I might switch from photo to a trade like a plumber. No lie

There is a kind of art that can be replaced completely by ai and no one will notice or care, and its the most gruling animation related stuff especially.

When i say no one will care. I mean the consumers, the artists out of work will care.

That said all high end art is probably safe but thats a small number of individuals.

Honestly surprised they haven’t tried doing AI for accounting to be honest. At least, not have it be before art.

[deleted]

It will but I don't think it'll destroy them. Rather, it'll create a shift from producing to investing and financing marketing operations for existing projects created by one or a few people. They'll probably still produce but they'll have one or two people on projects rather than large teams.

At least that's my guess. I'm excited because I see a much more robust independent industry and more opportunities to share the pie.

I never thought the new AI would be so good. I think it will be hard for less talented artists, but the best artists will be fine. It's like synthesizing music, versus an actual instrumentalist. You can hear tone, depth, passion. Also, there's already AI making some pretty banging music.

For someone like me who only dabbles in art, AI would be a great tool to help me generate assets for a videogame or marketing campaign. But, I would also like to have original art in my home.

Don't be threatened by AI or robots, just use them to help speed up your process, or inspire you. Sometimes AI generates weird things you wouldn't have thought about.

Oh, and about automation. There's 3D printed houses, there flat boxes for drywall mudding, there's airless paint sprayers for painting, and aluminum studs for framing. You don't see a dip in wages for master trades people.

Let's have fewer artists and more starving..

I think just like any medium, there will be people who claim to be "artists" using AI to generate mediocre "art", think of all the people who call themselves photographers who really don't have the skill/knowledge required to produce professional photos.

Same with AI, there will be those who master it and use it as another tool in their toolkit. Creatives will still be necessary and while AI in its current form is great for inspiration and mocking up quick renderings, good artists will always outshine the mediocre "artists" who are just using the tool without knowing all the fundamentals.

I don't think we artists can be so easily replaced, I hope.

I'm a design student and have been thinking about it a lot. The thing I keep coming back to is this. For the foreseeable future someone has to direct it. If it could literally do everything on its own far more than just designers would have to worry about thier jobs. So, you fire your design team. So who's gonna direct it? The secretary? I think with every new innovation that let's us make more stuff our endless apatite for content also increases. So, will it costs current designers and illustrators thier jobs? There's a very real chance. But its almost guaranteed whole new fields will be created. Sorta like how a shit load of the traditional effects industry lost their jobs after Jurassic Park. But now there's more effects jobs than ever (and practical effects is still a large industry.)

Both I think. First, I think AI-generated art will be mostly used in non purely artistic contexts such as poster and ad design. There will always remain a market for human-made art.

For instance, my SO works at a small NGO and often need art for their newsletter. They have been thinking of using AI generated art instead of their previous method (looking for free images on google). Other companies may use AI images instead of hiring artists.

​

But there is an upside for graphical designer and the likes. AI-generated images could make them WAY more productive! Maybe they can get a rough estimate of what they want and then do some manual corrections. Or maybe they get really good at giving the AI the right prompt. Since they are more productive, their rates will drop, so more people will be able to afford graphical design. Imagine having a designer do custom christmas cards for you, or a banner for some event! So in the end, it may be the case that nobody loses their job!

It will reduce the number of artists who can make a good living on their own skills, because it empowers the top talent (and firms) in the field to produce more work. A skilled artist who can tell the AI what they want, and then modify it as a painter / sculptor - could work with a handful of other artists to churn out tremendous volumes of work.

There are a ton of artists who make a living doing a good job drawing things most people don't want to draw - everything from boring stuff like commercial illustrations and technical drawings for training manuals - to furry porn. That's the kind of work AI can do far more cheaply - and that means illustrators for books and magazines, website drawings, personal art requests, billboard artists, et cetera - become more scarce.

As a 3D artist off and on for the last twenty-five years I've seen a hell of a lot of changes.

My main takeaway over that time is that new tools don't take away jobs. They just create more specialties.

>Which leads to an interesting question, will AI be utilized as a tool for artists or be used as a catalyst to displace the creative class?

AI is simply a tool just like a paintbrush, any child can use it but it takes a long time to master and develop a unique style.

When the First Photography cameras were invented, Painters and Portrate makers where Furrious.

"This will bring an end to painting! No one will sit by the river and paint anymore if they can just take a photograph!"

Now, Here we are 200 years later and painting hasn't gone anywhere...

A.I is just a new medium of art. It will coexist and be mixed and matched just like all other art forms.

Currently that's the only practical way to use it. It's very bad at doing specific things (as in narrowly defined stuff). It's MUCH better at giving.what you want if you can draw at least a clear but mediocre version of the final draft. All of them are incredibly awful at consistency so they aren't good for things like multiple angles of the same character or animation. Any attempt at that is a fever dream at best which is cool, but not really what you want in the vast majority of media.

Until these issues are solved it's mainly going to be a concept tool imo. I know a few professional and semi- professional artists who sketch a few things then generate like 20-30 different versions to help them concept out or send something back to the client so they can get clarification on what they want.

I used AI art recently as references for a commission I made. I think this will largely do what most tools have done. Raise the minimum bar of acceptable work this driving the quality up but the work amount will be the same overall, at least for the next few years.

The use of canva speeds up content creation for marketing, basically short garbage views on Instagram. But can't replace photoshop pros completely. Likewise, Photoshop can't replace painters, but we lost animated films like Ghibli

MBAs are probably already figuring out how to do this.

i see something in this (and also ai music) that nobody sees -i always get the thousand mile stare when i mention it.

imo the "artistry" in these works isn't just the end result (the painting or musical composition.) It's in the programming. ai isn't an objective source. i could program my "Bach" or "Van Gogh" machine and it would behave differently than my colleague's machine because we each have our own strategy for getting from a to b.

so we could critique the programmer based on how well the result matches the original master if they are producing new "Van Gogh" material. this would be no different than judging wine by how closely the taste matches the grape.

or, if somebody is producing original material (not based on a historical precedence), then we could judge the programmer on how original or compelling the end work is.

none of this usurps traditional art. instead of working in oils or watercolors these artists work in code; its just a different medium.

I’ve been planning to use AI generated stuff to get original ideas across to real artists. I think there’s a sweet spot in which AI art makes for great reference material but only to communicate to someone who can put it all together if you want anything specific. But it’s only a matter of time before that changes too.

Anecdotal but we're messing around with it at our VFX (mid sized) studio. The artists are excited. It's just another tool.

the devil is in the details

That's already possible right now

But then once the artist is successfully cloned, what use does society have for the original artist?

You could already do this with Stable Diffusion and uploading only your works to it.

A more interesting phenomenon is how AI art users are already making "deepfakes" in established artists' style. Tech savvy concept artists like Greg Rutkowski, who was conscientious about tagging his online art with clear descriptions, became overnight reluctant AI art gods. It remains to be seen if the glut of online art with his name attached will help or hurt their sales.

This is how I use it. I already do art, mostly composition-based art, and seeing a near-final product first before I delve into my own work has made the process far easier for me.

We use AI art in our creative mood board process. Once feedback is given on the moodboards, we dive in to asset creation with our own style, using the AI art as a springboard. We have won two out of the last three pitches with this process.

For now. Give it 10 years tops, and there will be AI that will create masterpieces based on a few lines of text.

It really is genuinely good for subject generation that one can then take and do in their own medium as a study and practice. I really like it for this.

Yes I found I can develop new ideas very quickly with lower opportunity cost. Sometimes the AI images will spark a new way of thinking. My own art might look nothing like the AI images but they might inspire me to use certain color combinations. For now it’s more of tool. What the future holds well who knows.

As someone who is in the IT industry, AI is not nearly at the level of sophistication that humans have regarding art. AI algorithms are clumsy and random, spewing out grotesque products. Even if an AI managed to paint something beautiful or awe inspiring, it's still pointless because it was made by a machine. Real Art can only come from the human soul as a reflection of the human experience.

I think it will take over graphic design jobs more creating illustrations for corporations and weird background shapes. Maybe even get to logos

Exactly. Just because the printing press ( or printer, or word processor ) made the scribe obsolete as a profession doesn't mean people don't learn to handwrite things and put it to use.

We already watch synthetic media we literally call “computer generated images.” The field employs more people than ever worked in traditional effects and we all love (most of) their work.

I don't think AI will ever be able to satisfy the needs of furries. They need their Fursona with all of its little details and neon colors.

The onus of proof is on your side to explain why in freezing blazes is this a future worth pursuing.

Most “new” ideas have always just been mash-ups of existing ideas.

You provide the idea via a textual prompt that the model then uses as a basis.

Say you want to make a new album cover for your upcoming piece. Before, you’d ask for a studio for a graphic designer, photographer, etc but if you’re not looking for anything perfect then AI art can pretty much do all their jobs.

Think of that this way.

In a movie, a director asks actors and camera people to move around in a way that captures the vision he is in his mind.

When someone commissions artwork, they are doing the same thing as a director - they want a certain character a certain way in a certain style.

So rather than hire an artist, you would hire and manipulate an AI. For an artist to compete, they would need to be able to better capture a person's vision than a computer and also do so at a rate that's economical, which as tech progresses will be difficult. Already, art that is purely descriptive (I want you to paint me a girl with a sword) is essentially obsolete for human artists to compete with.

You text the ideas, go check DALL•E, Stable Diffusion or Mid Journey.

It really is. I'm an industrial designer. I've designed super yachts, athletic tracking devices for rugby, boxing and American football, EV chargers and more.

I'm a huge technology nerd (obviously in a Redditor). Through my career I've watched simulation software get smarter and eliminate dedicated engineers, rendering software become so easy you don't need a visualiser, CAD software become so easy you don't need a draughtsman, Product lifecycle software eliminate QA and NPI engineers. That entire department I've just described is literally now just me. I've been a solo designer for nearly 90% of my >10 year career.

I've started using AI in my concept generation and soon AI will eliminate the need for a separate Industrial Designer and consolidate it back into a single role doing the above stuff I mentioned plus concepting. It doesn't need to be the best in the world. Just good enough and a user needs less and less skill as time goes on.

Soon, I won't have render software, it'll be a rough base model and I tell it what to make it look like. Like Vizcom does right now.

Photoshop, I'll upload a photo and describe the changes I want.

CAD software I'll outline roughly what I need and then an AI Will generate the design for me Like Autodesk Generative design .

>No it isn’t

You're too late. It's already changed the landscape for design and I'm telling you now it'll change it forever to come.

People are pretentious, I agree. Calling themselves directors might be valid, but artists? No way.

[deleted]

Right now storytelling and themes will still be safe. The AI will have some difficulty giving work real meaning, and I'm not saying that because I am some kind of human elitist - I still believe AI will wipe out most of the art industry. But how do you "train" an AI to write a narrative handling how to deal with a romantic comedy where each character handles love in a different way, for example, with consistent characterizations and character growth over many many chapters, and resolving in a chaotic final scene where everyone's arcs resolve at once? Certainly it might be possible but it is not a trivial problem the way generating "Elon Musk as an Astronaut" already is, or using AI Dungeon to roleplay as a wizard or write a beautiful description of a house.

As above however, art that exists purely to be descriptive or entertain will not be safe at all however. An already difficult profession to break into will be made tougher still to make a living from.

Try dreamstudio. There is a small charge for generating images but it's negligible. Go to r/stablediffusion for guides and help

/r/DallE2 has the best comprehension, which means it requires the least amount of skill or fiddling, while also producing coherent works. No complicated setup either.

It's not free, but you do get 50 free credits when you start and 15 every month which should be enough to have fun with.

Yes, the ability of anyone anywhere to generate anything they want or can imagine instantly and at almost no cost, is definitely just a fad.

You've definitely got it all figured out.

Art directors will be safe. Everybody else - it will be tough for them to survive.

You can just not pay attention to celebrity news

So here comes the catch: what’s stopping anyone from claiming that it’s their human made art? As AI becomes more sophisticated, this will continue to be an emerging problem. They can make an art piece with AI, modify it a litttle bit so it looks imperfect, and make money out of it.