Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Wyrdeone OP t1_j6gmdcc wrote

Reply to comment by Grenvallion in AI will reduce the number of starving artists, one way or another by Wyrdeone

A wolf standing on 2 legs, hands up in a fighting stance, hands wrapped like a fighter, stern mean look on their face, with long braided hair, eye patch and a scar under their eye is not my idea of art worth buying, but maybe I'm old and uncool?

2

Grenvallion t1_j6gncgq wrote

The subject of the art isn't the point. You completely misunderstood the reasoning. The point of why I went into this amount of detail was to show what ai art generators can't do. Anyone can generate ai art for free. Not everyone can create art with specific defined features and specific parts in certain places though. Ai can't do specific stuff. Only an artist can do that. That's the reason you pay for a commission. There's plenty of generic ai art you can get for free.

1

Wyrdeone OP t1_j6gogq9 wrote

That's fair, absolutely. The niche interest areas definitely die last. But you gotta understand that if there was a pie chart of worldwide spending on 'art' which is a product of artists, weirdly specific internet drawing commissions are a vanishingly small percentage.

1

Grenvallion t1_j6gp2dx wrote

Depends what it's for. To make it easier to understand why I included specifics, the way I did. Think of making art for a an indie game dev. Indi devs need specific art for their games. This type of art can't be done with ai and will be expensive. The same is true for 2d animation. 2d animation is still art, a bit beyond typical art but pretty easy for a good artist to learn, as its just drawing and redrawing things in new frames. This is expensive too. High quality sprites aren't cheap, but aren't ridiculously hard for artists to do either.

1