Any AI girlie to help with GOE MV?

[TheFrenchGuy 124]

10 minutes ago, lastpopicon said:

you are using computational power to achieve a result when you use Photoshop or other editing programs, from that perspective, generative AI is the same type of tool, it uses computational power to achieve a result.

Photoshop is just code on a nicely packed GUI, does math on the CPU and GPU by user input and you get a result, now, I'm not saying it's easy, but it's essentially what it is, same goes for every other editing software.

Let me ask you this, if you had a AI model that you knew for sure never stole art, and created art on its own, would you be ok with AI art? 

You're still missing the point. I know Photoshop is just code. But it requires the user to make choices on a minute level. Every brushstroke, adjustment layer, blend mode, filter... all of requires a conscious decision from the artist. The skill lies in vision, taste, and judgment. Photoshop is a tool that extends human intention, not one that replaces it. Every part of the resulting artwork is built from the agency of the artist using the tools at their disposal. 

It’s not just about whether the AI stole or not. Even if the dataset were entirely original and not derivative, the role of the human shifts from active creator to prompter. The AI takes all the decisions for you. That’s a fundamentally different dynamic than a human manipulating pixels directly. It’s about authorship, control, and intentionality. Tools like Photoshop enhance human craft. Generative AI, even if ethically trained, erases the humanity in art. 

Edited yesterday at 03:05 PM by TheFrenchGuy

[TheFrenchGuy 124]

(My previous post got duplicated ignore this message)

Edited yesterday at 03:07 PM by TheFrenchGuy

[lastpopicon 31,019]

14 minutes ago, TheFrenchGuy said:

You're still missing the point. I know Photoshop is just code. But it requires the user to make choices on a minute level. Every brushstroke, adjustment layer, blend mode, filter... all of requires a conscious decision from the artist. The skill lies in vision, taste, and judgment. Photoshop is a tool that extends human intention, not one that replaces it.

It’s not just about whether the AI stole or not. Even if the dataset were entirely original and not derivative, the role of the human shifts from active creator to prompter. That’s a fundamentally different dynamic than a human manipulating pixels directly. It’s about authorship, control, and intentionality. Tools like Photoshop enhance human craft. Generative AI, even if ethically trained, erases the humanity in art. 

I don't think I'm missing the point tbh, I know human input is important, I'm just arguing that at the end of the day artists are just interacting with code,  and there's far better ways to interact with that code, humans are really bad at it (we need shinny GUI's), machines tend to do much better, I guess I'm talking more about philosophical questions. 

And let's put a pin on it cause I have a dentist appointment in 30 minutes. lmao 

Edited yesterday at 03:15 PM by lastpopicon

[TheFrenchGuy 124]

27 minutes ago, lastpopicon said:

I don't think I'm missing the point tbh, I know human input is important, I'm just arguing that at the end of the day artists are just interacting with code,  and there's far better ways to interact with that code, humans are really bad at it (we need shinny GUI's), machines tend to do much better, I guess I'm talking more about philosophical questions. 

And let's put a pin on it cause I have a dentist appointment in 30 minutes. lmao 

Good luck at the dentist lol

I see what you mean about everything being code at the core, but I still think that art is made from the way the process unfolds. For me, the value comes from knowing a person lived something, felt something, and then tried to communicate it through their craft, subjectivity and all. Machines can generate beautiful things, sure, but they don’t experience. They have no creative take, no identity. And without that, I feel like the meaning of art collapses into aesthetics without substance, which is very in line with the times we live in. Algorithms and technology have made everything so fast and disposable that it feels like we don’t value substance anymore. For that reason I firmly believe that we cannot ever place AI art and real art on the same level. One is a shallow reflection of an idea, while the other carries so much subtext about the richness, nuance, and emotional weight of the human experience.

Edited yesterday at 03:40 PM by TheFrenchGuy

[lastpopicon 31,019]

1 hour ago, TheFrenchGuy said:

Good luck at the dentist lol

I see what you mean about everything being code at the core, but I still think that art is made from the way the process unfolds. For me, the value comes from knowing a person lived something, felt something, and then tried to communicate it through their craft, subjectivity and all. Machines can generate beautiful things, sure, but they don’t experience. They have no creative take, no identity. And without that, I feel like the meaning of art collapses into aesthetics without substance, which is very in line with the times we live in. Algorithms and technology have made everything so fast and disposable that it feels like we don’t value substance anymore. For that reason I firmly believe that we cannot ever place AI art and real art on the same level. One is a shallow reflection of an idea, while the other carries so much subtext about the richness, nuance, and emotional weight of the human experience.

Thank you lol It was just a check up, no needles today 

Let me just make clear I'm not trying to diminish art created by humans, we literally created everything there is to create, digital or handmade, hell, even the AI that creates "art" is made by humans, we are the sauce that makes everything magical  Hell, I could even talk about it's humans that make the CPU's where everything is calculated lol We are really awesome. 

I'm just fascinated with our path over the past 100 years, especially the computational advancements and how that changed and keeps changing our lives, hope we can all find answers to the challenges AI will present, because for better or worse, it's here to stay IMO.

Perhaps the solution for artists in the future is to also use AI, using it as an extension to boost their own artistic abilities, but I understand that even this might be a compromise many are not willing to make.

[TheFrenchGuy 124]

2 hours ago, lastpopicon said:

Thank you lol It was just a check up, no needles today 

Let me just make clear I'm not trying to diminish art created by humans, we literally created everything there is to create, digital or handmade, hell, even the AI that creates "art" is made by humans, we are the sauce that makes everything magical  Hell, I could even talk about it's humans that make the CPU's where everything is calculated lol We are really awesome. 

I'm just fascinated with our path over the past 100 years, especially the computational advancements and how that changed and keeps changing our lives, hope we can all find answers to the challenges AI will present, because for better or worse, it's here to stay IMO.

Perhaps the solution for artists in the future is to also use AI, using it as an extension to boost their own artistic abilities, but I understand that even this might be a compromise many are not willing to make.

 

The thing is, AI was not designed to be useful for artists. It was made to maximize efficiency and generate outputs quickly, which is why I say it sidesteps the creative process. To me it really comes down to what we want as a society. Do we want mass-produced, soulless content, or do we want to resist a capitalist system that prioritizes efficiency over humanity by supporting real artists instead of relying on the quick AI fix? That’s where I’m coming from. Minimizing the impact of AI simply because you’re not an artist is easy, but ignoring the argument entirely is just following the path set by a system that doesn’t value depth and substance. We risk losing the critical engagement and care that make our culture meaningful if we use it without taking a second to discuss the impact. So thank you for engaging in a respectful manner ! 

(i say you in the general sense, not talking about you specifically) 

Edited 23 hours ago by TheFrenchGuy