Yeah so to be clear, listing a bunch of pursuits where creativity may thrive doesn’t really illustrate your passion for the craft. It actually makes your interest in art sound passing and sterile. My point is not that you have been banned from picking up a paintbrush, but that your creative process has been damaged.
And look, what we actually already have from you is an example of that damaged creativity and resourcefulness; you are proclaiming that a problem that has been solved for decades is “impossible” without AI. You’re also flitting back and forth seamlessly between these images being “glanced at for one second, less than art” and “semi important, needing to serve a particular taste” depending on whatever you think serves your point more in the moment. It doesn’t sound like you had any thought or justification behind it before today. Just something you were doing because it’s easy and you felt the need to come defend it today when you saw the concept taking some heat.
Which is all fine. You’d be better off just owning it rather than trying to construct some goldilocks zone of importance where it’s justified
My craft is not painting. My craft is designing characters, locations, scenes, interactions, storylines, events, etc. The visual aids I use are accessories to the craft, not the craft itself. My craft is not damaged because I outsource a minute portion of it. Is the creative process “damaged” because a baker doesn’t make chocolate chips from scratch for their cookies?
There is no flitting back and forth, there is no contradiction in making a particular visual aid to assist in efficiently conveying information, and that depiction only being necessary for a few moments.
Okay, so I was correct in my assessment that you mentioned it for completely inauthentic, point-serving reasons?
Is the creative process “damaged” because a baker doesn’t make chocolate chips from scratch for their cookies?
Yeah so, this is actually paying for premade assets, which is an established practice and what I am advocating for. It’s not comparable in any way to AI.
The metaphor you’re looking for is, “Is the creative process “damaged” because a baker doesn’t take photographs of their actual goods, and simply uses generic AI generated advertisements?” And the answer is yes, obviously the creative process has been damaged.
It is up to you and not a moral conundrum whether or not you care that you are eroding your creativity. But that is evidently what is happening, I’m sorry to say
You are very badly mistaken in your assessment of this conversation. In fact you’ll notice I have repeatedly excused you from any type of judgement. Look at how I’ve signed off my last comment; this is not a moral issue, merely a practice that has damaged you.
Alcohol is bad for you. In any amount. Ten drinks a day, one drink a week, no matter. You would be better off drinking zero alcohol. I offer this wisdom to you completely free of judgement
Do you believe the above is possible? Do you believe, having offered your opinion on why AI use is fine in your case, someone can offer the viewpoint that it is damaging without judgement?
You haven’t presented any “evidence” to disagree. You’ve made subjective declarations, treating them as facts. You may be interested to know this severely damages your intelligence. Not that I’m making a moral judgement, but you should acknowledge your damaged intelligence.
It’s obvious to any reader that this is a simple and complete misread, I’m sorry to say. The evidence has been laid out very plainly for you. Please feel free to consider this interaction more carefully in the future, without the burden of pride forcing some poorly constructed reply
Yeah so to be clear, listing a bunch of pursuits where creativity may thrive doesn’t really illustrate your passion for the craft. It actually makes your interest in art sound passing and sterile. My point is not that you have been banned from picking up a paintbrush, but that your creative process has been damaged.
And look, what we actually already have from you is an example of that damaged creativity and resourcefulness; you are proclaiming that a problem that has been solved for decades is “impossible” without AI. You’re also flitting back and forth seamlessly between these images being “glanced at for one second, less than art” and “semi important, needing to serve a particular taste” depending on whatever you think serves your point more in the moment. It doesn’t sound like you had any thought or justification behind it before today. Just something you were doing because it’s easy and you felt the need to come defend it today when you saw the concept taking some heat.
Which is all fine. You’d be better off just owning it rather than trying to construct some goldilocks zone of importance where it’s justified
Uh, wow, don’t really know where to start there.
My craft is not painting. My craft is designing characters, locations, scenes, interactions, storylines, events, etc. The visual aids I use are accessories to the craft, not the craft itself. My craft is not damaged because I outsource a minute portion of it. Is the creative process “damaged” because a baker doesn’t make chocolate chips from scratch for their cookies?
There is no flitting back and forth, there is no contradiction in making a particular visual aid to assist in efficiently conveying information, and that depiction only being necessary for a few moments.
Okay, so I was correct in my assessment that you mentioned it for completely inauthentic, point-serving reasons?
Yeah so, this is actually paying for premade assets, which is an established practice and what I am advocating for. It’s not comparable in any way to AI.
The metaphor you’re looking for is, “Is the creative process “damaged” because a baker doesn’t take photographs of their actual goods, and simply uses generic AI generated advertisements?” And the answer is yes, obviously the creative process has been damaged.
It is up to you and not a moral conundrum whether or not you care that you are eroding your creativity. But that is evidently what is happening, I’m sorry to say
We’ve certainly come a long way from “not judging or anything”
You are very badly mistaken in your assessment of this conversation. In fact you’ll notice I have repeatedly excused you from any type of judgement. Look at how I’ve signed off my last comment; this is not a moral issue, merely a practice that has damaged you.
Alcohol is bad for you. In any amount. Ten drinks a day, one drink a week, no matter. You would be better off drinking zero alcohol. I offer this wisdom to you completely free of judgement
Do you believe the above is possible? Do you believe, having offered your opinion on why AI use is fine in your case, someone can offer the viewpoint that it is damaging without judgement?
There are other forms of judgement than just moral. Subjective proclamations are one.
You are of course free to disagree with the evidence, thank you for your consideration
You haven’t presented any “evidence” to disagree. You’ve made subjective declarations, treating them as facts. You may be interested to know this severely damages your intelligence. Not that I’m making a moral judgement, but you should acknowledge your damaged intelligence.
It’s obvious to any reader that this is a simple and complete misread, I’m sorry to say. The evidence has been laid out very plainly for you. Please feel free to consider this interaction more carefully in the future, without the burden of pride forcing some poorly constructed reply