n. lyn-marie charlene excelsia

I keep seeing this argument that boils down to 'all artists steal and are influenced by others, why is it different when a computer does it' and I wanna toss my computers into the sea

it's (almost) always people who have never made any art themselves, too, so they actually don't know a single fuckin thing about the artist experience. they just know "machine learning" has the word "learning" in it and extrapolate that it must be just like a human

cannot cosign this hard enough. christ

Someone's shitty drawing is still art even if it's not objectively "good".

THANK YOU! I wanna scream this all over the rooftops

I think this is the main appeal image gens have to people who aren't really familiar with a Creative Process, and is being leveraged by their developers to increase reach

Like "now you can finally make art with our tool and express yourself", no buddy you always could. Even if it looked like shit you could still express an idea, and much more about you, when you do it. It can preserve and transfer feelings in a way where they can even morph between person to person, without requiring the thing to Look Impressive

And it's being discarded just for the one of many aspects of creative works that can quickly sell. If there's people that think less skillful art is worse, or not even art, there's people that will feel gatekept by an imaginary gate, and will be taken advantage of by things like these ((vaguely gestures))