TechnologyArtificial Intelligence: Good for Art, Bad for Artists?

Artificial Intelligence: Good for Art, Bad for Artists?

Emerging AI models operating in the art world are the subject of a wide-ranging discourse full of promises and threats, whose potential effects are only just beginning to emerge. Many are fascinated by the world of possibilities that open up when the artist is in direct contact with the archive of visual learning that spans the entirety of recorded history; much remains skeptical for what they see as outsourcing human creativity to the database machine. The former will make the case that Study Art History, for example, is already similar to accessing this database, except that it is now more complete and faster than the human brain; The latter will remain unconvinced and invoke notions of errors and intuition.

Bottom: Jaw Spin

This conversation about the nature of perception and creativity is in itself a wonderful and well-fitting exploitation of the kinds of conversations artists and philosophers enjoy. Abundant contact with a Cosmos of ancestors in your field It is an effective suggestion. But there is another aspect to this, and that is the effect on commercial illustrations, animation, character design and the like – professional commercial artists, without reference to the linguistic controversy, daily see their role eroding, their job itself being becoming obsolete in a way that is concerned about its occurrence in fine art. At the same time, since many of the AI ​​systems currently available to the public are speed-based, it is extremely easy to borrow and steal another artist’s style – just by typing his name into the program. So, is the role of AI in the creative process a tool, a collaborator, or a competition? and he.

For keen artists to explore the relationship Between their creative process and the augmentation and innovation of AI, there is also a difference between analytic models and generative models – one that sorts data sets on behalf of the user, and the other that creates “new” content based on everything they’ve learned. Far away, which is more similar to the idea of ​​a human brain. This and other points along the way where Questions originality , Authorship and intellectual property Interfering with play, sometimes blatantly.

Artificial Intelligence: Good for Art, Bad for Artists?

Bhutto: The scene precedes

artist says MidjourneyAnd the D-EAnd the Night CafeAnd the stable spreadAnd the dream studio Or a host of other apps they would like to have “Landscape with a distant city skyline at night in the style of Henry Cole,” “Dwarf queen statues with antique weapons on a tall ship sailing toward the horizon in Rembrandt style,” or “Jazz-age alley cats on A spaceship in a folk art woodcut like Grant Wood”, or – well, you get the idea. this Fun game that will eat thousands of waking hours In addictive entertainment. Taken seriously, it can be a great way to achieve instant gratification of an idea embodied, as a diagram; Many programs allow the user to customize the file once it has been created. Not to mention all the fun you’ll have with poetic or non-linear language.

Artificial Intelligence: Good for Art, Bad for Artists?

Sasha Styles, Hair is the original block, 2021 (courtesy of the artist)

But what happens when an artist enters the reference wave to the style of a living artist, the one who will do it I do not like to be a learning model fodder For a global network of instant competitors who seem to flirt with copyright infringement by intentionally invoking their names in the work they plan to claim as theirs? Practically speaking, what happens when an art director at a magazine or advertising company can take what would have been an email outlining the themes and parameters of a commissioned illustration—a public park in the winter with children’s toys and dogs and snow in the trees; A waiting room in the medical office with a variety of patients all on their iPhone in the style of collocation of photos; Buffet table full of exotic sweets and wildflowers in pop art style – write the same words in Midjourney instead and get their score for free? Yes, that would be a problem.

Artificial Intelligence: Good for Art, Bad for Artists?

Bhutto: Consequences of the psychiatrist

But back in the world of fine art, with its high tolerance for academic experimentation and smashing things, painters and photographers, poets sculptors, filmmakers, animators and all kinds of artists whose work requires a deep engagement with world cultures, hidden history, literature, architecture, politics and other extensive data sets – Artists who really view their relationship with AI as collaborativemutually informed, and foreshadowing a future in which the singularity is not just a physical union with our technology but an epistemological and consciousness-based union as well — exuberant and very optimistic about the possibilities.

Artificial Intelligence: Good for Art, Bad for Artists?

Vince Fraser for Artechouse (Courtesy of the artist)

Artificial Intelligence: Good for Art, Bad for Artists?

Bhutto: Contribute to temptation

Artificial Intelligence: Good for Art, Bad for Artists?

Anatolia Companion

Editor’s Note: The disclaimer below refers to advertising posts and does not apply to this or any other editorial stories.

Advertising Disclosure: We may receive compensation for some of the links in our Stories. Thank you for supporting LA Weekly and our advertisers.

Source

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Exclusive content

Latest article

More article