I clarify my question:

How do you feel about the fact that art created by AI this year is not much different from art created by humans? I think those who have seen it themselves understand what I mean.

How do you feel about the fact that now and in the future, AI will do most of the creative work 80-90% instead of authors and humans, doing it at the highest level better than any human, and people will just train their AI models and create content with prompts?

  • wakko@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 days ago

    There is now just a large gap between what "profesional’ (read: corporate) art is and what is relegated to “hobbyists”.

    In the corporate world, time-to-deliver matters. It matters that creating a logo, an ad, or a t-shirt design can be made faster with AI.

    However, AI isn’t likely to be used very widely in what people consider “fine art”. Fine art is more about something intangible that AI can’t really assist with.

    What current image generation models can do is reproduce shapes, forms and color mixes that are similar to what they’ve seen before. For the high-volume, high throughput world of corporate art, AI image generation is reducing the cost of goods down to something barely above the cost of electricity. For the fine art world, it means the barrier to entry is a bit steeper and a whole lot fewer people will be capable of spending the time creating it.

    AI is making some creative jobs into something akin to blacksmithing or horse-based transportation is today. Making things with older technologies still exists, even though most of modern society has moved on. But it’s something that only a handful of people can do professionally anymore. For most people, it’s a hobby or a fun tourist attraction.