be minimal in brush strokes
I wonder if the proliferation of AI art will add value to human / kinetically painted work. I don't know, either way, nothing replaces painting! Thanks for sharing I value your videos. also- great tone on that canvas as a starting point.
It absolutely will. Having a “hand painted original” is going to become a major flex in the coming years.
Stunning!!
Great work. Thank you so much for making this video.
Some of the comments here are brutal - too many karens
Mark - keep doing what you’re doing, you’re a great artist and teacher. All great artists get inspiration from somewhere.
Nice simple Landscape idea Mark!
Just in the edge. Grate job
Gorgeous! Thank you!
Absolutely wonderful. Is it okay to paint this as long as I don't sell it? Giving you credit of course.
Wonderful, I love how you paint the tones :)
Love your colours... very natural. May i ask... What were the original colours in your palette?
magniifique , beaucoup de présence ce paysage. Pourrais je savoir la marque de vos peinture , je trouve qu 'elles ont une brillance et une onctuosité incroyable. Merci isabelle
Hey Mark, 10:10 onward, It seems to me that your sky color on the palette was spot on in value with the sky color from the source AI painting, but when you went ahead and put that sky color on the canvas itself, it seemed much lighter. I don't know if its just me, but it seems that your canvas camera is exagerating the values is a little bit. It seemed more subtle on the palette, but then on the canvas it seemed brighter. Does that make sense? Thanks for the video
It's quite similar to the old painting by numbers method, except you have to do the underdrawing. But you could even do that stage with tracing paper and pounce or charcoal
Nice painting.
Wow, this might be the most controversial issue to hit the art world in recent years.
I’m interested in AI. I use it in music post production. I understand some people oppose it, but really it’s another tool in the tool box. Great demo ❤
استاد بینهایت ممنون از آموزش عالی شما واینکه ترکیب رنگها را به خوبی نشان میدهید با آرزوی موفقیت برای شما
Cool!
Beautiful.
Beautifull
I was once told by a painter to always see green as being yellow and work from there.
Hello, I am a fan of yours. I really want to buy your paint. Please ship it to Korea 🥺🥺🥺
I messed around with one of those image sites that way. I had some luck with it, making it create woman or men playing the guitar. Norman Rockwell and Winslow Homer worked well for that.
From New Zealand
when you are painting in the style of ... when can you sell it... what has to be different
You can always make anything in the style of anyone else. A style cannot be copyrighted. Only individual works can be copyrighted.
So if you are painting from an AI reference and the AI reference is not a legal copy of any existing works (and it almost never is) then you can paint from it as a reference and sell it.
If you ask it to give you an image of the “Afghan Girl” and it makes something that looks like the famous Afghan Girl Time Magazine cover…then you could get in trouble. Because that’s an actual work that is copyrighted.
Essentially…if you create an AI image and run it through a Google reverse image search and it comes back clean…no other exact copies out there…then you’re in the clear.
I read John singer Sargent first preferred landscape painting before portraiture
Would this AI approach work for Still Life and Portraits? I can see it having value if one wanted to learn portrait painting by asking the AI software to give you a Sargeant-esque portrait in modern dress to copy.
hey Mark, how much money do you make per month in painting sales?
i like it
$5000.00
Tonalism is so beautiful and when the values are right you'll know it...
EdwardCastaldipainting
Does anyone know what happened to the DMP artist forum?
I wish there was a way for there to be some livestock in there. like some sheep, but getting that to go right isn't worth the risk of a bad result here.
💚💚💚💚💚💚💚💚💚💚💚💚💚💚
Fantastic, what do you use for AI programs?
He said midjourney
Love the finished piece. I too try to be abstract. My wife like realism and never likes my work. She is not an artist. I always try to tell her we are not photographers. Sucks she is clueless about art. Just sayin.
Does anyone have thoughts on whether an artist should disclose that their painting was derived from an AI generated image? There’s almost always a source an artist is working from whether it’s real life, photographs or other paintings. However, using AI cuts out a lot of work for someone who just wants to churn out paintings to sell.
$5,000?
Why AI? That’s all I want to know.
Quick way to filter thru many source images to find inspiration
@@dmurray2978 thanks, I get that. I’m a long-time fan of Marks, but for me, the idea, composition and style of an artwork are key parts of it, no matter its source of inspiration. And art is something created by artists (=humans) for the sake of themselves and other humans. Leaving it to AI because it’s quicker somehow erodes the whole experience.
It needs to be renamed “Synthography”. Because that is what it is.
AI Art implies that the mindless computer software is a person. It is not. But we are anthropomorphizing it.
We essentially have a situation where the magician in Vegas is so good that people are starting to actually believe he has supernatural powers. It’s really an illusion. A trick. But people are thinking it’s real.
Same here. People are actually believing that the dead machines are “creating” things. They are not. They are just machines that sit there until fed some input. Then their inner electronic gears and pistons and spammers and gyroscopes whir and spin and spark and out pops a penny smashed to look like an old train. Or rather…an image of a penny smashed to look like an old train.
It’s a dead machine. Nothing more. If you believe that “it” is creating anything rather than just following software code…it has tricked you into believing that the magicians magic is real.
My major problem is colours
Starving artist don't exist on TH-cam and you can make a lot of money 💰
I have another comment about this approach: using this AI technology to generate an image that is a composite of the features of stored images to create a wholly new image, the AI could also be programmed to apply oil paint to canvass to reproduce the image. Since the AI image is itself entirely original, the work could be sold under an artist's signature since it is the artist who inserted the parameters that produced the unique art work. That way, an artist could conceivably produce multiple originals daily - each with unique and original parameters. Machines can then mass produce art for the masses. Even where the artist takes the AI-produced image and uses it to paint from, the artist seems no more than a highly skilled technician but not really an originalist nor a creator of art.
- The "AI" in "AI Art" is a misnomer; it's much closer to Google than HAL 9000. Use "Stable Diffusion" instead.
- The most common dataset used for training stable diffusion programs violated the consent of millions of artists.
- Multiple stable diffusion operators are currently being sued for mass copyright infringement.
- Stable diffusion often generates images identical to those in its dataset.
The courts will work that out. I disagree that any copyrights were violated.
Transformative use is fair use.
Fair use is legal use.
What could be more transformative than taking a billion images and “showing” them to a computer in order to create what is essentially…a digital brain? Because that’s what the training “model” is.
Also…SD does not “often” generate images that would be considered by most to be a copy. It is extremely rare for it to do so. Probably less than 1/10,000th of a percent of all generations.
And I would be willing to bet that nearly all of those were intentional. That is…the person was trying to recreate something as a copy to prove that it could be done. The rest of the instances are likely people trying to mimic something that has nearly no other images for the keyword. So “Afghan Girl” produces imitations of the famous time magazine cover…because almost all images on the internet associated with the words “Afghan girl” are that cover image.
shocked to hear you are using A.I considering your traditional teachings! However I suppose it is a way to stimulate your creativity.
I'd prefer it if you don't use AI, generally. Because it strikes me as greatly unethical and immoral. But I have to say, this is one of the better ways I've seen of using it. Using the AI image as a prompt for you to then paint from, that is.
The main thing thats unethical about it is that it's stealing other peoples artworks and generating artwork from them. I don't even see this technique as being interesting. He's basically copying the copier.
@@johnbloom1109 i was thinking the same thing. and although adjustments were made, none that were too appreciably different.
@@johnbloom1109 is it though? Mark is keeping with the times, instead of being left in the dust
@@dmurray2978 So copying AI stolen artwork that has been collaged and manipulated is keeping with the times? Hopefully Mark at least gives credit to the designers of the AI software since without them to program the software and create the algorithms that manipulate the copied artwork in it's database, Mark wouldn't have anything to copy.
What the software doing is illegal and they already probably have a ton of lawsuits being presented against them.
It reminds me of what happened when music producers and rappers started to use music from other artists to create their own. It ended up being taken to court and banned unless you could get permission and/or paid the musician/band/label.
I would be VERY surprised if what these software's are doing is allowed to continue to on years from now.
@@johnbloom1109 is it stolen artwork? Show me a link to the painting he's using as a reference. Hint- it doesn't exist beyond this video
I think the ai painting is better, I will not buy from the artist from now on .
There was no "ai painting". It was an image generated in the style of an artist he likes.
How is using an AI painting for a reference any different than using a photograph or using a drawing from another artist as a reference? It's not a copy, it's a reference. That's just a silly closed minded comment.
$5k!?
Your landscapes all look the same.
So weird seeing a real artist use AI as a reference. Not sure about that. But I guess it's the end result that matters. I feel as an artist though we much go out and take our own pictures etc....
But maybe for practice, this works too. And like you said, not all people live in beautiful places.
you are a perfect mixer , but none of your paintings strike me , there is just nothing in them , this is a perfect example . Spot on values , but the image if it was music would be muted . it does not speak . The only thing i am getting the only vibe is some sort of loneliness. Its just a shame , you are a perfect painter but a machine . If you have to take AI generated images , and even they are dull , i just dont get it . Its a medium , powerful medium , image . When Dali does his Clocks , values are not what its important , not even color , could be black and white still be fantastic art .
Or if you do such good mixing , maybe get some happiness some nature in to it .I dont know a waterfall , forest , mountain kind of thing ,spring ,autumn , take your pick . Or you did it and i didnt see it . I dont know , but i thank you for showing me mixing and values , that you do very good . I will take it from there .
Thank you .
You said AI. Bye.
Without googling it…do you know who the Luddites were?
@@BrianReplies You're trying to dictate to me whether I look something up? What are you, a fuckin' AI bot?
Bro, we don’t care about your landscape painting . We want portrait paintings . You did still life painting really well. Now we need portrait lessons . come on listen to your viewers
@Bleu d'amour you must not understand. His portrait work is amazing !
I prefer the AI painting better than yours. 👍
agree
Please don’t do this. AI is not your friend. Do you need long sermons on this?
I think it’s brilliant. The people up in arms about it are just the Luddites of our day.
@@BrianReplies Personally, I think the Luddites were on to something.
I think it's fantastic! AI is only a tool, just like photography.
AI productions by their origin have no artistic merit and the finished painting here is nice but I guess you have to ask where does art come from, not from an artificial generated source. Compare an AI image to an Arthur streeton. But if you can sell this for your asking price the best of luck to you.
Why is your paint out of stock? Maybe you need AI to make some paint for you.
The AI one has more clarity in the background where the water is. And, it has more depth perception where the hills are in that the ones that are closer are brighter at the front whereas yours just all merge together. Also, the AI one is less linear across the hills and sky which is more realistic and adds to its character. You say your aim wasn't to copy it, but this is a copy, only the AI one is actually better... This is lazy use of AI.
You are kidding yourself! You keep saying "this is me, this is my work - really? It's NOT. It's AI.
Your ability to listen is lacking. He never said "this is me, this is my work". He said that he was trying to create a piece of work in the style of an artist that he likes, and that he used AI to generate an image similar to that artist's work, and that he settled on an image that he liked. Clean out your ears.