[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Settings Mobile Home
/gd/ - Graphic Design

4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.
  • Additional supported file types are: PDF
  • There are 23 posters in this thread.

08/21/20New boards added: /vrpg/, /vmg/, /vst/ and /vm/
05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
[Hide] [Show All]

Janitor applications are now closed. Thank you to everyone who applied!

File: 1632757653201.jpg (145 KB, 1024x1024)
145 KB
145 KB JPG
I'm 19 and have been trying to improve my skills and build a portfolio. But then my brother tells me about dalle 2. This ai can generate insane quality art pieces instantly. Is it over before it even began? Seriously, what the fuck should I do. A creative field is the only thing I'm interested in and good at. I'm actually worried about how this will affect the art industry as a whole. Am I scared over nothing? What's an art field that won't be fucked over by ai just yet?
I wouldn’t worry about it yet. AI will never trump the human artistic spirit, even if it can fool normalfags. Just keep going buddy
Don't worry, the software may look impressive, but it doesn't beat human work. You can't tell it how to fully make something up to a specification, so it's safe to say that creative works can't be fully replaced but machine just yet.
I just watched a video yesterday where a team's graphic designer was pit up against Dalle-2. The results were shown to different team members without telling them which piece was human and which was Dalle. 2/3 of the pieces selected for accuracy to the prompt and good work were by the human designer. The Dalle-picked piece won over a small technicality.
Even being presented two options that were very high quality, they naturally leaned toward the human-done design. I don't think computers will ever be able to replicate that essence.
However, I am interested to see what kinds of artists are replaced by Dalle.
Can you post the link? I need the copium.
An AI makes 50% of posts here
Don't worry zoomerbro, by the time your portfolio is big enough the AI will be much better
I can assure.you that DALLE while have it's uses in gd, just not outright replacing the graphic designer entirely.
I think this video might answer in whether the art field (or rather, graphic design in particular) will be replaced under AI. It offers quite a nuanced take that I've not seen elsewhere.
AI isn't just about asset creation. Things like Canva will evolve so if you upload your brand logo and colors they will create designs around it automatically with a few keywords.
never, until . . .
There's a lot of people who will over-hype the ability of Dall-E

It's still built on a set of rules, and we will see bigger flaws emerging in Dall-E compared to original artworks, as time goes by.

You'll also notice a lot of the images generated are mimicking an art-style. Art reflects culture and culture reflects art, but this AI doesn't have some kind of culture interpreting ability. so as long as you are an artist who is willing to engage with the world around you, then you should always have an advantage over the AI.

Most likely in the future you will one day find yourself in a job where you are collaborating with an AI to create art. (Lots of creative fields have already been doing it, such as animation and film editing and those industries still have need to hire).

Be more worried and alert about getting underpaid for your labor. Its a tough industry and people get taken advantage of all the time.
Dall e 2 isn't perfect at the moment, and not available to the public. So there is no immediate threat. You should be good for probably at least five years. After that no one can tell. I want to work creatively as well and this scares the shit out of me.
If I was 55, I wouldn't give too much of a shit. Retirement and all being in the horizon. But I'm really young. I'm already feeling existential, I thought I had my life pinned down and now this shit happens. Sure, it's easier to reconsider careers at this age but I'm fucking stuck again. It doesn't help seeing a bunch of people soifacing over this tech and cheering on how many people will become unemployed
File: hopium.jpg (78 KB, 600x618)
78 KB
You posted this question in /gd/ which is full to the brim with knuckle draggers who are drunk on dangerous amounts of hopium that DALLE2 isn't gunning for their job. I'll give it to you straight OP:

DALLE2 at the very least it means much fewer man-hours are needed for brainstorming/prototyping (which constitutes a large part of the skilled work that artists do). Any dummy can watch a YouTube tutorial on the pen tool and trace the shapes generated by DALLE2 et al.

Like all implementations of AI at this stage, humans and machines will have to work together to compensate for each other's weaknesses. An artist armed with DALLE2 is going to be so much more efficient at generating content that they'll start to gobble up work of the neckbeard denizens of this board very quickly.

If you're looking for a very similar example, just look at how MS Excel and other spreadsheet tools put countless number-crunching accountants out of work through efficiency gains. Those applications require human input, sure, but much less so than before their implementation.

Will graphic designers go extinct? No, but those jobs will become increasingly rare as it will take fewer and fewer humans to input & tweak AI output.

Fewer man-hours = fewer human jobs.

If you're 19 my advice to you is find a career that can't be A: Outsourced to another country more cheaply. B: Be made redundant by efficiency gains granted by AI advancements.

The trouble is that automation is gunning for a lot of blue and white collared work across industries. Choosing correctly is difficult but if something needs to be done on-site (construction, installation, etc.) or the service needs to be delivered in-person, then you're generally safe... for now.
What if I hate everything else but creating art?
>An artist armed with DALLE2 is going to be so much more efficient at generating content

>If you're looking for a very similar example, just look at how MS Excel and other spreadsheet tools put countless number-crunching accountants out of work through efficiency gains.
Very dissimilar for two major reasons; accounting isn't a creative field and improvements are all about efficiency, not coming up with a wide array of answers. It's overhead that has to be there, that doesn't improve the bottom line if you up the budget for it the way graphic design can via advertising, packaging, etc.

>Will graphic designers go extinct? No, but those jobs will become increasingly rare as it will take fewer and fewer humans to input & tweak AI output.
>Fewer man-hours = fewer human jobs.
This is a fundamental flaw in most assessments of impending automation and game changing tools- assuming that it's a zero sum game where some finite amount of output will be switched over to machines and everyone not running a machine will have no work regardless of their skill.
This has almost never been the case for the simple reason that demand levels for products and services that require skilled manual labor are always tempered by labor cost when there's no alternative and its in effect a (labor) seller's market.
When alternatives lower the buy-in cost the demand not only rises for traditional applications but new and creative (hint) applications are developed that take advantage of the new cost/benefit paradigm and create new markets and more work...

Sign painting was automated by the ability to compose and create lettering digitally; sign painters who refused to adapt lost out but the fact is that the technology caused many people and companies who would never have considered using a sign painter unless they absolutely had to because of what they cost to be able to effectively get the same results at costs so low by comparison that they present almost no barrier to green lighting the decision.

"Jobs" where you can sit back and rely on demand outstripping the available labor pool to keep wages comfy or so you can name your price and have steady work even if you are a PITA to work with always suffer from automation, that's one of the primary reasons for implementing it.

But that's an entirely different thing than *market demand* and eliminating the barriers of high cost and gatekeeping attitudes within a skilled labor force nearly always causes more overall demand as people have more and better choices to suit their needs and less hassle fulfilling them.
It's impossible to fucking tell what's real anymore. Everyone feels biased. One side says "no, the job is safe, it's just hype" while the other says the opposite. It's like everyone has compelling arguments and I can't tell which will become the future.
It's almost like predicting the future is very difficult due to how chaotic the world is.
Focus on destroying the AI.
this 100%. labor defines value in our system of markets so maybe you'll use AI as a tool but mostly you still have to be creative and no AI can replace that or doing sketches. A friend who is an artist living from it does the most awesome requests to craiyon.com since it came out and he is like 50 years old and doesnt even need to understand it fo using it. me for example I never learned to draw but it took me the same amount of time to learn to te 3d model an now I can draw very ugly but creatively. its about the skill of being creative an the craftmansship that gets you there so dont worry, learn to draw and go with the flow you can make it.
File: Capitalism is failing.jpg (89 KB, 960x960)
89 KB
I'm the hopium-destroying poster and I just want to thank you for providing a thoughtful counter-argument.

The truth of the matter probably lies somewhere between our interpretations of the facts as they stand. I don't trust anons to make an informed decision but at least they're exposed to some conflicting perspectives.
File: luddites.jpg (371 KB, 1200x808)
371 KB
371 KB JPG
"Let's destroy the AI rather than learn to work with in, that'll save our jobs!"
the Luddites were not against technology, they were against a bourgeoisie technological monopoly controlling their lives
You're a personal portraitist starting out the day the camera was invented.
People are saying "oh but there'll always be need for personal portrait paintings".
I wouldn't listen to them.

See cope:
It's already competing head-to-head with human designers.
Wins 1 out of 3 times.
It takes the AI 30seconds to make 6 prints for free. How long does it take the well-paid human?
>we will see bigger flaws emerging in Dall-E compared to original artworks, as time goes by.
Apparently we're just assuming they make no improvements to Dall-E ever, this is the final product of all time.
>in the future you will one day find yourself in a job where you are collaborating with an A
If you're one of the 10% of the industry that still has a job in 5 years, yes.
It's scaling up to 1M users as we speak. Bad bad cope.

Join the trades. Last to be automated. Make art with pipes n stuff.
I build the data centers that destroy your careers. Good times for us.
The AI isn't simply going to replace us, it will eventually going to attain superhuman creativity. It has instantaneous access to the entire corpus of human experience, past and present. It can iterate and extrapolate faster than the greatest genius that will ever live. Eventually, it'll produce work so profoundly beautiful that we'll fall to our knees and thank the lord we were even born to witness it. This marks our shift from a society of creators to one of pure consumerism. Just let the machine entertain you, it's fine

But also, seriously: Get into motion graphics. It's only going to take 5-10 years to get there, but the AI's weaknesses right now are structure and sequence. Animation is going to be the last problem to be solved. Even once it's technically capable of producing a contiguous animation with lifelike physicality and Pixar appeal, a text prompt won't get you there. Cartoony animation in particular is virtually unsolvable when artists selectively break with reality- how do you train a model for that without also producing nonsense?

Graphic design will remain viable for the next decade. The AI can't handle typography yet, and it won't satisfy whatever pedantic criteria designers hold when selecting Helvetica over Helvetica Neue. These models don't provide high resolution output yet, so you can still beat it for quality if you're already a master. Vector graphics will never be automated, possibly. Geometric data structures haven't seen much play in machine learning research yet because explicit coordinate sequences don't map well to random matrix convolution, So get into 3D modelling, too.
Yes please.

>retard who destroys his body and mind for a living talking about cope
trades suck dick, did it for 5 years and made my money but it was hell even as a business owner.

more importantly you shouldn't be giving a young kid advice because you're a moron. there's a lot more an artist can do for a living besides painting a portrait, and many of those things can even be highly technical and valuable. your analogy is completely wrong and you don't understand what you're talking about.
it's not about building a bigger hammer, it's about consciousness and the creation of structured ideas and systems, which machines fundamentally cannot accomplish alone because all of their feedback is completely dependent on human input. art and design are not tools which bring us to an end, but expressions of tiny fragments of our infinite reality on an individual human level. retards like you think tools are about to replace consciousness because globohomo convinced you so and you fell for it. you chose your future.

give up and kill your soul if you want, but dont try to get kids to join you you sick fuck.

nice paragraph where you suck off math formulas for an hour but you're missing one thing. humans don't like passive entertainment, we like to interact.

your understanding of history is upside down. for most of human history, we were dependant on special people who had the talent for storytelling, or the natural world to provide entertainment. we were completely dependent unless you were basically chosen by god to be creative. this changed with the creation of art and writing. now instead of acting as a conduit for spontaneous creativity such as singing or speaking, we could put it concretely in a literal sense. all of that has lead up to the internet and an age where everybody can be creative thanks to the fancy tools we've made.

let the machine entertain me? fuck that, the machine is boring. it's more fun when i come up with stuff for it to do. it's my slave, not vice versa. anybody who chooses slavery to a machine is really just a slave to its human master.
>an age where everybody can be creative thanks to the fancy tools we've made.
There's a paradox though where "creativity" always has some derivative element that is almost impossible to avoid, people are influenced what they've been exposed to and at best assimilate and transform that into something fresh if not entirely unique.
Thats always been the case but the explosion of media access and content has vastly changed the input side of the equation, which has in many cases worked against the kind of focus and refinement that artists used to have to engage in the stand out. There's also the fact that ease of production combined with an unfocused stream of content creates feedback loops where someone "creates" something they think is cool or commercially valuable because they saw it featured somewhere, others see that and make derivatives that are mostly no better and often worse, others are exposed to those and copy them, etc. until there's just a morass of bland derivative garbage.

AI doesn't offer much to counter that scenario and in many ways just automating it so what little human though goes into it is a basic script, that when you see them usually confirm the paradigm described above- make a picture of something that most anyone can visualize, in some established artistic style. There may be some novelty in the selection of incongruous elements like "a cowboy and a dolphin in outer space" but it's often just for the sake of novelty and doesn't convey any recognizable message or purpose.


All of this can be witnessed in how popular music has changed since the advent of fast, easy production and sampling. There's endless novelty where any lyric or vocal can be juxtaposed with any piece of recorded music or synthesized instrument and run through effects to make it mimic some producers signature sound and/or a particular era. "lyrics about murder over polka riffs in a Phil Spector Wall Of Sound style and played on an old 78 record player"...done. It's not that it can't be cool or worthwhile but the speed of production means LOTS more of it to sift through for gems, and the risk that people who don't do that will make more stuff derived from what should have been sifted out.

>let the machine entertain me? fuck that, the machine is boring. it's more fun when i come up with stuff for it to do. it's my slave, not vice versa

In the slave analogy the real value of a slave is working it without concern for how tired or discouraged or hungry, etc. it might be. Look at the amount of concessions must be made and rules followed just to get AI graphics generators to spit out a handful of iterations od simple ideas and you can see that its a pretty
shitty slave.
Ostensibly the idea is that it is trying out various possibilities and permutations of how the prompt can be interpreted in quantities and speeds that a human couldn't but it's taking over the decision making part of that process using an algorithm that can't turn on a dime and head off on a tangent the way even an average human brain can- and those tangents along with plain old happy litte accidents ( to quote Bob Ross) are often where art magic happens.
A slave conditioned to only do what it is told is poorly suited to that kind of flight of imagination, and true experimentation goes beyond just mixing this and that and seeing if you like what happens.
If you ever posted some art on social media, this AI is likely ripping off your own work to blend in theirs. It should be sued back to oblivion and then never appear again desu

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.