Definitely use it? Definitely don't use it? A lot of creatives aren't sure what they feel about this, yet, or how to share what they feel. And that's okay. You don't have to know yet. It's new!
AI for me as an artist is less about the questions posed in this writing and more about its significance in a trend I've watched for some time as an arts educator. This is the trend away from creativity. I realize that creativity can be a vital part of working with LLMs (large language models, so I refer to digital technology beyond AI as well). However in teaching university students over the past 25 years, I've seen a huge loss in their basic ability to think outside of the box, to make connections woven through their personal identities and observations, or to articulate ideas without first consulting their phone. The ability to focus is also at an all-time low. I mourn the loss of creative practice that goes deeper than accessing information or engagement in prescribed introspection.
As a writer who came to Substack to have a quiet place to think and put words together, I'm not sure exactly how I feel about AI. I don't really see myself making a living from my work--although I could do so if I just succumbed to the big race to get clients and subscribers. At this point, I'm not that concerned about losing an audience I don't really have. On the other hand, I see so much fear in artists and so-called creators. Perhaps I'm naive, but I think people read and consume artistic work to feel a connection with another human being, regardless of the perfection or polish of their work. I suppose that's complicated enough, yes?
This of course is a hot topic for creatives everywhere. There are those who completely oppose AI and there are those who have no problems using it guilt free. Then there are those in the middle. I think I’m in the middle.
Because I use AI for research and brainstorming. It has been helpful in ways a simple google search can’t at times. But I refuse to generate art especially for profit. I feel like it’s a violation of taking someone’s work and scrambling it to fit a vision. If I’m going to do that, I’ll put in the work myself and give proper credit to who helped inspire me.
Still I worry about what AI means to the art industry. What I do have hope in, is that the time and resources it takes for someone to correctly visualize what they need because they have to keep imputing prompts and fix up constant machine made mistakes, that time could have been used to commission a real artist and have faster results with less frustrations. But AI is continuing to learn and that setback may be a thing of the past. Until then, I can only hope that I can make my small mark on the world. Technology is getting scary.
Very well said and explained. As a photographer, I have been using Claude for about a year now. My struggle was with articulation about my imagery and bodies of work as I started participating in semester long critique groups through a longstanding photography community.
I am adept at creating the imagery I want to create but not so good at explaining why I created it. Often, there may be no explanation at all. The image has to stand on its own.
Claude has been really amazing at helping more sort this out. I see this as the "industry level" work where it requires the language whereas for me the art is back in the moment of creation.
I mix it up in the group. Sometimes I give some background. Other times I just lay out my images and sit silently until someone responds with something.
Thought-provoking, as always. I have my head well and truly anchored in the sand on this one! It's a bit dark down there, and someone may well come along and kick my butt. However, I realise there are some real advantages of being as old as I am, and I hope I'm sufficiently anchored to weather the storm when it comes, as it surely will. Or perhaps it will be like the weather forecast that got it wrong.
AI for me as an artist is less about the questions posed in this writing and more about its significance in a trend I've watched for some time as an arts educator. This is the trend away from creativity. I realize that creativity can be a vital part of working with LLMs (large language models, so I refer to digital technology beyond AI as well). However in teaching university students over the past 25 years, I've seen a huge loss in their basic ability to think outside of the box, to make connections woven through their personal identities and observations, or to articulate ideas without first consulting their phone. The ability to focus is also at an all-time low. I mourn the loss of creative practice that goes deeper than accessing information or engagement in prescribed introspection.
As a writer who came to Substack to have a quiet place to think and put words together, I'm not sure exactly how I feel about AI. I don't really see myself making a living from my work--although I could do so if I just succumbed to the big race to get clients and subscribers. At this point, I'm not that concerned about losing an audience I don't really have. On the other hand, I see so much fear in artists and so-called creators. Perhaps I'm naive, but I think people read and consume artistic work to feel a connection with another human being, regardless of the perfection or polish of their work. I suppose that's complicated enough, yes?
You raise important questions for which I have no clear answers. Thanks for reflecting the confusion many of us are feeling.
This of course is a hot topic for creatives everywhere. There are those who completely oppose AI and there are those who have no problems using it guilt free. Then there are those in the middle. I think I’m in the middle.
Because I use AI for research and brainstorming. It has been helpful in ways a simple google search can’t at times. But I refuse to generate art especially for profit. I feel like it’s a violation of taking someone’s work and scrambling it to fit a vision. If I’m going to do that, I’ll put in the work myself and give proper credit to who helped inspire me.
Still I worry about what AI means to the art industry. What I do have hope in, is that the time and resources it takes for someone to correctly visualize what they need because they have to keep imputing prompts and fix up constant machine made mistakes, that time could have been used to commission a real artist and have faster results with less frustrations. But AI is continuing to learn and that setback may be a thing of the past. Until then, I can only hope that I can make my small mark on the world. Technology is getting scary.
Very well said and explained. As a photographer, I have been using Claude for about a year now. My struggle was with articulation about my imagery and bodies of work as I started participating in semester long critique groups through a longstanding photography community.
I am adept at creating the imagery I want to create but not so good at explaining why I created it. Often, there may be no explanation at all. The image has to stand on its own.
Claude has been really amazing at helping more sort this out. I see this as the "industry level" work where it requires the language whereas for me the art is back in the moment of creation.
I mix it up in the group. Sometimes I give some background. Other times I just lay out my images and sit silently until someone responds with something.
Thought-provoking, as always. I have my head well and truly anchored in the sand on this one! It's a bit dark down there, and someone may well come along and kick my butt. However, I realise there are some real advantages of being as old as I am, and I hope I'm sufficiently anchored to weather the storm when it comes, as it surely will. Or perhaps it will be like the weather forecast that got it wrong.