Відео

Never heard of tracing paper?

Clearly one of the first questions he had was how do i make money from this AI and Promptly (pun also intended) releases a book!

I had no idea who you were and I did a full spit take when I realized. Omg.. this makes the journey even more incredible

16:20 "Just do something, the physicality of it is real art". Was real art. AI extends the physically to traditional fine arts and beyond. Limits of traditional paint, print and illustration with AI will extend art into augmented reality, neural lace perception. Sculpture will extend with AI into 3D printing, interactive kinetics, haptics, smart material and robotics. Music with AI will extend beyond instrument and voice limitations. Data sculpture presentation is and will become a art form for communication. AI makes it easier for more, if anyone see this and uses it a criticism I think they are blind. Yes, was a bottle in the ocean, with AI a ocean of a bottles.. fantastic!

14:31 "pride in the effort. Learning from what you produce. Assigning shared perception to abstractions. Testing yourself. Doing things you didn't think you could do. Revisions. Growing up is being human. The journey, learning, testing, growing. Your not doing any of that with AI". Anyone can do and feel al those things while using AI to do it. Denying humans aren't with AI is subjectivity combined with arrogance.

12:53 "everyone has dedicated time...time and effort in something has value". Like dedicating some time to changing a battery on the smoke detector so it stops chirping during a stream. Joking aside, the value of a thing is subjective, some ppl do value the niche of nostalgia. Simply, AI is making more of us, more productive.

9:50 "need to live it(art), can't do it on your lunch break". Quote from medieval Monks about hand calligraphy at the invention of printing presses. "we(antiquated artists) are going to be a isolated islands, throwing individual bottles in a ocean filled with AI generated bottles". In the 1970's people only had access to one TV broadcast station, now with things like youtube those antiquated brocasters complain millions of content providers changed a drip of information into a ocean.

Very well articulated and I totally agree. I've spent a lot of hours using 3D and 2D artist tools to come up with fantasy artwork and AI seems to sweep aside what I can do. I also spent a LOT of time in the car doing vocal exercises trying to develop my voice. I'm glad that for a living I finish tables, making newly build tables look like true antiques. A small business that is practically one of a kind. AI is not going to be doing that for the foreseeable future.

meow

I draw everyday and have been for over 50 years...The one constant has been breaking my own sets of dogma. I use AI and I work the F### out of it. All images start with my drawings and paintings. Most results are failures. I drive it towards quixotic aims and mostly fail. It is a legitimate tool for genuine creators. It is a fertile ground. If you are stictly a formalist you probably will deeply recent this. I've incorporated Duchamp, Bacon, Rembrandt, HR Giger John Cage, Picasso, Robert Crumb, Ralph Steadman, Marizio Catalan , Richard Prince, Michael Heizer and more. AI is (for now) agnostic. If you are a genuine outlier you will find ways to disrupt it to your pleasure. If not , you might want to revisit your commitment to genuine artistic practice.

AI is NOT Art. It is Collage. The person does not need any effort or talent or skill to generate an AI image. Just like a person that cuts magazine photographs out of a magazine, and glues them to a Poster and calls it "their art". I have no problem with people wanting to do art, there are free millions of them You Tube videos and tutorials online to learn techniques tools and other inspirational and educational methods. When AI is called Artificial Collage Creations then I will support it, it will never be Art unless the Computer on its own comes up without input from external sources an image of their own creation that the computer can explain its ideas in creating it. It is not Art till then.

Being nobody might be not that bad, but being forgotten? I think about that since years, I'm a musician (not this channel) and I'm not a known artist at all, even taking into account that I'm involved since I started my music education at 8 yo. So I'm usually asking myself - whats the point of giving my heart and life to something that will be lost anyway, just like it never existed at all. That makes my whole life a big mistake...

Been reading his books since the early eighties and it was love at first sight. Thanks for putting the master in the spotlight (Jeremiah fans probably get the pun).

Thank you.

Dave is wrong when he says that commercial art is going to disappear because you can't copyright A.I generated images, so if you generate an image for an album/book cover or a poster for a film, everyone can use that image without having to deal with any of the copyright claims. Any sort of revenue that it could generate is going to be gone when others are selling it too without any repercussions.

Re-watching a year or so later,, that last part is especially troubling - - yes, why we create is important, but unless born wealthy, you can't live the life of an artist and get good at it, if the commercial applications, beyond gallery sales (which is out of reach for many who don't live near an appropriate gallery, or have the contacts and money to travel/ship/exhibit there) are gone. For most of us who are artist/illustrators, it was already an uphill battle against our working class or poor roots to get where we are... everyone starts somewhere and no one starts at the top, and A.I. threatens to erase the jobs that help you both grow and make a living, while becoming a better artist.

'But then' only works in certain situations. In other situations, it can be a very bad idea. Imagine a story told by a 1st-P protagonist as the story happens, as opposed to a story told in 3rd-p (where the author is a disembodied sentience telling the story) told in past tense (and this can be accomplished without using YA simple present tense). 'But then' should be restricted to 3rd-p past tense if you want it to work well. In a 1st-P present day scene or story, the protagonist is the narrator. For them to mention 'then' as an aspect of when something happens, implies the past, or at a minimum, a jump in time to the past (they have not experienced what happens next yet, so there can be no jump to the future). True, they can reference the past, and they can relate flashbacks, but in the present day scenes, being told as they happen, 'then' typically just does not fit, unless it is used as a reference to something that has already happened, which again, is always going to be a reference to something from the past, either the immediate past or the distant past, or something in between. 'Now' might fit, if used properly. But 'then', makes no sense at all and undermines the fact that the story is being told as it happens. Using it there is a very bad idea. And what does 'but' even mean? If we use the Cambridge dictionary definition, what it is (in this usage) is a coordinating conjunction, a linking word that connects two ideas that contrast with each other. Is it really even necessary? No. If you show the first idea and then show the second idea, the concept of 'but' is implied. The word itself is then superfluous. Repetitive. And being superfluous and repetitive violates the basic cardinal rules governing good writing. The reader will see the contrast all on their own. They don't need a 'but'. I suggest not overusing that word. So it does make sense for a writer to think in terms of 'but then' when creating a scene, but placing it directly in the text is an entirely different animal, and should be done with caution. It's not a shortcut to good writing. There are no shortcuts.

How can I draw character design

I'm concerened. Why don't you upload any more

If everything is art, then art is nothing If everything means art, then art means nothing

I realy like AI art, i hope it doesn't get held back by old artist

beautiful message, thank you guys!🍀

Artists, how do you deal with the pain and the grief? I made some sketches recently and thought I might turn them into digital illustration, then felt so foolish thinking an ai would do it better and faster. I tried generating something using OpenArt's free generator and turns out I'm quite good with prompts, because it's what I've been searching and the hashtags I've been using (such as brushwork, texture, semirealistic, etc). It's so painful. On the one hand, the mind telling you you don't have to reinvent the wheel, just use all the tools already at your disposal. On the other, the ethical sense telling you to not unfairly use the collective work of many artists before you. I found it paralysing!

I have made a living as an artist for over half a century. I have found my name on midjourney lists of art styles to prompt. It's rather depressing to say the least. there needs to be some serious legal oversight to what is blatant piracy of our life's work.

The great thing is when you type "in the style of Dave McKean" into your prompt, it doesn't look like he made it and it doesn't look like his AI art either. It does look cool though.

Your videos are very helpful man. Thanks a lot

Hey, the links doesnt work

I love ai art, I love the software, haterz complain.

can you give a tutorial about how chat balloons should be?

I was the collateral damage of AI. I was working with a small game developer and after a year they dropped me and went with AI. Now I'm still having a hard time finding a place that wants to pay an artist who isn't already well established in the field. I hope I can get back to making a living from art someday.

the old school greats used references all the time like hal foster

I love all the no - bodies

Great video thanks a lot

Nobody has never headaches somebody has always headache 😂

Love your videos. I supported your "Comics Crash Course" as well - good stuff :)

interesting point he makes about the "spark, fire, human element that great works of art have "it",......" but theirs lack same. will that change in future if they turn there selves on and off,....? thanks for the video......

How would you expose yourself as your working on your universe of stories and characters ?

As it is since a week my mind is high on violent fantasies as I am making sketches first then buy the proper pencils sketch book after Sketch book like never before, I do think motivation is the biggest concern before you dedicate yourself to this form of art ( although mine is very gritty ) I just go by particular movie scenes but work them out differently a good way for that is to create your figure and see where he/she fits last thing don't get discouraged or if anything try to work that depression in the form of an antagonist for example, you think your hero is too much of a rip off so you create a gang or murder club to have him killed like in many storylines you're the one in control you can dwindle it down or top it up a notch

I was not a fan of AI art, but since it is here I am using it as a creative partner (for idea generation mostly) since I have nobody else to work with. I guess we just have to try and adapt, somehow.

After recovering from the initial blow of this, and the subsequent existential crisis, I realize that I do not give a shit. I am going to keep drawing. I am a proud 'luddite'. I have no interest in looking at AI 'art' as I have concluded that it is dull and tasteless. It's a barren plane of endless, bland, 'middle ground'. Your typical studio exec can't tell the difference, but people can. You look at it, and yeah, it's often technically nice, but completely absent an actual voice. People won't know why exactly, but it will not captivate them. It will say nothing.

Hi Palle. A wonderful video and very informative. I know this is an old video from 9 years ago, but can I ask you some questions. Say I have a pencil drawing and I want to do my paneling digitally, is it just a simple as scanning my drawing into my computer, do what I need to do with my drawing like turning my drawing into a digital artwork then fitting the artwork around a panel? Hope that makes sense. Last question, if I was to do my comic paneling digitally, what program do most comic book use? Photoshop? Illustrator? InDesign? Maybe it depends on the artists taste?

Embrace it. Stop whining.

How I see it! AI art enthusiast are those who wish they could learn art but never had the courage and or discipline to follow through on it. They now see a tool that can do it for them and they push their efforts to discredit the very people they admired to be but could not.

I feel somewhat discouraged that once again we blame the tool and not the human using it and the purpose for which it is used. Whose fault is for ex. that music artist is not receiving their true worth from streaming services? the tools or the human's maneuvering the streaming service? Let's work at the core of the problem instead of blaming technology.

This artist really hits the nail on the head for me. Most discussion around AI is still so much about politics and profit, but very few seem to ask what do these developments do to humans themselves. Linking creativity and mental health is extremely apposite. Creativity in turn is so much ingrained in skill development. As AI is pumping out millions of images in every few seconds, we are going to see massive devaluation of artistic intent and output, as well as the lack of need to really develop your manual skills and struggle for them. But without that struggle and the process of creation there can be no art, which is going to be detrimental to our creativity. We should all go back to drawing and learning to play music.

I believe that when creative people abdicate their imaginations to machines, their ability to create will atrophy to the point of nonexistence. They will become slaves to the very systems they sought to master.

why walk when we can run? why run when we can drive? why drive when you can fly? why fly if you can teleport?

This may be extremely dated for just 8 months, there's over 100 years of art history and artists viewpoints that don't agree with his definition of art. From Dadaism and the pop culture movement, to experimental video. We live in a time where visual images and mental thoughts are paint to be mixed on a digital canvas. It's still up to the artist that creates the artist.

I found this because of a Facebook post where some small Comic Con convention will ban the sale of AI art and if they see any aka if the staff determine it's AI art it will be removed. one of the comments was that they should quote, "... inform this counterfeiter that his bootleg a.i. made comic book is not welcome and will be removed from the show." talking about Dave's book. Now the fun part is that 90 % of the people commenting who agree and overall are negative about AI, all sell fan art of Marvel and DC comics, which is something AI can do better, faster and cheaper, so I see AI as a means to push the artist into creating their own voice, instead of just making cheap looking copies of other artists work. I agree that there need to be some regulations with using AI datasets that's been trained without the consent of the original artist which is how we got the Getty Images vs Stable Diffusion lawsuit, but imagine as a concept artist, having a clean version of Midjourney that's only trained in your style, so when you need to pitch a concept, you can save maybe 80 % of the work time. But other than that most of the discussions smells more like traditional artists vs digital artists.

Very interesting critical evaluation of AI and Midjourney. It poses the question very well whether it is art what AI does. Certainly there is no "artistic" effort. There is no life put into this effortless "art". But the result is similar and can satisfy many economic interests while liquidating, in a way, art as a creative activity. Moreover AI, in the directions it is taking, is becoming a great automatic parasite on the knowledge and experience of human beings. AI, of course, is also a human product. Much is made of "algorithms" as coded opinion. It is not AI that is the problem but this "codified opinion" that subtly puts us in a "fait accompli" situation that favors the large conglomerates with great computing power at their disposal, a resource that will increasingly turn humanity "into sand", as Nietzsche said. The parasitism embedded in certain, not all, uses of AI is little realized. The current "weak" AI focuses on parasitizing a vast amount of data and knowledge gathered from humanity in a process of acachapant transformation that hides the origin and the sweat and blood with which it was all engendered. The extraction of surplus value now proceeds on a cultural level and in infinite exacerbation.