Reply To: Film music books
Which is why, unlike some, I am not worried that A.I. is anywhere near replacing creative artistry.
Yes, theoretichally but practically I am worried. Maybe for the hobbyist it does not matter. But if you talk about professional environments people already loose commisssion because AI is cheaper and faster. Some of these areas like illustrations for children books are already underpaid. Many people deciding don’t care about design and such and have no understanding. If it only looks “nice”… A common term you hear in that environemt is that “you do it for fun” anyway… People who use random stock material you see around every corner most likely use some AI generation.
By the way, I am no more an “A.I.” fan than I am a fan of word processors or electric juicers or carports.
I was not directly addressing you, just in case.
On the other hand much of so called creative work by humans could have easily been created by AI. The term “creativity” is used too inflationally.
“Creativity” is used to inflationary in some context, especially on Hollywood film PR interviews…
I estimate about 90% of creative work is based on knowledge and experience which can easily be reproduced by AI. The remaining 10% are based on errors and misunderstandings, that get included into the process instead of being compensated.
That human factor is what it makes creative. If AI does everything no one will ever bother to learn certain things to it it himself anymore. And soon no one will know how to do things anymore, too. Nick’s AI image above is nice as first sight but it is bland and without any personality, too.
Of course there is a lot of bad or “cheaply” done art out there but art is always to some part in the eye of the beholder.
Adobe is already advertising to use AI to create your own soundtrack for your movie. Of course music is very mathematically and even more easily generated than other forms of art…
I still think AI here is used for things we don’t need AI for in the first place.