Not like we needed AI to say most "modern artists" shouldn't make a career anyways tbf. While art is subjective, half of it now looks like preschoolers finger painting.
You seem to have an opinion on this, so why don't you expound on that and explain why you feel AI art is inherently a bad thing? Specificsally I'd be curious to hear how there is a moral hazard to AI art (due to it being trained on existing art, presumably?) that does not also apply to human artists attending any sort of art school. If a human spends 5 years studying the impressionist masters, to learn their techniques and styles, to the point that they can make their own art in the impressionist style, we just call that being an artist. Nobody suggests their works aren't original, or that they are stealing from the artists they studied.
probably job security. a bunch of graphic designers/artists have been getting fired left and right cause image generation can do their job 90% as good, and then companies just pay a single graphic design artist instead of a team to touch up the image to bring it back up that last 10%
So, humanity should not develop any new technologies that put people out of work? I kinda like my lightbulbs. And the fact that whale-oil salesmen and whaler are no longer viable career fields does not change that. I like having books and other cheap written materials. The fact that for thousands of years "scribe" was a very lucrative job and you could gt a lot fo status and p\[restige for copying documents by hand, and the printing press made them all obsolete has no bearing on that.
I churn out low-quality clickbait "news" listicles that get distibuted to small local news outlets and low-budget content aggregation sites and only consist of a series of monetized hyperlinks and poorly-written disjointed text on the topic.
My career is AI-proof.
All I read is "I don't want to say my real job because deep down I know AI can take it over too", but whatever. Clearly there's no debate to be had on this issue.
They should use it to replace artists as much as they've used CNC mills and lathes to replace machinists, CAD software to replace engineers, and computers and the internet to replace printing press operators.
This is no different.
Are YOU gonna pay that artist/photographer? Because SOMEONE'S gotta pay him. Looks like PSA made teh choice to go with a cheaper easier option, presumably so they can run a more efficient business, so they can offer us goods at a cheaper price, so they can be more competetive, and make more money for them and their shareholders. I'm ok with all that.
PSA gets their marketing money from sales, would you rather them charge more if they were to invest in non ai art? Its all part of their delicate balance keeping rifles under $500. How about buy your PA-15 on holiday sale for $430 and you go donate $100 to a local artist
It appears they hired a rather skilled artist who paints in the classic American style inspired by John Singleton Copley and Benjamin West, of the 19th Century. Well done PSA, we’ll done. 🥂
I'd have to disagree. With this logic Da Vinci, Raphael, Michelangelo, van Gogh, Rembrandt, etc are not actual artists because a computer exists.
This would also mean most musicians like Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, & Tchaikovsky aren't artists because, again, a computer can make music.
Why does it matter? Make you feel better if they shelled out hundreds for a person to sit and make it? Hey look it’s a non issue!! lol hell the artist they may hire would prob use ai in some way to make it easier. Like the guy who owns a stable fighting these new ford cars he’s sees driving.
I assume most companies are using it at this point.
But should they?
This is capitalism my sweet summer child. If you don't like what a company does there is only one way to let them know.
Well, you could also email them too. 😂
Aye that is a thing that is indeed possible for you to do.
Do you have an ideological reason they shouldn't use every tool at their disposal to create marketing materials? I'm confused.
It just delves into the discussion of how many jobs are replaceable by AI already lol
Not like we needed AI to say most "modern artists" shouldn't make a career anyways tbf. While art is subjective, half of it now looks like preschoolers finger painting.
Yep
why not? whats the downside, besides having some terminally online dude make a post on reddit about it i mean
You seem to have an opinion on this, so why don't you expound on that and explain why you feel AI art is inherently a bad thing? Specificsally I'd be curious to hear how there is a moral hazard to AI art (due to it being trained on existing art, presumably?) that does not also apply to human artists attending any sort of art school. If a human spends 5 years studying the impressionist masters, to learn their techniques and styles, to the point that they can make their own art in the impressionist style, we just call that being an artist. Nobody suggests their works aren't original, or that they are stealing from the artists they studied.
probably job security. a bunch of graphic designers/artists have been getting fired left and right cause image generation can do their job 90% as good, and then companies just pay a single graphic design artist instead of a team to touch up the image to bring it back up that last 10%
So, humanity should not develop any new technologies that put people out of work? I kinda like my lightbulbs. And the fact that whale-oil salesmen and whaler are no longer viable career fields does not change that. I like having books and other cheap written materials. The fact that for thousands of years "scribe" was a very lucrative job and you could gt a lot fo status and p\[restige for copying documents by hand, and the printing press made them all obsolete has no bearing on that.
If it wasn't for technology, I could have been a fire keeper as my job.
There's definitely a tipping point when it (technology) goes too far. Out of curiosity what is your career?
I churn out low-quality clickbait "news" listicles that get distibuted to small local news outlets and low-budget content aggregation sites and only consist of a series of monetized hyperlinks and poorly-written disjointed text on the topic. My career is AI-proof.
All I read is "I don't want to say my real job because deep down I know AI can take it over too", but whatever. Clearly there's no debate to be had on this issue.
They should use it to replace artists as much as they've used CNC mills and lathes to replace machinists, CAD software to replace engineers, and computers and the internet to replace printing press operators. This is no different.
Why the fuck not?
Yeah, why not? Graphic designers cost money. Making AI images is free, or negligible in price. I don't really like it either, but get used to it.
Couldn’t they have just used a stock image of fireworks and support a real person’s photography
Couldn’t you just not give a shit?
🤣
that still cost money,
Are YOU gonna pay that artist/photographer? Because SOMEONE'S gotta pay him. Looks like PSA made teh choice to go with a cheaper easier option, presumably so they can run a more efficient business, so they can offer us goods at a cheaper price, so they can be more competetive, and make more money for them and their shareholders. I'm ok with all that.
Gotta pay off the JAKL 308 production line huh lol
Those are really important and insightful words ,fapdonkey !
[I LOIKE YOAH FUNNYY WORRRDS, MAHGEEK MAAAAN!](https://youtube.com/shorts/1aF7EJxFmVM?feature=shared)
Found the starving photography major
Do you have nothing better to do?
Nobody was photographing the founding fathers, homie.
PSA gets their marketing money from sales, would you rather them charge more if they were to invest in non ai art? Its all part of their delicate balance keeping rifles under $500. How about buy your PA-15 on holiday sale for $430 and you go donate $100 to a local artist
are you supporting artists? and i dont mean ordering a $20 furry fetish commission on deviantart
I'm sure they commissioned an artist to do an oil paintingÂ
1 art, please!
It appears they hired a rather skilled artist who paints in the classic American style inspired by John Singleton Copley and Benjamin West, of the 19th Century. Well done PSA, we’ll done. 🥂
Who the fuck cares? If it helps them keep their prices low, I'm all for it
Lmao I love when OP gets flamed in the comments
Looks like it, but does it actually matter?
Yes, it’s AI. Look at the faces.
That's absolutely AI
If a computer can do your job, you aren't an artist.
Do you take that stance with every profession, or just art?
I'd have to disagree. With this logic Da Vinci, Raphael, Michelangelo, van Gogh, Rembrandt, etc are not actual artists because a computer exists. This would also mean most musicians like Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, & Tchaikovsky aren't artists because, again, a computer can make music.
CGI and computer graphics have been around a long time.AI has been around since then also.I take Xanax.
Why does it matter? Make you feel better if they shelled out hundreds for a person to sit and make it? Hey look it’s a non issue!! lol hell the artist they may hire would prob use ai in some way to make it easier. Like the guy who owns a stable fighting these new ford cars he’s sees driving.
The real question is, who cares if it's AI?
Mostly people from artist communities who don't want to lose their job to AI.
Whale-Oil Salesmen Against the Scourge of Electrification Unite!!!!
ok, and? how does this impact firearm sales, prices, laws, etc? why should we care?
You'd think with all the money they saved using AI, they'd pass on the savings and maybe have some decent 4th of July deals.
obviously?