That’s a hell-to-the-no from me. You already went into the ethical reasons (minus the enormous carbon footprint of the generators), so no reason reiterating that here. Though an additional note should be made about bias. Image and text generators largely rely on and reinforce race, class, nationalistic, and gender biases.
As to artists using it, sure, I suppose they can. But, honestly, why? If your photo isn’t wide enough, next time use a wide angle. And if you don’t know what might be in a wider version of your painting, well, get out the paint and paint it. Explore. Having the machine do it, won’t get you inside the work. I read an article by a writer who uses AI to generate scenic detail they don’t care to write about. But all that is process. Scenic detail — or lack thereof — speaks to a book’s point of view. What’s mentioned or not matters. And just filling a page with unintentional words is garbage.
There’s a passage in “We” by Zamayatin that describe’s a future “utopia” where people can compose several symphonies at a touch of a button. But symphonies hold no value for these people, who live under a surveillance state. Nor does love. This book was written in the 1930s, but predicts instant AI creation and the values of a society that uses it.
It’s not going back in the bottle. But I also don’t have to touch it. And I won’t.
Excellent post. Perhaps AI is like a gun -- you can kill someone, or you can save someone, or you can kill a lot of people for no reason. It's not going away, that's for sure. So we'll just have to learn how to live with it.
Hi Jeffery! You gave me my first interview on F & B and I am so happy to re-discover you! Life took hold for all of us.
"Personally, I think AI and artists can coexist, but it has to be an ongoing conversation rather than a one-off transaction—and I don’t think it can be sustained if it’s rooted in greed, laziness, or outright theft." -
I agree and, like with most things that require work and accountability, I wonder. I also agree with Annie Leibovitz. This will hurt new artists and it's obviously a huge point of discussion with new actors in the entertainment industry.
I find that I am really too busy getting out and taking photographs, then editing them to learn how to even use AI tools, although I do use adobe editing tools including noise reduction and I like the edits, so I am happy to use this on my own work. I really am not interested in the seemingly dull world of asking a computer to create an image for me. I like the wind in my hair, the rain in my face, the birdsong and sounds of the sea in my ears,these are what making photographs mean to me. I will remain and embrace being happily too old to try his new tech! Photography helps me see a richness in the natural world that I would miss if I didn’t slow down to take the photos, which once seen can’t be unseen. Thank you for a thought provoking post as always.
Using these tools to produce an end product seems lazy to me. There's no real skill involved in writing a prompt, since it's the iterative nature of the prompt that gets a desired output. Fine tuning words is not the same as fine tuning artistic skill.
That’s a hell-to-the-no from me. You already went into the ethical reasons (minus the enormous carbon footprint of the generators), so no reason reiterating that here. Though an additional note should be made about bias. Image and text generators largely rely on and reinforce race, class, nationalistic, and gender biases.
As to artists using it, sure, I suppose they can. But, honestly, why? If your photo isn’t wide enough, next time use a wide angle. And if you don’t know what might be in a wider version of your painting, well, get out the paint and paint it. Explore. Having the machine do it, won’t get you inside the work. I read an article by a writer who uses AI to generate scenic detail they don’t care to write about. But all that is process. Scenic detail — or lack thereof — speaks to a book’s point of view. What’s mentioned or not matters. And just filling a page with unintentional words is garbage.
There’s a passage in “We” by Zamayatin that describe’s a future “utopia” where people can compose several symphonies at a touch of a button. But symphonies hold no value for these people, who live under a surveillance state. Nor does love. This book was written in the 1930s, but predicts instant AI creation and the values of a society that uses it.
It’s not going back in the bottle. But I also don’t have to touch it. And I won’t.
Excellent post. Perhaps AI is like a gun -- you can kill someone, or you can save someone, or you can kill a lot of people for no reason. It's not going away, that's for sure. So we'll just have to learn how to live with it.
Hi Jeffery! You gave me my first interview on F & B and I am so happy to re-discover you! Life took hold for all of us.
"Personally, I think AI and artists can coexist, but it has to be an ongoing conversation rather than a one-off transaction—and I don’t think it can be sustained if it’s rooted in greed, laziness, or outright theft." -
I agree and, like with most things that require work and accountability, I wonder. I also agree with Annie Leibovitz. This will hurt new artists and it's obviously a huge point of discussion with new actors in the entertainment industry.
Great thought provoking article!
Take care, deb
I find that I am really too busy getting out and taking photographs, then editing them to learn how to even use AI tools, although I do use adobe editing tools including noise reduction and I like the edits, so I am happy to use this on my own work. I really am not interested in the seemingly dull world of asking a computer to create an image for me. I like the wind in my hair, the rain in my face, the birdsong and sounds of the sea in my ears,these are what making photographs mean to me. I will remain and embrace being happily too old to try his new tech! Photography helps me see a richness in the natural world that I would miss if I didn’t slow down to take the photos, which once seen can’t be unseen. Thank you for a thought provoking post as always.
I've played with MidJourney for a few minutes.
It's boring.
Using these tools to produce an end product seems lazy to me. There's no real skill involved in writing a prompt, since it's the iterative nature of the prompt that gets a desired output. Fine tuning words is not the same as fine tuning artistic skill.
+1 on the ethical reasons.