roundearthervaxxer

roundearthervaxxer t1_it13lj5 wrote

Reply to comment by kmtrp in Talked to people minimizing/negating potential AI impact in their field? eg: artists, coders... by kmtrp

ok. I will watch out for that "rude awakening." Thanks for your wise counsel.

When you can take an innovative piece of concept art off of Artstation and reproduce it faithfully, you are getting closer. We are really not there for that right now. For concept art for movies and special effects, we need much tighter control.

Also, mixing a bunch of art styles is not at all the same as innovating. Art defies imitation. That is what art is.

We will probably get there. I don't see this as certain.

...waiting for those amazing mech designs.

1

roundearthervaxxer t1_isw5jen wrote

Reply to comment by kmtrp in Talked to people minimizing/negating potential AI impact in their field? eg: artists, coders... by kmtrp

Naw. First off, you are in the roll of cinematographer and art director. When I look back at the art concepts I thought were cool when I was just learning? Forget about it. Practically none of what first year art students conceive as cool is even remotely viable- and that is after 4 years of training.

More importantly, however, being able to render concepts directly based on a director’s input is job one. Ai art just doesn’t work that way. You encourage it to do things and it pretty much goes off on its own.

Show me amazing mech concepts that are not derivative and clean and tight, model sheets from the different views.

That does not mean ai isn’t useful. It is an idea generator and that is invaluable to me.

Fine art is trickier, but people are already growing tired of the Midjourney look.

Blending art styles is not innovating, it is deriving.

1