I don’t think that artists will be doomed with AI

Submitted by alakeya t3_10prtp7 in singularity

I hear everyone’s concerned and formed my opinion on it. Please take into consideration that this is merely an opinion and I can still absolutely be wrong and uninformed.

With that being said, I don’t think that artists are done for now that AI is developing in that area. The main concerns come from digital artists whose works are being used and they’re scared of the AI replacing their job, now that it’s free and quick. I disagree.

At one point we invented prints, we can easily print an image on a canvas and display it as a work of art but that didn’t make painters any less appreciated.

Artists, in whichever sector, have something that AI could never replace: artisanship. You can find thousands of similar prints, copy pasted from one another or even done by AI, but the difference will always be that something handmade by humans will always be more valuable.

I work in the art sector and as my competitors there are giant, soulless machines creating exactly what I sell. Yet I still have clients, despite my competitors being faster, cheaper and more diverse. People purposely outsource to hand-made arts, when they can afford it, because we put more value into the time and craftsmanship of another human being.

I’m not saying that AI will not explode in the art sector, I completely expect it to, what I’m saying is that I, personally, don’t think that art is lost because of it.

3

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

just-a-dreamer- t1_j6m1oq1 wrote

Left to their own devices with plenty spare time at hand, humans want to do 4 things all day.

Eat, do drugs, have sex and get entertained. Whoever can provide one of this things, will always have a job.

5

CertainMiddle2382 t1_j6m7bo3 wrote

I belive “art” will be more present in our lives than ever before thanks to AI.

I just also believe even less money than now will go to the producers of art and even more money will go to the performers of art…

7

Portgas t1_j6mb8ik wrote

> handmade by humans will always be more valuable.

As long as what's made by humans is in any way distinguishable, yes. You could already be looking at ai art down at /r/art or reading ai comics at /r/comics and have absolutely 0 idea.

7

alakeya OP t1_j6mcz6m wrote

Replying to Portgas (#1,652,704)

I do agree on that front, but at the same time isn’t it rather easy to share the process and therefore demonstrate that the art was handmade?

Sorry for the parallel but can’t help but compare it to my current line of work. Machines are able to recreate exactly what I create, down to the details. But I can share easily how it’s handmade by providing my work process and therefore my work isn’t questioned anymore. This is something that’s highly present in fashion as well where they’re competing against fast fashion, or sculptures against 3D printing.

2

CertainMiddle2382 t1_j6mfejl wrote

Replying to alakeya (#1,653,063)

I won’t pretend to be a specialist but I would think decreasing the work and skills to produce artful pieces would greatly increase their production hence decreasing their value.

The value of real people with real skills doing real stuff would not be impacted, or would even become more prized.

3

Portgas t1_j6mngh6 wrote

Replying to alakeya (#1,653,149)

> isn’t it rather easy to share the process and therefore demonstrate that the art was handmade?

It's also rather easy to fake it. Like, I'm an okay artist, and I can probably take any art from /r/art and fabricate the 'how to' process in every step imaginable, and I don't see why ai couldn't be made to do the same either.

3

Iffykindofguy t1_j6n50ed wrote

The problem is that it absolutely can replace "artisanship" there is no divine touch in the human spirit that makes it irreplaceable, its just experience.

2

californiarepublik t1_j6nel46 wrote

Hilarious that your reasonable, politely-worded post has been downvoted to zero. I agree with you, for this and other reasons, but it doesn't seem a very popular opinion on this sub and I'm not quite sure why. Posters here seem to take delight in the idea of people's jobs being eliminated and Skynet taking over, not sure the appeal. Many fantasize about UBI while forgetting the real 'alignment problem' between elite classes and the rest of society...

4

dasnihil t1_j6niu4e wrote

Replying to alakeya (#1,653,063)

we will soon be desensitized to "art" as we know it today in various forms: drawing/painting, music, literature etc

you mentioned "print" as a technology but you're discounting the fact that we're talking about a different beast here. a beast that can bring your imagination to life and wow you.

isn't art something that wows the audience and takes them places? and if a machine generated thing is coherent enough to paint our imagination for us, do you get where we're headed now?

art as we know today will be understood better by future humans, just like we now understand religion and human constructs way better than even Nietzche did during his time. when he said "god is dead" it was shocking and profound, now we're all like "yeah god is dead who gives a shit".

humans have a peculiar way of finding new constructs and making it a trend. a few of us see that, rest are just discussing art like it was not a human construct and as if the universe has a thing like "art" in there lol.

3

alakeya OP t1_j6nx5p8 wrote

Replying to californiarepublik (#1,664,837)

I don’t mind getting downvoted as long as there’s a civil discussion going on, I knew that our opinion is quite unpopular. Yet no one convinced me of thinking differently as of now, I guess that we’re just more optimistic?

2

isthiswhereiputmy t1_j6or8qb wrote

I think a reality is that most art projects will always need human instigators and logisticians. A public sculpture doesn't just *poof* into existence from a prompt or desire. Someone needs to use software to design it specifically and safely, a team needs to fabricate and install it, and there are often lots of stake-holders who will have their say along the way. The idea of AIs coordinating all of that is not realistic in most cases.

2

fjaoaoaoao t1_j6ovn2s wrote

Half of the sub is kool-aid. Could be misremembering, but a similar post that covered this was well upvoted recently. I believe they were saying there will be greater appreciation for human-touched endeavors, just as there is the rise of etsy and so forth.

I agree with you. Artists will adapt. A lot of their art will be fueled by AI, AI used as a tool. What is currently recognized as AI art will be even more recognizeable as machine/AI-based in the future as human artists evolve with AI. Sort of like how trained ears can recognize autotune. Of course, I am only talking about near term future - too hard to say about the far.

Another point. AI is already used in a lot of interactive or simulation art. The humans are using AI to create new forms of art that AI cannot create on its own. Of course, in singularity, that could change, but people in this sub are underestimating what real singularity is.

2

socialkaosx t1_j6pbkps wrote

In my opinion, in the first wave - yes.
Later on, when there are no more artists, we will start to appreciate manual work again.

2

TheDavidMichaels t1_j6pe7uj wrote

Well, I'm not certain that handmade is necessarily preferred, but I mostly agree. Even the concept of handmade can be subjective - if you use a pencil, you're not truly handmade unless you dig up the graphite and make your own tools. AI is just as "handmade" as Photoshop or photography, and I am proficient in all three.

I believe that in the next 2-5 years, it will be possible to prompt a feature film or AAA video game with a few words, but the effort of crafting that experience will still come down to human effort to make it unique. Only humans can understand the human condition and experience, and they are the ones who translate that into something to share.

2