Twitter destroys Shad again....

Backup channel:
/ @punishedartbookaddiction
Discord:
/ discord
Twitter:
/ ngo_oils
Patreon:
/ artbookaddiction
Reddit:
/ artbookaddiction
Instagram:
www.instagram....
website:
www.ngooilpain...

[@pie4486]

I remember watching a video once regarding A. I. Art “Prompters” having their own identity in the art community. “A. I. Prompt artists/engineers” because it does require a certain amount of skill knowing exactly what to key into the A. I. Program’s prompt section before executing the search [or ‘create?’] button and while I supposed it’s true, to me it’s no different than a person calling themselves ‘doodle artist,’ like I used to when I was in high-school just doodling away on the headliner of my college ruled notebooks and corners and bottoms of my homework. It’s like a person who makes art with dried spaghetti ‘spaghetti artists,’ thus identifying the art they make as spaghetti-art. I don’t think too much about it, other than it’s just that, ‘That’ being what the artist themselves wants to be. Shad’s sourced art, no matter what anyone’s opinion of the art in question, is real art because it was made by him and it took work on his end [imagination from the mind and skill with a pencil] to imprint in his ideas on paper and create something he 100% made himself. But when he uses A. I. Assisted programs and tools and speaks of it as though he did the rest when the A. I. Was the workhorse than corrected and colored most of it it isn’t art anymore. Art is a human endeavor, a construct of sorts we’ve been creating since the dawn of mankind some hundreds of thousands of years and wall paintings in caves have been found all over the globe as a testament to these endeavors of our ancestors. A. I. On the other hand are just tools, they’re no different than a twig dipped in charcoal and water used to etch something on paper, and no different than a hb pencil we’re all familiar with each one used as tools for us to communicate ideas; but with A. I. There’s no communication, just a series of words that we humans have defined over the course of time, which computers have no concept of meaning and value because it’s simply not what they do. One need not go so far to know how true this is after learning about the Chinese Box mind experiment where a person who doesn’t speak a word of Chinese lies inside of a box and is handed a book based on learning to communicate in Chinese. A speaker of Chinese inserts a page, ‘Hello, how are you?’ In Chinese and the person inside the box picks it up and not knowing a word of Chinese but having a book of instructions that tell where to find the exact words the sender sent to him and what combination of Chinese symbols and words to use in order to respond to the sender they’ll be able to respond accordingly. But they don’t really know Chinese, they’ve just been instructed what to send back upon them receiving a message. In the same sense we can all draw a picture, let’s say a squiggly-line that looks like an snake but we call a ‘crook’ and give it to a computer A. I. That wouldn’t know what to do with it unless we instructed it to learn our symbol as a crook. If we were to feed it a picture of composition that used the golden ratio we know of in art and asked it to spit out an original drawing just like it it would most likely break the golden ratio and give us at best an exact replica or near exact replica, or at worse completely butcher the painting. If the painting we gave it was one done by one of the Old Masters of art like Leonardo DaVinci, us knowing the reasons why he shaped and shaded and composed his drawing the way that he did deliberately and with reason and much thought, and meaning behind every detail from the lighting and composition to the minutest of lashes, say a single baby blue lash because the color reminded them of their baby brother or the sky or ocean. An A. I. Program would never be able to do any of that, it can never put any meaning behind why it made the decisions it made and if any of it holds any kind of value or significance. It can’t because it’s only a tool, it’s not responsible for the art that is made on paper or any medium, the human being acting as the creative agent is because we’re self-expressive and reasonable, we’re aware of our conscious thoughts, and we’re volitional; these are unique, human qualities that make us creative agents. Inanimate objects like a pencil is abstract or otherwise A. I. Which is the same as any tool in our creative arsenal doesn’t hold the qualities associated with human beings aforementioned earlier. A. I. Art will never make one an artist. Anyone can be an artist. A person who draws a line be it straight or curved or crooked has already become an artist automatically no natter how bad or good they think they are, or we think they are; soley through their own volition to give art a shot. An A. I. Can also replicate that same line, curve or crooked; better or worse, but without volition of want or desire to be an artist as it can never hold such personal desires. I have more to say, but I’m tired as of now. It’s almost 2AM. I just found your channel after searching for the Yoh Yoshinari sketchbook and I liked your long form video on it, indeed. I decided to watch your most recent stuff and this video was it. Thanks for posting. You have a like and a new subscriber in me.

[@SleepyRulu]

I am not professional artist but unlike shad I am proud of my work its the most skilled and well crafted at least I am happy unlike shad. Its took three years get better and understand there’s more life than what shad doing.

[@someuser4166]

i legit thought the thumbnail was a shitpost but thats his finished piece? it looks like a meme...

[@mikekazz5353]

I thought it was about shadman and not the guy who's known for his medieval weapon videos.

[@lukeyskywalker1251]

I thought you were referring to shadman, I haven’t heard about him for years

[@1neinate0]

Same I don’t know where the Shadman is, but I do recognize that name 😅

[@SylvesterLazarus]

Honestly I can't even decide anymore whose side Shad is standing, but if he's trying to be a bad example he's doing amazingly!

[@mcdoubler]

The only good AI art I encountered is a handful of anime stuff I've seen on Pixiv, even then the way it renders hands, feet, and even the shiny finish all feels artificial. There's always an extremely glossy look to the final product.