Question for artists: do you use AI as a tool?

[Taw Tu'lki]

For example, I use AI as an auxiliary object. Most often, I even copy what the AI generated, trying to copy only the body, torso and legs, well, and elbows, but I do everything else myself. At the same time, trying to do something myself, I sometimes use them as an auxiliary object in order, for example, to correctly position light and shadow. In general, I am a bad artist, I draw poorly, even tutorials do not always help. Therefore, sometimes I look for an alternative.

 

 

[MFG38]

Nope.

[Mr. Freeze]

mfw we're due for ANOTHER ai shitflinging thread 

 

[mrthejoshmon]

I tried it exactly once, wanted a rainstorm against a distinctly alien sky for a background piece of a render I was making (I was going to DOF it out) and the absolute unusable garbage it made was worthless.

 

AI just has too many oddities and bizarre malfunctions to be useful to me, even when drawing. Genuinely, what can AI produce that you can't find better elsewhere easier?

[Adamantium]

No.

[Panzermann11]

I'll put my 2 cents: I'm also not good at drawing, but I'd rather get a virus on my computer than try out some tech that's churning out generated images through a few lines of text and causing the internet to be infested with these images, plus stealing from images and other artists all around the internet and eats lots of power like popcorn for its shit as well.

 

That said, much as I dislike this kind of tech being called A.I. (it's not even close to how I pictured A.I. as a young teen, i.e. sentient machines), I'm actually interested seeing it being used as a tool for improvements, such as upsampling low-quality audio and upscaling FMVs and textures for older games.

Edited 1 hour ago by Panzermann11

[Naarok0fkor]

I started to use AI a few years ago. I never use it raw. I always rework things a lot by hand. Nightcafe's one of the rare few web sites I'm registered to. It's a sad thing to say that they keep changing things too often and not necessarily for the best. The new Flux AI generator is no match for Stable Diffusion. AI still is quite an interesting tool to work with. I'm about to have to upgrade my computer to get AI art generators to work offline. Maybe get to work on mapping for more modern games than good ol'Doom...

[esselfortium]

No. I enjoy the process of creating something myself, I have no interest in giving that up.

[Mr. Freeze]

To actually add to the thread: no. I can't make it work for my art, music or writing. The results simply aren't good enough, unless you need programmer art that you'll eventually replace anyway. 

[Edward850]

There's nothing I trust less in a creative process than a computer. I'd sooner turn to a 3 year old.

[Lollie]

I can say I've used forms of machine learning AI that aren't generative. Upscaling applications like Topaz Gigapixel have been invaluable for making low-resolution assets halfway usable, and iZotope RX's "Dialogue Isolate" and "Music Rebalance" tools are godsends for aiding in audio clean-up and music editing.

 

When it comes to generative AI however, no. Even in the case you describe, I've gotten far more useful and precise reference material from posing doll software, scrap geometry in Blender (literally, mashing cubes and cylinders together to figure out environments or ground shadows), even taking my own photo references with my phone. I do believe that you shouldn't have to strive to be a wizard in every part of art - it should be encouraged to use tools that help you produce better work. But at the same time, being bad at something is a natural part of learning how to be good at something. Embrace that, and don't be afraid to make bad art.

Edited Tuesday at 10:36 AM by Lollie

[Taw Tu'lki]

5 minutes ago, Lollie said:

I can say I've used forms of machine learning AI that aren't generative. Upscaling applications like Topaz Gigapixel have been invaluable for making low-resolution assets halfway usable, and iZotope RX's "Dialogue Isolate" and "Music Rebalance" tools are godsends for aiding in audio clean-up and music editing.

 

When it comes to generative AI however, no. Even in the case you describe, I've gotten far more useful and precise reference material from posing doll software, scrap geometry in Blender (literally, mashing cubes and cylinders together to figure out environments or ground shadows), even taking my own photo references with my phone. I do believe that you shouldn't have to strive to be a wizard in every part of art - it should be encouraged to use tools that help you produce better work. But at the same time, being bad at something is a natural part of learning how to be good at something. Embrace that, and don't be afraid to make bad art.

Thanks for advice.

In general, I may someday plan not to use AI as an auxiliary tool, and not to use it in general, especially considering that every time I converted my art into a neural network drawing, it always turned out crooked. So far, I am not professional enough to draw myself. Basically, I do redraw or even trace. 

[QuaketallicA]

Didn't I see another a.i. thread just like this last week?

[Taw Tu'lki]

12 minutes ago, QuaketallicA said:

Didn't I see another a.i. thread just like this last week?

Then I apologize in advance if I created it. I was banned, and I didn't know that while I was banned, a topic about the AI was already created. I won't create any more topics in Everything Else.

[QuaketallicA]

11 minutes ago, Taw Tu'lki said:

Then I apologize in advance if I created it. I was banned, and I didn't know that while I was banned, a topic about the AI was already created. I won't create any more topics in Everything Else.

 

It's chill man, don't lose sweat over it! It's understandable. It's a topic that has everyone on edge nowadays, with its possibilities to reshape society. Everyone's got a voice on it, which is why it's popular, but I think a lot of regulars have already seen all there is to be said on the issue, so it's a bit old news. Don't worry, this thread has not come anywhere near flame war territory.

[nv4xi2a]

Since neural nets are just a tool i prefer to use them in a heavily edited form. Its strange artifacts and misconceptions of generated content, overall artifical nature are completely unique. I like to generate snippets of music and break them down into different tracks to use for further sound design. In terms of visual art there's also limitless potential for experimentation (e. g. black midi's album covers done by David Rudnick). A very interesting thing to play around with to achieve psychedelic/surreal imagery or soundscapes.

[Michael63]

6 hours ago, Taw Tu'lki said:

In general, I am a bad artist, I draw poorly, even tutorials do not always help. Therefore, sometimes I look for an alternative.

AI is NOT an alternative of creating process. Even if you have a good example of a picture generated by AI, it is NOT YOURS.

 

And what about light, shadows and so on, I think it's better to use real photos as an example.

 

[YeOldeFellerNoob]

If you count porn as a tool, then hell yeah I do.

[Amaruq Wulfe]

Nope.

[JackDBS]

If I had to choose between using AI and death, I’d choose death any day.

[Scuba Steve]

Yes... but I know how the tools works, what they're capable of and the legality of scraping others work for training purposes. When I tried to finish up the remaining work on hidfan's Doom neural upscale project, I used AI to generate images, but it took a lot of additional work to prepare the file using their recorded steps. I've occasionally used AI tools to extend artwork or fill in missing areas... but that's never the final step and it always requires a skillful eye to blend it seamlessly into the original art.

 

I also know that AI is essentially stealing the collective work of others, so I never use it in commercial work. I think there are legitimate uses for generative AI as a limited tool to assist artists with repetitive and dull tasks, but the use of AI to supplant real artists is definitely a problem and anyone who thinks they're an artist because they know how to 'write good prompts' is delusional.

 

Edit: It's painfully obvious that the Tivauri album art was AI generated. The wad doesn't have a title screen, so I generated a stupid image based on the word 'Tivauri' and it looked kinda neat so I stuck it there. I'd never claim I made it.

Edited Tuesday at 02:25 PM by Scuba Steve

[Doom_Dude]

Also yes here, but rarely. The novelty of it kinda wore off.

 

I've made a few titlepics using wombo dream back when it mostly generated abstract art.

 

[Helm]

No I do not and do not respect any artist that does regardless of the quality of the end result as they're normalizing use of technology that is putting people out of work at a dramatic pace and paving the way for an even more terrible enshitification of culture on all fronts. Whatever gaps in your skillset you think you're paving over by having the plagiarism machine help you with your blank page, you will yourself regret relying on them once you realize that the only way to feel even a little bit of that feeling of freedom when you do art is to push yourself beyond what you thought you were capable of achieving. The struggle of learning is the crucial part of the dialectic of creativity. That is also what is inspirational in your artwork and other human beings will resonate with your struggle and your overcoming when they see the beauty you created out of your imagination. Manufactured beauty without humanity is the most grotesque thing in the world and I've already seen how quickly sensitive humans acclimate to picking apart this terrifying slop from the hand-made thing, it triggers a visceral reaction of disgust to most. To others a deadened laughter, like the 'oh well' as a society crumbles.

Do you want people to feel disgust when they see your manufactured pretty? Or do you want to hide your traces so meticulously so they may only wonder if it's true when they see your shit? 

Not every technological invention gets widely adopted, progress is not linear, culture is elastic and resistant and just because we've gotten to this low point doesn't mean the world will indefinitely accept lower and lower standards. The job of the artist is to self-express (1) and inspire (2). The self-expression bar is not low, but you can make the argument that you're expressing yourself with AI and nobody can stop you in that solipsism. But what are you inspiring by using AI?

If you're serious about art you'll understand what I'm talking about sooner or later.

Edited Tuesday at 04:07 PM by Helm

[Loud Silence]

Using AI makes you AItist, not artist. :D I'm neither, but i appreciate nice pictures if they are not made with AI.

[GibFrag]

It looks like shAIt. 

[Xim]

I don't hate AI but I don't think it should be considered seriously as a tool. You're better off without it. If you do use it don't completely rely on it because anything it makes is going to need a lot of fixing.

[Fonze]

Alternate questions for mappers: do you use the curve linedef tool? What point does something cease to be a tool? Should we go back to not being able to see our maps in 3d viewer mode? Are prefabs not okay? Do ai tools still require human input? How much of the creative process does the ai circumvent?

[DiavoJinx]

6 hours ago, esselfortium said:

No. I enjoy the process of creating something myself, I have no interest in giving that up.

100% this!

Also, I pride myself on creating things myself... my own flaws included.

[DiavoJinx]

7 minutes ago, Fonze said:

Alternate questions for mappers: do you use the curve linedef tool? What point does something cease to be a tool? Should we go back to not being able to see our maps in 3d viewer mode? Are prefabs not okay? Do ai tools still require human input? How much of the creative process does the ai circumvent?

Good questions, actually.

 

I do not. I also do not use the auto-stairs tool, or auto-adjust anything tools. =)

[Lizardcommando]

Aside from messing around with that Craiyon thing for my own amusement, no I don't use AI as a tool for my own projects.