AI is stealing writers’ words and jobs…

[Andvari]

So the question I'd where is the line. Right now, at this moment, there are generative AI tools that accept iterative inputs. At what point, precisely, does the person manipulating such a tool in order to get a precise output get to be considered an artist (even if not "the" artist, as you have indicated re: the director)?

I’m not sure I understand the question. I think I may have made by point unclear. My point is not that a director can’t be “an artist”, but that someone shouldn’t take credit for being the creator of art they didn’t create. For example, telling Larry Elmore to paint a yellow lizard eye doesn’t make you the painter of that eye. Yet some are presenting themselves as such with regards to the equivalent of an AI creating art. (Of course some may claim the AI didn’t really create it either, and simply “stole” it, but that’s another debate and besides the point)

 

[Reynard]

I’m not sure I understand the question. I think I may have made by point unclear. My point is not that a director can’t be “an artist”, but that someone shouldn’t take credit for being the creator of art they didn’t create. For example, telling Larry Elmore to paint a yellow lizard eye doesn’t make you the painter of that eye.

Is an art director an artist?

 

[Scribe]

Is an art director an artist?

Hmm, now that one, I dont really think so. You are directing someone else in the effort of creating the work. A Director, the finished product is a combination of all the elements which the Director 'directs'. An Art Director? Hell I could be one.

"Paint me a hot woman in a purple dress, shes got horn's because she's a tiefling, no not that kind from 4e, the real kind, ok, put her in a circle, flames dancing, yeah yeah, long dark hair. OK draw that up."

Thats not an artist. The one creating that work, is the artist.

YMMV.

 

[Andvari]

We’re going in circles. I don’t understand.

 

[Reynard]

Hmm, now that one, I dont really think so. You are directing someone else in the effort of creating the work. A Director, the finished product is a combination of all the elements which the Director 'directs'. An Art Director? Hell I could be one.

"Paint me a hot woman in a purple dress, shes got horn's because she's a tiefling, no not that kind from 4e, the real kind, ok, put her in a circle, flames dancing, yeah yeah, long dark hair. OK draw that up."

Thats not an artist. The one creating that work, is the artist.

YMMV.

I know some art directors that would take issue with your characterization of their jobs. I'm married to one, in fact.

 

[Reynard]

We’re going in circles. I don’t understand.

What are you confused about?

 

[Scribe]

I know some art directors that would take issue with your characterization of their jobs. I'm married to one, in fact.

I plead ignorance to the details, I'm only going by what I've seen as the initial prompts documented as the starting point for MtG cards. They look awfully similar to the prompts we would use, and have, in the Dall-E thread.

No offense intended of course to your spouse.

 

[Andvari]

What are you confused about?

The question appears to ignore the point of my post, instead returning to wondering about whether some vocation (now an art director instead of a director) might be an artist.

 

[trappedslider]

"I know it when I see it." is kind of where this will sit for me. As long as it is generally taking a prompt, converting it into something that the program then maps and associates with various aspects of the image, I still dont call the prompts, art.

I don't know what prompts, programs were used for the above image, but would you call that art or the below image?

I plead ignorance to the details, I'm only going by what I've seen as the initial prompts documented as the starting point for MtG cards. They look awfully similar to the prompts we would use, and have, in the Dall-E thread.

Can I get a link to that thread?

 

[overgeeked]

In publishing, there’s a job called ghostwriter. This person is given an idea or a topic by a publishing house (usually on behalf of a celebrity), and the ghostwriter goes off and actually does the work of writing the book. When they’re done writing the book they’re paid and generally under an NDA to not discuss the fact that they wrote the book rather than whatever celebrity whose name will grace the cover. They get no credit but they did all the work.

When dealing with “AI” art, the program is the ghostwriter. The program did all the work. Not the person who handed them the contract nor the celebrity. In the same way the celebrity is not a writer because they didn’t actually write the book, the prompt writer is not an artist because they didn’t actually make the art.

Tools do not do the job for you. They help you do the job. An oven is a tool that helps you cook a meal just like a paintbrush is a tool that helps you paint. Telling someone what to cook for you does not make you a chef. Telling someone what to paint does not make you an artist. Typing what to paint into a text box sure as hell doesn’t make you an artist.

I get in our culture doing zero work while getting all the credit is a dream for some people, but come on.