Thank you for your report!
We have received your report and it is currently under investigation by a forum moderator.
AI Art, Saturday Guardian
Welcome to the forum.
Here you can discuss all things art with like-minded artists, join regular painting challenges, ask questions, buy and sell art materials and much more.
Make sure you sign in or register to join the discussions.
Hang on Studio Wall
This is a Studio member-only feature!
Join our Studio membership and save your favourite Painters Online content, from gallery artwork to step-by-step guides, to your own online mood boards. Create your go-to place for inspiration and learning. Plus, members can also enjoy a range of exciting features including monthly art videos and a digital magazine library.
If you are already a Studio member, simply login to your account.
Not a Studio member? Why not try our free 30-day trial - no commitment, no credit card required
Message
Posted
An interesting and scary read. I would have made a few wrong choices. From an personal art point of view this doesn't affect me much, but the point made about commissioners of artworks opting for AI art rather than real art is very worrying indeed for artists starting their careers. For me, the interest in art is the 'doing' not always the result.
Here artificial intelligence is mimicking real artists. Would it do so in other areas? Yes. Not great. Look where the so called 'intelligence' of world leaders have brought us right now. Would AI imitate that? Spooky.
Posted
My alter ego has just given yours an uptick, Robert.
On a slight tangent, having watched a program in Rothko on Friday, I decided to mock up a pastel to share with friends for a laugh. It took me all of 10 minutes. But the interesting thing was how my phone camera recorded the image. I used very dark navy Murano pastel paper, almost black, as a visible background. No matter how I tweaked the camera settings, the best it could come up with was a deep royal blue, several shades lighter. The moral here, is that the camera often lies.
Posted
Call me cynical, but wow, reading this it sounds like I can create 'paintings' just by typing a few words on a keyboard. Certainly less effort than downloading a photograph and fiddling about with image manipulation software, and certainly not as messy as using a bristly stick to push some sticky stuff all over a piece of cloth - all that wiping of the bristly stick just because you want a different colour, Ugh!
Posted
I DON'T object to digital art - though can probably give that impression - I don't object to conceptual art (just to the term: all art is conceptual, or it wouldn't happen!). I do object, on behalf of young art students more than on mine, because I'm past caring, to manipulating others' copyright images. Thing is though that I have no desire at all to actually DO it: I like my bristly sticks and messy paint - it was that whole thing of unscrewing the tops of tubes, inspecting the paint, sniffing it too, learning about what different colours do, what better painters than I was (of which there were and still are many) thought about painting practice, getting into the theory and not neglecting to apply it, that got me going. Whereas playing with a pc or Ipad or tablet just leaves me thinking 'Oh: how........ clever. Is that it?' One of my best friends is a high-level software engineer, who loves his work - he's not an artist, but he's certainly a professional, and has a brain the size of a planet: at least when it's applied to maths and computer coding; so he's creative too, in a different way. I couldn't begin to do what he does, but then, I couldn't begin to want to, either.
Gimme paint - lots of lovely messy paint: oil, watercolour, acrylic, gouache: I admit that I could do without having to clean all the equipment away afterwards, but there's some pleasure to be obtained even from that, as you restore your brushes to their more or less pristine state, stow away your paint for next time, clean off the palette. It's not that any one approach is wrong, at all - but the digital route would be wholly wrong FOR ME; maybe something to play with, but that'd be my lot.
Posted
I don't object to it either, there are some marvellous dig artists, who paint from scratch. A bit like abstract art, where there are some who like to think they can produce it but it doesn't work like that - a few splatterings do not = abstract art. Similarly, digital art requires skill and vision, just as the more trad art does. Having said that, I also like the hands on approach, though the tidying up is another issue.
Posted
I'm a big admirer of digital art, with the proviso that it's made by people. Traditional methods also hold immense attraction.
But this thread is about AI. It's here, and, to a degree, still in its infancy. Who knows where it will lead? Digital authors, digital historians, digital doctors, digital pets, etc, etc, all produced by AI. The key word in this is ARTIFICIAL...not personal. In art, the personal is what makes the difference. AI could only replicate that by 'cloning' an individual person. Yuk!
The more I think about AI, the less I want to.
The only advantage to someone my age is that I'm unlikely to see the results of AI going full throttle. I worry about the youngsters. It may, of course, produce a WONDERFUL LIFE ENHANCING FUTURE. But I'm enough of a dinosaur to doubt that.