Toon Link

@skobkin But I understand why artists are angry. On top of the indignity of having their work scraped and dismantled by others for profit, without their permission, David's situation is a very frustrating and tragic one that is extremely widespread, and we already have cases where people are being granted $2m contracts for their work, only to have it ripped away again, because the legitimacy of what they've offered is called into question. That's bad, and that's a real concern, I think.

@skobkin Yeah, there is indeed a panic that is understandable but I don't find realistic. It would have been in the early days, when people were literally losing their jobs as their bosses replaced them with AI, and no one knew where it would lead. But the hype is starting to settle, and there is an overall backlash that's opening up, and commercial clients are seeing the reality of the marketability of their choices. We'll find our niches, as we always have.

(Second post incoming.)

@skobkin Yeah, in all truth, I don't care if people want to use AI for their stuff. I understand the dopamine spike of visually seeing your idea, and I think people creating images for their own use is relatively harmless.

I don't think it will destroy the art industry. I think people who want to make money on AI will fill the recesses of Fiverr, and the rest of us will thrive elsewhere.

The problem is mostly in the commercial field, and artists dealing with having to defend their reputation.

@skobkin Here's an unfinished painting I did, where the table and dishware were done in Blender. I built the models, I rigged the lighting, I tweaked the arrangement to fit a mistake I made in the characters' perspective, in a way my client preferred. It sticks out like a sore thumb, at this stage. I could run it into AI so that the models are integrated smoothly with the hand-laid brush strokes, but I won't. I would learn nothing, and it would destroy the legitimacy of the rest of the painting.

@skobkin (Adding in, because my character limit is very small and I didn't feel satisfied with the promptness of my response, because your specific question deserved more attention: I know about photo-bashing, and I know about using models as an base to paint over. David has a video where he teaches people to do exactly that, where he explains the basics of Blender and shows people how to build a setting and props to paint over. The difference is that he does it all himself.)

@skobkin @radioclash Well, no. I'd rather spend the effort making something that's actually mine. It gives me no joy to have a machine output the artwork for me. And then I have an image that isn't any different from the rest of the machine-made stuff.

I'm actually not worried about my livelihood, because people see value in my work. What I worry about are people losing contracts because they have to prove that they actually made it. Clients won't work with AI because it's uncopyrightable.

@skobkin @radioclash You know, I see that being said all the time: that art is an ivory tower guarded by Elites from the public who are incapable of spending hours of blood and sweat on making art... but that making AI output takes hours of blood and sweat which should be respected. It doesn't mesh.

It just sounds to me like an ad hoc justification. It's easier to stand tall on the backs of others and dump the fast-fashion of art onto the landscape when it's spun as an act of defiance.

@skobkin @radioclash This is what happens when people see art as a product to be consumed and not something human with a piece of the artist's soul put into every brush stroke.

I can buy a soulless $2 press-formed plate from a Chinese factory at Walmart and chuck it in the trash when it serves its purpose, but I'd much rather buy a hand-thrown piece where I can see the artist's fingerprints in the stoneware and talk to him about the nature of his glazes, and then pass it on as an heirloom.

@davidrevoy You're welcome. Good luck, mang! I definitely sympathize with your struggles, here. I'm eager to watch your journey continue.

@davidrevoy Obviously I'm not going to make demands. 😆 And I will support you in any decisions you make. I like your art because it comes from you, not because it looks a certain way (and definitely take some time off!)

But I think it's more important to live authentically, than to worry about if other people think you're "doing it right". I know that's different when you're worried about a career, but industry peeps have a different perspective from randos who might just want to shitstir.

@davidrevoy I don't think changing the style would change anything. I honestly don't think your style looks like AI (or at least not the AI I've seen), and you might end up chasing dragons for something that won't stop the accusations anyway.

It's just... so strange. I think that, since those kind of places are so full of AI, people are extra vigilant. It stops being a reality check and starts being a defense against "falling for it", to the point that people want to see AI that isn't there.

@davidrevoy Man... You know, the really, really bizarre ones to me aren't the ones that, like, accuse you of using AI, despite you having literal decades of documentation and video proof of your hand.

It's the ones that accuse you of deliberately using an AI style, as if you're trying to trick them into thinking it's AI?

I wonder if some people just genuinely can't tell the difference between corporatized AI "style" and a soft, stylized cartoon with warm colors and a painterly texture.

I thing a big part of my difficulties is that I haven't found my path yet. I know I want to illustrate, but I haven't found the story I want to tell. The emotions, the textures, how realistic or cartoony.

I went back to my roots for a bit and scribbled this out in about a minute. And for all its flaws, it feels more like a kitty than all the other kitties I've done.

It feels a bit generic disney, though, and I don't want to do generic disney critters. But maybe I'm chasing the wrong tail.