What is your opinion on the use of AI art in kpop comeback teasers? (2 Viewers)

[The_LastRomeo]

Isn't that rat thing CGI tho?

 

[The_LastRomeo]

I feel genuinely offended

Are you the artist or is it an AI artist? Like a voice singing the songs you type out? Because in this case I don't think you fall into that category because you aren't making money off of this

 

[Pirioca]

What is modern art?

- You see some red blots on canvas.
- You start thinking about that ... thing. "Obviously someone had nose bleeding and forgot to paint something!"
- Then you read about 'thing'. "It's a painting? Someone earns money with that? But even my neighbour's kids could paint better!".
- Then you see the price of the painting and fall from the chair. Now you're the one with nose bleeding.



The discussion what is art... will it ever ends? In my opinion: as soon you put your own creativity into something artistical, it's art!

I'm more into AI music than AI paintings, but here's the point:

Creating a song with Udio - option 1 (the easy way):

- The AI suggests a song type. For example: "A song about people that hate AI music!"
- You click on 'auto-generate' and the AI gives you song parts.
- You continue adding more parts and let the AI auto-generate them too.

Is it art? Nope!

Creating a song with Udio - option 2 (the way I create songs, the way @Willow creates songs - and many other creators of AI music):

- Imagine how a song should be, think about a concept.
- Specify the style and instruments, describe the voice of the vocalist(s). You can even mix styles.
- Write your own lyrics.
- Add commands like [Intro: Sound of train chugging], [Verse], [Verse 1], [Verse 2], [Verse 1: Voice One], [Verse 2: Voice Two], [Chorus], [Chorus 1], [Chorus 2], [Chorus: Both Male Vocalists], [Spoken Verse 1: Male Voice], [Dialogue 1: Female Voice 1], [Spoken Word: Male Voice], [Spoken Word: Female Voice], [Build: Male Vocalist], [Build: Female Vocalist], [Chorus: 2x] [Bridge], [Pre=Chorus], [Pre-Drop], [Drop], [Post-Drop], [Verse 1: Male Vocalist], [Verse 2: Female Vocalist], [Hook], [Chorus: Gunshots in the distance], [Verse 1: With street ambiance], [Pre-Dialogue], [Instrumental Break], [Build: Male Vocalist], [Whispers in the dark], [Chorus: All, Detective (Male)], [Dialogue Bridge], [DETECTIVE (spoken)] , [FEMALE SUSPECT (spoken)], [Instrumental Streak], [Whispers], [Instrumental Break], [Dialogue Interlude].
And now let me describe all possible instruments ... are you still there?

I didn't make a bad joke. The commands above work (at least they should work), they are from the Unofficial Community Udio Generation Tips:

Tips - Unofficial Community Udio Generation-tips DRAFT

Unofficial Community Udio Generation Tips Existing FAQ If you are new to using Udio, the first thing you should do is read this awesome existing FAQ: https://www.udio.com/faq The below is just meant to complement with more detailed specific examples of techniques and advice along with songs tha...

docs.google.com

- Then the AI creates two song parts. Often the AI didn't understand what you want - you might get different results when changing the lyrics. Back to 'write your own lyrics'.
- You need to choose the part that fits better and continue from that.
- The same procedure again ... specifying things like style (as I said, you can mix styles even in one song) and instruments, instrumental variations, writing more lyrics, adding more commands...

Is that art? Yep, because it's a creative process.

I guess AI painting works the same way: You can auto-generate everything, or you can be part of the creative process.

 

[snsd2beg]

What is modern art?

- You see some red blots on canvas.
- You start thinking about that ... thing. "Obviously someone had nose bleeding and forgot to paint something!"
- Then you read about 'thing'. "It's a painting? Someone earns money with that? But even my neighbour's kids could paint better!".
- Then you see the price of the painting and fall from the chair. Now you're the one with nose bleeding.

Slightly unrelated but what you're referring to as modern art is called contemporary art and its value is normally attributed to its context rather than its content. I just wanna be a smartass but I am a contemporary art defender

 

[eclipsoul]

@eclipsoul you can always claim people are being harmed. Is it okay to harm people who are doing jobs seen as menial? For example, it’s okay to replace people who performed difficult calculations back in the day before handheld calculators because they’re not creative? Because you can argue that just as easily, if not more easily. For the deepfakes thing you can also claim that for just about anything, including other art forms. Hell, I went to an old ass palace in Europe, where the guide informed us that the artist painted the royal couple nude, and they sold it to the male in the relationship because the male knew the female would hate it because of her beliefs. That wasn’t ai, that was normal art, and preceded ai art by centuries. And ofc it’s a thing with digital art too, I bet you could find a naked edit of just about any decently known kpop idol, because if people want to, they’ll find a way to do it, ai or no ai. So unless you’re anti digital art because it’s easier to edit people nude there than with a paintbrush, then I don’t get your argument. As for the stealing, yep, humans do it too, intentionally or not. With humans the difference is it’s called reference photos and inspiration. Very very rarely is any art new, a variation of it exists somewhere. A replica likely not, but ai is not a replica, but instead a new combination or variation, like all art. As for looking objectively worse, if that’s true then this isn’t an issue because companies want their stuff to look good. So if an artist can do a much better job and they have the funds to hire them, they’ll hire the artist. Otherwise now we have the same issue, companies won’t usually hire artists who clearly suck because they’ll get a bad name, unless they’re super poor perhaps. So if you’re right ai art looks objectively terrible, companies won’t use it anyways, so there’s no harm because there’s not profit for them. It does a lot of times because it’s newer still, but not always, as the fact that people get upset that you can’t tell ai from real photos or art shows.

I’m not an artist, and this isn’t something I’m affected by. I realize that. I just also know that these patterns have occurred in history, where people boycott or show strong opposition to technology that can replace human workers, which makes me think that this is pretty similar, and as such, will likely become pretty common as the technology gets older. Viewing that this isn’t a new belief, and just another form, and viewing how things turned out in older cases, I just don’t see his not becoming commonly utilized just as much.

honestly i am not as knowledgeable on the use of AI in non-creative areas so i won't speak on that, but in the case of arts i'd say the worst thing about the deepfakes is that it has made creating such awful imagery way easier and more accessible than it should have ever been. the nsfw digital art of people sucks too, but due to the effort it takes to make it wasn't that common to come across. correct me if i'm wrong, but i don't recall it ever going to the point where kpop companies take legal actions over nsfw digital art the way they do with AI deepfakes. i wouldn't compare it to inspiration either as while you're being inspired by something, you still add your own elements of expressions to that which AI is quite literally unable to do. and when a human artist goes as far as attempting to pass off a piece of artwork as their own, it is incredibly frowned upon and could be even seen as copyright infringement, and AI literally does that which is one of the reason why i will forever be against its use in creative industries. obviously i can't stop it, but in my opinion something being common doesn't mean it's right and no matter how often it happens, i'll never support any work that has AI in it. it's for a personal reason too because as an aspiring graphic designer it's tiring as hell to have to explain to people that each detail of what you do was made by you and not by AI, not to mention knowing that you'll likely never work in the field you're passionate about because companies would rather go the lazy and cheap route of typing some words into a generator. i wish it was always true that they wouldn't use something that looks objectively worse than human work but i think we can all agree that the kiss of life backgrounds look shitty and yet they're still out there which proves it's not always the case. also i don't know how it is where you live but my country has a fair amount of AI used by companies in promotional campaigns even though it looks awful too so i sadly cannot agree that looking terrible will stop anyone from using it. the use of AI in billlie's album has also gained negative reactions mostly from what i've seen, so it would have definitely been better if they simply... didn't use it. i agree with you that it will likely be commonly utilised, but my opinion remains strongly negative and i don't see myself ever consuming AI "art". obviously i respect your opinion and i'm not judging others who enjoy those kinds of creations but it'll always be a no from me.