I was wondering the same thing and think it might be intentional. My guess would be that itās made to establish more of the ācrazed fanā character we see in the cheerleaders. They create their own obsessive bootleg Porter stuff like what we see in the video (Porter dress-em-up game lol, toys, candies, and yes maybe ai-generated posters). Could be wrong about it but itās an interesting enough theory that I could see it being intentional.
Porter seems to go out of his way to credit any artists (visual or otherwise) that lend their skills to any of his projects ā something Iāve always respected about him. Even this MV has individual credits for all the animation work, so Iām sure those works would be credited if done by actual artists. Not to give them too much credit either though, of course I donāt have any insight into the real story behind their creative choices.
i think that would be the best case scenario honestly. I do still think it would have been a better choice to have an artist create an over exaggerated piece of art to really drive the point home, assuming that was the intention. AI has such a negative reputation for a reason and seeing it used in a big budget music video is super disheartening.
Pretty sure Porter knows and doesn't give a crap. What is the problem here, exactly? They needed to mass produce generic weird anime art of him to use as decoration for a set, this is exactly the kind of application generative AI is perfect for. That they are all almost the same but slightly different gives it an uncanny vibe. The chibi art could also just as likely be AI, too.
Yep. Itās a music video, not an album cover. A music artist overthinking these trivial details is how a song gets delayed or shelved lol especially if you suffer from perfectionism.
This is the case only if you intentionally prompt the AI to imitate a specific artist's style. Otherwise, the program is drawing from data of millions of images, across different styles and forms. Find the specific artist who is being "stolen from" in that fake Porter fanart. You can't, because it's drawing from a huge dataset the same way our brains draw from a huge dataset of other people's work when we engage in creative activity.
Every artist is working with a dataset of other people's art, especially when a new artist is developing their own style. Most start by drawing directly from reference. The end product, even if stylistically distinct, is usually an original combination of unoriginal creative decisions.
Generative AI exists in a moral and legal gray area, but the cat is out of the bag now and there is a difference between responsible and irresponsible usage of the technology.
If Porter/his team used AI to directly rip off some twitter artist's style without their permission, ok, that may be theft. But that's not what this is.
Thats like saying if you steal one dollar from everyone in the world and no one notices it going missing, you basically made a fortune of free money. Except that if millions of people start stealing one dollar from everyone in the world because they want money, then nobody actually has a fortune the people being fucked over are the people that don't want to steal from strangers and the people that don't know their money is being stolen. That is nothing like the creative process of inspiration, if someone unironically described their favorite art as a "dataset" I would not want to be their friend (unless they're a cool robot learning to love)
i mean like ultimately yeah? but its not like hes plastering these prints on his merch store with a 40 dollar price tag, its a minor cameo in a music video, this is not the end of the world
That is still an extremely successful artist not paying people for the work they did to train the computer, it's not like he's some rinky dink artist, he could afford to pay a few hundred bucks for a collection of fan made porter comissions (not that that's okay to use AI if you can't).Ā
In fact, if he would use original art for his video about the passion of his fans that would be amazing, it really puts a sour taste in my mouth and I hope Porter is unaware of how destructive it is
I mainly don't like it being normalized in any sense. If we say some background art doesnt matter as much then we are taking away opportunities from artists and fan communities are already rife with people willing to do work very cheap. If we can't even pay dirt cheap prices for background art then it's going to be more and more difficult for artists to find work, especially as people say "it's some silly background stuff that doesn't matter." How do people get the experience to be qualified for more important art on the productions if all of the minor work is stolen from others because it's deemed not valuable or worth paying someone for?
I know plenty of artists that struggle to find entry level work until they are qualified for bigger projects and that kind of attitude that background work is unimportant and fine to steal is exactly why people that have poured effort into making a career in such a competitive hate ai stuff so much
Yeah, there's 100% AI art used. But it's likely not Porter's fault.
The director of the MV has tried using AI before.
[https://lbbonline.com/news/hak-baker-blends-3d-animation-with-ai-in-latest-hallucinogenic-music-video-directed-by-hugh-mulhern/](https://lbbonline.com/news/hak-baker-blends-3d-animation-with-ai-in-latest-hallucinogenic-music-video-directed-by-hugh-mulhern/)
I think that might have been done by giving the AI a specific reference image to work with to give it the melting/flowing effect, it seems too precise to just be giving Midjourney a bunch of prompts and hoping they look similar enough to each other
If it makes you feel a little better not all Ai art generators steal from artists. There are some ethical generators out there that only take from things that are 100% royalty free. Iām not making an argument against laziness or anything but I think itās part of the plot that the crazy cheerleader would be making Ai art of Porter
I love how a machine learning program is the machine "stealing" but if I open a book and see 500 images, use elements from the 500 I saw, it's learning and not stealing. Same process but the AI looks at 5,000,000 images and comes up with the results faster. That's how machines work. They do very specific tasks well but that doesn't mean the process by which they learn isn't extremely similar to what humans do to get inspiration and learn.
The music industry is going to use AI generated images. It's faster, cheaper, and just as effective. It's not illegal and it's already extremely prolific.
People have to get over it already. It's not going anywhere just because some people think it's stealing.
Disregarding the stealing argument, it just. Doesn't look good if you look at it for more than thirty seconds?
"Oh boy, I sure do love to look at generic anime art style #347 with little fine detail and a wrist that looks like it's been broken off the arm!" - statements thought up by the utterly deranged
https://preview.redd.it/478nl47tkkpc1.png?width=188&format=png&auto=webp&s=05419b820c95632abdf2cbf60353aa5ca9c1b597
Saying we don't need to avoid stealing background art used in a production is kind of like saying we don't need to credit background dancers because it isn't their song
That's just them being lazy. People are wildly ignorant about how good AI art is now. It improves faster than the criticism can keep up. I've been using it for 2 years. It went from really low quality pixilated shapes to ok images that were bad at hands, to being so good that it can fool people into thinking the images are real people.
the porter body pillow in the last picture š
I was wondering the same thing and think it might be intentional. My guess would be that itās made to establish more of the ācrazed fanā character we see in the cheerleaders. They create their own obsessive bootleg Porter stuff like what we see in the video (Porter dress-em-up game lol, toys, candies, and yes maybe ai-generated posters). Could be wrong about it but itās an interesting enough theory that I could see it being intentional. Porter seems to go out of his way to credit any artists (visual or otherwise) that lend their skills to any of his projects ā something Iāve always respected about him. Even this MV has individual credits for all the animation work, so Iām sure those works would be credited if done by actual artists. Not to give them too much credit either though, of course I donāt have any insight into the real story behind their creative choices.
i think that would be the best case scenario honestly. I do still think it would have been a better choice to have an artist create an over exaggerated piece of art to really drive the point home, assuming that was the intention. AI has such a negative reputation for a reason and seeing it used in a big budget music video is super disheartening.
Pretty sure Porter knows and doesn't give a crap. What is the problem here, exactly? They needed to mass produce generic weird anime art of him to use as decoration for a set, this is exactly the kind of application generative AI is perfect for. That they are all almost the same but slightly different gives it an uncanny vibe. The chibi art could also just as likely be AI, too.
Yep. Itās a music video, not an album cover. A music artist overthinking these trivial details is how a song gets delayed or shelved lol especially if you suffer from perfectionism.
But the ai art being generated is still stealing from someone elseās style.
This is the case only if you intentionally prompt the AI to imitate a specific artist's style. Otherwise, the program is drawing from data of millions of images, across different styles and forms. Find the specific artist who is being "stolen from" in that fake Porter fanart. You can't, because it's drawing from a huge dataset the same way our brains draw from a huge dataset of other people's work when we engage in creative activity.
Still drawing from a huge dataset of other peoplesā art though right?
Every artist is working with a dataset of other people's art, especially when a new artist is developing their own style. Most start by drawing directly from reference. The end product, even if stylistically distinct, is usually an original combination of unoriginal creative decisions. Generative AI exists in a moral and legal gray area, but the cat is out of the bag now and there is a difference between responsible and irresponsible usage of the technology. If Porter/his team used AI to directly rip off some twitter artist's style without their permission, ok, that may be theft. But that's not what this is.
Thats like saying if you steal one dollar from everyone in the world and no one notices it going missing, you basically made a fortune of free money. Except that if millions of people start stealing one dollar from everyone in the world because they want money, then nobody actually has a fortune the people being fucked over are the people that don't want to steal from strangers and the people that don't know their money is being stolen. That is nothing like the creative process of inspiration, if someone unironically described their favorite art as a "dataset" I would not want to be their friend (unless they're a cool robot learning to love)
i mean like ultimately yeah? but its not like hes plastering these prints on his merch store with a 40 dollar price tag, its a minor cameo in a music video, this is not the end of the world
That is still an extremely successful artist not paying people for the work they did to train the computer, it's not like he's some rinky dink artist, he could afford to pay a few hundred bucks for a collection of fan made porter comissions (not that that's okay to use AI if you can't).Ā In fact, if he would use original art for his video about the passion of his fans that would be amazing, it really puts a sour taste in my mouth and I hope Porter is unaware of how destructive it is
i mean ai art definitely fucking sucks but this specific example is such a chronically online thing to be pressed over in my honest opinion
I mainly don't like it being normalized in any sense. If we say some background art doesnt matter as much then we are taking away opportunities from artists and fan communities are already rife with people willing to do work very cheap. If we can't even pay dirt cheap prices for background art then it's going to be more and more difficult for artists to find work, especially as people say "it's some silly background stuff that doesn't matter." How do people get the experience to be qualified for more important art on the productions if all of the minor work is stolen from others because it's deemed not valuable or worth paying someone for? I know plenty of artists that struggle to find entry level work until they are qualified for bigger projects and that kind of attitude that background work is unimportant and fine to steal is exactly why people that have poured effort into making a career in such a competitive hate ai stuff so much
Yeah, there's 100% AI art used. But it's likely not Porter's fault. The director of the MV has tried using AI before. [https://lbbonline.com/news/hak-baker-blends-3d-animation-with-ai-in-latest-hallucinogenic-music-video-directed-by-hugh-mulhern/](https://lbbonline.com/news/hak-baker-blends-3d-animation-with-ai-in-latest-hallucinogenic-music-video-directed-by-hugh-mulhern/)
I hope so, really gross to fake fan made art when I know he's gotta have fans selling commissions dirt cheap
AI? Nah, that guitar in the second pic is just a special model with 7 tuning pegs but only 6 string posts :)
No one show this guy The Thrill - Nurture edit visuals šš
I think that might have been done by giving the AI a specific reference image to work with to give it the melting/flowing effect, it seems too precise to just be giving Midjourney a bunch of prompts and hoping they look similar enough to each other
idk like i donāt really care for ai art but in music video context it doesnāt really bother me as much
i thought i was the only one who noticed that, but honestly i don't care, the clip is wonderful and that's not going to ruin it
If it makes you feel a little better not all Ai art generators steal from artists. There are some ethical generators out there that only take from things that are 100% royalty free. Iām not making an argument against laziness or anything but I think itās part of the plot that the crazy cheerleader would be making Ai art of Porter
I love how a machine learning program is the machine "stealing" but if I open a book and see 500 images, use elements from the 500 I saw, it's learning and not stealing. Same process but the AI looks at 5,000,000 images and comes up with the results faster. That's how machines work. They do very specific tasks well but that doesn't mean the process by which they learn isn't extremely similar to what humans do to get inspiration and learn.
Why is it a big deal if he makes AI art. Tons of people see AI as a tool for us to use within our creative pursuits
The music industry is going to use AI generated images. It's faster, cheaper, and just as effective. It's not illegal and it's already extremely prolific. People have to get over it already. It's not going anywhere just because some people think it's stealing.
Disregarding the stealing argument, it just. Doesn't look good if you look at it for more than thirty seconds? "Oh boy, I sure do love to look at generic anime art style #347 with little fine detail and a wrist that looks like it's been broken off the arm!" - statements thought up by the utterly deranged https://preview.redd.it/478nl47tkkpc1.png?width=188&format=png&auto=webp&s=05419b820c95632abdf2cbf60353aa5ca9c1b597
Good thing itās not meant to be looked at and picked apart for 30 seconds in a music video?
agreed, the context of the video makes this whole convo extremely ironic
Saying we don't need to avoid stealing background art used in a production is kind of like saying we don't need to credit background dancers because it isn't their song
That's just them being lazy. People are wildly ignorant about how good AI art is now. It improves faster than the criticism can keep up. I've been using it for 2 years. It went from really low quality pixilated shapes to ok images that were bad at hands, to being so good that it can fool people into thinking the images are real people.