AI Art is Dying. Here's why...

[Nancy OShea]

One YouTuber had this to say:  "Most AI 'artists' are in it for the wrong reasons."  

[oleschwander]

I get a little confused when he - and others - talk about 'art' in connection with AI. What he shows is not 'art'. 'Real' artists - with pen, paper and painting will never disappear no matter how much AI. But it will certainly make life miserable for many commercial photographers who do not adapt. AI as an assistive tool will never die and we have only seen the tip of the iceberg. In the next several years, the use of AI will be intensified within all branches of creative production: films, images, drawings, theatre, music - and not least computer games. In order to use AI as a visual language, however, it is necessary to be a kind of artist yourself. Few can, for example, create electronic music without possessing talent and musicianship. And AI will largely function as auxiliary tools for both 'free' artists and commercial artists. And the results will be even more exceptional. The only thing that can stop the development (but probably only for a period) is the legislation, which he is also aware of. But that seems unlikely given the complexity surrounding AI and training.

[Nancy OShea]

I don't think I'm alone when I say I'm experiencing "AI fatigue."  Most of the AI art on social media has a slick, synthetic sameness to it that's unmistakably AI.  #TrumpTradingCards.  

For me, the Hollywood actors strike was an AI eye opener.   A long time friend who is an animated voice over actress in a hit series told me AI posed an existential threat to her profession and future earnings.  I asked her why? 

She said studios previously paid actors for each episode. An 18 episode series could mean 3-4 months of studio work.  Then they cut her pay by 70% and used her 3 day performance to train AI to complete the rest of the project.  What's worse, her prior work could be used & re-used into perpetuity, without pay. 

It's unsettling to think that one's 3 day performance for one series can be imitated by AI and used to create countless new series & episodes long after the human performer has died.

[daniellei4510]

Same for extras paid to hang out in the background of movie and TV scenes. I believe this was also part of the actor strike. Studios were using AI to recognize and store faces of those actors with the intent of using them over and over again without having to hire extras going forward.

AI, CGI,  and movie magic in general can and is used in ethical circumstances (the crowd scenes in Bohemian Rhapsody were actully created from just a small number of groups of extras and then copied and pasted over and over to fill the stadium. But using AI in the example you mentioned, or to take the place of extras henceforth is just plain wrong.

[Nancy OShea]

If you remember Gladiator, ALL the extras were CGI.  I didn't like the movie for that reason. But I liked the soundtrack.

[Abambo]

Your definition of art is limited. Taking your definition and exaggerating a bit more, I came to the conclusion that the real art involves cave painting only. This doesn't work.

[Abambo]

AI is there and will stay there. It will evolve as all technology does. The generative AI is just a thinny piece of the software application, and that will stay too.