captain disillusion has explained himself

[@cupocolor6410]

Hearing the full "thanks for watching" and holding on complete silence made my bones shiver

[@jamesdempsey1330]

With the elements cutting out I felt like it was building up for a goddam jump scare.

[@gabed.2632]

agree with you guys, she basically subverted herself this time

[@cupofdirtfordinner]

i hope she cuts the video like a minute short next time to make up for it

[@gabed.2632]

@@cupofdirtfordinner nah

[@bounceysteve]

spoiler >:(

[@tabescentpaws]

thanks for the big spinning captain, the mario cam simply wasn't doing it for me anymore

[@magicksilver4444]

Yeah, what’s up with all that…

[@octcube_]

Captain D's take feels like the VFX equivalent of saying sampling isn't a valid form of composing music

[@cyl_genderfluid-furry]

With this comparison, I think I'm starting see the issue with what he said, which I didn't see after it was clarified. (Edit): In my defense, I paused the video before commenting, and probably would've realized the issue by watching the rest of the video.

[@Demilich23]

It isn't.

[@LexYeen]

​@@Demilich23bro, bro you have to say _why_ you think that do you want anyone to take you seriously or not

[@slashess69]

and in this comparison arises much of the discourse I personally loathe around AI or generative art. Synth based music composers have used various algorithms, equations, and programs to manipulate a melody into something new, not explicitely composed by the musician - from taking seabed depth data and mapping it to pitch or other aspects of the piece, to using math to transpose and manipulate a short melody into a longer piece - THE ENTIRE debate around the artistic value of these types of compositions comes down to context. Is what you're doing here saying anything? And if it is how necessary is the data or algorithm you used to create it.

[@bnuuyes]

​@@Demilich23do you know what channel you are on right now

[@bromstead]

the day we stop using "effort" as a metric in determining the validity and quality of art will be the day i'll finally make peace with the world

[@Demilich23]

only failures like you want to remove standards from artistic canon

[@bambsy9665]

​@@Demilich23You're allowed to just not like things. If you don't like a piece of art that's cool, but you not liking it doesn't change whether it's art or not.

[@LexYeen]

​@@Demilich23what standards are you talking about, bro? art is vibes based, not standards based.

[@clockwork_mind]

*What is the point of art?* Is it to make us feel and think? To produce some kind of reaction in its viewer, some kind of introspection, bring them a new perspective on the world (or at least a small part of the world)? I think those are all fair things to say art is "supposed to do." If that's the case, I don't think *effort* is any kind of reliable metric for judging art. I've seen many projects that clearly had hundreds of hours of effort behind them, but which I still found to be shit. They didn't make me feel anything except "this is... just bad." I think lots of people understand this intuitively, though they accidentally conflate effort with quality, hence "I'm going to randomly scratch a pen on paper and call it art." "So good art is something that both makes you feel something, makes you think, introspect, etc, AND that required a lot of effort to make." Well, at this point, why are we including the effort as a metric? If something makes me feel, think, shifts my perspective, but it was relatively easy to make, does that mean it's any less art? Can art not be simple yet powerful? I'm not saying that all the examples of art in the video make me incredibly emotional or changed my life, I'm just saying that pointing and saying "low-effort" is not enough to discredit it as art.

[@D3LTATRAX]

​@@OctovenderRealIf only I had a nickel for every person who's opinion of art boils down to "but how much cash did they nab selling this? If it's too much, then I hate it." I bet I'd have $17m.

[@k4kadu]

Alright then. L opinion from Captain D, but certainly props for him to give a concise answer that doesn't increase drama or anything but actually explains his position.

[@ChanceCardFilm]

Captain Disillusion's definition of art seems to be "Would I pay someone for this?" which comes across a bit shallow and incurious.

[@digdogbulldogdog]

He called the artists he didn’t like “low effort commercial artists” tho And he’s made entire documentaries on just movies he loves and which made him fall in love with VFX he clearly has a normal love for art In his flight of the navigator video he literally does original research and brings old props into the studio just to recreate how the a shot was created doesn’t seem incurious to me seems like healthy engagement with art I don’t even like the art opinion it’s dumb but why did it make everyone here start huffing their own farts lol Everyone alive hates the kitschy balloon animals, they look like shit

[@yeethittter1285]

​@@digdogbulldogdog I like the kitschy balloon animals :(

[@MotherLover1984]

Better than "vibes" tbh

[@undeniablySomeGuy]

I don't really think that's a valid reading of his statement on art. I think it's moreso that he has this bar of "derivitaveness" that invalidates something as being "art"

[@bugsisland3061]

@@digdogbulldogdogFirst time I’m hearing that people hate balloon animals.

[@catbot6037]

The captain, he's accelerating...

[@tabescentpaws]

my gosh... what do we do?!

[@geroldy4546]

@@tabescentpawsTell him Jesus loves you

[@isaac_759]

rap battle now

[@miajajajajajajajajajo]

Or do it the controversy Spanish youtuber way and set up a boxing match

[@unblorbosyourshows9635]

@@miajajajajajajajajajo oh no is this what we're famous for

[@miajajajajajajajajajo]

@@unblorbosyourshows9635 I say this as someone who speaks spanish; I'm the one snitching to the gringos

[@jaborbis]

EMINEM VS IBS

[@FinetalPies]

Relegated to the tumble dryer for the crime of bad opinions

[@trigger7ff6]

this quote goes

[@trigger7ff6]

not in any particular direction or having any specific quality it just goes

[@Bashfluff]

Also, I can't imagine any other hot take that would make him sound less like a professional and more like a typical KZbinr.

[@cyl_genderfluid-furry]

If he said literally anything even slightly more bigoted, he'd sound atleast slightly less professional.

[@zarrg5611]

​@@cyl_genderfluid-furry Yeah, but this is pretty bad, he would have to go on a ten minute tirade against any post 1900 art or something.

[@cyl_genderfluid-furry]

@@zarrg5611 I was jokingly stating the obvious, whilst also pointing out that literally speaking, there is worse. My statement is accurate, and can't really be argued against.

[@zarrg5611]

​@@cyl_genderfluid-furry I'm sorry if I was too ‘but aktually’, I can see how that can be irritating, I just didn't quite understand your comment.

[@rotisseriepossum]

im sure we all love the ‘thanks for wa-‘ typical of these videos (I know I do, I laugh every time), so I just need to say: getting the full ‘thanks for watching’ and then having the video slowly, like, shut down was both hilarious and unsettling. thank u

[@Person.1234]

I was legit getting worried there'd be a jumpscare lmao

[@signalings]

I just thought it was pretty.

[@vacantvisionary]

I was really expecting the Mario Cam to be the last element of the video standing

[@MrInsideEye]

immediately thought of duchampe's fountain when reading his definitions also, excellent subversion of the "thanks for wa-" bit in your previous videos

[@ebucario]

good to know my initial take of "it was an extended, in-character rant from someone whose barometer of 'good art' is solely 'technical skill in VFX', as a joke" was only wrong about the "in-character" and "as a joke" parts

[@frumbolo]

HE'S STILL IN CHARACTER HE'S STILL IN CHARACTER IT'S A JOKE IT'S A JOKE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE IT'S A JOKE HE'S JOKING HE'S SDTILL ING HCAHRACTER PLEASE

[@ebucario]

@@frumbolo what?

[@JasminUwU]

​@@ebucario They're coping and seething in real time

[@neerajnandan3519]

@@JasminUwULmao, it could still be a joke. In one of the 30 minute talks on CD’s channel he talks about how you should always appear right on Internet and shows an example as a joke where he sticks to a weird narrative rather than admitting he is wrong for a while.

[@Scarwing]

I have been dragged into the timeline where the ambiguity of sarcasm has been clarified to be no, he really does think that. I want to go back to the ignorance.

[@personpeoplepeoplepersons5722]

I wish I didn't know he thought this tbh

[@cheatexp]

love how the captain d picture in the corner kept spinning faster

[@tsrenis]

i cant believe captain disillusion is now a 3d animated vfx motion simulated milkshake duck

[@francegamer]

If there's a piece of art or an artwork that you hate it doesn't stop being art. If you think the art is shit you have every right to rabidly critique it, but it's still technically a work of art. If it wasn't one, you wouldn't be trying to invalidate that from it. I think this especially annoys me due to point 2 tacitly assuming you think that hobbyist or student art is in some way or in some cases not real art. Like it's true people learning a skill aren't going to be as good at it as they will be in a few years, but their early art is still very much meaningful! Even if it's complete garbage it's still got intrinsic value just due to its necessity as well as how it simply shows continuous effort towards a goal if nothing else. Implicitly saying "you're not going to be a REAL artist for at least like, four years" is just uncool. Uninspiring to the youth at the very least.

[@miajajajajajajajajajo]

I think this kind of take makes it so that things like children's drawings don't count as art. I always think of that one post a parent made showing a drawing that their kid made with the word "safe" in mind. Three people sharing a bed, the little one in the midle, and everyone is smiling. I don't think I can make this any more clear.

[@vixo551]

People are scared of saying that art can be bad. Because for them being art implies some form of "greatness" that transcends itself or something like that. Art can be amazing, mediocre, awful, or just meh, once you realize that, everything is better.

[@francegamer]

​@@miajajajajajajajajajo Yeah, It can be real meaningful! I just wanted to bank on the absolutely certain fact that you have to draw a whole lotta drawings that are at least mechanically crap until you can make stuff that is mechanically good. Invalidating those is both a dick move and probably untrue. There's usually some real neat stuff in there, like you said :3

[@Numbabu]

I think it’s completely fine to be of the opinion that things that aren’t up to a certain standard aren’t art. I just don’t think that having a definition of art like that is ever helpful. Art is a dumb category. It’s a human thing to do, so as a human you have to decide if and how you can know it when you see it. I think saying that something being derivative makes it bad is dumb unless you have some inspiration quotient you can point to to quantify how derivative something is. Like The Inferno is kind of derivative, of history, and the Bible and whatever whatever. It’s not art? I think musical sampling is a fantastic example. I don’t get a lot out of most art, and when I do, recontextualized versions of that art tend not to do as much as the original. American Gothic just makes me want to stare and stare in a way that no other “interpretation” Does. But that’s not how I feel about music. With music I can absolutely see how a person making their own cover, or adapting a melody, or fully sampling something, can make an entirely new piece of art. I’ll never understand his exact criteria for art with an explanation like that basically.

[@digdogbulldogdog]

aren’t you just projecting your gripes on some random dude tho I feel like even if he’s wrong we have to come to terms that people we don’t know have shitty opinions

[@Irigesic]

the way the video disintegrated piece by piece after the "thanks for watching" was oddly chilling in a way i wish i had the words to describe

[@Demilich23]

please stop talking like that it's beyond insufferable

[@DianeSteele]

@@Demilich23 live a little, let people express themselves however they want. no way of speaking is gonna be more annoying than someone coming into a comment's replies to be a preachy weirdo, shoosh

[@ashleybyrd2015]

@@Demilich23 why do you care?

[@hideawaysis]

​@@Demilich23 ?????? how

[@Irigesic]

​@@Demilich23 i think i will actually continue to talk however i'd like to, and i think that maybe you should reflect on why something so inconsequential bothers you so much

[@QUINTIX256]

I recall a certain adorable doggo claiming art “is not a goddamn endurance sport” and I couldn’t agree more. Edit: misremembered the quote, original did not have the word “endurance” but you know what? It fits.

[@QazzyTransport]

there's something i find so intriguing about this channel, how it's structured and how each video no matter the topic whether it's something I'm deeply interested in, something I've never heard of, something i agree with or an opinion i absolutely despise, it's still very entertaining and interesting to me. These videos feel exactly like those little conversations i have with myself in my head from time to time about the most random and obscure problems that it's completely meaningless and there's something so comforting yet also motivating about it. I know it doesn't make sense, but... Your videos sort of motivate me to have opinions?? Idk it just feels like im more motivated to notice things and think about it over in my head if that makes sense. Maybe I should try making a channel like this one day it would be interesting to see how it turns out anyway hope you enjoyed my little 12 AM rant thanks for r

[@mutantfreak48]

well, that's egg on the face of people saying he was being sarcastic somehow lol

[@kawaiiconcept7479]

yeah so it's as I thought it's another Solar Sands situation.

[@dragonusmolamola4140]

whats a solar sands situation

[@jossaccountofmadnessandmem1844]

​@@dragonusmolamola4140 art-related creator having horrible opinions about art despite his work

[@ahdog8]

​​what was solar sands's horrible opinion? I recall he made cringe compilations in the past but I thought he doesn't make that sort of video anymore @@jossaccountofmadnessandmem1844

[@ratewcropolix]

@@jossaccountofmadnessandmem1844 when did solar sands do this

[@jossaccountofmadnessandmem1844]

@@ratewcropolix he has explained his views on contemporary art, especially fetish art, multiple times on twitter, stating esp that the "overexposure" to fetish art might be the cause of rapid surges in "mental illness" recently. the usual correlation (by time span) = causation kind of deal.

[@fitandhappy42]

Well that’s a disappointing clarification, but not a surprising one when his take on more experimental forms of fiction was an appeal to Jospeh Campbell’s hero’s journey structure. He knows a lot about shutter speeds I’ll give him that.

[@hazelschannel162]

What video was that in? I kinda am morbidly curious to watch it

[@fitandhappy42]

@@hazelschannel162 the Escher staircase I think.

[@joeiechristiansantana9641]

To be fair, he said that about Escher stairwell, and the non-biodegradable nature of that myth. Because damn, can't the coy fella just put (THIS IS A WORK OF FICTION) all over the pl... To be fair, who cares? Honestly, gullible people like myself should just literally believe everything they see online at this point. But for real, yeah, that was weird. Not all stories need that kinda loop.

[@zinfuldreams1709]

that take is so inflammatory and silly, im honestly shocked he still holds it and doubles down on it after 5 years of it being up

[@cheddarbaby]

one of the biggest annoying things other artists do sometimes is claiming a piece of art they don't like is no longer art seemingly just because they don't like it. There is no quality minimum for something to be art, its entirely just intention to make a piece of art and even then sometimes things not intended to be "art" become art. There are whole beloved performance pieces that are like "either read or don't read this sentence" and that is even less effort than anything captain mentioned but its absolutely unquestionably art. I dont know im rambling a bit but it feels like it comes from this misguided sense that art is some elevated thing the average person can't do when its one of the base things that makes human beings unique. Its something to appreciate that every human can make art regardless of quality, if you like it or not, or if its entirely stolen from other people.

[@ClarkWasHere1]

The perlin noise 2:01 is a great joke Artists use tools built up from previous artists to make new art easier than they could before. Just because something doesn't take hours of hand animating cloth physics anymore, doesn't mean it's not art.

[@nope1018]

MORE LIKE CAPTAIN PISSILLUSION

[@JohnSmith-tk3pw]

That subversion of expectation at the end made me smile so much.

[@akumatsutranslations]

This is like if a highly skilled traditional artist looked at a painting or something and said "Oh, but look! The paint they're using is all pre-made and comes from bottles, the brushes were all made in a factory, and the canvas itself was mass produced! So, where's the art?"

[@tilkomp]

i never expected Patricia taxxon and captain D beef

[@blikthepro972]

CD has gained a status that kind of prevents him from ever displaying his takes, which isnt a good thing

[@onetimeoccam]

wonder if the captain got dizzy here

[@krakuf5239]

captain d seems to treat art and storytelling as a kind of methodical engineering (eg the ending of the escherian stairwell video)

[@VampirsTTG]

the inversion of the "thanks for watching" bit 😱😱😱😱😱

[@tituslafrombois1164]

This is the exact kind of argument that leads people to say music made on a computer isn't "real" music which I would hope at this point has been completely disproven by the absurd amount of evidence.

[@NecromancerSloth]

GREAT video, thanks Patricia ❤

[@CameronMcManus]

His concern in my interpretation isn’t “is this allowed to be called art?” in a literal sense, but “Is this doing anything as a piece of art to move me? Is it subjectively (to him) greater than the sum of its parts?” His answer is no, and he cites artist like Koons as other examples of artist that don’t make things he finds moving. Seems like a fine opinion to have if he didn’t use “would I call it ‘art’” as his way of saying that.

[@ConvincingPeople]

Yeah, it's a frustrating posture for him to take. The way that certain artists with a big platform go about things leaving a bad taste in one's mouth is fine, I think, but the framing here and the emphasis on what is or is not derivative feels both a bit shallow and missing the forest for the trees on his part. There are critiques he could have made which I probably would have agreed with but these ones aren't great.

[@dizzyformula1142]

I think you’re very good at talking and putting points together it’s actually refreshing on the internet :3

[@Hazelpupps]

Does Captain D hold the position that art should be based around meritocratic ideals? I dont think so neccesarily, however, I think he still holds a lot of contempt over certain artists for them creating art that isnt based around its perceived "effort". Ive seen this position held a lot in mainstream art discussion and its honestly disheartening how modern art is perceived and thought of in such a negative light in the public eye.

[@sentretsparkle]

I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks it's weird how his takes about art somewhat contradict the very industry he's actively a part of. Would he call his own visual effects art? If I point out the inaccuracies or errors in his effects, do they cease to be art? How much effort or lack of commercial viability is necessary for something to be considered art?

[@birchwwolf]

Ah, so this ended up being a one of those "jokes" where the contempt isn't even given plausible deniability by being told in joke format. Hmm

[@tverdyznaqs]

2:17 this, exactly. thank you!

[@orifox1629]

So i remember watching his stuff nearly a decade ago and really enjoying it, but I remember hitting a video but not the specifics of what was said, but I remember going "huh i don't like that take" whether it was art or politics idk. But one way or another he said a thing and left and did not come back. I don't mean this in a "i'm cooler than you cause i stopped watching him earlier" kind of way to be 100% clear and tbh i'm still reeling from "which part of this is the art" like . . . the whole work is the art? Right? I mean i'm not studied on art at all, but that's always how i've thought of things. Like a film score is a piece of art (i was thinking the performance of the score, but i suppose the score on its own without the performance is its own little bit of art too) but it can be used within a film and the film is a piece of art. Art Within Art. So for the example of these little videos . . . it's the video and audio combining. Even if there's other art within the work it's still An Art™ again that's how i see things, maybe i'm wrong. I've never studied media criticism or anything and my Art and English classes in elementary and high school did not teach these things

[@user-alxasaurus]

This take is cool

[@ekisacik]

we figured out (he told us) what he was getting at, there

[@xangorf]

Yapping levels today: catastrophic

[@birchwwolf]

Spinning Captain D, eh? Wutcha tryna do, put him in a...blender?

[@GALL0WSHUM0R]

Captain D also had some takes that I disagree with in... maybe the Gateway to Sedona and the Escherian Stairwell videos? Basically, he blamed the rise of mis/dis/malinformation and conspiracy theories, at least in part, on unbelievable fictional stories that present themselves as fact as part of their framing.

[@swimsvg1855]

Antivax people exist because of bigfoot for some reason

[@AJ1770s]

Ex star wars has a lot of things it derives from just look at the trench run then look at the dam seen from dam busters almost one to one yet we would consider both unique well-made influential scenes with a lot of creative and similarities.

[@vicbaez]

Your captain disilution voice was spot on.

[@imogenmangle]

"the other mass-produces colourful doodles that he has his assistants fill with colours" MATISSE?

[@Hemostat]

a lot of people call norman rockwell an illustrator and therefore he is not an "artist" im not really a fan of that take myself, i've always liked his stuff and found it distinct enough to recognize, but idk that seems where captain D's coming from

[@WangleLine]

oh my fucking god lol

[@LimeyLassen]

by god that argument had a family!

[@louimmature]

I read this as "capitalist disillusion" and was confused but now I know thank you

[@louimmature]

hexagon..

[@fruity2]

Yeah this is kind of what I suspected. From how judgemental and well poisoning they sound i wouldn't be surprised if they reply with some appeal to neoclassical bs

[@lesterdyltT]

spinny captain d go brrrr

[@JamSparing]

I am not sure what the original problem was, but it sounds like he is really just saying 'people who make low effort art should not then turn around and start arguing that other people make similar art'

[@hideawaysis]

can we also have spinning captain d in the corner of the screen with mario cam in every video going forward

[@fatguy338]

yo somethin about how the elements popped out of existence at the end one by one. I feel tingly.

[@Vizion0513]

Gonna internally start calling these "Captain Delusional" moments whenever his vids have a take like this

[@ts4858]

oof man i totally forgot about this take im so tired of people thinking they can decide what art is

[@bounceysteve]

Rapidly increasing in velocity Captiulious Disollution

[@ratewcropolix]

WHY IS THANKS FOR WATCHING LONG

[@superhuman33]

if the bread is from a bakery, the onions from a farmer, the beef from a butcher, and the cheeze wiz from a factory, what exactly is made in a cheesesteak?????????

[@rfmerrill]

I honestly read his initial rant as confused frustration about how our system applies lame pseudo-philosophical rules to art to determine who "owns" it in order to decide who gets money for the work they did and who gets nothing. But his clarification just tells me that he's big mad about someone making more ad revenue than him from "low effort" work--which is ok to be mad about as long as you're mad at the system that arbitrarily rewards art based on no sensical criteria and not at the lucky people for being lucky.

[@bogkanalenbrbrbrbrasil1447]

captain doggy

[@Matheus_Braz]

minha cabeca 🤯

[@ferweenie]

Makes me think about how i felt when i heard his takes on args lol, made me feel really weird like "what?? Is that what he thinks or is that just a joke??" It was something about args being stupid due to "tricking the audience" when it could do the same story with the clarifications that its fiction. Missing the entire point and just assuming args are media meant to lie to people for internet points rather than... a cross reality story? Fascinating how he thinks.

[@karolkozik5918]

I feel like Alex's opinions on the subject seem to... change depending on who he's talking to? In a presentation to the Blender Foundation he jokes(?) about how the animated short films produced by the Blender Animation Studio only gained acclaim (a Webby Award) for their work after they created a derivative animation based on a comic book, likening that to a supposed derivativeness of Hollywood. But in a different short Quick D video (Cup Levitation & Train Track Rescue), he opens the video slanting the whole media landscape of being derivative, and finishing off with a joke(?) at the fact that his persona and aesthetics of his program are also derivative. So I guess he doesn't consider any pop culture to be art then? I don't know anymore. On a related note, Dan Olson made a somewhat related video on the subject of modern art early on in his work, discussing The Cremaster Cycle. I'd like to hear your interpretation of it.

[@chocokittybo]

despite knowing the name of this channel I misread it as Puppygenic Triangle this time somehow can't put any more relevant thoughts into words right now though so that's the comment

[@blipboigilgamesh7865]

This outro was the best one yet, next should be even longet

[@SuperQuadocky]

If I had an assumption onto why he said it: Artists don't have to be good critics to be artists the same way good musicians don't need to know how to read sheet music.

[@SuperQuadocky]

Tho I think these structural points of individual failure are kind of not even that unusual IMO. You see these kinds of lapses of awareness constantly in bureaucratic or corporate structures.

[@Demilich23]

@@SuperQuadocky terminally online pseudo intellectual

[@LexYeen]

@@Demilich23 bro, just because you didn't understand what was said doesn't mean you should start trying to insult people with terms you don't understand.

[@SuperQuadocky]

@@Demilich23 No, just read a lot. Humanity is full of interesting foibles. Like how you make a hobby out of insulting people on your 11 year old youtube account.

[@lithobreak3812]

The definition of what is art will always be contested, and while i disagree that art is characterized by work hours i agree that i wouldn't consider something that is mass produced primarily to be sold for profit art (i quite like Britto's art, and he used to be a piece of national pride for me, but he quickly made his art into a production line). Nor would i consider scaling up someone else's work art.

[@LimeyLassen]

I swear it's the fate of skeptic channels to end up "debunking" intangibles because they've run out of content and their audience is getting restless.

[@AmbivalentDreams]

Someone needs to summon CJ the X to yell at Capt. D about art lol

[@machine.angel.777]

I just stumbled across the previous video and this one, why is a mario cam here

[@LimeyLassen]

She made a couple short videos criticizing that scene from the Mario film. There's no other context, it's tomfoolery.

[@allistair6864]

Ive always had an off feeling about captain d cause it always felt like he wasnt teaching people about VFX he was teaching it in *his* way and any other way is wrong. I remember he showed a video that had VFX in it and one of the comments of the original video thought it was done in a specific way and captain d got real pissed off at them for being wrong. He views art as if its boolean and theres right and wrong ways with art

[@mcbiscuits8015]

that ending...

[@pandaqwanda]

ngl i thought he was just playing a character , as he does in some other segments in his videos if he sincerely believes those things then that s . that s weird

[@YakulDeath]

No idea anyone will ever see this as there’s already so many comments. But I’d like to think D’s argument really hinges on his final point. That people with art styles he’s mentioning are somewhat “derivative” then go on to sue other people who they feel are making things “derivative” of their art. As in, according to the artist, fine when they (David Koons) make something that takes influence from another person’s art. But if someone takes influence from David Koons’ art then David will sue them. And that’s inherently unfair, when according to D, the initial art being created isn’t all that original to begin with.

[@puppyhelictriangle]

The only person that Captain claims is protective of their IP is romero britto, who does not make obviously derivative work. he just kinda says it in the same sentence as "jeff koons has been criticized for stealing others' work" to make it sound connected.

[@YakulDeath]

Oh, I’m actually not to familiar with Koons or the Instagram guy so I was assuming they were included in that. In that case yeah he’s completely lost me as well then lol

[@anaraosmth]

It's ironic that an artist and vfx veteran is critisizing how overprotective artists can get about their work, yet is so overprotective of what they deem "true art" that they'd rather punch down and stomp on people who just want to make stuff. He could've gotten away with it too if he had said that it's part of his character he plays in every video, whos supposed to be kind of unlikeable, but now we know he genuinely believes these things.

[@ninefoldrin5507]

I wonder how he feels about Duchamp's "Fountain?"

[@cybergoth2002]

oh yikes. great analysis as always

[@superjoeyman1]

I mean like, yeah, he's not an art critic. He's expressed ties to the "Skeptic" community and they're like, how do i put this, mostly the kind of autistic guys who think autism makes them Superior. He's, like, kinda a Reddit Guy, even if his internet presence predates reddit, and even if he's on the good end of the Reddit Guy spectrum This kinda take is the end result of a philosophy of criticism thats rooted entirely in criticisms of form, of execution Thats what the hoax debunking form was - pulling at threads and failures of CG until it falls apart. That obviously falls to bits once you apply that philosophy to art criticism, and why yeah he does poison the well by criticising the execution

[@PlurCo]

That is true, but the whole Breadtube scene evolved out of the skeptic community. I think this take is part of a systemic problem.

[@LimeyLassen]

The bread tube scene evolved kinda specifically out of Contrapoints 😄

[@superjoeyman1]

@@LimeyLassen i mean, no, it evolved as a response to gamergate. And CD is definitely not a "breadtuber," he's a staunchly apolitical film guy with a bill nye aesthetic

[@siobhanelysia8852]

We were already claiming that Natalie invented bisexual lighting, now we’re saying she invented breadtube???

[@mutantfreak48]

@@PlurCo that's kinda ahistoric, when gamergate was happening a lot of skeptic community guys showed up with the same attitude towards feminism that they had against theology - they were trying to tear it down and prove it wrong with facts and logic. "breadtube" was a response to that, for example hbomb's (ahem) bread and butter early on was responding to people like thunderfoot and davis aurini captain d is/was actually associated with the sceptic community, he's been to sceptic conferences and used to see people like neil degrasse tyson and penn jilette as idols somewhat. he's talked about being disappointed in how some of them have made "being right on the internet" into their whole thing which has turned them into assholes (he talked about it in a conference presentation of his own, a recording of it is up on his channel and he's in character the whole time, it's actually a fun watch from what i remember)

[@nibrocgeck7508]

Can the spinning Captain D return in future videos please.

[@npc_undead]

i truly think a major qualifier for what art can be is human input, not necessarily effort. a scribble on a page is 100% human input, but low effort. still art. typing in a prompt for dalle to interpret and produce an image is like 5% human, 95% AI if you even count them as one continuous creative process. the prompt alone is 100% human and definitely qualifies as art. there are many many choices the simulated cloth guy has to make to arrive at a final result, even if they're somewhat derivative choices. at least he's the one making them.

[@Architextured1]

Couldn't agree more with this comment, thank you. I've been thinking a lot about the different parts that go into all of this discussion, and you basically typed out exactly what I had in my head atm.

[@sporky9861]

Right, but I feel like the issue with the "human input" definition of art is that there are other forms of art that require arguably just as much human input as AI art. And I don't mean this in a "pencil scribble is basically as much effort as typing in a prompt" kind of way, "pencil scribbles" would still qualify as art in my mind, but other processes that just take a human input and have other processes act on that input in a way that is completely separate from the human. EX: That one guy who attaches paint buckets to the ceiling with string and lets them swing over a canvas after he pokes a hole in the bottom of the bucket. That definitely takes human effort to set up, but the resulting process is chaotic, unpredictable, and doesn't really need any extra input after the artist lets go of the bucket. But I still feel like that would still qualify as art, though, despite the fact that it doesn't require any external human input besides the setup. In my opinion, AI art *can* be considered art, but perhaps just a potentially harmful form of it.

[@Architextured1]

@@sporky9861 Personally, I think the paint-buckets-on-swing example applies to both human input and effort. Input to decide which colors to use, length of the string, strength of the push, etc. There is also a crucial form of input after they let go of the bucket; When to stop it. As for effort, you have to set up the canvas, get your bucket and paint (probably costs a fair bit of money, I'll admit I don't actually know how expensive that much paint is), making the correct size hole in the bucket so it doesn't come out too fast or slow, setting up your pendulum correctly, etc. There's an additional form of input here, that I would call "curation". A good example of this, say you write a program that assigns random colors to pixels in a 10x10 grid. Then, you start going through them randomly, discarding ones you think look "bad" and keeping the ones you think look "good" based on personal taste. Then, you take your selection of images and showcase it in whatever way you want. This "gallery" may not have had effort put into the *input*, but it did have effort put into the selection process. This same analogy can be carried over to the paint-bucket-pendulum process. Say you make 30-40 of them over the course of several weeks. some of them look pretty good to you and some look ugly. Is there an amount of input and effort simply in the selection process of which ones you pick out as the "good ones"? Not saying I have a concrete answer, but I think it's an interesting question at least. Also, one thing that I think a lot of people are leaving out from this discussion. I very strongly believe that what *I* think counts as art, is just for myself. I don't think I should ever take that opinion and claim it as fact to other people (and same for others towards me!). I will have my own definition, and others can have their own definition, and we can even talk about why we feel that way and why we disagree with each other, but at the end of the day if we try to set down things as "fact" about what art can and can't be, we're quickly going to run into philosophical issues that cannot be resolved this way, if at all.

[@MMurine]

Readymades, Music of Changes, procedural level generation in Roguelites, painting techniques that emphasize dripping and pouring. All of these are distanced from being "true art" in your model, and I think that's a great loss. People need to realize that the problems with AI art are material, not ontological. Art is sturdy. It is necessary and pervasive. It is artists that have their work stolen without compensation who are at risk because of AI, not art itself as a category.

[@sporky9861]

@@MMurine What is your perspective on the argument that using images for ai datasets without permission is equivalent to taking artistic inspiration without permission for humans? I think it muddles the waters a bit. As in, it starts to beg other questions of what constitutes plagiarism versus inspiration. Like what physically differentiates the concept of free use sampling and the idea of using an artist’s work in an AI dataset from a legal standpoint and a moral standpoint?

[@_vh]

i suppose this is the expected response form the guy who thinks that creating unfiction means you're lying to your audience

[@MrLordFireDragon]

I dunno, personally I agree with D's take. I just think some wires are being crossed about some of the words he's using (or people just disagree with his take on 'art'). A lot of people in the comments are big on the idea of 'effort' being removed as a prerequisite for 'art'. But in what sense are we using either of those words? Are we using art in the artisinal sense? Because effort and technical prowess is a defining aspect of artisanship. What about art in the sense of non-literally conveying some kind of idea, commentary, etc? 'Effort' here may include some degree of authorial control - the more aspects of your work you have tangible control over, the more potential you have to fine-tune your communicative medium. 'Art' is not a single idea, and 'effort' doesn't just refer to the man hours spent doing something, or the amount of creative output being generated. If we want to seriously engage with anything Captain D says, we need to understand how he's using these words, not just apply our own definitions and dismiss his ideas because they're incompatible with our own. With all of that in mind, I think the kind of art D engages with and appreciates is clearly compatible with the idea that "Not creating significant portions of your work diminishes its quality as art". D even makes it clear the kinds of things he thinks art 'does' in his Escherian Stairwell video - and agree with his philosophy or not, I think it's clear those things tend towards greater impact when greater effort is spent on them. At that point, the question here is really "What do you think about The Captain's opinions on art?". I think it's perfectly valid to both agree or disagree, but to imply one perspective is infantile or ahistoric ignores the fundamentally subjective nature of what's being discussed. People can have opinions, and those opinions can have value, without diminishing the value of other, contrary opinions. That said, a lot of the times people have tried to convince me that "art doesn't require effort" I haven't found their arguments compelling. Anybody have an alternative perspective I might find valuable?

[@axelanderson2030]

I think the video is kinda hateful author clearly can't accept or entertain other opinions (and by extension a lot of the commenters.)

[@1000dumplings]

Its kind of disappointing that we're having this discourse about what is and isn't art when A.I. generated stuff exists- Like, the fact that A.I. stuff exists, by comparison, makes everything he talks about here seem like art WAYYY more

[@hideawaysis]

...ai art is art too?? why wouldn't it be art. bad art has the capability of existing yknow

[@LexYeen]

point of order: it's not AI, it's machine learning. to call machine learning artificial intelligence massively inflates the ability of machine learning algorithms (making them big and r- sorry, memetic infection flareup) and only serves to obfuscate their true nature - to the benefit of the corporations pushing machine learning algorithms as profit generation engines.

[@zarrg5611]

@@hideawaysis I think straight AI art without any human decided concept is 'AI art' a new thing that exists outside of normal art, it is made by a machine trying to replicate art it has seen and can be mass produced to a massive degree. Art can be made from AI art though.

[@hideawaysis]

@@zarrg5611 why are you trying to make a distinction between "normal" art and ai art, i hate ai art as much as the next guy but objectively it is still art. the only difference is that it's made by a neural network and not a human being, and even then, how does that make it different from art made by humans? it's still art. would art created by a monkey be classified as separate from art because it's not made by a human either? i don't understand.

[@zarrg5611]

​@@hideawaysis Well a neural network is not a self aware thing, one may say that the wind eroding the rock is creating art. I don't 'Hate' it really though, it has some very bad applications but it can be used for anything like any other tool, If they had twitter in the 19th century then I would be cancelled because I am a photographer.

[@BlakaD]

I think this whole point of that part of the video was to highlight the type of art the is made for the purpose of being good on a certain algorithm (popular song + good dance moves + real places + realistic fabric simulation = cool and diferent thing to scroll). Especially when the art made by the same artist or team is just a diferent version of the last version made with the intention of feeding the algorithm. I dont think CD thinks its not art, but i think he sees them as art made for the algorithm, something that feel souless. And the point about other groups or companies using the same concept of a "viral" social media post its that the artist could say they copied they work even tho even tho the concept is really simple, you cant gatekeep a style or a concept that is created by mixing standard concepts on social media. For me its weird to watch videos that imo its overanalyzing something a fictional character said about some viral videos made with intent of grabbing atention on a scrolling world of videos. I dont think that is wrong to say you dont like or respect something that you consider simple and not well made. Little screensavers are art, weird clipart is art, but i would not be bothered if a fictional character that is know to be a master in animation says that a certain set of cliparts is almost not art.

[@thekaola]

rotato

[@ratewcropolix]

ranana

[@SuperQuadocky]

HAH! my experience in Rhetoric has not failed me!!!! I knew it!!!! AAAAAAAAAAAA

[@nomansland1494]

If captain replaced “I don’t think it’s art” with “I think it’s bad art”, y’all wouldn’t be complaining nearly as much

[@lightningninja6905]

Yeah, but like, Captain said what he said. It's not other people's job to misinterpret him to give a more generous take.

[@nomansland1494]

@@lightningninja6905 boo hoo Also that implies that you’re taking the least charitable interpretation as you can in order to make captain’s take look as worse as possible

[@Architector_4]

​@@nomansland1494 pretty sure interpreting someone's words as meaning something entirely different, literally providing the different words they would have needed to say for that interpretation to be correct at all in the first place, is as least charitable as an interpretation can be at all it's like, if someone says "i like blue", interpreting that as "i hate yellow" would not be very charitable, but claiming that by "i like blue" they actually really meant to say "i like green" just straight up dismisses the words the whole discussion is about in the first place, which is arguably worse lol

[@deapthog]

Yes, because those are two different things genius

[@zarrg5611]

TBH I would go far harder on this guy, it feels like the glib philistinism that is taken for some kind of intelligent cynicism nowadays, when it really threatens to make art be reduced to a bunch of dull realistic paintings. I am especially sensitive to this kind of thing, I remember stopping watching a video in a huff because there was a second long panel of a wholly whimsical comic by some webcomic author the youtuber was interviewing calling Mondrian "awful"(though to be fair he is one of my favourite artists).

[@enneff]

I don’t think you need to worry too much about it. This worldview lost the war a century ago. Art is what people decide it is. There’s no going back now.

[@ExValeFor]

@@enneff if it lost then why tf is it everywhere still

[@justanotheraltaccount7821]

@@ExValeFor i mean, racists are everywhere too, doesn't mean they're at all correct or that their opinion is the majority

[@garthgoldwater5256]

Captain D has been a super active member of the still-existing “skeptics” community that a lot of right-wing atheism eventually spun out of. I don’t think he or the community would take kindly to being referred to as right wing (and i don’t think they necessarily share a lot of opinions with any of the splinter groups). but those kinds of ideologies seem to regard most deviations from (AT MOST*) modern art as a hoax or scam * (like “dang! splatter canvases in abstract expressionism have a measurable fractal dimension! i guess that guy WAS an artist”)

[@HMPerson2]

i think the undercurrent in Captain D's argument relates to money: why *should* the "low-effort/derivative" works see dramatically more success and make orders of magnitude more money than the works that they're based off of? abstractly, if we imagine the post-scarcity utopia of luxury gay furry space communism, it doesn't matter: art is art. but in our late-capitalistic hellscape where people need to make money to continue to live, can we really say that this is fair?

[@miajajajajajajajajajo]

But he mentions that student works can also fall out of his definition of "art", and doesn't mention money or the fairness of that money anywhere. "should art cost millions of dollars" is an interesting conversation to have but he doesn't raise that question, he is arguing that these million dollar works aren't art, and that anyone can make something that doesn't count as art. he argues for a definition of art based on the effort it took to make it, and the amount of skill applied, which is a very weird opinion to have as a vfx artist but alright (;-_-)ノ

[@harryblack540]

Why does the spinning captain keep getting faster Is he about to take off?

[@TheRadkid1]

Theres an argument to be made for whats 'product' and what is 'art' If you create solely to sell and be famous, such to the point you go after people who are "copying" you, youve made a product. If youre creating to create and know that your creations are sellable things you can profit from, but enjoy the process and create mostly for the fun of it, then youve created art That doesnt mean the two cant overlap some, but if someone (like captian d) sees more product than art, i can wholistically agree with his statement. And i think the 'im glad im a youtuber' line just meant "maybe im no better"

[@desicmanifold4025]

I have no idea if this is something you were looking for comment on, and god only knows if you feel somewhat unequipped to respond to that KZbinr (which, this was great, so totally not), I'm at the bottom of a well yelling up, so feel free to ignore. That said, I haven't seen too many dissenting opinions in the comments, so: I feel there is something to be said here, not in procedural animation being used in art, but intent and complexity. What was the artistic intent of those videos? What are they hoping to evoke? Presumably, just the thought that dancing sheets look pretty rad, which to be entirely fair, is a perfectly valid art form. But with the context that it is just two elements (three when you count the backdrop) that can be really varied, all of which don't demand much effort to obtain individually, or meld together... it definitely doesn't cease to be art, but I assume it's upsetting for him that it's successful art. It's probably the same feeling some people get when watching a film that really affects them on a deep level, only to see its box office in comparison to others. In a way, it's quite elitist, but also totally understandable. It's okay to have standards. Granted, should he have put that opinion in a video? Eh... You're probably right that it should've been left unsaid, at least to a wider audience in such an authoritative manner.