E
Euphoric Elephant
guest
Suppose someone has top-notch prompt engineering skills when working with generative artificial intelligence so much that the final rendered output rivals, other creative persons, should their artistry be questioned?
I'm a writer, not an artist, and I spent 5 hours on MidJourney today, the first two hours blew me away but by the fifth hour, I reached the barriers of this tech very quickly, it's very limited and soulless indeed, the attraction was lost after 5 hours, the art felt "soulless" and the same thing over and over, definitely no human invention.
Only a fool would buy any AI art. Let them throw away their money.
What's wrong with replacing the creative workflow? If the result is the same or better then it's a win-win, creativity should be about taking what's in your mind and making it tangible, making that process easier should be the goal, right?
Making the process easier means less effort which equals less meaning to your artwork. That is what bothers most artists right now with how low effort and how easily amazed people are by copied art that the original artist isn't even credited with.
What's wrong with replacing the creative workflow? If the result is the same or better then it's a win-win, creativity should be about taking what's in your mind and making it tangible, making that process easier should be the goal, right?
Stable Diffusion doesn't produce art without creativity. If you don't provide the creativity, it just steals from other artists.
What's wrong with replacing the creative workflow? If the result is the same or better then it's a win-win, creativity should be about taking what's in your mind and making it tangible, making that process easier should be the goal, right?
Only a fool would buy any AI art. Let them throw away their money.
Painters said the same thing about photography. It took a while for acceptance but it came.