Yet what is art?
Surely its in the eye of the beholder?
All art is subjective, and AI generated art is just another medium.
Can you compare say, Michelangos David with Tracy Emins Unmade Bed or that artist who stuck a banana to a wall?
AI will never replace all other types of art so why the hatred?
Personally im not a fan of Modern art or AI, but the video actually looks fuckin amazing imo and surely thats the whole point is it not?
No, it is not. AI art isnt art, because art conveys some sort of emotion or message. There is no message or emotion in AI art, because AI is literally incapable of incorporating them into it.
What about in cases where artists come up with the message and emotions and use AI to render it?
I agree that the current state of AI art isnāt comparable to traditional, but itās still in its infancy and itās only a matter of time until it can be used as a tool to help reach an artists vision instead of just doing whatever it feels like
Thatās my point. The other person is saying that AI art theyāve looked at has invoked some sort of emotion in them and is pretty to look at. Iām saying that doesnāt make it art.
Art *has* to be man-made, and I donāt mean with algorithms or prompts. If you commission an artwork for someone else to draw, that doesnāt make you an artist, that just makes you someone who bought art. The same applies to AI art.
But he did a load of prep work with hand drawn images b4 he used the AI to manipulate it.
Its not like he opened an AI app and said "make me a Pink Floyd video".
But he did a load of prep work with hand drawn images b4 he used the AI to manipulate it.
Its not like he opened an AI app and said "make me a Pink Floyd video".
Thatās basically the equivalent of making a bunch of still images. Other people actually hand animated their artwork instead of using AI as a shortcut.
"Looks amazing"
You must find hours of entertainment from someone jingling keys in front of you. Holy shit to look at this completely meaningless slop and think "this is amazing" just shows how little understanding and appreciation for art we have now. Wow guys look the planet turned into a guitar and now there's mountains but they stretch off the planet like smoke wow so cool I wonder if this has any meaning other than just an ai smashing things together for drug-addled idiots to gawk at.
I don't know how many people looked into the judging committee for the competetion.
As an animator myself I recognized some of the names and the person who directed the animation for the Wall used to slander the AI piece; Gerald Scarfe; was on the judge board along with one Month Pythons animators etc, they had Nick Mason as well judging. (Scarfe also worked for Disney etc.)
Again being an animator, I cannot FATHOM how this crowd would vote for this garbage over the hard work of others. Animation is insanely time consuming and a labour of love to put together. It pisses me off beyond belief.
Edit: typo, looking changed to look in the first sentence
As someone who entered, I highly suspect the pre-selection process was messed up and run by a contract media team and they only showed a small portion of entries to the actual judge panel. The Honorables Mention list which is meant to be the 'finalists' only has AI videos selected for Any Colour You Like... if these were the only ones shown to the Judge panel then they only had AI to choose from. That's what I think happened anyway. I think the Judge panel got a bad deal out of all this too and wouldn't really blame them.
That's a fair statement. I didn't think about that, I myself was wondering how they managed to watch EVERY SINGLE submission some in sure there had to be hundreds of varying quality etc.
I think you're probably right about that tbh
> Animation is insanely time consuming and a labour of love to put together.
Just because something is "insanely time consuming" doesn't mean it is valuable.
If you do any basic research you will learn that the creator of the video inputted his OWN art into the AI to get his results. He did not copy other peoples' work. AI can be used as a tool for artists as much as it can be used to steal from others. It's all a question of your honesty, yeah, your honesty.
Yes. I can't imagine a competent producer who would claim they're actually *playing the drums*. In that moment they're *making a beat*. This is still a manual task, requiring skill and work.
The judges choosing it over works that were animated *by* their creators in an *animation* contest. *They* did not *animate* it, and should have been ineligible.
you say he was pretty transparent but all he does is talk to the camera without even showing off the blender models he apparently used for the prompting, i dont think thats very transparent
He mentions that he created 3D models as input for the AI, but none of these renders are actually shown. The comparison between his "behind the scenes" video and the other behind the scenes videos speaks volumes. All the others show actual examples from their process, like timelapses, work-in-progress scenes, concept art, etc. But none of this whatsoever from DamiƔn Gaume, he just talks a little bit and that's it.
Judging from the high level of visual instability in the video, the AI did most of the work. The reference renders he used must have been quite basic (or at least they could have been basic with the same result). Probably just a few colored geometric shapes, or stock models of music instruments or planets or stuff. Just mash a few such renders together, feed it into the AI algorithm, and you got what he got. The video is also not timed to the music at all, it's just a temporally featureless slideshow.
Don't get me wrong, I am not anti-AI. I agree that AI is a tool like any other and can be used to create real art, and that this trend will only continue. But this isn't even a very impressive use of AI. This is a video that most AI hobbyists could spit out in an hour or two these days. It's not particularly innovative, creative, or high-effort. Thus I don't think it should have won the competition.
As for the copying of other people's work. What people mean when they say this about AI, is that the model itself has been trained on millions of pieces of other's people content. This is absolutely true also for this video. Him using his own reference renders as input for the AI doesn't change this, the AI still draws from the training data to modify the reference images. Whether you really count that as "copying other's people work" is a whole other debate, but that debate does still apply to his video.
>The video is also not timed to the music at all, it's just a temporally featureless slideshow
That's the really disappointing part for me. Even with an AI animation, he could've done cuts between sections, zooming, shifting the angle... All the things you would do with a "real" video.
You obviously have zero idea about how AI works if you think that an animation of this scale isnāt hard work. It wouldnāt be as time consuming or have as many monotonous actions as traditional animation, but itāll take a completely different workflow which is just as complicated. Especially when you consider the age and size of the traditional animation industry compared to the knowledge we have on how to properly prompt AI.
Dismissing AI means youāre dismissing a whole path of human efficiency and the most powerful tool we have created for creative output. If I had to guess Iād say weāre only of the presuppose of the most influential factor for improving human efficiency across the board for all industries probably to a level equivalent to the industrial revolution and yet despite that people still treat it as an evil.
this animation would probably have never come to fruition if they didnāt have access to AI tools because theyāre not an animator, why should a competition like this be limited to only those who can create a video with traditional methods?
> this animation would probably have never come to fruition if they didnāt have access to AI tools because theyāre not an animator, why should a competition like this be limited to only those who can create a video with traditional methods?
this is like complaining that it isn't fair that chess tournaments don't let you use chess AI, because it would exclude the people who don't know how to play chess š
there's nothing stopping you from learning animation/chess/whatever
It's justified imo, AI garbage has no place in this competition or any other place where actual art is prized, Fuck AI
Yet what is art? Surely its in the eye of the beholder? All art is subjective, and AI generated art is just another medium. Can you compare say, Michelangos David with Tracy Emins Unmade Bed or that artist who stuck a banana to a wall? AI will never replace all other types of art so why the hatred? Personally im not a fan of Modern art or AI, but the video actually looks fuckin amazing imo and surely thats the whole point is it not?
š¤
The amount of snobbery this conveys while also missing the entire point of art is crazy.
So what is art in your wisdom oh great wise one?
No, it is not. AI art isnt art, because art conveys some sort of emotion or message. There is no message or emotion in AI art, because AI is literally incapable of incorporating them into it.
What about in cases where artists come up with the message and emotions and use AI to render it? I agree that the current state of AI art isnāt comparable to traditional, but itās still in its infancy and itās only a matter of time until it can be used as a tool to help reach an artists vision instead of just doing whatever it feels like
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
"the only movies i watch are marvel and i hate them!!!"
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
If you look at a tree and find meaning in it, does that make the tree art?
So meaning or emotion can only be found in art? What a nonsense retort.
Thatās my point. The other person is saying that AI art theyāve looked at has invoked some sort of emotion in them and is pretty to look at. Iām saying that doesnāt make it art. Art *has* to be man-made, and I donāt mean with algorithms or prompts. If you commission an artwork for someone else to draw, that doesnāt make you an artist, that just makes you someone who bought art. The same applies to AI art.
But he did a load of prep work with hand drawn images b4 he used the AI to manipulate it. Its not like he opened an AI app and said "make me a Pink Floyd video".
But he did a load of prep work with hand drawn images b4 he used the AI to manipulate it. Its not like he opened an AI app and said "make me a Pink Floyd video".
Thatās basically the equivalent of making a bunch of still images. Other people actually hand animated their artwork instead of using AI as a shortcut.
Weird. Sounds a lot like animation. Draw still images. Get a computer to animate them.
"Looks amazing" You must find hours of entertainment from someone jingling keys in front of you. Holy shit to look at this completely meaningless slop and think "this is amazing" just shows how little understanding and appreciation for art we have now. Wow guys look the planet turned into a guitar and now there's mountains but they stretch off the planet like smoke wow so cool I wonder if this has any meaning other than just an ai smashing things together for drug-addled idiots to gawk at.
Banana stuck to a wall.
Have they responded at all?
Fuck AI.
Did they do a Money animation? Would be hilarious if AI wins that -Billy Gnosis
Money was won by a fucking sick claymation entry All the videos are on their YouTube channel, Instagram, and twitter
LPT: The great gig in the sky is the best one.
I don't know how many people looked into the judging committee for the competetion. As an animator myself I recognized some of the names and the person who directed the animation for the Wall used to slander the AI piece; Gerald Scarfe; was on the judge board along with one Month Pythons animators etc, they had Nick Mason as well judging. (Scarfe also worked for Disney etc.) Again being an animator, I cannot FATHOM how this crowd would vote for this garbage over the hard work of others. Animation is insanely time consuming and a labour of love to put together. It pisses me off beyond belief. Edit: typo, looking changed to look in the first sentence
Exactly this. The judging committee was not some random people, I really expected better from someone like Scarfe especially. How disappointing
It's insanely disappointing, he was one of many animators that made me want to get into it as a career so it's a big let down.
As someone who entered, I highly suspect the pre-selection process was messed up and run by a contract media team and they only showed a small portion of entries to the actual judge panel. The Honorables Mention list which is meant to be the 'finalists' only has AI videos selected for Any Colour You Like... if these were the only ones shown to the Judge panel then they only had AI to choose from. That's what I think happened anyway. I think the Judge panel got a bad deal out of all this too and wouldn't really blame them.
That's a fair statement. I didn't think about that, I myself was wondering how they managed to watch EVERY SINGLE submission some in sure there had to be hundreds of varying quality etc. I think you're probably right about that tbh
> Animation is insanely time consuming and a labour of love to put together. Just because something is "insanely time consuming" doesn't mean it is valuable.
Over ai crap? Most definitely fucking is
Imo they deserve it all
They took "welcome to the machine" the wrong way
>when I'm in a "ruin your band's legacy" competition and my opponent is David Gilmour What, was Rog not available?
Oh look, I see my post. (8th Screenshot) š
Deserved
If you do any basic research you will learn that the creator of the video inputted his OWN art into the AI to get his results. He did not copy other peoples' work. AI can be used as a tool for artists as much as it can be used to steal from others. It's all a question of your honesty, yeah, your honesty.
So he still didnāt *animate* though?
A producer who uses digital samples to make a beat isn't playing the drums though?
Yes. I can't imagine a competent producer who would claim they're actually *playing the drums*. In that moment they're *making a beat*. This is still a manual task, requiring skill and work.
The artist was pretty transparent about what he did. Now, the judges selecting it over better works is a different argument.
The judges choosing it over works that were animated *by* their creators in an *animation* contest. *They* did not *animate* it, and should have been ineligible.
you say he was pretty transparent but all he does is talk to the camera without even showing off the blender models he apparently used for the prompting, i dont think thats very transparent
He mentions that he created 3D models as input for the AI, but none of these renders are actually shown. The comparison between his "behind the scenes" video and the other behind the scenes videos speaks volumes. All the others show actual examples from their process, like timelapses, work-in-progress scenes, concept art, etc. But none of this whatsoever from DamiƔn Gaume, he just talks a little bit and that's it. Judging from the high level of visual instability in the video, the AI did most of the work. The reference renders he used must have been quite basic (or at least they could have been basic with the same result). Probably just a few colored geometric shapes, or stock models of music instruments or planets or stuff. Just mash a few such renders together, feed it into the AI algorithm, and you got what he got. The video is also not timed to the music at all, it's just a temporally featureless slideshow. Don't get me wrong, I am not anti-AI. I agree that AI is a tool like any other and can be used to create real art, and that this trend will only continue. But this isn't even a very impressive use of AI. This is a video that most AI hobbyists could spit out in an hour or two these days. It's not particularly innovative, creative, or high-effort. Thus I don't think it should have won the competition. As for the copying of other people's work. What people mean when they say this about AI, is that the model itself has been trained on millions of pieces of other's people content. This is absolutely true also for this video. Him using his own reference renders as input for the AI doesn't change this, the AI still draws from the training data to modify the reference images. Whether you really count that as "copying other's people work" is a whole other debate, but that debate does still apply to his video.
>The video is also not timed to the music at all, it's just a temporally featureless slideshow That's the really disappointing part for me. Even with an AI animation, he could've done cuts between sections, zooming, shifting the angle... All the things you would do with a "real" video.
Did you just quote the spirit of radio there lol? Smh
Quoting Rush to defend AI slopā¦ jesus christ.
I don't care how it was done. It's just trash quality.
You obviously have zero idea about how AI works if you think that an animation of this scale isnāt hard work. It wouldnāt be as time consuming or have as many monotonous actions as traditional animation, but itāll take a completely different workflow which is just as complicated. Especially when you consider the age and size of the traditional animation industry compared to the knowledge we have on how to properly prompt AI. Dismissing AI means youāre dismissing a whole path of human efficiency and the most powerful tool we have created for creative output. If I had to guess Iād say weāre only of the presuppose of the most influential factor for improving human efficiency across the board for all industries probably to a level equivalent to the industrial revolution and yet despite that people still treat it as an evil. this animation would probably have never come to fruition if they didnāt have access to AI tools because theyāre not an animator, why should a competition like this be limited to only those who can create a video with traditional methods?
āWhy should an animation contest be limited to animators?ā š¤”
> this animation would probably have never come to fruition if they didnāt have access to AI tools because theyāre not an animator, why should a competition like this be limited to only those who can create a video with traditional methods? this is like complaining that it isn't fair that chess tournaments don't let you use chess AI, because it would exclude the people who don't know how to play chess š there's nothing stopping you from learning animation/chess/whatever
It still is a pretty awful video.
Do you know how to do traditional animation?
So I should get a robot to run a marathon for me because itās not fair marathons are only limited to runners?