Raw LLM Responses

A Character Conceptual Designer's Voice: My English is not good, so what I write may be different from what I think, but I try my best. Some people think CG generators are like some new drawing tool that came along in the past. But think about it, when the AI can decide and complete all or most of the picture for you, while the human only has to check the problem at the end and complete it, who is the tool? Instead of people using tools to help them painting, it's instrumentalized people help another tool to make pictures. I have seen more and more people give up learning painting, more people do not choose to learn painting. To be honest, the study of painting is filled with unimaginable helplessness and hardship. Under the current situation, it will be more and more difficult for new painters to find the joy of painting in the ocean of generate pictures. If things don't change,there will be big problems ahead. The current artificial intelligence is pseudo-intelligence, without subjective consciousness and independent aesthetics with biological feelings. Even though some of the generated images now look good, the quality and style of the generated images are still completely dependent on the training set, and there is a great fear of contamination of the training set. At the same time, machine learning is completely different from human learning the art of painting. People learning painting art will be painting knowledge, reference pictures, skills...... And everything related to painting art is selected and refined through subjective consciousness and independent aesthetics with feeling ability. The formation of a unique artistic style is more complex and related to more things, even involving personality and other things that seem unrelated to painting. If it goes on like this, people will give up painting, new artists will find it difficult to grow up, and old artists will gradually lose interest in their art and leave painting as they grow older. However, the learning of painting art is not only by listening to the lecture can be understood, must bear hardships, with their own subjective consciousness, feeling ability and independent aesthetic and practical ability to learn. So in the long run this means that CG generators will interfere with the future development of human art and aesthetics, and destroy the soil of art. What's really scary is that when future problems start to arise, those of us who are aesthetically constrained and in the environment in this situation won't even realize it. How I wish it is a real artificial intelligence, even if it in a moment beyond all the masters from ancient to modern art, I will be the first to stand up and applaud him. Unfortunately, it is still a generator that relies entirely on training sets for picture quality and style. On the other hand: The core of painting art lies in conscious creation and expression。（If you disagree on this point, I sincerely suggest you buy 《Janson's History of Art》.） Since the introduction of CG generators, the art of CG painting has been completely invisible in any public domain. Others have no way of knowing whether or not a generator was used during the image's completion, and in what way. It is also impossible to determine whether the image is a "conscious creation" and "expression" of the owner. This makes it meaningless to speculate and understand the painter's intention, as well as to ponder and feel the painting process。 Even though it's an important part of the appreciation of painting。 Now, in the public domain of the Internet, artists can't even decide where their work is used. Because there are so many ways to get an image on the Internet, and it's so easy. And when the artists' work was thrown into the training set, they couldn't respond effectively. Even if explain that human learning is different from ML, no one will listen. Even if one day there will be a regulatory system, it will be ineffective and problems will inevitably occur. Because it was open source too early. It doesn't matter anymore.