Jump to content


Please note: You can easily log in to MPN using your Facebook account!

AI Art - Stealing or…


Recommended Posts

I've seen a few people post on social media complaining that in order to train AI to create art, they used existing art without the artists permission nor compensating them. As a creative person, I get the complaint, but OTOH, isn't that what humans have done since the beginning? You know, good artists copy, great artists steal. I can go to a museum and be inspired by a painting, or hear a song somewhere and be inspired by that.

 

I'm curious what you guys think. I guess the concern is that the AI can get too close to the source since it doesn't have the human filter that usually makes the new art unique and individual. But I haven't tried these generators so I don't know what you get out of it. "Give me a landscape of the moon in the style of Ansel Adams."

  • Like 1

"I'm so crazy, I don't know this is impossible! Hoo hoo!" - Daffy Duck

 

"The good news is that once you start piano you never have to worry about getting laid again. More time to practice!" - MOI

Link to comment
Share on other sites



Hmm, from the time I was a young sax player, to the present day, I've stolen from so many people, Stan Getz, Stanley Turrentine, Jimmy Smith, Aretha Franklin, Mark Murphy, Jimmy Page, Muddy Waters, Plas Johnson, Earl Bostic, Elvis Presley, Mel Torme, Jimi Hendrix, Brian Wilson, Ann Wilson, Robert Plant, Dexter Gordon, Doctor John, Leon Russell, Paul Horn, Paul Desmond, Tom Jones, Gino Vannelli, Frankie Valli, Shirley Horn, Miles Davis, Joni Mitchell, Jon Hendricks, Annie Ross, Diana Krall, Eliane Elias, Jeff Beck, Gato Barbieri, Etta James, Joe Perry, T-Bone Walker, Bobby "Blue" Bland, Tony Bennett, Frank Sinatra, Lady Gaga, Toni Braxton, Bonnie Raitt, Charlie Parker, Terry Kath, Jay Black, Richie Cole, Candy Dulfer, Grover Washington Jr, David Gilmour, Smokey Robinson, Stevie Wonder, Buddy Guy, Carlos Santana, Sonny Stitt, Lester Young, Leslie West, Joe Walsh, Cannonball Adderly, Harry "Sweets" Edison, Michael Brecker, Ben Webster, Illinois Jacquet, --- oh I could go on and on.

 

Sax players, guitar players, singers, organ players, flute players, violin players, and everything that I hear and that I like gets internalized, and the result sounds like none of the above, but it sounds like me. When I was young, I copied, but from more than one person, As I get older, I'll hear someone like Otis Redding hit a long note flat and gradually pull it up to pitch ("You Walked Out" in "I've Been Loving You Too Long") and appreciate how the distortion of intonation adds to the pain of the line, and months later I find myself doing that on the sax.

 

Or I might hear on an old Jimmy Smith album a fast repetition of a few notes while changing the top note for every repeat to make the top note the melody, and one day during an improvised solo, I hear myself doing it, even though it was never planned or done intentionally.

 

I might hear Stan Gets change the shape of his mouth to make a note say Yeow, or Fwah, and I'll figure out how to do that myself.

 

Noticing a vocalist dragging the beginning of a phrase and rushing the end to make up for it, or singing all the notes just a hair late, or rushing and accenting certain parts of the melody line, and all the other tricks that turn the empty notes into music, and they will come out of my horn.

 

For most of these and so many other expressive devices, when I'm improvising, or playing a melody, I won't be thinking and planning, I'll just be doing it the way I feel at the moment. Sometimes I even surprise myself and say to myself, "Wow!" and those uncommon occasions are like a little climax during lovemaking.

 

Adding so many people doing/playing/singing so many songs to my internal mix makes me sound like either none of them or all of them, depending on your point of view.

 

I suppose as AI continues to develop, it will be very similar.

 

I am a bit saddened that it will put some people out of work. I'm also glad I was born in my generation. It's not as easy to make a living doing music and nothing but music for the young of today. And when AI figures out hot to make pop tunes, even fewer will get gigs.

 

Insights and incites by Notes ♫

Bob "Notes" Norton

Owner, Norton Music http://www.nortonmusic.com

Style and Fake disks for Band-in-a-Box

The Sophisticats http://www.s-cats.com >^. .^< >^. .^<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Round and round we go!!!

Only a matter of time before a human takes an AI "creation" as a starting point and makes something new and interesting. 

 

They can stuff it's craw to infinity but one thing AI will never have is "imagination". It is a complex cafeteria with a robust digestive system but eventually all processes must create waste or regurgitate. Poop or puke? 🤔 😇

It took a chunk of my life to get here and I am still not sure where "here" is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wrote an article about AI-generated art a while back in reaction to the time Jason Allen used Midjourney to create AI-generated art and winning first prize at the Colorado State Fair fine arts competition art competition. 

 

https://photofocus.com/opinion/artists-are-pissed-ai-generated-artwork-wins-first-place-at-competition/

 

kenlee-If-the-Beatles-were-Goth-four-pan

One of the more amusing things to do is create “what if”-style word prompts. Here, I’ve typed in “If the Beatles were Goth.” Midjourney then created four possibilities.

 

kenlee_The_last_selfie_taken_on_Earth_ap

I helped create this photo with the word prompt “The last selfie on earth.” Midjourney did the rest.

 

9277kenlee_2015-12-28_0139_28mintotal-2m

When polled by the school newspaper, 59% of Yale students thought this photo was generated by AI. It's in fact a real photo, a long exposure night photo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, KuruPrionz said:

Round and round we go!!!

Only a matter of time before a human takes an AI "creation" as a starting point and makes something new and interesting. 

 

They can stuff it's craw to infinity but one thing AI will never have is "imagination". It is a complex cafeteria with a robust digestive system but eventually all processes must create waste or regurgitate. Poop or puke? 🤔 😇

The old algorithmic composers, and even dice to Mozart, gave inspiration to some wonderful music. They were just tools to get the composer out of his/her usual habits and/or introduce something to crack writer's block.

 

I don't know if AI will ever have the imagination that a human brain can possess, but I've also heard a lot of pop music that doesn't have much imagination either, just recycling of what has gone before.

 

I'm glad they haven't taught an AI machine how to play saxophone :D

 

Notes ♫

  • Like 1

Bob "Notes" Norton

Owner, Norton Music http://www.nortonmusic.com

Style and Fake disks for Band-in-a-Box

The Sophisticats http://www.s-cats.com >^. .^< >^. .^<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One significant difference between AI-generated art and the "we have been stealing and borrowing" from other artists argument fails to acknowledge on some level is that, as a musician or a painter, you need to practice and build up a skill level and eventually, some mastery of the craft in order to create something whether that is inspired by past works or not.

 

I expect the following statement to be unpopular:

 

AI art, at its core, takes zero skill. It's a toss-off for those who are too lazy to try and master something. I say that because ALL great art from the beginning of time took risk, chance, serendipity, skill and usually large amounts of failure, over and over and over.

 

We as a society need to get past the notion that EVERYBODY needs to be GOOD at EVERYTHING. I cannot play guitar. Is that anyone else's fault? No. It's mine for never sticking through with lessons. Can't read music? No one's problem but my own. Can't mix in Atmos? Can't paint a picture? Same thing.

 

I am thinking about taking up pottery. Would I rather make a bowl or a mug with my own hands after multiple failed attempts, or would I rather have AI generate it for me?

I guess I'm a hardliner, but I have always been against the democratization of art, music, literature or video. If it is worth doing, it's worth putting in the blood, sweat and tears to grapple with it.

 

Even if you never perfect it, it's the journey of discovery. That's what AI generated anything in an instant gratification, everyone should be able to do it society is robbing us of...in effect, the human experience has always been about striving, learning and growth.

 

Can AI art inspire or push someone past "writers block?" Maybe, but writers block is arguably part of the process, throw your own ideas at the wall in frustration until something sticks. The danger is that AI art can become a drug. "hey the computer generated what I wanted, its good enough, now I don't have to do it...yeah!!!"

 

I am quite sure many will disagree with me, though, thats ok, its just an alternate view.

  • Like 1

Editor - RECORDING Magazine

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Paul Vnuk Jr. said:

One significant difference between AI-generated art and the "we have been stealing and borrowing" from other artists argument fails to acknowledge on some level is that, as a musician or a painter, you need to practice and build up a skill level and eventually, some mastery of the craft in order to create something whether that is inspired by past works or not.

 

I expect the following statement to be unpopular:

 

AI art, at its core, takes zero skill. It's a toss-off for those who are too lazy to try and master something. I say that because ALL great art from the beginning of time took risk, chance, serendipity, skill and usually large amounts of failure, over and over and over.

 

We as a society need to get past the notion that EVERYBODY needs to be GOOD at EVERYTHING. I cannot play guitar. Is that anyone else's fault? No. It's mine for never sticking through with lessons. Can't read music? No one's problem but my own. Can't mix in Atmos? Can't paint a picture? Same thing.

 

 

I agree. And disagree.

 

My article above touches on this very thing, and no, it's not an unpopular view at all. It's in fact a very common view. The first part of what you say above, in my opinion, is accurate. If we're talking about AI-generated art from text prompts, it takes little skill.

 

Where I disagree is the part about societies getting past the notion that everybody needs to be good at everything. We're not there. We never were there. We're not trying to be there. There is no there there. 

 

A bunch of us have been messing around with AI-generated art for almost two years now, back when you had to enter specific code and not just key prompts. I've interacted with literally hundreds of people creating AI-generated art from key prompts. And you know what? Not a single person thought they were the ones really creating art or that they were suddenly a great artist because they could type in a string of words.

 

What's going on are two things. Well, more than two things, but I'll just mention two things.

 

1.) It's not about people being good at everything. It's about technology creating things and advancing artificial intelligence. This is just one of the many ways in which AI is advancing. Art or music AI happens to be a popular topic of discussion because it's obvious and strikes a nerve with people. The reality is that AI is actually extremely useful, particularly for split-decisions and repetitive tasks, as I mention elsewhere, and identifying problems and getting rid of them, i.e., noise in audio or whatever. Most of us use AI or experience it all the time, and we might not even know it.

 

2.) It's also largely about money. If you are a corporation, small business, or hell, just even one person, and you want to make something cool, well, now you can do that without having to pay a photographer, graphic designer, painter, artist, musician, or whatever. I don't know that we're there yet, but we're rushing up on it super fast.

 

And it's been happening for years. Drum machines, soft synths, soft synths that emulate orchestras and guitars, etc. We've already been rushing up on this for years. It's just that now, everyone uses virtual modeling amps and fake orchestras because they're used to it but get their panties in a wad over the next new thing. We're already desensitized to AutoTune, fake French Horns, and fake choirs. However, we can still get pissed off at AI. Businesses wanting stock photos for free or music supervisors wanting interstitial music for free are gonna be happy about this. The photographer or musician who studied for years? Not so much.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...