How do an artist, a videographer, a musician and a copywriter feel about generative AI?
*effects
Submitted 5 days ago by LadyButterfly@piefed.blahaj.zone to technology@lemmy.world
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8e9627w156o
How do an artist, a videographer, a musician and a copywriter feel about generative AI?
*effects
Mmm, maybe. Affects also works as it means to influence. It’s subtle and context matters, but if AI is still changing things with their job then affects is the verb you want. If AI has changed their job and nothing further is happening then effect is the noun you want.
Effects is past tense. Affects is not.
I work in a creative industry for a pretty large business, with limited exception really nobody is using AI except maybe to send lazy email responses. If there’s workers getting replaced by slop it’s not where I’m at.
It just really hasn’t shown much ability to not fuck up. People dip their toe in occasionally to show upper upper management we’re leveraging “all the tools available to us”, but I’ve never seen it used for anything more substantial than a mood board.
You sounds like you work at a great company. Every single level of my leadership at my company is fully brainwashed by it. They literally tell us how to do our jobs with AI, and yes, it’s almost always wrong and creates headaches and long emails explaining why we can’t or shouldn’t listen to what “they” are telling us to do.
I’m a few of these professions. I freaking hate AI. It’s dramatically harmed my enjoyment of my job.
A family member is a graphic designer for an agency. They use AI to reformat files, and claim that having AI do it, then fixing it, is quicker and easier than doing it some other way. But their actual creative process doesn’t involve AI at all.
I do retouching work. Recently lost a client to an ‘AI’ retouching firm. When the client came back to me to fix loads of stuff and I looked at the output, it became apparent that the work had actually just been outsourced to India and there was no magic AI solution.
Marketing people are the worst. They are why Ai won’t fuck off, tech bros can push it but without the marketing twats nothing will happen.
I’m only a hobbyist, but I hate GenAI with a passion; I hate everything it stands for and now I genuinely think it’s a scam and that needs to be treated and prosecuted as the scam it is.
Start coding and learn prompts engineering and workflows, be the manager and not the workhorse. You can inpaint you can Photoshop, you can still write or be an editor, review copy etc.
learn prompts engineering
“Can you please do it right this time? Pretty please?”
“You are correct, I did it wrong the other time! This time I’ll give you the correct code!”
<code that is wrong elsewhere>
There are also things that present-day generative AI is not very good at in existing fields, and I’m not sure how easy it will be to address some of those. So, take the furry artist. It looks like she made a single digitally-painted portrait of a tiger in a suit, a character that she invented. That’s something that probably isn’t all that hard to do with present-day generative AI. But try using existing generative AI to create several different views of the same invented character, presented consistently, and that’s a weak point.
I’ve noticed, at least with the model I occasionally use, that the best way I’ve found to consistently get western eyes isn’t to specify round eyes or to ban almond-shaped eyes, but to make the character blonde and blue eyed (or make them a cowgirl or some other stereotype rarely associated with Asian women). If you want to generate a western woman with straight black hair, you are going to struggle.
I’ve also noticed that is you want a chest smaller than DDD, it’s almost impossible with some models — unless you specify that they are a gymnast. The model makers are so scared of generating a chest that could ever be perceived as less than robustly adult, that just generating realistic proportions is impossible by default. But for some reason gymnasts are given a pass, I guess.
This can be addressed with LORAs and other tools, but every time you run into one of these hard associations, you have to assemble a bunch of pictures demonstrating the feature you want, and the images you choose better not be too self-consistent or you might accidentally bias some other trait you didn’t intend to.
Contrast a human artist who can draw whatever they imagine without having to translate it into AI terms or worry about concept-bleed. Like, I want portrait-style, but now there are framed pictures in the background of 75% of the gens, so instead I have to replace portrait with a half-dozen other words: 3/4 view, posed, etc.
Hard association is one of the tools AI relies on — a hand has 5 fingers and is found at the end of an arm, etc. The associations it makes are based on the input images, and the images selected or available are going to contain other biases just because, for example, there are very few examples of Asian woman wearing cowboy hats and lassoing cattle.
Now, I rarely have any desire to generate images, so I’m not playing with cutting edge tools. Maybe those are a lot better, but I’d bet they’ve simply mitigated the issues, not solved them entirely. My interest lies primarily in text gen, which has similar issues.
If it needs to be prompted right, it’s a defective product.
It really depends, you can be bad a prompting and waste time generating and reviewing or learn to be able to say what you want produced. It’s like being a director or manager, you need to lay out what you expect your team to accomplish, give guidance.
MurrayL@lemmy.world 5 days ago
hahahahahaha
pinball_wizard@lemmy.zip 4 days ago
If I told JP that I did not find their work authentic, I’m sure they would say “You’re absolutely right!”