Will AI make artists obsolete?

[sekabead]

Also it would be cool as fuck to just like sync up your brain to a computer and have the computer create your thoughts

I've just remembered that's quite something Google want to do actually right? Putting chips in our brain....

Then they can collect and study our behaviour, pushing ads right into our brain so we'd buy things easier, and other companies decide to jump into the ship and then...... wow it's a story idea!

[bear1]

I doubt human artists will become ever fully obsolete. But I wouldn’t be surprised certain skills will be, such as coloring or background drawings/design. We are already on the way where you can create BGs with CGI and programs like clip studio are working on AI coloring methods.
However, I doubt AI will ever be able to do all (or even most) of the work. Unless we are talking about comics or art in the rage-comic style or such.

In other words, we as artist will nit become obsolete but our way of working may become easier

[erudenedure]

Even when/if an AI is able to create wholly individual art, it's not any different than the plethora of artists available today. Certain people and certain programs will have differing styles. Even when a program is designed to copy another person's style, people will still enjoy differing renditions. It's the same with AUs of popular fandoms or different takes on characters; people enjoy possibilities.

In theory, automation can take over a lot of jobs, which leaves swaths of people free to focus on their passions. (Which we'll need an economic safety net for these people, but putting that aside for now.) I'm excited for a potential future where creative people can focus on what they enjoy creating, or even just exploring, since that will bring an influx of media options for the population. I hope it happens in my time, because that'd be interesting to see how it evolves or how society changes because of it.

[GabiWolf]

Seeing as an AI hasn’t already replaced singers and music artist, We have nothing to worry about.
There is actually an AI that if fed popular styles of music will generate a whole new song, but we still have singers.

We love art because of the human element, the emotion, the expression. Computers can’t create that. This was actually a topic in my Philosophy of art class, which is where I found out about this music producing bot.

[IdiotWithPencil]

Ai can only create with references I.E it can only create what is already created
which is the basic for what finding a style entails.
No Ai can replace all artist since it would be like replacing picasso with leonardo
two styles two different audiences.

Now they may replace artist in the corporate world for a while until the corporations notice they are losing all their money cause people are tired of the "Bland" product the A.I would create I.E people get tired of the same style of product

but still that's a long time in the future

[machimaquiaveli]

I'm so happy to see most people here supports artist! <3 <3 <3 I mean, a machine can create amazing stuff but only based on other people's work, to have a machine with enough imagination to rival with a human is to go too far away in AI. I mean, can you picture a machine inventing Gaudi's style out of no-where?

Or Dali's?

[AVXP]

AI or any machine can only create CRAFT, not art.
Being assigned a task or job as in 'programmed' to do a function does not lead to art.
That leads to craft- the same way a machine can weave a basket or etch a pattern in metal.

Art is an expression of the human (creator/watcher/receiver's) condition, rendered through imagination.
The closest place is a commission, which is art for profit. [that's still (considered mostly) a craft]
A machine would not be creating art for profit, it would be creating art as a response to a command or prompt.

The AI would have to be expressing its own machine condition and use its imagination to express it.
THAT would be art(istic) to a MACHINE and NOT humans as we could not relate and humans would not consider it art.
It would be a crafted thing, done by a machine.
And it would be appreciated as artistically crafted, not art.

---

For those that got lost.
Machine art is when your printer crashes or has a problem and prints some garbled, almost-image that seems to use every color and character, but makes a big smear across the page. THAT is ART to a printer. It is using an image to express that something is wrong and any other thing that sees it, understands that.

We humans- do not relate to that printer in distress and consider that printout a problem that needs fixing.
That's why people who can't appreciate ART and STYLE only see pictures that 'don't look quite right'.
They are missing the message AND, more importantly, THE INTENT.

Remove the intent and remove the meaning, it's not art.
It's craft. Machines do that well already.

[gempompadour]

I doubt AI will make artists obsolete unless we can create true sentient AI that's human like. Then we'd be dealing with feeling/thinking beings that can create art (though would they even want to is another question entirely.)

An AI that's just super good and fast at creating models and solutions (usually mathematical) to problems is not something I see as being capable of replacing humanity's artists. But we'll see.

[LCT_m_a_d]

Sorry for the essay (cause I hate reading long posts online)

In my opinion as a technologist by profession and fineartist ... consider the following with a grain of salt.

Right now the art market (and consequently art culture) largely favors the supply pool of speed, quantity, and accessibility. 3 areas humans are grossly outmatched by technology...especially data driven AI. So artists who rely on productivity and metric driven strategy, which is probably the biggest pool of successful artists will likely be replaced by AI.

I believe that a small pool of currently successful artists who are driven by a slower output and reliance on human-human connection/collab as a brand will survive the cut, and quality/skill driven uncessucessful artist will find a new clearing in the marketplace as they will change what art fans and critics consider valuable.

In short,
It depends on the fanbase's ability decision to consume content based on values and not impulse

[user400]

I believe that AI will soon be able to create art that human's won't be able distinguish from man made art. Not because it understands human emotions or anything like that, but by simple trial and error.

Once it's good enough, humans will (falsely) project emotions and motivations to the art the AI made. And that's the point where some will claim AI has surpassed artists.

I don't think it's anything to worry about though. Someone still has to tell the AI what's good or bad. I believe that person then becomes the "AI artist", and the AI becomes just another tool for artists to express themselves with.

[Swamp]

I think AI will take a lot less jobs from artists, and redefine what the purpose of art is, less than the camera.

Also, the more procedural work my computer can do in making backgrounds and stuff, the more I can focus on telling my story.

[joannekwan]

[joannekwan]

Closed because of rez