I feel like AI art will become so saturated that we’ll start turning to teenagers on deviant art to do $5 commissions
I don’t understand the odd jump to teenagers on Deviantart. You sound like you have an axe to grind.
I don’t know why you attribute to the deviantart community the status of teenagers, and I also don’t know why you think that there aren’t talented and seasoned artists all over the world making beautiful expressions in a diverse spectrum of media.
Are you bitter about something? I don’t like AI art whatsoever and I don’t think it deserves to be called art. It’s sewage. I also think that individuals who like that crap distinguish themselves as unsophisticated and dumb. I think most people with taste feel this way. So what’s got you worried?
I’m not bitter, just wondering if we’ll start seeing video games with “made with real art! made with real voice acting!” as selling points as well as the “losers” making lots of money and selling art becomes a bigger internet business venture.
OK I hear ya. I think like anything, a low-quality, low-effort, low-cost product will appeal to a certain demographic, and there will be no shortage of bottom-feeders who will peddle it for a buck.
Probably no. I don’t like art because a human made it, I like it because it looks / sounds / feels good. I presume most other consumers feel the same way generally.
I don’t think so. We are already at the point where people don’t truly value the time artists spend creating their art. Artists and artist adjacent people will put additional value on human made art but they likely already highly value human made art.
I’m no expert, but don’t think so. It’s mostly non-artists who flock to stable diffusion and the likes, so it doesn’t affect the number of artists or the offer of man-made art. The demand wouldn’t really increase either. There won’t be more people who need art, and even if a significant amount prefer human-made art, the predencr of some people satisfied with AI means a decrease of demand.
It’s certainly feasible that, as with other technology, it starts out controversial but then becomes mundane and overdone. It’s not exactly the same as how people have started collecting records again, but records might be a decent metaphor for it.
But, no guarantees. Not every piece of disruptive technology ultimately catches on. (Smellovision, for example.)
I’d say we’ve reached the point of AI art becoming mundane as of this moment. Most people don’t really care anymore about AI art, and many actively avoid it. It doesn’t have that same “Wow!”-factor it had the first couple of months when it was becoming “good”.
No, we are still years off from it being mundane.
In order for it to be mundane, people need to stop caring about it. But it’s still a hotbed issue, complex and full of nuance. Nobody agrees whether it’s good or bad. The reality is probably somewhere in between.
Mundane doesn’t just mean commonplace, it needs to be non-controversial. Like how rock and roll music was controversial even through the 1960s and 1970s, but (as a whole) isn’t now.
I think for many purposes, regular people just like cool art. We’ve very much become accustomed to a near overwhelming tide of reasonable quality, but ultimately transient media.
‘Content’ has a much lower value than it once did, simply by benefit of sheer quantity. Even ignoring AI, I have access to endless art, music, video content, etc.
AI art is not really different from the non-artist perspective. It’s just accelerating the flow. But do people really even care where their current art comes from in most cases? The average person might download some art for their phone or computer desktop. They’ll be exposed to marketing and cover materials (that they’d have no clue or care about how they’re made), and they might buy some art for their house. Either from a home goods store of cheap, mass production art, or perhaps on a vacation or art fair for something a little more personal. Beyond that, I doubt most even think about it at all. AI art will be largely invisible to them because the human artists already are.
I do think you’ll see a similar surge of ‘human’ art niches like we have for Vinyl collections today. A small subset of people will pursue the story and mystique of hand crafted art, but this will be a drop in the bucket compared to the entire industry. Only a small few will be able to fit into that new niche.
I agree that humans are going to like human-made art better. Well, at least educated humans.
But I think the conclusion does not work. The feeling of saturation will stay, but the amount of generated “art” won’t be reduced by it, and so the demand for human-made art will remain small.
Enjoyment of art is subjective and not generally related to education level or even awareness of art being generated by AI or not. Is someone likes something, they like it.
If you like green circles and I like blue squares and we are both self-aware and confident enough to understand our own feelings, there is not much education that could change our feelings. Education may change our respect and appreciation for other forms of art, but it should rarely change our preferences unless there is something extremely relatable I lean about your green circles. (There are thousands more conditions that might shift my opinions. Education is just a single variable, is my point )
Edit: My use of caveats was intended to be extremely liberal in this particular case. Opinion and preference can be extremely dynamic.
Maybe you misunderstand the point. It is not about whether you like green circles, but it’s about whether you prefer human-made green circles to generated green circles. I say that educated people know that difference better, and therefore that preference will be stronger among them.
