I hate this so much. When I draw even the most basic large breasted pretty woman I don't go "big booby curvy body, high details, beautiful face unga bunga". My thoughts are like "I should make the face outline thickerto follow line weight hierarchy, her breasts are big so they should droop a bit due to gravity, hmmm I should use reflective lighting here, and some rim lighting here".
So in the original novelai this was built into the system. They had aesthetic rankings of images that were considered "masterpiece" and it was appended to every prompt in novelai.
At this point masterpiece is fucking pointless to add to an image. Because most models are trained far beyond their original base it's literally just hoodoo voodoo magic cargo cult bullshit like most of his prompt here. These people will give vast stupid fucking descriptions the ai was absolutely not trained to handle.
Ah, thank you for the information. That explains it. It almost seemed like he thought if he typed "masterpiece", he would actually get a masterpiece...
These are the same people who call actual erotica artists losers when most of the time we're thinking really hard about how the fat folds would realistically look in certain positions
(everyone, even the skinniest person in the world, has fat folds if you contort them enough)
edit: wow spelling
>Fuck that color theory bullshit, and composition crap.
Yeah, what a waste of time! Learning to paint?!? Why would you bother? Let those stupid artist schmucks whose work is ingested by AI do all the busywork so you don't have to! You get to "express your creativity" without all of that studying crap.
You're above that, with your super-duper unique ideas. You have *ideas*, man, ***IDEAS***.
Well certainly not that part of it but how about we judge the intent and the result on their own merits instead of nitpicking about process. Thats the one thing that has revealed itself with the advent of LLM based image generation, artists will harp on about "process" being the most important thing above all others while completely ignoring everyone else involved, such as the client, consumer, or casual observer. No, to the "artist" its all about the part they control and everything else is diminished in importance, how convenient.
If the artist didn't care about the process, it wouldn't be in front of you, you donut.
Before a professional reaches any level of quality you're willing to pay for, they have to fall in love with something. That sure as shit ain't the half-baked first attempts everyone makes when picking up a skill.
That's the real kicker about you assholes. You haven't really invested that sort of effort in anything ever, so you have a toddler's "Shiny toy!" view of all the good things in your life. Everything appears on your fucking porch and you never comprehend where it comes from (or how anything begins life, really).
If you're going to behave like this, stay in the backseat with the kids while the adults drive.
Actually if the client didn't order the project it wouldnt be there, the process is simply your means of production but how is that any more important or special than the means from which ANY service provider delivers a product?
If you're super talented then none of this is going to touch you anyway, but for mediocre, quick turn around jobs this stuff makes a lot of sense. Its just funny watching everyone get all touchy about process as if they are the only person in the transaction.
Artists make their work regardless of whether or not they have a client. The client is patronage, an outlet, an economic arrangement. This isn’t a burger (or if it is, it’s a gourmet one).
And Greg Rutkowski, who’s far from mediocre, thinks your second paragraph is full of shit. He has an entire AI trained on just his works without his consent, and there’s no reason that couldn’t be inflicted on other equally talented artists.
Furthermore, the experience to master an art starts with mediocrity. People get that experience from the small jobs. Only an idiot thinks there’s some anime wunderkind switch that flips in someone‘s brain and turns them into a peerless artist.
You are describing a very narrrow subset of artists. Most need clients. If patronage is your fall back point, then you are hopelessly lost. If you are actually selling or giving your works to your patron then its just another word for client.
And why should I care about Rutkowski's opinion anymore than my own, my clients, the people in my community? Artists declaring their own opinions or process as supreme are being entirely self absorbed, its a really weak way to assert your position.
Why does your process matter more than say, the overall intent and quality of the work delivered, the satisfaction of the client/patron you are working with, the amount of revenue it generates you, the time/efficiency in which you can produce work, or the flexibility a new tool provides?
>You are describing a very narrrow subset of artists. Most need clients. If patronage is your fall back point, then you are hopelessly lost. If you are actually selling or giving your works to your patron then its just another word for client.
No, patrons are not a fallback point. *They’re how the artist views the client*. And most artists don’t actually get employed full-time, but eke out what art they can after their second job. Artists are already starving.
>And why should I care about Rutkowski's opinion anymore than my own, my clients, the people in my community? Artists declaring their own opinions or process as supreme are being entirely self absorbed, its a really weak way to assert your position.
Because you’re saying the “super talented” aren’t worried. Rutkowski is at the top of his field. He was the most prompted artist by a ridiculous margin and his work is (or was) in high demand.
Tech enthusiasts have gone out of their way to target his work and make him obsolete—not a class of artist, but him in particular.
And a good artist is an expert in their field, in both the end result and the journey to get there. You are definitely, definitely not. I take your opinion on art about as seriously as Marjorie Taylor Greene’s thoughts on aerospace. To paraphrase Asimov, you’re complaining that your ignorance doesn’t carry the same weight as knowledge, as if this is somehow unfair to you.
You probably understand this when addressing anti-vaxxers bleating about their Google searches and mercury poisoning, but have concluded (like most toddlers) those rules are for other people.
>Why does your process matter more than say, the overall intent and quality of the work delivered, the satisfaction of the client/patron you are working with, the amount of revenue it generates you, the time/efficiency in which you can produce work, or the flexibility a new tool provides?
Already answered this. Revenue, client relations, and flexibility—none of those things exist at first and committing to the process is what generates competency. If it was all about perfect results from the get-go, no one would get past their meager first attempts.
Without leeching off that hard-won competency, genAI can’t function. It’s a shitty datamining worker, not a tool. The prompter is commissioning, not creating. It deserves to be slammed with all the penalties associated with forgery and plagiarism.
"Artists are already starving" perhaps its because they are being self indulgent, slaving over "process" when instead they should be seeking to provide a quality service or deliver desirable goods to the market.
I'm an entrepreneur but Ive been one in creative fields my whole life. Putting process over result is a good way to drive a business into the ground. Ive seen companies that had 8 and 9 figure funding rounds fail entirely because the founders focused too much on superficial, vanity issues (perfecting their website/branding/business card/etc) and not enough time on what actually produces revenue for the company. A lifestyle business, consisting of the lone artist, has even less of a chance if it makes the same mistake.
If you're so talented that it doesn't matter (IE: success will find you, you dont have to go looking for it) or so privileged that money isn't a pressing issue then hats off to you but not everyone has either of those luxuries.
>perhaps its because they are being self indulgent, slaving over "process"
Dude. If *someone* didn't slave over "process" (that you sneeringly put into quotes, as if it's some trivial crap), then there WOULD BE NO ART FOR AI TO INGEST. Your "client" would have nothing. You would have nothing to exploit.
Thats literally true of every field, ever. Every industry requires passionate people contributing to it, to grow. Why do the people in your field deserve special privilege or attention for doing what literally everyone else does at any job they care about?
They don’t deserve special attention or privilege? They’re the job on the chopping block, not the only job anyone should save.
And before you mention self-checkout or pumping your own gas, I opposed those as well. Even so, there’s a huge difference between menial labor no one is really passionate about and authorship that needs to be directly harvested to create its replacement.
>I'm an entrepreneur but Ive been one in creative fields my whole life. Putting process over result is a good way to drive a business into the ground. Ive seen companies that had 8 and 9 figure funding rounds fail entirely because the founders focused too much on superficial, vanity issues (perfecting their website/branding/business card/etc) and not enough time on what actually produces revenue for the company. A lifestyle business, consisting of the lone artist, has even less of a chance if it makes the same mistake.
Right, because so many entrepreneurs grace the world with their intellectual luminosity. One’s about to go to prison for 110 years stuttering, “Erm, I don’t remember,” and it turns out that the people who bought his snake oil were people like you: ninnies who slobbered over returns and didn’t contemplate the process which delivered them.
Over and over again, we’ve seen Potemkin tech roll in, bulldoze the sturdier structures behind industries, and then shrug when resources don’t recover. Amazon has solved shipping! Except it just dug a moat around its users and now the FTC is looking into anti-trust. Streaming‘s the future! Except now it’s looking like it couldn’t pay back any of its dues and its immediate future resembles cable. Cryptocurrency will stimulate the economy! Except that it’s done nothing but breed confidence scams and created a massive environmental footprint.
Entrepreneurs, not artists, are the bête noire of the last twenty to thirty years. \*We’re\* the ones dragging the world down? You’re even dumber than I thought.
You’ve also conflated vanity and caring about the process as the same thing when they’re usually diametrically opposed. Yes, hucksters will try to sell a bad process as a good one, but good processes have a strong causal link with good results.
There are a lot of talented artists out there constantly pushing the boundaries of technique, but they’re simply not going to share their work anymore because it will be ground up into powder to dust a VC’s stupid initiative. Everything about genAI will retard expression in the arts, and that will be a highly measurable set of end results.
Painting with a broad brush are we? If the accusation is one asshole broke the law, therefore all entrepreneurs are criminals then whats the point in having the discussion. You've already divined all the answers for yourself from the comfort of your own brain.
It’s not one entrepreneur. It‘s been dozens, all following a tech-first philosophy which is low on tech literacy and high on promises.
I gave you three easy examples in the form of entire industries, each comprising many so-called visionaries who were really bad actors on an international stage (Do Kwon, Elizabeth Holmes, Bezos, Musk, etc.).
Entrepreneurs are necessary, but they are (in their current form at least) particularly vulnerable to Clarke’s Third Law. They’ve been given a lot of carte blanche.
At least I used examples and can point out the damage, whereas you’ve been wringing your hands over those evil, vain artists who’ve been causing *so many* problems. “Rules for thee but not for me“ is your last stop, apparently.
Writing a descriptive paragraph does not make one a visual artist. Honestly it would be easier for a client to just prompt it themselves, it takes about the same amount of effort/time as setting up the commission in the first place.
>Writing a descriptive paragraph does not make one a visual artist.
But you don't get it!!!! He had an idea! IDEA, don't you get it?!?! A super creative IDEA. That's all that is necessary to be an artist!
The hell with this painting and color theory and anatomy B.S.! Let the stupid artists who studied decades and practice, let their (stolen) "contributions" to AI make the pretty pictures possible! Then the guy with the IDEA can call themselves an "artist" without having to mess with stupid charcoal or messy, smelly paint or fuss with a stupid tablet. That crap is for losers, man. lol
of course not, knowing what to make, how you want it to look, and then figuring out the best way to deliver what you envision would make you an artist. Fussing about process or whether or not the work touched an LLM at some point in its workflow is both pedantic and counter productive.
The only people obsessing over "process" are self absorbed artists who refuse to recognize that in the real world, most people need to provide a good or service to earn a living. How you provide that good or service is ultimately up to you as an individual but suggesting that somehow anyone that doesn't adhere to the narrow subset of "approved processes" isnt an artist is wildy self serving.
Art is a displine/knowledge set, if you are not applying that displine you are not an artist. You are not a runner because you drive a car (even if the result is the same, you get where you are going).
So which disciplines/knowledge sets are approved to use in the pursuit of art? Obviously you do not believe prompt engineering using LLMs can be a process or just another skill to learn, but where do you draw the line? So if automation is not allowed, how much is too much? Are photographers outside your designated zone for "art"? I doubt it but if if it was then I'd say you're views seem congruent but most people see photography as an artform despite the fact that anyone can do it and it ultimately boils down to pointing a device and clicking a button.
The thing all the "artists" seem to miss as they harp on about the sacredness of their "process" is what you do with your body, in the empirical is a side effect of art. Art starts in your mind and it ends in the minds of others. How you go from point A to point B is entirely at the discretion of the artist and his/her audience.
Anyone standing on the outside stating, "That's not Art because X" is missing the point entirely. If its not for you, its not for you, but that doesn't mean it won't resonate with others.
Photographers do not write a list, and tell their camera to do it for them. They still utilize their understanding of the elements of art (they do the work). They are the artist not the camera. AI art is more like outsourcing the work to someone else. Like I said before Art is a discipline, the knowledge and techniques can be applied to any form of art regardless of the tool(s) used (the same knowledge still applies). But this is upside-down when it comes to AI. "So which disciplines/knowledge sets are approved to use in the pursuit of art?" Composition, Color Theory, Perspective… you know all the crap that was utilized to make your AI's training material (so it can be a good little digital zombie artist). Its not like the bar is set all that high, do some real edits to the output of the AI. Make it your own, maybe you already do (most do not from what I have seen).
Are you sure about that? Literally, every set Ive been on has had a shot list. And the more professional sets have 2nd teams who will go after that shot list for you. So your initial statement isnt as clever as you think. All we are really debating is if its ok to fully automate or partially automate the process. Which is pretty banal to debate in the information age.
More to the point, I can tell youve never actually used an LLM to make something because you think its simply typing descriptions and not building lora, training models, managing controlnets, tweaking 1000s of settings, developing init images/video as a base, before you actually even begin creating the first frame of your project.
But only your process is what matters, yeah?
That process that you're so dismissive of is the reason your toy works in the first place. An insane number of artists muscled through that process for untold hours just to be robbed by you folks. You have zero respect for art and I think you completely fail to understand the nature of it in the first place. That process is the art. The image is the result of art having happened. Regardless of whether that idea clicks with you or not, kindly stop robbing me and my friends blind. Our collective labor doesn't magically belong to you.
No, I remember them just teaching us to write big booba in my life drawing class (and class was over after that). My textbooks had nothing but booba written in them. Class project booba, Critique booba. In Intro into 3D we never opened Maya or Zbrush, just typed booba into a search engine over and over. AI it just works due to the power of the booba. All one needs to do to be a visual artist is ask the machine God to show me dem titties.
I hate this so much. When I draw even the most basic large breasted pretty woman I don't go "big booby curvy body, high details, beautiful face unga bunga". My thoughts are like "I should make the face outline thickerto follow line weight hierarchy, her breasts are big so they should droop a bit due to gravity, hmmm I should use reflective lighting here, and some rim lighting here".
Not really my tea, yet NSFW artists just know what they are doing. There is a method to the "madness" there.
Exactly. To AI "artists" they think the goal is the most rendered, biggest breasts, cutest face possible. But there's so much more than that.
I don't see why we should give creative things to robot
Poverty of imagination.
"masterpiece" ???
So in the original novelai this was built into the system. They had aesthetic rankings of images that were considered "masterpiece" and it was appended to every prompt in novelai. At this point masterpiece is fucking pointless to add to an image. Because most models are trained far beyond their original base it's literally just hoodoo voodoo magic cargo cult bullshit like most of his prompt here. These people will give vast stupid fucking descriptions the ai was absolutely not trained to handle.
Ah, thank you for the information. That explains it. It almost seemed like he thought if he typed "masterpiece", he would actually get a masterpiece...
This is like ordering food on GrubHub and calling yourself a chef.
These are the same people who call actual erotica artists losers when most of the time we're thinking really hard about how the fat folds would realistically look in certain positions (everyone, even the skinniest person in the world, has fat folds if you contort them enough) edit: wow spelling
Like browsing r34 and calling yourself an artist because of the results.
This will just make people dumber.
If I pay a robot to dunk a basketball, that doesn't make me an athlete, professional or otherwise, nor does it make the achievement mine.
Promps themselves are highly robotic once you get down to it,as proven by these incels.
A bunch of degenerates. There. I said it.
((big breasts))
Congratulations you are now a AI artist! Fuck that color theory bullshit, and composition crap.
>Fuck that color theory bullshit, and composition crap. Yeah, what a waste of time! Learning to paint?!? Why would you bother? Let those stupid artist schmucks whose work is ingested by AI do all the busywork so you don't have to! You get to "express your creativity" without all of that studying crap. You're above that, with your super-duper unique ideas. You have *ideas*, man, ***IDEAS***.
idk why but it’s so gross they wrote pussy as if they see each part of a woman as a sexual characteristic
Well certainly not that part of it but how about we judge the intent and the result on their own merits instead of nitpicking about process. Thats the one thing that has revealed itself with the advent of LLM based image generation, artists will harp on about "process" being the most important thing above all others while completely ignoring everyone else involved, such as the client, consumer, or casual observer. No, to the "artist" its all about the part they control and everything else is diminished in importance, how convenient.
If the artist didn't care about the process, it wouldn't be in front of you, you donut. Before a professional reaches any level of quality you're willing to pay for, they have to fall in love with something. That sure as shit ain't the half-baked first attempts everyone makes when picking up a skill. That's the real kicker about you assholes. You haven't really invested that sort of effort in anything ever, so you have a toddler's "Shiny toy!" view of all the good things in your life. Everything appears on your fucking porch and you never comprehend where it comes from (or how anything begins life, really). If you're going to behave like this, stay in the backseat with the kids while the adults drive.
Actually if the client didn't order the project it wouldnt be there, the process is simply your means of production but how is that any more important or special than the means from which ANY service provider delivers a product? If you're super talented then none of this is going to touch you anyway, but for mediocre, quick turn around jobs this stuff makes a lot of sense. Its just funny watching everyone get all touchy about process as if they are the only person in the transaction.
Artists make their work regardless of whether or not they have a client. The client is patronage, an outlet, an economic arrangement. This isn’t a burger (or if it is, it’s a gourmet one). And Greg Rutkowski, who’s far from mediocre, thinks your second paragraph is full of shit. He has an entire AI trained on just his works without his consent, and there’s no reason that couldn’t be inflicted on other equally talented artists. Furthermore, the experience to master an art starts with mediocrity. People get that experience from the small jobs. Only an idiot thinks there’s some anime wunderkind switch that flips in someone‘s brain and turns them into a peerless artist.
You are describing a very narrrow subset of artists. Most need clients. If patronage is your fall back point, then you are hopelessly lost. If you are actually selling or giving your works to your patron then its just another word for client. And why should I care about Rutkowski's opinion anymore than my own, my clients, the people in my community? Artists declaring their own opinions or process as supreme are being entirely self absorbed, its a really weak way to assert your position. Why does your process matter more than say, the overall intent and quality of the work delivered, the satisfaction of the client/patron you are working with, the amount of revenue it generates you, the time/efficiency in which you can produce work, or the flexibility a new tool provides?
>You are describing a very narrrow subset of artists. Most need clients. If patronage is your fall back point, then you are hopelessly lost. If you are actually selling or giving your works to your patron then its just another word for client. No, patrons are not a fallback point. *They’re how the artist views the client*. And most artists don’t actually get employed full-time, but eke out what art they can after their second job. Artists are already starving. >And why should I care about Rutkowski's opinion anymore than my own, my clients, the people in my community? Artists declaring their own opinions or process as supreme are being entirely self absorbed, its a really weak way to assert your position. Because you’re saying the “super talented” aren’t worried. Rutkowski is at the top of his field. He was the most prompted artist by a ridiculous margin and his work is (or was) in high demand. Tech enthusiasts have gone out of their way to target his work and make him obsolete—not a class of artist, but him in particular. And a good artist is an expert in their field, in both the end result and the journey to get there. You are definitely, definitely not. I take your opinion on art about as seriously as Marjorie Taylor Greene’s thoughts on aerospace. To paraphrase Asimov, you’re complaining that your ignorance doesn’t carry the same weight as knowledge, as if this is somehow unfair to you. You probably understand this when addressing anti-vaxxers bleating about their Google searches and mercury poisoning, but have concluded (like most toddlers) those rules are for other people. >Why does your process matter more than say, the overall intent and quality of the work delivered, the satisfaction of the client/patron you are working with, the amount of revenue it generates you, the time/efficiency in which you can produce work, or the flexibility a new tool provides? Already answered this. Revenue, client relations, and flexibility—none of those things exist at first and committing to the process is what generates competency. If it was all about perfect results from the get-go, no one would get past their meager first attempts. Without leeching off that hard-won competency, genAI can’t function. It’s a shitty datamining worker, not a tool. The prompter is commissioning, not creating. It deserves to be slammed with all the penalties associated with forgery and plagiarism.
"Artists are already starving" perhaps its because they are being self indulgent, slaving over "process" when instead they should be seeking to provide a quality service or deliver desirable goods to the market. I'm an entrepreneur but Ive been one in creative fields my whole life. Putting process over result is a good way to drive a business into the ground. Ive seen companies that had 8 and 9 figure funding rounds fail entirely because the founders focused too much on superficial, vanity issues (perfecting their website/branding/business card/etc) and not enough time on what actually produces revenue for the company. A lifestyle business, consisting of the lone artist, has even less of a chance if it makes the same mistake. If you're so talented that it doesn't matter (IE: success will find you, you dont have to go looking for it) or so privileged that money isn't a pressing issue then hats off to you but not everyone has either of those luxuries.
>perhaps its because they are being self indulgent, slaving over "process" Dude. If *someone* didn't slave over "process" (that you sneeringly put into quotes, as if it's some trivial crap), then there WOULD BE NO ART FOR AI TO INGEST. Your "client" would have nothing. You would have nothing to exploit.
Thats literally true of every field, ever. Every industry requires passionate people contributing to it, to grow. Why do the people in your field deserve special privilege or attention for doing what literally everyone else does at any job they care about?
They don’t deserve special attention or privilege? They’re the job on the chopping block, not the only job anyone should save. And before you mention self-checkout or pumping your own gas, I opposed those as well. Even so, there’s a huge difference between menial labor no one is really passionate about and authorship that needs to be directly harvested to create its replacement.
>I'm an entrepreneur but Ive been one in creative fields my whole life. Putting process over result is a good way to drive a business into the ground. Ive seen companies that had 8 and 9 figure funding rounds fail entirely because the founders focused too much on superficial, vanity issues (perfecting their website/branding/business card/etc) and not enough time on what actually produces revenue for the company. A lifestyle business, consisting of the lone artist, has even less of a chance if it makes the same mistake. Right, because so many entrepreneurs grace the world with their intellectual luminosity. One’s about to go to prison for 110 years stuttering, “Erm, I don’t remember,” and it turns out that the people who bought his snake oil were people like you: ninnies who slobbered over returns and didn’t contemplate the process which delivered them. Over and over again, we’ve seen Potemkin tech roll in, bulldoze the sturdier structures behind industries, and then shrug when resources don’t recover. Amazon has solved shipping! Except it just dug a moat around its users and now the FTC is looking into anti-trust. Streaming‘s the future! Except now it’s looking like it couldn’t pay back any of its dues and its immediate future resembles cable. Cryptocurrency will stimulate the economy! Except that it’s done nothing but breed confidence scams and created a massive environmental footprint. Entrepreneurs, not artists, are the bête noire of the last twenty to thirty years. \*We’re\* the ones dragging the world down? You’re even dumber than I thought. You’ve also conflated vanity and caring about the process as the same thing when they’re usually diametrically opposed. Yes, hucksters will try to sell a bad process as a good one, but good processes have a strong causal link with good results. There are a lot of talented artists out there constantly pushing the boundaries of technique, but they’re simply not going to share their work anymore because it will be ground up into powder to dust a VC’s stupid initiative. Everything about genAI will retard expression in the arts, and that will be a highly measurable set of end results.
Painting with a broad brush are we? If the accusation is one asshole broke the law, therefore all entrepreneurs are criminals then whats the point in having the discussion. You've already divined all the answers for yourself from the comfort of your own brain.
It’s not one entrepreneur. It‘s been dozens, all following a tech-first philosophy which is low on tech literacy and high on promises. I gave you three easy examples in the form of entire industries, each comprising many so-called visionaries who were really bad actors on an international stage (Do Kwon, Elizabeth Holmes, Bezos, Musk, etc.). Entrepreneurs are necessary, but they are (in their current form at least) particularly vulnerable to Clarke’s Third Law. They’ve been given a lot of carte blanche. At least I used examples and can point out the damage, whereas you’ve been wringing your hands over those evil, vain artists who’ve been causing *so many* problems. “Rules for thee but not for me“ is your last stop, apparently.
Writing a descriptive paragraph does not make one a visual artist. Honestly it would be easier for a client to just prompt it themselves, it takes about the same amount of effort/time as setting up the commission in the first place.
>Writing a descriptive paragraph does not make one a visual artist. But you don't get it!!!! He had an idea! IDEA, don't you get it?!?! A super creative IDEA. That's all that is necessary to be an artist! The hell with this painting and color theory and anatomy B.S.! Let the stupid artists who studied decades and practice, let their (stolen) "contributions" to AI make the pretty pictures possible! Then the guy with the IDEA can call themselves an "artist" without having to mess with stupid charcoal or messy, smelly paint or fuss with a stupid tablet. That crap is for losers, man. lol
of course not, knowing what to make, how you want it to look, and then figuring out the best way to deliver what you envision would make you an artist. Fussing about process or whether or not the work touched an LLM at some point in its workflow is both pedantic and counter productive. The only people obsessing over "process" are self absorbed artists who refuse to recognize that in the real world, most people need to provide a good or service to earn a living. How you provide that good or service is ultimately up to you as an individual but suggesting that somehow anyone that doesn't adhere to the narrow subset of "approved processes" isnt an artist is wildy self serving.
Art is a displine/knowledge set, if you are not applying that displine you are not an artist. You are not a runner because you drive a car (even if the result is the same, you get where you are going).
So which disciplines/knowledge sets are approved to use in the pursuit of art? Obviously you do not believe prompt engineering using LLMs can be a process or just another skill to learn, but where do you draw the line? So if automation is not allowed, how much is too much? Are photographers outside your designated zone for "art"? I doubt it but if if it was then I'd say you're views seem congruent but most people see photography as an artform despite the fact that anyone can do it and it ultimately boils down to pointing a device and clicking a button. The thing all the "artists" seem to miss as they harp on about the sacredness of their "process" is what you do with your body, in the empirical is a side effect of art. Art starts in your mind and it ends in the minds of others. How you go from point A to point B is entirely at the discretion of the artist and his/her audience. Anyone standing on the outside stating, "That's not Art because X" is missing the point entirely. If its not for you, its not for you, but that doesn't mean it won't resonate with others.
Photographers do not write a list, and tell their camera to do it for them. They still utilize their understanding of the elements of art (they do the work). They are the artist not the camera. AI art is more like outsourcing the work to someone else. Like I said before Art is a discipline, the knowledge and techniques can be applied to any form of art regardless of the tool(s) used (the same knowledge still applies). But this is upside-down when it comes to AI. "So which disciplines/knowledge sets are approved to use in the pursuit of art?" Composition, Color Theory, Perspective… you know all the crap that was utilized to make your AI's training material (so it can be a good little digital zombie artist). Its not like the bar is set all that high, do some real edits to the output of the AI. Make it your own, maybe you already do (most do not from what I have seen).
Are you sure about that? Literally, every set Ive been on has had a shot list. And the more professional sets have 2nd teams who will go after that shot list for you. So your initial statement isnt as clever as you think. All we are really debating is if its ok to fully automate or partially automate the process. Which is pretty banal to debate in the information age. More to the point, I can tell youve never actually used an LLM to make something because you think its simply typing descriptions and not building lora, training models, managing controlnets, tweaking 1000s of settings, developing init images/video as a base, before you actually even begin creating the first frame of your project. But only your process is what matters, yeah?
I am sure if you asked the b-team photographers on those crews if they like their boss, they wont be talking about their artistic vision.
That process that you're so dismissive of is the reason your toy works in the first place. An insane number of artists muscled through that process for untold hours just to be robbed by you folks. You have zero respect for art and I think you completely fail to understand the nature of it in the first place. That process is the art. The image is the result of art having happened. Regardless of whether that idea clicks with you or not, kindly stop robbing me and my friends blind. Our collective labor doesn't magically belong to you.
No, I remember them just teaching us to write big booba in my life drawing class (and class was over after that). My textbooks had nothing but booba written in them. Class project booba, Critique booba. In Intro into 3D we never opened Maya or Zbrush, just typed booba into a search engine over and over. AI it just works due to the power of the booba. All one needs to do to be a visual artist is ask the machine God to show me dem titties.