The ErgoJosh AI controversy EXPLAINED

[@lolaholliday]

Josh has now made an updated statenent following his AI video: kzbin.info/www/bejne/pqDIoHyso9acjc0si=IrLo2Nilrb1q3fA0 Are you guys against AI in the integration of the artistic process? Do you have any leniency on that view? Is it ever acceptable to you? What’s your opinion on people knowingly using AI images as a reference? And does it make a difference whether they found the AI reference or intentionally generated it? And if you are a subscriber of Josh, what’s your reaction? Are you still supporting him? In my overall opinion, although an impressive tool, AI is currently ethically iffy. At the end of the day, creatives value different things. If you value to learn and get better at art, then you should practice what you find difficult until you get where you want to be. Sometimes it can be an incredibly frustrating process, but it gets easier and when you look back on your progress you'll feel proud of all the work you put in. If you're someone who values making stuff just purely for fun, then generating some images for an idea would be fine if it weren't for the ethical baggage. Or if there's a part of the art process you hate (like hating the process of making backgrounds when you just love focusing on character art) and you'd rather use a stock image or generate something then that's also up to you. Art is meant to be fun after all! But I think the key point Josh missed is, considering Mid journey has not been sourced from consenting artists, it's incorrect to say it 100% doesn't infringe on anyone's rights... (not to mention the amount of power it uses!) If we had good models trained on our own art or the art of a consenting pool of artists, then sure, use it to make the parts of the process you can't/don't want to do easier if you want. I personally will just keep drawing by hand whether AI art exists or not because I enjoy building up my skills, seeing my progress, developing my own style and making my ideas come to life, as that's what I value. I wouldn't personally be satisfied to replace any part of my process with AI as I wouldn't feel as proud of what I created and a bit like I cheated, just like I don't trace for the same reason. But that's just my personal stance. It's a complicated topic, let me know what you think! TIMESTAMPS: 00:00 A preview of Ergo Josh's video 00:26 Intro 00:48 Who is ErgoJosh? 01:35 Josh's initial statement 03:14 Community backlash 04:23 Why the backlash? 05:01 Josh's AI video 09:11 Josh's instagram statement 10:08 Video hate comments + why a lot of artists dislike AI 12:05 Midjourney's leaked artist list 13:05 My thoughts 16:53 Questions for you My video on AI speedpaints: kzbin.info/www/bejne/hGGaZoeNf7x-nKssi=2tk48OoKUSTtAgVq

[@bunnyconcubus8468]

My view of AI is that is that it shouldn't be used in the art process or at the very least used for backgrounds. AI not only does it have lots of mistakes that a beginner won't notice or know how to handle but it's bad to try to learn from something that's not applying the fundamentals of art properly in the first place. It shouldn't be used for reference as that could lead to janked anatomy or poor painting. Speeding up the process of artwork is just an excuse ai bros use, I've tried. It just feels wrong and weird because whatever i have in my head is nothing like the ai image, whether i generated it or not so i end up just not using any elements of it in thr first place. If people think it helps with workflow, then thats fine, but when it becomes too noticeable that's where i think it's problem, like imagine soft color rending the body and you can't get a post or anatomy right because the AI you are referencing didn't either.

[@omnipenne9101]

AI's pretty garbage for references and I can already find inspiration from pre-existing artists and real life so hard pass for me.

[@theartsyduck9762]

I have been very mixed about AI, on one hand, it can be a really great reference to or something to get inspiration. But on the other side, you have all the art that got stolen and the massive backlash tour artist since AI came out. At first, I thought AI could be fun to use, but then when I saw how everyone else got treated and all the problems that came up I’m against it. Also had to learn that people who steal the AI and redraw it. It’s just giving AI more attention. It’s literally a different form of DTIYS except AI.

[@nonyabusiness3619]

The amount of respect I have for professional artists who use AI, is about the same amount of respect I have for graphic artists who photo bash pictures they find on the internet. Not much.

[@TeaTimeTable]

@@nonyabusiness3619 Your about to have a bad day when you find out all blizzard and riot artists use photobashing to make environment backgrounds and thats how the professional industry works.

[@renfaere]

I am always against AI. For many reasons. Bottom line is that it steals from artists all the time and that I personally consider its usage to be lazy. So many people want to draw but don't want to learn how to do it.

[@lolaholliday]

Some people only care about the end result but, as artists, we wouldn't have developed our skills if we didn't enjoy the process of creating art

[@TeaTimeTable]

The end goal for everyhting on earth is to make life and processes easier for humans the reason you can reach people and communicate online easier now? is because technology advanced, your welcome.

[@renfaere]

@@TeaTimeTable Just because a technology makes things easier, doesn't mean it is always the correct choice.

[@TeaTimeTable]

@@renfaere True but in this case its a bunch of people so scared they'll lose their jobs to AI when in fact they wont because people still value the skillset of being able to draw and use your own imagination AI just helps visualize that

[@renfaere]

@@TeaTimeTable There are already cases where artists have been booted for AI. Not many people value art like you would think. Until it is ethical, there is no place for generative AI.

[@moderndayjames]

If you need the AI to do the creative work then you're not the creative individual you think you are. Really didn't appreciate his 30 minute condescending lecture (nor do any of the other animators I've spoken to)

[@jonathanlharoldo6167]

uh yea no I can take reference from real art, images and ai art for creating my own art. That doesnt make me less creative for using it for reference the same way I would for pinterest.

[@Kymddd3753]

@@jonathanlharoldo6167if you read that’s not what he said is it. Nb said anything about references. He said something about drawing something then using ai generators to fill the skill that you lack in ur art it’s not about references it’s about using said generators in the peace

[@jonathanlharoldo6167]

@@Kymddd3753 "If you need the AI to do the creative work then you're not the creative individual you think you are." Using reference is part of the creative work you're welcome.

[@justcallmekai1554]

​@@jonathanlharoldo6167 AI references aren't that great. The best reference is real life. If that thing you're drawing doesn't exist then the imagination part kicks in to render the idea (which is the best part). At best, AI is sub par when better alternatives exist, constantly needing to justify its existence.

[@jonathanlharoldo6167]

@@justcallmekai1554 I cant tell if you guys lack interpretation skill or if you are being intentionally dense. Read my comment again. *REAL ART, REAL IMAGE AND AI ART* You dont use only one reference. You use multiples. Real pictures, artists including Ai art ! Its extremely useful for giving very specific stuff you want without you having to scroll 3 hours on pinterest. Its practical for inspiration too Its funny how you guys are trying to dismiss my argument by just saying "No ai is not good reference" ?? You dont use only one image for reference my dude. No one is saying to rely on ai for reference. Omg Its like im talking with a wall.😂😂😂 Anyways If the ai image you have is so bad you cant get anything out of it, thats on you. Your ai "art" sucks because you dont know how to use it. Its as simple as that. You guys are so out of touch that you think its still 2022 and Ai still cant draw hands or perspective. Or do proper shading Many pictures and drawings on pinterest are starting to get difficult to tell if its ai or not. Ai is only bad reference for YOU because you dont know how to prompt. And its okay. I also cant prompt, im really bad at using Ai, but when I need inspiration for design and stuff like that, I ask my friend to generate something like a concept design for me, I tell her my general ideas and she always manage to find soemthing thats more or less what I want and so I can make a moodboard with multiple images (Not only ai !!!!!)

[@PinkPulpito]

As a ballpoint pen artist ive never have felt more powerful

[@AezlyndWanderin]

As both a pencil artist and a painter, I’m with you on that.

[@kerriharris7418]

It looks very generic ai, unfortunately. His final version seems too cluttered and borderline incoherent. 😢

[@kolourmecute6618]

i kinda agree haha sadly specially the hair that he did it all for lol cause some places its like where is this hair piece going? where did it come from? some places its like hair not connected to anything

[@damntae6540]

@@kolourmecute6618it’s supposed to come out of nowhere. It’s a mess of hair and he wanted it to look that way. I thought it was cool 😢

[@LJXrot]

Right? The original strokes he did with the brush could've made for a 10x more effective and pleasing result ​@@kolourmecute6618

[@BlxxdLeaf]

I think it's even funnier that at the end she had a similar yet better version of that type of image. In her own style, without ai guides.

[@thejester2751]

Agreed! I wasn't sure about it but this actually fit exactly what my feelings were. It's messy and the face which should be the main part ur looking at gets lost in the details.

[@Henbot]

In the context of him saying it isn’t theft- permission hasn’t been given by these artists or requested from these artists to have their work scraped as you demonstrated with mid journey. They actually did target artists and guarantee other AI have as well. So his whole argument that there isn’t any theft is complete moot because they haven’t consented and they did target it’s a shame he using it like this. I would say to him if you wanted to improve hairstyle or drawing hair in 3-D space then why not just talk to another artist you know? Ask for advice from peers

[@lolaholliday]

I think he definitely neglected this point. At the end of the day, not everyone does art for the same reasons. If you value to learn and get better then you should practice what you find difficult. If you just want to make stuff for fun then generating some images for an idea you have would be fine, or if there's a part of the art process you hate (like backgrounds but you just love focusing on character art) and you'd rather use a stock image or generate something then that's also up to you. Art is meant to be fun after all! But considering Mid journey has not been sourced from consenting artists, it's not particularly ethical... If we had good models trained on our own art or the art of a consenting pool of artists, then sure, use it to make the parts you can't/don't want to do easier.

[@damntae6540]

But what he generated just looked like ai nonsense. He was nothing anyone would actually draw. Just a mess of hair. And he added a lot of his own touch to it to make it into actual art.

[@takimi_nada]

@@lolaholliday i think beyond neglecting the point, he maliciously ignored it. I'm sure he's fully aware of this and it's not like he "failed to mention it" he's trying to sway the public to his opinion by obfuscating this fact

[@CrniWuk]

@@Hanarace It's even far worse when you think about it. Because those algorithms do not only work on "artwork". They actually scraped almost everything imaginable. Which includes a hell of a lot of private informations as well. This whole thing is first and foremost a serious violation of data privacy like we've never seen before.

[@lolaholliday]

​@@Hanarace I wouldn't personally use it in my workflow but just was expressing some reasons of who might. Personally I would not feel as connected to and proud of my work if it wasn't 100% handmade, but I suppose some people might like the idea of using it to replace parts of the process they don't particularly like

[@RetroAdventurer-k3m]

My thing is for thousands of years Humans did not need A.I to create art why do they need it now??

[@CJojo_13_]

I think appealing to tradition is one of the weaker arguments to be made against A.I. Within all of history, movies, television, videogames, and digital illustration are relatively new mediums, but we understand those to be mediums through which art is made. The problem with A.I. cuts into the heart of capitalism as an economic system. One that prioritizes the circulation of money above the needs/quality of life of human beings. Corporations have already steered the internet away from the dream of being an open democratic tool, towards being a highway to a mall of products through a computer screen. It would be to the benefit of corporations to increasingly normalize the production of slop content, while trimming down how many people they need to pay to produce the slop. The A.I. bros who shill about the "democratization of art" posit a very cynical perspective on art. One which erases the exploration of journeying through one's chosen medium to express themselves. Of facing the various challenges that come forward that requires introspection and self critique. It views the artistic process as a hurdle which should be avoided at all costs to reach the end result.

[@jasonmann9497]

By that logic we also don't need digital art, photoshop, 3d models etc.

[@noorienoorie7784]

@@jasonmann9497 sure but real artists won't suddenly break down if those things are taken away, they'll just go back to traditional mediums.

[@SpearSilver]

@@jasonmann9497 Or fire.

[@CrniWuk]

To make it very short : Capitalism. For the religion of unlimited growth everything has to be sacrificed on the altar of profit. Labour, art, health, people you name it. Nothing is safe. Nothing is sacred. Shareholders have to be pleased. CEOs to get rich.

[@vaelia1203]

8:42 I don't understand why he needs so many references for loose hair tbh. I feel like there are A LOT of easy ways to find a shape without AI... he did all of that because ONE sketch of the hair didn't work out... no wonder his piece took 100+ hours to do with all the ai images he had to search as references. Also I feel like he uses way too many of them, like YOU CAN'T DRAW POINTY EARS WITHOUT A REFERENCE?!?!?!?!? No wonder he loves AI when he needs so many references to draw.

[@vaelia1203]

Also Im pretty sure that he would've taken less time if he just drew it himself & without making any of these stupid mistakes + the composition would've been way better (which btw considering he said Ai was a tool to help him focus on stuff like composition is laughable that the composition is so bad). The hair in the shadow is not rendered at all & I think that's what shows the reason he used AI was pure lazyness but it backfired and it took him a lot of time to integrate AI in his process so he probably ended up not rendering it & correcting the mistakes because it took too long already. If he had just drawn it himself he would've probably have had the time to do the rendering so the rest of the painting wouldn't look so flat (also wasn't that THE reason he used AI for in this piece? To make it less flat?!? But then he didn't render the hair?!?!? What was the point then?!?!?).

[@youropinionsareshitandsoar1954]

That's exactly the problem that these people don't think about why bother fixing an image that isn't even something you made? if you did it from scratch it'll look a lot simpler & cohesive... You're wasting more time adjusting the prompt than anything else

[@artsandgoodies4653]

I don’t understand why he didn’t just use actual artistic reference of the actual work

[@c0rnichon]

The pointy ears thing was kinda ridiculous. If he really needed a reference for that he could have used the thousands of photos there are from people dressing up as elves. There's no added value by using AI in this instance.

[@Clovilupe]

Yeah his mental library shortage is the actual problem here

[@theimperialkerbalunion7568]

He was already losing viewership, this is just the nail in the coffin IMO

[@Murderface666]

Its just pseudo activists hating on AI and people who can't draw as good mad someone is using it in a productive way. Objectively, what did he really do? Simple: He uses A.I. as a reference, no different from anyone using a piece of an image or a photo they took as a point of reference to help get the base look and feel. He used a collage and even his own sketch to rough out the image base.

[@theimperialkerbalunion7568]

@@Murderface666 its not the use if ai thats inherently bad, its the fact that the majority, if not all ai art tools were trained unethically

[@TeaTimeTable]

@@theimperialkerbalunion7568 whomp whomp oh well who cares life goes on the people who like drawing will still draw and the other artist who incorporate it in their works will save time either way. this is basically vegans vs meat eaters at this point.

[@Murderface666]

@@theimperialkerbalunion7568 What you're referring to as "unethically" is perfectly legal, because of one case: Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc. v. Goldsmith (Fair Use). It's the same ruling that allows KZbinrs to use other people's content so long as they're making original content. That's why KZbinrs can't just play someone else content without splicing , pausing and adding context to their own videos. So for everybody complaining, they're being hypocritical. And as far as artwork is concerned (commercially), if something is used, it must undergo significant transformation and add new expression or meaning, which is protected by the 1st Amendment. So in the end, I just see a whole bunch of anti-1st Amendment comments (some bots and burner accounts as well as some of these comments are made from new accounts).

[@riccia888]

@@Murderface666just a tip if you saw a comments hating AI that is usually an american living under his parents basement. Thats where the cancel culture came from. Even Armand Serrano mention this in his interviews there are no cancel culture in asia only in america.

[@johnbrockiii]

I think using AI to generate some images for inspiration like a mood board is fine, but the part where he was literally tracing the hair was giving serious Shadiversity vibes lol

[@KalicoKal]

hell he couldve just spent time sketching instead of prompting and still got there

[@azoth8031]

Generating ai images takes the amount of electricity it takes to charge a phone form 0 to 100 percent. And it's still stealing for artists and legitimizing it's use. So no. Don't touch the generators.

[@trey8823]

I don't know about the Shadiversity thing. What happened?

[@KalicoKal]

@@trey8823 jazzas brother is on the darkside completely gave upon on art and went off deep end to be a prompter wanna be because jazza was too nice sad really

[@damntae6540]

But he only did that for the shape since he didn’t know how to do it in a 3d way. You see him change it up a tone after he used it

[@Dexter01992]

AI has a high chance of making you complacent into your own job. Once you start using it for your own artwork, you might end up making it do more and more of the process until there's barely anything you've done yourself. It is similar to accessing nearly unlimited free assets for 3D scenarios. Even you being totally able to model stuff yourself, once you start having entire scenes that are mostly downloaded assets you haven't done nor edited, what exactly can you call yours onto this scene, except for the overall idea? Not everyone will do such, obviously, which it would be unfair to generalise over this, but there's still a high risk of just stop practicing what people knows you for, just out of convenience. You'll become a shadow of your former self.

[@lolaholliday]

Yeah this is what I'd personally be afraid of ending up like if I started incorporating it myself 😅

[@jacktaktical]

I’ve felt like this, this is so perfectly put, Laovaan is probably a good example of this which you can see in his art progress thru the years (NO HATE TO LAOVAAN, he is not doing anything wrong and I love his art :)

[@StridingJack425]

which is exactly why there should be more smarter ways into using ai right? okay i like yo hear what your strategy is to use ai more maturely and intelligently

[@jacktaktical]

@@StridingJack425 answer: just don't, you can copy a book and publish it, doesn't mean you should And You can use a pen and paper even when typewriters and phones exist

[@ilikecookies230]

IMO as someone who has tried to use AI as reference, here’s the problem. It sucks as reference. 😅 it will always be immeasurably inferior to what you can find in real life, through photos OR just finding things in real life, LIKE ACTUALLY GO OUTSIDE OUTSIDE MAN. The fun of the idea is problem solving, and our tools as artists is observation THE most important tool, so yea. Absorb the world around you.

[@rambunctiousraptor]

“The fun of the idea is problem solving” so freakin true. Creativity IS problem solving!

[@NaughtMax]

I’ve cut up old clothes, or made something just to use as reference. Took photos of myself in dumb poses or expressions. Made mini sets and props, or blocked everything out in 3D. He had limitless options for the hair, he could’ve whipped out some string and a static camera and made his own reference, he could’ve gotten a wig and flipped his hair back and forth, he could’ve done literally anything else and it would’ve looked better. But instead he got a weird incoherent mess with Ai.

[@rambunctiousraptor]

@@NaughtMax ask a friend to pose, use photo or even better video reference like artists have been doing for decades at least now! Not to mention computer programs that don’t steal, or plug ins for the programs he’s already using. But no, instead he drew floating hair clumps and has improved his skillset 0%

[@BillyViBritannia]

Let them use AI and fail if it sucks, what's your problem? If you're right the problem will sort itself out. Why do you have to be so elitist and brag about your superior creative process?

[@NaughtMax]

@@BillyViBritannia I can’t speak to OP but it’s not about bragging is about how it hurts new artists that don’t know better. If they’re using garbage input they’ll get a garbage output even if they are good at rendering like ergo Josh. The reason you do studies and use reference is not just to copy what you see but to understand why an artist does what they do or why and object or subject looks the way it does. Because Ai doesn’t make decisions and lacks intentionality, studying it will hurt newer artist that are missing that knowledge. Coincidentally I’m working on project with similar needs for the hair and it’s even more obvious why Josh’s use of Ai was silly.

[@felix-xd4mx]

he worked on that for 115h that's insane. and with AI somebody can just steal it in 1 second. does he not think of this?

[@BillyViBritannia]

You cannot steal it with AI. You can by taking a screenshot though, which was always possible. Please stop regurgitating "facts" about AI when you don't know how it even works. Also, hours spent do not make art good. A bad artist can polish bad art for months and it will still come out bad. Conversely, art is not bad because it was made fast.

[@saquenmedechile6943]

​@@BillyViBritannia for gen ai to be functional, it needs to be trained with existing material. most if not all of the time that material is stolen, aka, used without permision and compensation to the author/owner of the material. it is, in fact, stealing. also, i dont give a flying fuck about the "quality" of an art piece in this context, because what counts is the human work, the artistic process, the intentionality, the effort. skill develops with work. hours and days and weeks put into a piece of art is what makes someone an artist, independently of how much it may appeal to you as an individual. ai takes no effort to use, and has no though behind its process other than pattern recognition. art made by ai is art made without humanity, and art made by no one means nothing.

[@BillyViBritannia]

@@saquenmedechile6943 How did actual artists learn? Did they pay for all the material they studied? If not, did they steal? It's a double standard, even if it's against machines I think it's disingenuous. The original material is not being used anywhere in it's original form. Should humans whose faces were used to train face recognition algorithms be compensated for their photos? Should chatgpt compensate every writer whose article it read? This is ridiculous. The only reason this is a problem is because AI is actually threatening artists jobs while you and I studying a person's work doesn't threaten them at all. On the topic of investing time into an art piece: I guess you never admire SpeedPaint art then. A very talented artist who can create a killer sketch in 5 minutes should not be recognized for it right? You either put 100 hours into your piece or it's bad? Gimme a break, double standard again. "AI takes no effort to use" neither does taking a photo. Is photography art? You just press a button. "AI [...] has no thought behind it's process" The human that is probing the AI is doing some pretty intense thinking, and many times I would argue more than an actual artist. You are confusing drawing skills with art. Art is not having a steady hand and knowing how perspective works. Art is about expressing your creativity and showing the world your vision. That's why AI art is for the most part bad art even if the strokes, the lighting, color harmony etc may be of a higher level than a beginner's. You should not be watching that when judging AI art, the same way as you are not judging realism when looking at a photograph. No one is taking a picture and saying "look how realistic" and no one should be creating AI art and saying "look what a fine drawing"

[@AussieFiggy]

It’s so bizarre, because a few videos earlier he focused on things AI didn’t produce, being realistic skin/nudity… and then to pivot into the idea that AI can help him draw hair better, somehow? I would not consider myself anywhere near his skill level, but I could probably draw floating hair in weird, wispy tangles without needing AI for that… It makes me wonder how much of everything else he’s drawn has included AI…

[@maboroshiiro]

Yep exactly, you can't convince me you need AI to draw hair at THAT level, give me a break!

[@jamesg4693]

​@@maboroshiiro I believe he was just trying out a new tool. Ever grab a new pen and sketch something you could do already? Its kinda like that. The takeaway here is he is now beginning to understand technique is only a tool. The next logical step in his artistic development is understanding the importance of communication and what is being communicated. it will be interesting to see him come to these conclusions and adjust his work accordingly (if it occurs). I wait and look with anticipation, I also am freely throwing out there whats up, in hopes that many (very many) artists come to this conclusion at once. I gave up as art languished in technique (necessarily so as technique was no longer given due importance as conveyance of communication) after years if IG face value finally a Grand New era of art can begin. As I see it only a new era of art will break the stagnation of all humanity we all ride this new cusp of transformation, where will it go, what will it become? its energetic and invigorating, a communication revolution in visual media! Enjoy these interesting times (it is not a curse to be among the vanguard if your vocation is to relay your view to those behind). Enjoy the view upon the front fellow artist, such pivotal shifts in mankind are few and far between. you have front row seats, do not hide your face in fear you can only draw what you experience.

[@AussieFiggy]

@@jamesg4693 was this written with AI? Wall of text and some odd words make me wonder.

[@smalllfox]

i feel like if josh actually took the time to figure out the hair on his own it wouldve came out a lot better, it seems like he just gave up resorted to using ai, and now you can see that reflected in the random strands of hair that dont connect to eachother

[@oniteru]

If feel like the difference here is literally the fact that AI is not an artist tool. It is a tool that NON artist use because they cannot create, they cannot imagine and then MAKE bold things in the way that artists can. AI always makes art look inhuman and it is VERY inaccurate when it comes to accumulating logical ways a subject looks. An example being when an AI engine generates an ear it isn’t taking into consideration the actual anatomy of said subject so there’s always something off about it. Using reference of AI is mostly inevitable I’ve used it most times on accident bc of how saturated pintrest has become with AI. By the time I realized it’s AI it’s too late. I don’t actively go out of my way to generate images myself and give it a chance to learn and steal more than it already has.

[@gerrymurphy777]

If you go to settings, and tune your home feed, you can tune your home page to show things you're interested in. Uncheck any AI images you viewed, and you shouldn't find a lot. Saving some human made art to your pins should also help.

[@oniteru]

@@gerrymurphy777 thank you I actually didn’t know this ✨

[@oniteru]

@SabeyAubriTeeAnaNaki copy paste/ stealing then tweaking it to call your own isn’t referencing. Humans aka real artists look at artworks and develop their own idea and thoughts towards it and become inspired. An ai engine cannot be inspired.

[@morebassmusic]

True

[@gondoravalon7540]

*fact that AI is not an artist tool. It is a tool that NON artist use because they cannot create,* To be pedantic, not eally a fact since you conflate "AI" with "generative AI" with "generative AI used for X purpose," which are different things, and this also begs the question of where it was proven factually (as in, besides just asserting it has been factually proven) that people who are creative can't find a way to incorporate AI into their workflow (and that it is only "non-creative" people, whatever that means (another begged question) who touch it.) Many logical fallacies, IMO.

[@SnagTheRabbit]

Ergo Josh just sounds so pretentious in that video, which is really disappointing because I've been a huge fan of his and I've never heard him speak like that before. And the use of AI in his drawing itself so pointless. He's a good artist, there's no reason why he had to trace AI to draw wavy (f)ucking hair and elf ears.

[@jacktaktical]

AI is just one of the worst trends in recent times I used to like ergo josh but this was just so embarrassing Josh is clearly a skilled artist and hes no newbie to doing studies, this was just laziness and burnout The final art piece was ultimately ruined because of his attitude and AI Alot of the hair follows no logic, or have random elements that just look, wrong Some parts of the hair are not even connected or properly layered My guess he probably wanted an outlined look (similar to super dynamic anime art) I can tell his brain “shut off” while using the AI This is why i am against ALL integration of AI in art We’ve done completely fine without AI, we have brains, we don’t need a corporation to replace the use of our brain like machines to cattle That is not even mentioning how generative AI has done nothing good, and infact has worsened recent times alot, for creatives, deepfakes, replacement, and cases of CP, and the whole reason why AI got popular in the first place? Because of lazy skill-less people and greedy conglomerates who hate minimum wage My dad and I we’re talking about realistic robots 2 years ago, he said rich people like robots because they want to enslave people with no consequences, this is pretty much whats happening right now Corporates want to use AI because they all want to enslave us, AI is run on hatred, disgust and greed

[@Kalitayy]

I agree with everything you said. My hatred towards AI art is immeasurable that anyone who supports AI art is dead and buried to me. They don’t see artists as humans so I refuse to view them as humans as well.

[@jacktaktical]

@@Kalitayy thank god, nothing like finding someone who agrees completely I am tired of inmesurable hatred towards AI being slandered upon because "not all of it is bad" I would even hate it if it was "ethical", to me it's an absolute anomaly that shouldn't even exist, it has no purpose but to aid in sloth, greed, envy and wrath

[@gondoravalon7540]

@@jacktaktical *I am tired of inmesurable hatred towards AI being slandered upon because "not all of it is bad"* I mean, that's not how slander ... works? Maybe "not all of it being bad" (Especially if you talk about 'AI' instead of being specific) is actually valid, and a signal that one is being too absolute.

[@andrea-seems-ok]

That rough brush sketch at 6:51 is honestly so much better than the AI he generated and traced. Lots of passion and movement in the lines

[@underwatercosmonaut]

As an artist, the only time I’ve ever used ai was to check if the caption I wrote for my post is grammatically correct 🤧

[@davidogunlesi9294]

I think he's just coming at this with some naivety. I don't think he ever acknowledges the issues with the data used to train these. If AI art had never been trained on people's art without permission, it would likely be seen in a completely different light (whilst also being considerably worse). The only ethical use of AI art is if the data is all original, purpose-created, or given with consent to train the AI. Which drastically reduces the amount of data these data-hungry models can get. There is basically no way AI art can be done ethically due to the way it works. Either you steal the vast amounts of data you need to make it output "good" quality stuff, or you... don't get enough ethically sourced data. We'll have to wait til AGI before AI art can be considered ethical, and at that point, if an artificially conscious being is making art, with thought, emotion, and being, then it would be unethical to force it to an existence of creating art inside a prison of its mind. So really, there is no possible way AI art could be ethical unless we are able to build a large enough database of ethical training data. And at the end of the day, is the tool really that useful? Artists have been doing just fine without AI art, and it really seems like most of the people using it are beginners, novices or non-artists trying to "have fun". The only good use case for AI art is Pinterest adjacent, mood boards, or general inspiration: an artificial dream machine. But the issues with ethics still stand. The way I see it, AI art should only be pursued within a research context, as maybe some elements of the architectures used to build these models might contribute to AGI in the far future, but I don't think it's a marvel of technology that should be celebrated. After seeing AI art, I get a sort of sick feeling, you see enough and then you see all the patterns and hallmarks of it. It's like a poorly made procedural generated game, after enough hours you've seen everything, even though it technically has infinite possibilities. When all those possibilities are just small variations of the same soulless and inconsistent anime girl, it just gets old. I don't see AI art as the new medium like digital art was, because digital art contains no priors in which to bias the artist. A blank Photoshop document is synonymous with a blank canvas. Digital art is ultimately just a translation of old (fine art) tools into a new mode of creation; a new medium. AI art does not perform such transformation. There is no blank canvas with AI. And there is no equivalent tools to translate from because AI art is quite literally not a new medium. It is a tool. An unethical tool that at best is okay at inspiring art or just strokes the ego of artists with weaknesses. At worst, it can be used maliciously to copy people's art and HAS been trained on people's art without consent. But the cat is out of the bag and its here to stay, so what can you do.

[@vaelia1203]

naivety & privilege as well because he doesn't have to worry about AI replacing him since he's famous enough for people to seek out art from him because it's -him- and not "just" because they want art & anyone will do so if AI can do it then I don't have to pay & I get art without having to pay. So at least for now he's not threatened by AI, and since he uses it he feels like a lion trainer but who says that the lion will stay in his place forever, he feels comfortable rn because he has control over it but once people stop wanting art FROM him but just art that looks like his then he's going to lose it all. By catering to the AI supporters crowd he's driving away real art enjoyers & keeping the tech bros that will replace him in an istant the second AI is able to replicate his art well enough for them & he's helping them do it.

[@AB-wf8ek]

I see artists drawing copyrighted characters and selling it all the time with no compensation to the original creators. Meanwhile, an artist uses AI to make an image that doesn't look like anyone else's, and all of a sudden it's unethical? Who cares how they were trained, it's how people use it that's important.

[@CYBERFREAK0-n7o]

​​@@AB-wf8ek That's how copyright claims came to be, knobhead 💀, people steal work and sell it = illegal. Ai steals data from art work, people act like they made it and profit off of it = legal, it's fucking stupid. No artist who uses AI in their work clearly values their own work enough where they need a non-sentient machine to finish it off for them using the stolen data they acquired by, get this, ARTISTS. AI is quite literally lawless as of now, it can take from anywhere, laws are being introduced but at such a slow pace and quite frankly absolutely uselessly dished out with no intent of actually stopping this rose-tinted theft. Conclusion? AI images are fine to use for personal use, as long as you don't claim it as your work as you are not the AI in question. However, when AI is used like someone sort of cash cow for someone who can't be arse to put in actual work and instead types into a keyboard and lets the machine cluster together pieces of art to make them the image, they act as if they made it fair and square, they might be retarded as well as delusional-double whammy 🤦🏽‍♀️.

[@noirenard_]

I’d even argue that using AI as inspiration is not that great either 😭. It’s so much more useful to learn by using either photo references or drawings made artists who know what they’re doing, rather than what’s basically a big collage of millions of images made by a soulless machine. As convincing as some AI generated images look, the AI still has no idea what color theory is, what muscles in the human body you need to draw, how lighting and shading works, what’s a good composition for an illustration etc…Inexperienced artists who use AI images as a reference will just end up recreating the same mistakes these machine couldn’t avoid and take bad drawing habits from it, it’s barely more useful than learning how to draw by using the art of another beginner as a reference lol. That’s why I hate that my Pinterest and Google search is filled with AI generated shit…

[@noirenard_]

@@AB-wf8ek « if other people do bad thing than I can do bad thing too » caveman ass way of thinking lol. Some big companies and individuals allow artists to sell fanarts of their characters without compensation btw. Also no, there are indeed been examples of AI generated images that look very similar to certain artworks it has been trained on, especially with new features that allows users to mimic a single artists’ style. And even in cases where it doesn’t look similar to anything that the AI trained on, it doesn’t matter at all because the AI wouldn’t exist if it wasn’t for all the stolen copyrighted work anyway. It’s still directly using copyrighted work without the owners permission, that’s illegal. And if companies can sue individuals for selling fanarts of copyrighted characters without a permission, we as artists should be able to do the same with AI companies for using our work without our consent. That’s was not a good comparison at all.

[@AfterArtist]

“But as an experienced artist” as an experienced artist you should know that Tracing and Ai are both detrimental to artists as a whole and should not be used as tools

[@UvaVerde12]

Tracing is a tool for practice, but not for art you're gonna post and claim as your own

[@velvetundergrad]

Great summary! Personally I think in all things AI it’s important to remember that the “bad guys” ultimately are the tech companies generating revenue hand over fist with a product built on artists’ work that does not compensate artists. Any individual subscribing to midjourney really sucks imo but is a drop in the bucket next to Tech pulling off the greatest theft of labor in recorded history. Josh in a vacuum would be another drop in the bucket in a vacuum, but him using his massive platform to advocate for how a midjourney subscription has aided his process is inevitably going to lead to an influx of midjourney subscriptions despite how the majority of feedback he’s received has been negative. Thanks and keep up the great work!

[@knives.3733]

I think the issue for me is the dishonesty and lack of acknowledging where AI image generators come from. Calling that a "simple minded" way of thinking is frustrating when its a valid concern. AI *could* be a tool, but it has harmed more than helped, it has stolen more than created, and Josh's boasting like its revolutionary while dismissing people's concerns is a gross attitude.

[@FeatherMelody]

how did he manage to still get hair from nowhere after putting in his own lines.

[@sterilustra]

I'm also wondering that same thing. Wasn't his point that he knew what he was doing and he was not just tracing like a newbie? His original sketch was insanely better, imo.

[@ceciliaalves4945]

trueee i was literally looking at the weird strand from nw in the cheek

[@maboroshiiro]

I know Josh doesn't have bad intent but there are two aspects that are problematic with AI; Ethics but also fundamentals/efficiency (which if you don't care about the ethics I'd like to think you'd care about this one) For the ethics its pretty obvious, the mass data scraping and recently we have been made aware of the energy usage. I heard that one ChatGPT search is the equivalent of talking on the phone for 3 hours, and a simple search already says AI is using the same demands as a small country.. that's CRAZY if you think about it. I honestly don't know which is worse between this and the data... 2nd let's talk about efficiency and fundamentals, and what Josh was doing in the video. His drafts were way better than whatever he traced over with AI, also he had to PAY for Midjourney let's not forget that here (if he just reffed random pics from Pinterest I wouldn't care honestly), so: You'll pay money but also still have to generate multiple images and maybe frankestein some together to get the desired reference since AI still won't be able to get specific enough. Now let's be real here, how more efficient is this than looking up refs and photobashing them yourself? It isn't.. and also you'll get a more natural result from references that are made from nature and that are photobashed with intention. Also.. it's free! You can't convince me he couldn't have done something with floaty underwater hair photos. The end result? Hair pieces in places that don't make sense and that are disconnected. The whole piece slowly got worse as the video progressed. Like I'm not gonna lie the end piece is not *horrible* but.. it made things worse and it was unnecessary.

[@starsh1nachan252]

When Josh started to talk about "art intuition", I felt a deja vu for Shadiwersity's "artist's eye". Idk, it just feels weird and I don't like that feeling.

[@tenneluna6948]

It is real but it's mostly thanks to years of training, it sounds like mumbo jumbo leaving that part out (and of course shadiversity has no ""artist's eye"" or he would realize how horrible and cheap his AI generated pictures look...)

[@AirConditioner402]

Dude I had the same thoughts while watching the video. He sounded so much like Shad thinking he's a genius, it's so pretentious.

[@moritzruffonei3960]

i stoped watching ergojosh when i noticed i wasn't learning anything from him, and rather he was just picking things controversial that the algorithm favored. Or that would make people comment. Now i see i dodged a bullet. The whole point of ai is to speedup the process not to just spend 100 hours fixing problems, or being forever stuck making changes. Until we have wireless fusion energy sources (and free), this whole AI convo is pretty much not gonna replace humans artists, it simply requires too much energy.

[@EvanBear]

When I started bullet journaling and decorating my journal I used midjourney to generate me a doodle sketch of an owl to draw into my journal. I drew the owl as close to the AI art as possible. I technically drew it, by hand, making it mine, but whenever I look through my journal that owl drawing makes me stop. It's not truly "mine". It feels foreign. There's nothing of "me" in it. Hard to explain but I've not done that since and if the text on the page wasn't important, I would rip it out.

[@elvingearmasterirma7241]

What you can do is cut out a piece of paper about the right size to cover it up. And then make a new doodle on that paper and stick it over it. I think that could help?

[@EvanBear]

@@elvingearmasterirma7241 I might do that. I've also thought about cutting it out and sticking it on my page reflecting on AI and AI "art".

[@elvingearmasterirma7241]

@@EvanBear I think thatd be a great idea! I hope it goes well!

[@cinderefell1399]

Isn't he actually a good artist? Bruh, if I had even a fraction of his talent, then I wouldn't be using AI. I don't use it anyway, but still.

[@mica4977]

I wouldn't be surprised if it's to speed up the artistic process and keep up with the YT algorithm gods that require X amount of videos per week to be revelant. In a similar way to how other artists take their own shortcuts to do the same.

[@asdhggkrgkrmgirejlkgelkrjg2757]

@@mica4977 I wonder how long it takes for him to finish his art without the use of AI, if this one took 116 hours....

[@PlusSe7en]

He never uses ai images in a way that he hasn’t used other refs in the past (with zero backlash) but the only problem I see here is that he isn’t talking about the harm and may even (if he pays for midjourney) be contributing with cash to support these evil ai programs.. which is not a good look

[@NicoleHam]

I love how in the video when he's adressing his views, he mentions he pays for it and says 'thats bad, and a fair criticism, I know' And moves on and doesn't say anything else about it. Like bro, ok.

[@M4x4r0ni]

I feel like the biggest issue with his usage of the AI is the fact that he abandoned the starting vision of his piece to try inserting AI into it. You can actively see this in context of the character's body silhouette having a consistent shape & perspective. But then the moment the AI entered the mix, the shape & perspective became overly buried in the AI hair. Which is an aspect that had no connecting points, inconsistent, starts and ends in random bits, etc. It's to a point I feel like his piece would've been better had he looked up images of hair floating in water rather than gone with "AI hair void" like he ultimately ended up doing. Maybe even looking up additional references for space or sand if he really wanted to spice up his infinite void vision. (Edit: didn't answer the AI question at the end. I kinda look at AI art nowadays the same way I look at stuff like tracing, using a base, or even rotoscoping. Not a tool one should rely on, but if it's for a super simplified iteration of whatever vision your wanting to make for yourself then I say go for it. I do think AI art sites & data bases should really just commission some artists to create their data base from rather than just flooding their systems, but that's a different can of worms.)

[@RaushanLedgister]

😂He’s defending It like he’s working at a studio drawing over a frame but it’s the ai generator

[@TeaTimeTable]

And? He can still draw. I can draw too and I would do the same time if I have to spend less time.

[@vaelia1203]

@@TeaTimeTable spend less time? He took 100+ hours for a drawing he used AI to do "faster" and it looks like shit except the body. I can assure youe he could've rendered it way better & made almost no mistake that the AI did if he drew it himself + the hair placment would've looked less random and more intentional in half the time.

[@TeaTimeTable]

@@vaelia1203 Sure but at that point he's just not using his "Tools" properly and decided he wanted a bigger piece so thats on him.

[@RaushanLedgister]

@@TeaTimeTable if your not really thinking about how to draw the entire picture and having it drawn out for you your basically half an artist because the other part of the work would just go to AI.😟I didn’t know it was a group project

[@TeaTimeTable]

@@RaushanLedgister I mean programmers do the same thing - alot of stuff is already coded so you can just drag and drop certain things in instead of hand coding everything yourself... its the same concept here you can photobash peices from an ai image to use in your work if you want if it helps make the process go faster instead of doing it all by hand.

[@j_bubblez279]

I dont think using it as a reference is all that bad. Its more when you use it as the base that you then add to. Many artists use references that we piece together to create an image.

[@roachewy]

real artist don’t need to use AI

[@fernwehnightcore2871]

12:19 the way this made me roll my eyes so far back in my head

[@jacktaktical]

Lets not forget kim jung-gi shortly after freaking DYING Ai is not just bad, its the fall of morals and ethics

[@ev4d0r3]

bro needs to take the L and admit its a skill issue. look at Rella, Yoneyama Mai who draws BEAUTIFUL HAIR without the use of ai

[@rouhee]

AI is a tool for corporations, not for artists.

[@HOUNDDS_]

i personally don't understand his approach, as u could to all of those with ACTUAL references,, i have seen photos resembling his pose, why cant bro kitbash references, it gives him more control too! from the explenation of his video isnt that what hes doing.. but with ai?? why does go for ai rather then actual photos for such an approuch. i'm so lost when it comes to that

[@bluebrightstar1117]

Something I don't think ppl talk abt a lot when it comes to AI is that it takes the fun away from creating art, & I'm so serious when I say we need fun rn more than ever, it's inherently anti-capitalist, we forgot that we don't need to be more productive/ perfect we can just have fun with art ! Also, if you can't draw something bcs you couldn't find a specific reference/ don't have the skills yet, get creative & draw something else! & Practice to get those skills !

[@kuaikukia]

to add self of injury. He even list the title "How real artist use AI" as he is a real artist because he is using AI. SMH

[@virtuosyc]

I wonder what he even wanted to say with that piece he drew

[@maboroshiiro]

Yup i'm used to seeing surrealist art and symbolic themes - and even when I don't fully get those either, I generally can FEEL what emotion they're trying to portray. What is it here? Fear? Wonder? Curiosity? I cannot tell, this isn't shade towards him either 😅I am just wondering. He did say he wanted to incorporate his "spiritual beliefs" in the video (watched the og fully) but I still didn't get it. Tbh that's fine too, no one is obliged to make the messages in their art clear, but if that was an intention then it's definitely lost.

[@KalicoKal]

@@maboroshiiro a.i bro disconect from the actual piece. it might aswell be like giving the art teacher a bullshit exuse for why you made something that had no meaning it just "looked cool". at this point that might be what he thinks an artist is. YEAH making cool shit is valid and makes you an artist, making a piece with meaning makes you an artist, the pretentious every piece needs a meaning to justify its existence 3 paragraph shit a.i bros and bad art teachers like isnt

[@exitsunkiller]

he could've just made squiggles with a brush then used the warp tool it's so easy

[@cheesypastel]

This is so gross…. Lots of ppl have been called out lately for just doing horrible things, but this is just gross like ppl are so lazy and want to take the easy way out to do stuff

[@Carel-g7n]

''I don't make these videos to defend myself'' Literally makes a video to defend himself

[@DragonFlameAU]

People have been using references since the beginning, artist would paint a landscape or portrait in front of the real thing, animators have and still do trace videos to get to the final result some of the most famous Disney and anime animations are rotoscoped, traditional artists used to trace silhouettes of people to get their base, famous landscape artists have used photo cut outs to create scenes from assembled pieces, some artist just paint right over the photo, the list goes on and on, artist have always used what they can to make their process as easy as possible and I think in time AI is just going to be another one of these things, there is no real difference between collecting a bunch of references of art you like or generating a reference with AI the result is the same. I do agree that generating an AI art piece and just claiming you drew it is a problem but its the lie that is the issue not that they generated something. As for the stealing argument I just don't understand that one, are you stealing if you use an artist as reference the normal way? They didn't give you permission to use their art as reference so why is it ok in one instance and not the other. This is all coming from someone who has 30 years of art experience in both traditional and digital mediums, when I was a child I learned to draw by tracing art I liked then moved to copying styles using references until I developed my own style and skills, its a great way to learn. I think AI is bad reference in most cases though, if the AI generates something weird or wrong and that's what your reference is then your art will suffer. AI is not going away and I think we are in teething period, like it or not its going to find a place in the art world somewhere.

[@raina1887]

the thing about using other artists' work as reference/inspo vs AI images is that you can keep track of which artists inspire you, which artists resonate with you most, and if you're ever asked, you can give credit to those artists, but with AI, you would have no idea

[@ttvy1578]

It's ironic that the work he shows us is completely bland and messy, completely unlike his best work... So what is he trying to prove by showing this?

[@Cryptisss]

Is immature what Ai programs did, stealing art without even giving the names of the artists that the Ai is being trained with

[@futurethewolf5624]

Hello, As someone who used to use AI as reference and in my art, I'll tell you it DID NOT HELP ME IMPROVE MY ART IN THE LONG RUN My art looked good-ish at the start with AI, but I didnt learn anything in the long run. Later realizing I didnt need it.

[@kiwooten9106]

The thing that upsets me most about the video is his tone. The edge in his voice and him going on about how he's such a great artist while tracing over the AI was a big turnoff for me. Its a shame because I had seen a few of his videos before and it seemed like he would be the last person to be doing this sort of thing... Had he just sketched a few thumbnails before going into the piece, I feel he would have saved time and created a more powerful piece.

[@sres4]

Wait I’ve seen many videos of artists “stealing from ai” by using already generated images (not by them) as ref? Him tracing an generating images himself is pretty bad thi I think his original idea for the hair js looked sm better bc w the ai theres a bunch of loose strands that just don’t make sense

[@ywlumaris]

He’s defensive cause he knows using genai is wrong.

[@humanintelegence]

i think if your using ai for reference via putting together *ideas*, that's debatable (still on the wrong side for me). however, if your using it for HEAVY referencing like the literal tracing that he did, then i believe that's immoral. i'm also in two minds abt stealing ai "art" & redoing it. On one hand, you're making a new piece that isn't a gross collage of stolen art. On the other hand, the original ai image IS a gross collage of stolen art. I feel like the nuance there comes from the ai prompter claims it as a piece that they created & it's the art community fighting back against the theives.

[@jdaart-i3o]

Every shortcut has a price. When i was a beginner artist i did lot of cheating - tracing, 3d models, copying instead of learning perspective, understanding structure, anatomy etc. As a result what happened was that my inner creativity got dulled. Every artist has an AI image generator in their own head - to the degree that you rely on AI generations, shortcuts, cheats, that inner generator gets dulled. So what ErgoJosh is doing is that he is not training his inner generator to understand hair and its behaviour, volume. He is instead letting the AI do a part of the creative work that he would have otherwise arrived at by himself - which would have made the inner image generator stronger. The more he relies on AI the more he sacrifices his creativity. And so while he will still be able to draw well, he would start to lose a part of his ability for creative imagination. This happened in animation too. I worked in animation. And i would often whine about how tough, and long winded animation is - i've only ever animated digitally. Then i found out how they used to animate before it could all be done digitally by hand flipping pages to spit out a second of animation. And that made me realize that shortcuts or things that make things easier often take your patience as a prize or they shift your perception and expectation in subtle ways so that you percieve a thing to be tougher than it is. It will likely happen to Ergojosh too. There are no free lunches, you are always paying one way or another.

[@huglife626]

Bro they always try to say it's difficult... Everyone used AI at the start of its rise in popularity before the stuff about the datasets came out. Even when the tools were unrefined, it was SUPER easy to get a believable image. Even with Craiyon, which I firmly believe started this trend. Since then so many of those programs have tools that make it EVEN EASIER. Negative prompts, LoRa, models, etc. Even the ability to edit only a PART of a piece. It couldn't be easier and these people couldn't be lazier.

[@NightPhoenixPress]

But he’s right. I did a video on this and young artist don’t want to listen. They know everything and all the older people are wrong. They will pay for it in the end and honestly, it’ll be sad to see so many artists quit, as so many artists hate the business end of art.

[@ed2fun]

Ergojosh is the clear example about the difference between an artist and a youtuber, real artists as Wlop Guweiz etc don't invest time in youtube videos at all, ergojosh was more like an art advisor than an artist, I never considered him as an artist at all, like you can learn much more from proko or even mickeymegamanga has more educative content from what you can learn, ergojosh brand was more like an "artist cheerleader " and many times I saw him even talk about things he has no knowledge or experience about, he NEVER worked in any big studio, like we al know Mark Brunet and his credentials, ergojosh is only a youtuber never was a PROFESSIONAL artist.

[@Pyampyampyam]

Yep, instant unsubscribe on every platform he has. I'm losing hope about these big artists using a.i man.

[@PhoniczKidBubz]

Great Vid! i think you hit the nail on the noggin when you mentioned Josh (and other artists) are using AI as a crutch. It's actually really sad because the core of it is confidence, being willing to mess up, etc., Like he genuinely instead of rushing to the final product could have just thumbnailed LOL. And then to hear the ego in his voice while he's describing how REAL ARTISTS (real mad LOL) use AI is so similar to the type of voice we get from AI bros talking about how art isn't that serious so why not just steal it blah blah blah... I'm going to stay subbed for a little while and hope he changes but it seems like once you touch that AI pack you suffer from it in ways that take away from the process as a whole, getting better etc, etc., Unnecessary and damaging shortcuts...

[@lolaholliday]

Thank you 👍 At the end of the day, if you value to learn and get better then you should practice what you find difficult. If you just want to make stuff for fun then generating some images for an idea would be fine, or if there's a part of the art process you hate (like backgrounds but you just love focusing on character art) and you'd rather use a stock image or generate something then that's also up to you. Art is meant to be fun after all! But considering Mid journey has not been sourced from consenting artists, it's not particularly ethical... If we had good models trained on our own art or the art of a consenting pool of artists, then sure, use it to make the parts you can't/don't want to do easier. I just mention him using it as a crutch because I get the impression Josh is the type to be very focused on skills, and it seems like he could've gotten a good result without the Ai for this piece if he'd wanted, even if he thought he couldn't initially

[@Kawf._.is-trash]

Smh i’m so disappointed i cant even get mad anymore

[@backupforthevideos3861]

If you need to steal materials from someone else to make your cake, that is stealing, plain and simple. If a tool can't exist without taking other people's work, that's stealing. If you can't make the cake (i.e., the tool) without stealing the ingredients (i.e., other people's art), then you are stealing, plain and simple. Thus, most AI art is, in fact, advanced stealing.

[@drakeduped2872]

I see your point, but it's more complicated than calling AI art "stealing." AI learns from patterns in many images but doesn't copy directly. Some courts say it’s not infringement unless it replicates original works

[@kickbeez642]

i don't know if this had something to do with the fast rising upgrad of AI and Josh being at the current skill level just deciding to use AI gen as a "tool" for a more immerse reference than pinterest maybe. But as unethical as AI's data scraping is, Josh is gonna have to understand what his channel really did for his community which was inspire people to follow him feeling like they were on the journey as a artist at the same level as he was and slowly but surely reaching the goal together. This method really just sets his community back. I think the only way he can solve this is by using AI trained off his own work.

[@artistJames-od4fq]

I have been torn on Ergo Josh’s channel for a while now. As a self taught artists, several times he’s promoted bad learning advice that worked for him, not because it’s good, but because it’s how he figured it out. That’s probably why some of his pieces take over 100 hours to complete yet still contain little flaws in basic composition. His support of AI was the nail in the coffin for me to view his channel anymore at all. I agree that AI art, especially used from companies like Midjourney is ethically wrong. The works are clearly stolen. I understand the opposite viewpoint that all artists use references, even if you draw from imagination, you at one point learned from other artists and through references. But the difference for me is, I have always been ok teaching another human and helping them to learn, but I am not ok with teaching an AI, and as an artist, it should be my choice. It was my choice to put my art on the Internet in the first place, but I did it for other humans, not for AI. If there are ethically trained AIs out there that we can prove were ethically trained, they could be helpful in a similar way that 3D modeling is now, when you can’t find the perfect reference or set of references for a very specific pose, I can see it as a helpful tool. It would take just as much work I’m sure as 3D modeling something, so why not just train an AI model to work with 3D models instead of on actual art? That’s where I’d like to see AI used. Not something that can copy the style of any artist out there and just regurgitate a good enough image that looks well enough like they would have done it.

[@rambunctiousraptor]

What bothers me about his use for the hair is that he would have gotten a much better result by just finding real images of flowing hair and manipulating a few of them together in photoshop for the trace step. The face references and the redraw challenges are more nuanced but personally I don’t think it’s good because it reinforces the idea that AI is a good reference tool, even when they’re redrawing it from spite, which I disagree with. Not only are there mistakes that can be bad practice, it also feels disrespectful to the real artists whose art was scraped and their identities are completely forgotten in this process. I think even in private, using a real artist as inspiration has a certain love and reverence being put into the piece. That’s a personal opinion. But when it comes to the ear, that elf felt too close to real artists I’ve seen over the years and that reeeally turned me off. At the end of the day the uses he covered have already existed, gives other real artists engagement even if it’s just viewing that piece for inspiration, drives searches up etc. and lumping “AI haters” in with people who criticize tracing and calling the backlash immature is so unnecessarily hostile and it’s obvious he had his mind made up already and didn’t like the answer he got when he posted that note. If you want to have an open minded conversation, don’t belittle your audience.

[@mjbraw7386]

Ai is not art, and that is ok.

[@Kalitayy]

Anyone who defends AI art is dead and buried to me

[@unturned6066]

I think it´s fine. Ai is here to stay, even though it was built immorally. I just think ErgoJosh´s reaction was weird and way too aggressive, especially since it´s completely reasonable for people to critique this. He also focused way too much on "I still drew this, my skills are fine" when the real issue is not his skills, but the theft.

[@Obbinah]

AI is still at that early stage where no rules have yet been created for it. I trust It'll be sorted and regulated well in the future though. I don't fear the AI overtaking artists or that kind of thing, There are still a great amount of good and fair people in the world for such things to happen

[@charliebear154]

Ergojosh being canceled for supporting Ai was not on my 2024 bingo card 🤦🏻‍♀️

[@cosmicspacething3474]

12:22 They got Nintendo?! Damn I never thought I’d want to see anyone taken down by their ninja lawyers this badly

[@Aiesha87]

Great video and love your vtube avatar. Very cute. Your drawing looked so much better and I loved seeing the process from sketch to seeing you bringing the drawing to life ❤️❤️❤️❤️

[@vespulaggro]

AI can come handy- like in medicine, or to sort things- maybe even to take your calls and make appointments. I just really don’t think it should have a place in the artist community.

[@okamichamploo]

I feel like there's a difference between artists who work in an industry vs artists that sell their work as their finished product. Those in industry jobs will and have always used whatever technology is available because it's highly competitive and they are a part of a larger production where speed and efficiency is valued above individual vision.

[@isadora6092]

their work is also much more collaborative as they work in teams, have briefings, use different other tools like photobashing and are constantly giving and receiving input that changes the final product

[@joaovitorlima9952]

The problem with AI lies in the very foundation of the database, which is the artworks on which the models were trained. If some criminal steals an iPhone and then sells it to you below market price, depending on the country you're in, you aren't committing a crime. It is, however, malicious compliance. It wasn't you who stole all of those other artists' work, sure. But you're making use of the tool that resulted from the theft, no? Benefiting from said theft. That objectively tarnishes your process. So, no - there is no current way to support generative AI as it is. On the topic of Josh, I quite like him as a creator. Never liked his art, but I liked to listen to what he had to say. He always sounded grounded to me, like someone who really knew what he was talking about. I started not listening to him all that much anymore since last year, but this video about the AI assisted piece just settled it for me. Everything about that video was made to be inflammatory. He called the piece "What the meek see"; his discourse was filled with angry rhetoric, calling people immature and weak for not understanding that the AI technology isn't going anywhere, as if that made it's existence ok as this generative model was built. All of it comes to me as very tone deaf and inconsiderate of the struggles people are going through because of it at the moment. It didn't invalidate good advice I've got from him in the last years, but it definitely invalidates anything he says going further for me. 🤖 Robot emoji because I've listened to the end

[@Clovilupe]

Can I just say, I absolutely love how open minded you are! I love how this whole time you recognized the hurt and abomination that is AI while also acknowledging that there are some very interesting moral questions about using AI at all, like you didn't just "AI IS TERRIBLE AND IT SHOULD BURN" but like your questions about when it's ok to use references and stuff were interesting to think about and I love ur channel! :3

[@ourabouras]

Personally I find ErgoJosh to be a clown listening to him whine and shout that he’s a REAL artist. When I see the videos about redrawing AI art I mark Not Interested, I also do that on Pinterest, trying to train it not to suggest any AI regurgitative art. I will admit that there have been a couple pieces I really liked and downloaded to study, trying to figure out what my magpie brain was attracted to. From my small sample size I see that personally I like dynamic lighting and color and having high detailed sections with vibrant colors catches my eye, so I’m trying to incorporate theses aspects into my future illustrations.

[@sunla]

Why do AI defenders sound like they're baring their teeth like angry animals when they talk?

[@tangowhiskygirl]

In my native language there's a difference between an artist making skillful beautiful images, and one making images from concept or story. For the latter, I see no problem whatsoever using AI. But for the artists selling skill, you have to perform that skill yourself. It's a shame English doesn't have the distinction because it would clear up all confusion and controversy

[@motobaafeoke4900]

I think that's very interesting, what language is that?

[@tangowhiskygirl]

@motobaafeoke4900 Swedish. You would make a distinction between "konst" and "illustration", or possibly "bildkonst" for something inbetween

[@kenonerboy]

Chad tracer vs virgin ai proompter

[@pinkie_draws_stuff]

Honestly, using ai as inspo or for a reference/rough idea of what you want to draw is fine! Redrawing ai is fine in my eyes but using it in your art really (in my opinion) takes away from the whole drawing experience. That is something I enjoy personally about art is being able to look at it and break it down. It's so satisfying when you can finally figure out how to draw that thing! I suck at backgrounds but guess what? I still draw them anyway so I'm right there with you! I know my backgrounds, my hands and preceptive stuff will look like trash but I would rather try and attempt it then using ai as a short cut. It takes away the fun of drawing it yourself. I made a video about this but I said that I'm not 100% against ai but ai art is where I draw the line. (Haha see what I did there?) Like I would rather have ai do cleaning and house work. Not art. Let people be creative you know! Btw I like your art and I'm so subscribing! 💖💖

[@AHylianWarrior]

That redrawing AI thing that was on twitter was criticised which is why it vanished suddenly. People were calling it "fanart" and just giving the AI bros the point they wanted to say it can be used as reference which ultimately caused it to stop

[@shellyeditsalot]

if AIs database was ethically sourced (aka not stolen), then using it for reference/inspiration would be PERFECTLY fine. in fact, when there were talks of AI in the first place, this is what I imagined one way to use it. but now, considering how fucked up it is, mentioning AI in good faith is just being complacent and enables this bullshit

[@ridiculousnicholas4732]

This reminds me of when shadiversity tried to convince everyone and himself that AI art is art. SMH

[@aruraven]

What is truly ironic is the brand part you mentioned. He has put it in the time and effort it takes to learn human anatomy and that is what other artists find appealing of his work and videos. "This person did it, I can do it. It is inspiring.". If he values all that, he knows the people these AI companies stole from had to put in the time and effort to learn how to draw and paint hair in any number of ways (to use his example). Lighting hair realistically in a painting is no walk in the park. He clearly knows this. Imo, it's about making 'hot take' content. He might not be getting the numbers he wants and knows this kinda thing works in the short term. The thing is, it is not sustainable bc the audience you attract with this likely cares none about 'putting in the effort' or art as an actual craft/hobby and won't stick around for long. AI hacks videos can be done by AI! It really be 'tools dumbing us down'. Art takes time to improve (even for simple goals) and nobody will improve your skills for you. Curious artists make for life-long learners. There's a reason Proko has been around for like a decade and the content is still very relevant and useful even if you are an advanced artist. There is always something to come back to and refresh for your next piece. I really hope Josh gets back to showing people his passion for art and not jump in the tech bro wagon, 'cause that's what will take jobs away from him and his audience in the long run.

[@spookyjones6577]

To be fair, sometimes putting a lot of work into a piece just for it to not turn out well can be demoralizing. It’s only recently in my life (27) that I’ve been able to care about the process more. It’ll probably take the rest of my life to do it

[@Yipper64]

So here's my view. AI art seems like a neat *tool.* but it does not replace artists *in any way.* Why? Well, very simply, a computer cannot be creative, it can only automate processes. You might say "wait but isnt that exactly what AI art is? a computer being creative" its all smoke and mirrors, there's no creativity here. Its taking the prompt and filling in the gaps with averages, taking key words and sorting through images with similar tags, then using an algorithm to stitch them together in a coherent way. A picture is worth 1000 words, a prompt has about 20. Where does all of that information come from? Just the averages. So what is the result? What happens to the details? Smoothed out, and as generic as possible. So what is it useful for? Stock images, reference art, mockups, and that sort of thing. A final product however? No artist worth their salt would consider that good enough.

[@Angel_Kittichik]

There’s only three exceptions I would make for using A.I. in art. 1. If a filter uses A.I. I’ll elaborate on this one. I don’t mean the types of filters that make photos look like art pieces. I mean filters that are already in some art programs like Halftone and Blur. To create abstract backgrounds or textures or effects that enhance the movement of the piece. 2. If it’s to find the strengths and weaknesses of A.I. models to further push them back. I’ve seen people using poisoned images and artworks to not only protect their own works, but to sabotage the A.I. training models. I support setting back its progress in accuracy like this. 3. Purely comedic. An example I’ve seen of this exception is “Potato in solitary confinement”, because of its ridiculousness. I can see there could be an argument against this exception though, so I’m somewhat on the fence about it.

[@josephmurdock5549]

I am against using it as a part of the art process because then you can never trust the actual skills of the artist. You won’t know what they can do which is important for not only professional work but commission work. You can’t trust what artwork is in their portfolio once they have used AI art. I’m saying this as someone who has liked some ai stuff in the past, but I could never bring my self to use generative ai for anything that I want to feel pride about making. So never in my art, my writing, or making music. You made a funny haha meme? Cool I laugh with you, but I won’t respect or appreciate it when someone actively uses it in something that should bring them pride and joy. Because they are only hurting themselves, their integrity, and feeding their insecurities.

[@genera1013]

AI is theft. Period. Using it as reference? Than use real references. Not that difficult. Using AI, even if only for reference, is supporting art theft. Like how hate watching a show is still giving it views.

[@genastcreates907]

🤖 I like the composition in your drawing at the end. The composition did not 'distract viewers with the hair', make The Meek's face and glowing sphere the main subjects and additionally invites the viewers to also see what The Meek sees 👍🏻

[@MsPoliteRants]

I can’t believe Josh is intentionally missing the point. He gave money to MidJourney to make an image to then refer to for his drawing. That’s the problem. Does he not care that people could be out there generating “artwork” in his style in two minutes and selling prints of it? He’s okay feeding into an industry that does that?

[@FishiusArt]

16:45 the issue I believe with ai ref’s is that well 1. The ref won’t be high quality on anything but rendering, 2. It’s ai and the general negative connotations on that is a thing, but 3. The people doing those challenges where they fix the ai art aren’t just trying to make their own completely original artwork. They’re trying to fix the aim that’s the point, I doubt the people doing that challenge actually use ai refs in their professional work, maybe on their personal work if they didn’t know. I do think intent is a factor in this.

[@FishiusArt]

Also I would be fine with ai if these conditions are met. 1 it is an opt-in technology, and 2. The ai told you the people’s art was mostly used the image generation and had to be credited. Maybe they even get royalties. But I know that visual art is not something that society really cares about a lot so I doubt that would ever happen

[@FishiusArt]

Also I do like the flat colours idea. But you can do that very easily in clip studio already, I don’t use procreate so that could be useful. But in csp the bucket tool has lots of settings, on that allows it to expand by x amount of pixels so it leaves no gap between flats and lineart

[@machshfive]

150 hours that's almost an entire week. I mean everyone works at their own pace yeah but I finished a 20 foot long acrylic painting in 2.5 weeks. That drawing only has about 8 hours max put into it.

[@Chessbox09]

He’s gaslighting his audience and sounds very defensive. Makes me think he’s knows it’s wrong and is finding someway to justify it. We are all trying to make our own way. Sadly, not only is he cheating other artists he’s cheating himself.

[@Chris-bj5ps]

Whether it’s for fun or not ai is not ethical point blank period. It’s a slap in the face to all the artist it’s ripped off. If he isn’t confident in his skills just keep practicing why take the cheap way out. He’s just robbing himself of ever improving his artistry.

[@YVZSTUDIOS]

I personally think it's totally OK to use AI art for inspo, a bit questionable to use it like photopashing (just like regular photobashing), but not a killer. But where I draw the line is Midjourney. I'm currently building a new channel about art and will talk about this myself, but the short version is: Midjourney is THE WORST piece of AI you can use. It's evil and there is no way to use that ethically. There are other AI tools like Stable Diffusion and DALL-E (Microsoft Copilot Designer) that are possible to be used in an ethical way.

[@r1cceguy]

All fun and games until your job or career as an artists gets taken away by an ai "art" user All fun and games until ai steals your artwork that you've worked hard for to create All fun and games until someone uses ai to frame you All fun and games until takes all over the world and humans become lazy

[@mynameispi883]

ergojosh more like egojosh

[@Ongle_Spongle]

So... if he already has the skills to draw in a 3d space, use references from other established artists, using multiple references smashed together and tracing what he needs from that, and using the liquify tool to manipulate it *anyway*, then he literally doesn't/never even need to use ai in the first place. He could've (and probably did) use a 3d modeling program if he had so much trouble getting the pose right?? That video would've been just fine if he had instead said "here's how you can combat ai by doing this!" And then showed how he uses a combination of references from actual artists and real life and manipulate them to get what he needs for the finished product. But *no!* despite having literally all of the skills and tools at his disposal, and even knowing how to utilize a 3d space, and knowing how to use references, he still felt the need to use ai because: "Oh, I can't draw flat hair in a 3d space 😔 guess I'll just use ai!"