- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
So the generalized impression I get from the article is that gen ai creates more work for artists.
Did you read the whole thing, or even like halfway? Multiple concept artists are quoted in the article saying it makes their lives more difficult. You know, more work in the bad way. The thesis of the article is that it makes the job harder, makes for a less than unique art style, and potentially fewer jobs for artists.
Unless you actually meant “more work” in the bad way, of course. If so, sorry for the rant
I always wondered, Why reference the imperfect copies gen AI makes when you have databases of the real original artists and pictures and 3d scans of real things in the world out there to reference, it just makes no sense! It’s like having world class artists in your studio and settling for asset flipping.
Why reference the imperfect copies gen AI makes when you have databases of the real original artists and pictures and 3d scans of real things in the world out there to reference.
I think it is because one of these approaches requires skill and time, the other requires a ChatGPT subscription and George Jetson to push one idiotic button.
It makes people feel that they can contribute in fields where they were previously (and still are) useless.
So well put
For that use case, Gen AI lets you draw from thousands of pieces into a singular reference image in seconds tailored to whatever you can ask for. And, yeah, very imperfect and questionably sourced, but you’ve eliminated countless hours of work that could ostensibly be directed towards just fixing any problems created (Rare, but that’s how they sell it). And then, if you don’t like the result there, you can just get a fresh one in another few seconds.
I think it’s useful enough that it’s going to keep being a bigger and bigger problem.
I feel the problem is that in the end referencing isn’t about copying but extracting accurate information. You don’t reference something you want to design but something where you need a very specific object to be accurate. Using AI reference for this just sounds kind of useless. I can understand that very untrained or untalented artists will find most of the AI references useful because they don’t have the design language to construct things themselves. But this brings out the last problem that Generative AI models have a lot of diminishing returns. And after using them for a while everything starts to look the same and you need to steal more stuff to shake things up.
All that time could be better spent forming a design language or gathering useful references.
In the end most design processes I’ve see that use generative AI end up looking very flat and lifeless, because the system tends to veer towards that.
