Raw LLM Responses

@J-Specter-2 AI has to understand art or it wouldn't be capable of following a prompt. If someone makes art as a hobby and not professionally, then they have no reason to complain about others using AI to make art. It takes nothing away from them and simply enables others. If AI output is trash, then it's not capable of replacing 90% of jobs, but if you think that AI output is trash, then you've been looking at bad AI output. I have seen AMAZING works created with AI, which is why I know it is a threat to jobs, and I don't care. We can't hold back progress to ensure an industry stays afloat. That's like saying we shouldn't cure cancer because of all the people who would lose their jobs if cancer were cured with a single shot or pill. Besides, the industry won't disappear, it will just change. There will be less dependance on manual art labor and a greater focus on art taste. It won't matter if you can draw it yourself if you can prompt it properly, but if you can draw, it will be a plus. Being an artist who can also use AI effectively will be the ideal employee in the new paradigm. Yes, AI does make mistakes, like too many or too few fingers or toes. You know what that means? That a professional artist can get 95% of their work done in seconds with an AI prompt and then spend a little time fixing the errors with their own capabilities, while a non-artist will have to try to get the AI to fix it. AI is just as much a tool as any other automation, and the extent to which one chooses to apply it is relative. An artist can painstakingly create an entire work the traditional way and then decide they hate the background and have an AI swap it out instantly without having to do all the tedious labor of selecting the background manually to replace it. An artist, such as a mangaka, can even train an AI on their own work and style so that they can basically feed an AI with stick figure story boards and get the AI to do most of the work and then manually correct any errors, allowing them to produce work much more quickly in their own style. This would allow a mangaka to distill the workflow of them doing rough sketches and then having assistants fill in the details down to a mangaka simply feeding their rough sketches to an AI to polish things. Do those assistants lose their menial job? Yes, but this reduces the cost of production and improves speed. The assistant can also draw their own manga and use AI as their assistants too. If they don't have the creativity for that... well they are just going to have to figure it out, same as everyone else who loses their menial job to automation. Some might argue that an artist who lacks creativity and only possesses technical art capabilities that can assist a true creative by following directions isn't an artist at all, more like a human xerox machine. You also seem to think AI is all text prompt, there is image to image with text prompt guidance and image guidance, for example, drawing a character, drawing a stick figure pose, and telling the AI to adjust the character you drew into that pose. There's image to video that will allow artists to create a work traditionally and then animate it way more easily than they could before. There's image to 3d asset. There's 3d asset segmentors and auto riggers. Many TOOLS that are AI powered that allow artists to do work faster than ever before. You might not be a chef if you order a pizza in detail, but if you can create a recipe using your knowledge of how cooking works and what tastes good and a chef follows that recipe, then who cares if your hands aren't the ones that made that specific dish? Even a chef has sous chefs that take care of the prep of ingredients for a dish or that take care of the prep of parts of a dish or parts of a meal or even own a restaurant where they delegate all of the cooking to employees and just create the recipes. Those chefs are just menial laborers who assembled a recipe. Did it require skill to execute? Yes, but you are the true creative who invented the dish with your recipe, not the chefs who assembled it. If someone creates a prompt that directs everything that is to be in an image generated by an AI, then they were creative in imagining what they wanted and creative in their writing skill to express to the AI what their mental image was. It is a different way to get that image made, using one's words as their brush. Apparently, you don't think that any of that counts for anything. Apparently, you don't think that someone can know what makes great art or understand art theory if they didn't draw it with their own two hands. I disagree, and I would still consider that person an artist. It is a different sort of artist, but an artist none the less. As I said before, I don't care if someone has the title of "artist" if they work with AI, they could be called a creative director, such as the person at a game company who tells an artist what they want concept art of, or some other title. Although I do find it about as silly to quibble about the term "ai artist" as when people try to say you can't call something "cashew cheese" or "soy milk" because "cheese" and "milk" are dairy specific terms and "it might confuse someone" or as if they should be protected sacred terms. You clearly think there is some mystical magical property to humans. As I said, I do not share that view, so no amount of preaching about it is going to affect my opinion. AI doesn't create art from nothing, it was trained by humans on human work, and it is prompted by a human, that puts all kinds of humanity in it, even if it's not enough for you to acknowledge. You are trying to gatekeep what qualifies as art and who qualifies as an artist. That's fine, but I am afraid that you are just going to have to stay mad. AI isn't going anywhere, and it's only getting better and will be as accepted as photoshop is in the near future, especially considering that it's actively being added to photoshop itself. There were/are people who don't consider digital artists to be "real" artists because they don't have to deal with the same challenges as traditional physical media. There were/are people who don't consider digital photographers to be real photographers because they don't have to deal with the same challenges as those working with film, but most of those people have changed their minds or died off because time marches on and people accept the new things or get born with them as the norm. AI will be no different.