Probably not a hot take but Dark/spooky art or story telling does not equal weird or they have something going on in life And i know not everyone thinks that but i can see the look in some people's faces when i explain a story/setting for an oc or show them my art and they just have the look of "...oh" And im also fully content that thats probably also because i dont look like the average horror movie or thriller lover ( and truly im a wuss through and through) But still

Ai art = shit

Any youtuber: "I hope you enjoyed my video, leave a like!" Duchess Celestia: "My goal with this video is to irritate you" (Just a silly joke to try to forget the existential dread caused by the absence of Squarespace from a Celestia's video)

BIG AGREE on the point that "generic" art is not bad. I've seen "generic" get used as an insult a lot, and I've seen artists be criticized for drawing similar things over and over or for only drawing generic Pinterest art. Idc if a thousand other people have drawn something similar to what I'm drawing; I'm drawing it bc I LIKE it. I'm not gonna sacrifice qualities of my art that I like just to make it different from other people's.

These are sounding less like Opinions.... and more like Anvils that needed to be dropped. Props for doing the dropping.

The “aspiring artist” thing is true for a lot of things actually. For example: being transgender. My partner says they “wish they were a girl”, they get frequent dreams about being a cis woman, and get upset when they wake up, and they get excited when I refer to them as a girl, but so many times they say they can’t be a girl cause they’re “not feminine enough” (which is horrible mentality and especially ironic cause they have the most traditionally feminine feminine body type ever) and it is driving me insane. They are a girl, and anyone who says stuff like that, where they “want to be [insert gender here]”, you (in 99.9% of cases) ARE that gender. That was my tangent, love you all, enjoy your gender. Anyone who gets that reference gets a cookie.

yEAH, as long as you create arts (It doesn't matter it is good or bad arts), you can call yourself "artist"

To quote Kappa Kaiju on the subject of AI: “Many people implement (generative AI) in incredibly interesting ways - upscaling, photo restoration, game development, normalmapping and video pre-production are all things that image generation effectively (…) benefits. It’s just that the easiest thing to do with it, and what everyone *wants* the machine to do, is intentionally steal art. The more I look into it, the more I feel like it’s just the Iron Giant, but the humans *and* the giant want the giant to be the big guy that blows stuff up. If image generation somehow gets outlawed, I’ll shed a single tear for the loss of what could have been… and then feel the overpowering warmth from the inner earth that comes with the knowledge that the world is *absolutely* a better place.”

I agreed and have even had my own rants with friends about #1-9, they're all very based takes. And while I do understand what you mean about take #10, I refuse to call AI anything but trash. It cannot be allowed to be elevated by society even when it is used in creative ways, because we DON'T live in that utopia that this aims to exist within. Our value and livelihoods are tied to our labor and the democratization of these assets with AI can only exist peacefully in a society that upholds the value in all people equitably of their production of labor in society. But tht society is not here, its a utopic vision, and thus AI fundementally exists only as a means of robbing us of our labor, and thus our lives under capitalism. PLEASE do not allow our oppressors the value of 'well intentions', the atomic bomb was made with good intentions too.

I might not be the right audience for this video because I agreed with every point you made. The only one I almost got hung up on was the realism vs stylized but then I got what you were actually trying to say. I wholeheartedly agree with the ai art take. Yes, some ai art actually looks like slop I will admit, but a lot of it, especially recently, actually looks good. I think it's disrespectful to call good looking ai art "slop" because the artists that had their art stolen are not sloppy, bad artists. I think it disrespects the source material to call it slop. Is current generative ai unethical? Absolutely, I won't disagree with anyone on that. But I feel like it kinda rubs salt on the wounds of artists who've had their work stolen just to be called slop. I personally am not against new technologies or ai or anything of the sort, I'm against the unethical practices of these large corporations that are creating them, and also the lack of safety laws regarding new technology. We need to make sure that these technologies are thoroughly tested and made in a safe (including environmentally) way, and stop stealing from people. If they paid artists to create works to be fed into their databases I would absolutely be more supportive of ai generation, but these billion dollar corporations are having none of that and are just looking for ways to pay less for employment and hire less people. I really just can't stand the blatant exploitation of artists (who they have no relationship with and did not hire!) and the fact that they are not creating these technologies to make the world a better place. Sorry for the rant lol I just needed to say that.

6:36 - 6:54 no, it will look like AI (this half-joke will age well ;)

I am glad that I don’t really have an uncanny valley threshold. So far I have yet to see something that will cause me to feel something like that.

Agree with everything that you said

I really like your take on originality! There is no need to re-invent the wheel from scratch. If it's not a copy and the artist puts thought and intention into their choices, it very much is original, even if it shows pre-existing traits and characteristics.

Generative Ai harms the environment alot so even if it doesn’t hurt artists it still causes harm

So far i agree with every point you've made this video. Except the ai good part. Well as a tool, yes, but not as art in itself.

One reason I like AI art is because I know what I'm getting. Right now, I'm on my 4th human artist commission to do a single book cover. I try to have hope, but I'm feeling like artists are malicious genies, twisting my words and giving me something that's technically correct, but that I can't actually use. I don't know what I'm doing wrong, and it's stressing me out. If it fails this fourth time, I'm going with AI.

12:31 SO REAL

i'll take stylization over realism any day of the week. It's like, would I choose a game based on its graphics or how fun it is?

honestly it makes me upset when a series is supposed to be in the modern day but draws soldiers like its the 1950s with outdated equipment and completely wrong camo if they even have it

On that last point . . . my sister picked up a jigsaw puzzle over Thanksgiving and the image was a beautiful dragon head, and I had a very difficult time NOT suggesting that the picture looked like something from a generative AI (with a good prompt and subsequent upscaling). This didn't impact its utility as a physical jigsaw puzzle any, but still.

Well shit, I agree with all of them 😂... enjoyed this one.

What makes the extreme facial expressions that get JoJo level detail better is when the rest of the body is perfectly normal anime style, and it’s only the face or hand that’s hyper detailed,

100% agree with your point on calling people or yourself an aspiring artist

4:31 Yeah, I think a lot of people actually would do your chores in exchange for art, since jobs are so scarce and pay hardly anything. "The one job where salary gets me something? Sign me up!"

Ok, so the only takes that I actually have to discuss is the "aspiring artists" and AI takes. I find people who use aspiring artist aren't tacking it on out of obligation, they actually have a goal in mind that they haven't reached, and haven't met the goal, so can't be recognized by said goal. This is usually some narrative thing with their ocs. The AI take, i can see where you're coming from, and yes, i am man enough to admit that an image generated by AI can look good, but a mathmatical formula holds no true appeal to me. There was no real thought put behind a design choice, and no true reason for a specific brushing. It is a computer showing me what is mathematically likely to be an image similar to the prompts given to it. If i want inspired there are other more reliable options to gain it; look at nature, use a character creator, talk to friends, see other people's work. It really doesn't serve much other than convenient mediocrity at a fast speed the vast majority of the time, and even then people often have to photobash or edit it to be actually visually appealing

God bless you Jesus loves you all! Have a Godly day!!!

Spongebob gets away with it's hyper realistic closeups because it's part of the joke. Those are funny af

"The imposdibly strong familly resemblance" My OCs : Are we a joke to you ?

I don't want art to be my job, but as a disabled person it's the only thing I can do, since I can't stand for long or lift things that weigh more than 4LB

Speaking of ai, here is a bit of philosophical pondering: Would a robot count as making real art or ai "art" Let's say we end up with somewhat the same tech as my wife has no emotion (but the minas are adult looking because here the marketing team is not run by pedos), you get one of the robots and at some point teach it how to use a pencil to make sketches, a brush to paint, ect and the robot draws you. Would that drawing count has art? would only things the robot draw by itself count or if let's say you ask it to paint a scene of your wife in an olivia armstrong cosplay stepping on you (guess what wideo I recently saw) would that still count despite being ordered by you to a machine?

The sketching point is fantastic! I’ve seen too many people claiming to be “great at coloring, but not so good at lineart,” and I don’t wanna sound mean when I say it, but “You’re art is only as good as its weakest link,” so if you’ve got professional level coloring skill on amateur looking lineart, the whole picture looks amateur. It’s not a good or nad thing, it’s just wear you are

Hobbyist artist turned freelance professional artist, here. Yeah just don't. Do not turn your passion into a job. Don't do it. I have lost damn near every drop of creativity for myself since my entire well has been turned to creating for others. And it only really triggers anymore when it benefits somebody else. EDIT: Forgot to mention that the income from it is garbage unless you're LUDICROUSLY lucky. There are a handful of big artists who suck up every bit of space there is on Patreon. And the commissioner pool is shrinking rapidly with the advent of AI.

Great points you made, especially about AI art. I have 2 pinterest boards, one I made before 2022 when the AI boom spiraled out of control and one after 2022. The curated first one has, to the best of my ability, in it only art that I can tell is man made - it also helps that I'm intimate with digital and traditional brush strokes to tell the difference. I make it a point of hiding any AI art I come across and reporting it for being difficult to see and pixelated so I don't get similar ones recommended on my home page. That board I can't ever delete because deleting it means I'll never find those original photos of REAL art again, ever, because of how much AI slop is on the site. The second board has anything AI art, in general, that catches my eye and has good colours or shapes or ideas. There's very pretty AI art out there and the reason it's like that is due to the deal artists the generative AI database pulls from. I don't let it interfere or overlap with my curated board, because trying to train Pinterest to NOT recommend you AI art is a lot harder than having it recommend human made art - something which wasn't the case prior to 2022, but we have tech bros to thank for making us all detectives, eh? Many already existing AI art pieces have good ideas and can provide so much inspiration.

I feel lied too, these aren't even lukewarm takes! 😂

Those old yaoi hands are so goofy. I can't stare at them. 😭

17:10 there's an artist on here that I absolutely love who does art critique videos and whenever they correct a piece it just ends up looking like their own art. Along with some other things they do it makes me wonder "If I actually got good at this would it be Jellygate 2.0?" lol

no no you're right about ai. some of it does look really nice and cool, it's just HOw it came to be and what people have done with it that ruined it all.

21:25 in MY opinion i think ai art wuld have been better(still not moraly good but still better) and more used IF it was not maid with replacing artist in mind if it was maid to help artist it culd be used for so much good non creatives expresing there ideas artist geting eny ref they want ect ect yes it will still have a lot of ishues (global warming, some artist still being replaced ect) but most peoples main ishue will be gone

1. I'm seriously biased, because my art is pretty simple. But I agree I mean yes, detailed art can and does look nice. But that doesn't mean it's better than simple art (if that were the case, theodd1sout, wouldn't be nearly as popular as he is) 2. I agree. Because, unless you're doing an something like abstract art, where you don't necessarily need a sketch. The sketch is, in my opinion, the most important step of a drawing. Because it's easier to fix any mistakes (like with anatomy, or perspective), in the sketching phase, then another phase 'Cause you can have really nice colours, shading, etc. But people Will most likely be more drawing to something like. A hand looking off, or a tree being the same size as a person. Etc 3. Again, I agree. Like, I love drawing. It helps me express myself. And it's fun getting to see a blank page get filled with stuff I drew That being said, I'm not going to make it my career. Because, regardless of what type of art job you have. You're gonna have to draw stuff you don't like. And it's not just drawing something, and getting paid I'm not trying to be like a nagging parent, and say you should get a "real job". I'm just saying, that you should research what type of art jobs are out there, and think about if you really want to do art as a job 4. I agree. And it always annoys me, when my mom says something like "I can't even draw a stick figure". Because she absolutely can, and there's actually really good stick figure art out there But also, I didn't start drawing in a way I like, until I was maybe 20. And I still have stuff I don't like and want to improved on I didn't pop out of my mom's womb, being able to draw perfectly. I taught myself how to draw 5. Disagree, but that's probably the self-doubf talking 6. Biased, but I agree. I feel like this kind of thing, is basically saying simpler art, sucks. Which, isn't true at all 7. I agree. Like, I spend maybe an hour, drawing on one page in my sketchbook. But even if you only have like, 10 minutes of free time. That's still 10 minutes you can use, to draw/teach yourself how to 8. Neither agree nor disagree 9. I agree. 'Cause sure, having an "original" artstyle is nice. It doesn't mean generic art styles are bad. They're only really bad, if the artist is blatantly copying someone 10. Hard disagree

I don't think generative AI looking good or not is the main issue. Generative AI imagery directly impacts a person’s media literacy in a negative way. Both due to the spread of mis/disinformation, and the fact that it is increasingly harder to recognise what is AI generated and what is not. Media literacy education is far behind generative AI development, a paper “Generative AI and Media Literacy Education” by Ecorys and the London School of Economics and Political Science explains it well, without my personal bias- I do have a bone to pick with AI. Due to AI also playing a big role in the rise of anti-intellectualism ideologies, and subsequently ‘brainrot’ I can’t say its existence is warranted. If generative AI had to exist for one reason or another, it should not be available to the public under any circumstance- giant corporations don’t care to make a personalised revenge ‘corn’ of an individual, but a spiteful ex could. To quote Tawfik Jelassi, the Assistant Director-General for Communication and Information, UNESCO “Policies and regulations on artificial intelligence must prioritize user empowerment, and in this perspective, media and information literacy offers the key set of competencies for users to navigate through a disrupted digital ecosystem.” Most people who actually have the opportunity to look into the deeper picture GAI paints are in agreement- GAI ruins the internet landscape by spreading mis/disinformation, and with it being essentially brand new and shiny, people are often swayed by its messages. History is repeating itself- almost a century ago ‘new forms of media’ of those days were used to spread propaganda. The newer the form of expression (in media) is, the more novel it is, the stronger of an impact it will have. I mean, propaganda cartoons were far more effective during the cold war than any other form of media. (sources for this sections; ADDYSG CYMRU EDUCATION WALES, an article on HBW, Examining Media and Information Literacy Responses to Generative AI: A UNESCO Policy Brief , and the aforementioned paper by Ecorys) GAI has also compromised human creativity and intelligence (see article: Do Not Worry That Generative AI May Compromise Human Creativity or Intelligence in the Future: It Already Has On PMC central, written by Robert J Sternberg) Similarly to brainrot, the easy access to anything imaginable makes one’s mind lazy. That is made even worse by the fact that current GAI uses existing work to ‘learn’, meaning the ‘anything imaginable’ is already limited by the confines of what exists and can be ripped off. Also GAI imagery, texts, videos etc, cannot be copyrighted in most parts of the word (too many sources to list) anyway, before someone says 'it's not that deep bro'. yes, yes it is. in conclusion, IMO, generative AI is all souless slop, and directly messes with a human's psyche- whether by actively making the brain and mind lazy, or by feeding someone misinformation while betting on one's inability to see what's real and what's not.

Ai art is bad because it takes away people's jobs Why would I hire a thumbnail artist to do my work when I simply can have AI do the job????

Okay if it's about how serious it is what do you call yourself if you draw like once a month 👀 (too many hobbies ™️)

Yay I’m early!

omg the one about talent. i agree so much. it’s one of the few things i have actually strong opinions about! every time i see a video about someone doing something impressive (be it sport, a craft, or anything else) all of the comments are full of “wow this person is so talented!” “i could never be this good” “imagine just being so good at something” etc etc, AND IT DRIVES ME UP THE WALL LIKE NOTHING ELSE! i hate the way that every single impressive looking thing is automatically stamped as talent. it completely disregards any work that person has put into learning and becoming skilled by implying that they came out the womb that way. it’s like people are just calling it talent to feel better about themselves for not bothering to put in the work themselves! “i could never do that” okay but have you tried? to me it feels like… two-faced worshipping? basically putting someone on a pedestal, then insisting they can never reach a similar height and using that as an excuse to not even try. 10/10 take, fully agree

8:00 Hey so an even better example of this trope is Corrin from Fire Emblem, Corrin has two separate designs, a male design and a female design, their gender is chosen by the player. Corrin’s male design is covered up, obviously. But the female design of Corrin has an entire chunk of her leg armor removed and literally showing her underwear… Despite being the same exact character.

I agree that some ai “art” looks good but only because it was trained off a decent artist lol.

Everything you said about AI art? Yeah, I think I agree!

I'm very glad someone expressed an AI art opinion that admits that not all of it looks crap as well as the fact it COULD have been useful. I wish generative AI was used and created in an ethical way , bc it could've been great. ESPECIALLY in the " uncanny " stylization like you mentioned. Since AI art doesn't have the capacity to learn actual anatomy , some of the mistakes it can make can be genuinely good ideas for horror art , but ofc it's not like anyone can take these ideas ethically bc it's just a mass of stolen art mashed together. Ngl , it is surprising how many of your takes I agree with. Ofc , some nitpicks to some of your supporting points , but overall agreement

There's a problem a problem I have with generative AI and with most scientific findings recently is that it's all driven by the goal of maximum profit and people don't accept the concept of putting limitations into them. The over-reliance on generative AI causes harms to the environment due how much energy they consume and not deleting the theft in the database just to not start again is not ethical. Yes, it has benefits, but our species survived over 300000 years without this benefits, we don't have to go back to cavemen lifestyle but this benefits are not needed. We need to regulate them before we let them screw the world for proft.