It honestly depends. I am a digital artist, I make 3D sculpts, drawings, and pixel art. The past week I have messed around with stable diffusion to get specific poses generated for potential...
It honestly depends. I am a digital artist, I make 3D sculpts, drawings, and pixel art. The past week I have messed around with stable diffusion to get specific poses generated for potential sculpts - and it has been a great success. To quickly be able to visualize what I specifically attempt to emulate has been a massive time saver.
To add onto that: The hostile Pinterest flooding of Google Images has had a horrible effect on finding specific search queries - not to mention the quality of web search these days in itself.
Using the images generated for reference is in my opinion valid. It's in essence the same as using a picturebook, or perhaps your favorite screenshots from a cirque du soleil performance, to create something new.
Prompting does take some effort to get exactly right, and all 'good' AI 'art' is heavily edited in post, which does take knowledge and skill. Appeal remains subjective. See it more as collage art than traditional.
Where I draw the line is the masses who like to go 'I press a button, now I'm an artist'. Putting an image into a filter takes no skill, and is little better than messing around with the liquefy filter in Photoshop.
There are plenty of people who love taking shortcuts: anyone can emulate Pollock's or Mondriaan's techniques, but most of them won't be able to tell you why they have value and their copies do not.
Sadly, corporate does not care. I would advice any artist or writer to have a look at AI and get an understanding of its pros and cons, and make it a part of their workflow rather than be staunchly opposed. Stay ahead of the curve.
It honestly depends. I am a digital artist, I make 3D sculpts, drawings, and pixel art. The past week I have messed around with stable diffusion to get specific poses generated for potential sculpts - and it has been a great success. To quickly be able to visualize what I specifically attempt to emulate has been a massive time saver.
To add onto that: The hostile Pinterest flooding of Google Images has had a horrible effect on finding specific search queries - not to mention the quality of web search these days in itself.
Using the images generated for reference is in my opinion valid. It's in essence the same as using a picturebook, or perhaps your favorite screenshots from a cirque du soleil performance, to create something new.
Prompting does take some effort to get exactly right, and all 'good' AI 'art' is heavily edited in post, which does take knowledge and skill. Appeal remains subjective. See it more as collage art than traditional.
Where I draw the line is the masses who like to go 'I press a button, now I'm an artist'. Putting an image into a filter takes no skill, and is little better than messing around with the liquefy filter in Photoshop.
There are plenty of people who love taking shortcuts: anyone can emulate Pollock's or Mondriaan's techniques, but most of them won't be able to tell you why they have value and their copies do not.
Sadly, corporate does not care. I would advice any artist or writer to have a look at AI and get an understanding of its pros and cons, and make it a part of their workflow rather than be staunchly opposed. Stay ahead of the curve.