As someone who always used to be excited for new tech, I am not interested anymore. Everything has gotten so greedy, addictive, expensive and exclusive. They don't solve problems, they create them, and then try to sell you the solution. We're in literal technology hell.
I’m going to discuss this from purely Gen AI art, not code or other tooling.
I just see this narrative a lot and have been thinking about it since Epics concept video.
Speed. Acceleration. Faster.
I don’t understand why “it’s faster” has become the default justification for AI. Faster isn’t automatically better. The value of art has never been measured by the speed of its production.
Instant ramen is faster than making it from scratch. We know it’s not better than made from scratch.
Faster in crafting something rarely means something as good or better.
There’s also a broader cultural issue. Every time we replace a professional artist with a tool because it’s quicker, we create fewer paid opportunities for people to develop into exceptional artists. The industry becomes more efficient at producing images, while becoming worse at producing artists. Critical thinking and creativity declines, so all we end up with is mass-produced meaningless art and a small workforce of diminished creatives. Worse yet the overall talent pool diminishes.
This obsession with speed also reflects a wider trend in modern work: every technology promises to save us time, yet we’re rarely allowed to spend that saved time creating something better. Instead, we’re expected to produce more. If AI lets an artist make ten illustrations instead of one, the commercial incentive is usually to deliver ten, not to spend ten times longer refining the one that matters. The work loses meaning.
Art occupies a strange place because, unlike manufacturing, the process itself has value. With art, the choices, craftsmanship and individual perspective are often what people are paying for. The output is the culmination of that process.
Efficiency can increase output while reducing the very thing that makes creative work meaningful. We’re removing consideration whenever we remove a human from any part of the process.
Yes there will be some higher quality projects, but I guarantee the most creative projects will always be made by those who reject AI art and master their crafts to create something with meaning.
Before everyone comes in and says “yes but games is a business”. It is… and? Do we not laud beautiful games that are the peak of our craft? When the industry keeps laying people off do you really care to defend the business model games currently operates under? Do you only want microtransactions?
Some of us don’t. And well crafted, authentic and creator loved media tends to be more marketable than corpo-slop.
Epic releases Fortnite video that's trying to launder the company's use of AI in the art pipeline, but artists I spoke to simply aren't having it:
https://t.co/xC1Hb1mrmc
Blender has taken a principled stance and is sacrificing future donations from Anthropic to reaffirms their stance that they are supportive of artists and creators
This is very admirable and we encourage all of you to donate to Blender to show your support and appreciation 🫖
Powerful words for any artist, not just filmmakers.
And I love that he's saying it all after One Cut of the Dead. If you haven't seen it, don't look anything up, just watch it. A rare 100% on Rotten Tomatoes and a perfect love letter to indie filmmaking, it's so f*cking good.
@blauereiter Definitely the only film I like from him since his split with Christopher Doyle. That train station fight from start to finish is such a good scene 🎬
@LarAtLarian When you invite generative AI into the earliest stages of the concepting, you are robbing yourself of the most fruitful, compelling (and yes, difficult) parts of the creative process- the chance to *actually have an idea* That's the moment of magic- everything else is details
Before you guys try to explain to me why I am wrong, maybe take the time to consider that I am actually a concept artist and this is my job.
I said it in my comments, but I’ll say it here for the last time: using AI as a reference is useless and just bad because no experienced artist has any use for it, and for learning artists it would just be detrimental to their progress.
Art, especially concept art requires intention behind design choices and problem solving, which AI cannot, and will not ever be able to do. Maybe to the general public this isn’t noticeable, but to any artist experienced enough to be in a concept artist position, it is.
When you look at a human-made reference, you can ask yourself why the artist chose that lighting, or that color scheme etc. and take from it what you need - which like I said above simply cannot apply to AI references. The time it would take, to turn that into a decent end product would take the same if not even longer than it would take for an artist to use actual proper references and make it themselves with their own ideas (and I can guarantee you it would come out even better).
It is not time saving. For time saving we have photobashing, we’ve used that since forever. It’s just a pathetic excuse.