I’m calling a palaver around this here campfire. I want to know what this Brigade, this Corps of Rangers, this community of Frontier Partisans thinks about AI-generated art.
I bring this up because I recently watched a frontier history-related YouTube video that featured some borderland art I found extremely compelling. I mean it really grabbed me. Turns out, it’s AI generated. I recoiled.
I just googled “AI generated frontiersman,” and this kicked up. It’s someone’s AI generated “creation” that comes with a Frontier Fennario backstory. And this:
This artwork was created with the help of Artificial Intelligence. Create your own AI-generated artworks using NightCafe Creator.
I’m not sure what to think about the implications of all of this. I need help interpreting the sign on this trail that leads to an unknown land.
Is this one of those deals where if we trade for the copper kettles and the thundersticks, what follows dooms us? Kinda feels that way. But if all-in resistance is the only path, how the hell do we walk it?
Let’s pass the ’baccy, light the pipes and palaver…
Matthew says
I think that AI is like any tool is going to have both good and back effects. It is however a complex tool so it will be even more complicated. It depends on the wisdom of those that use it. Which I don’t like saying because even if the majority of people are that wise (and I’m not sure of that) it takes only a few people to really ruin things.
There seems to be a lot of push back in short story magazines to A.I. generated stories. These include probably especially science fiction magazines. I’m not sure why one would use A.I. to write stories. Sorta misses the point of creative expression.
A.I. art may be good for someone like you or me who isn’t an artist. If I ever self-publish a book (which I have been considering) for cover art. Since I can’t draw. You could use it for images for this site. That wouldn’t however make it
equal to Charles Russell’s western art.
Matthew says
History at the OK Corral has an episode on a raid by the Navajo on the Comanche
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOBJPbPQn0I
H.P. at Hillbilly Highways says
Somebody (Cirsova maybe?) published a series of blog posts guest written by someone who had done book/comic book art for decades. I was struck by how much the process has changed over time. There used to be a lot of literal copy and pasting. AI strikes me as the kind of productivity enhancing tool that artists (among others) simply won’t be able to afford not to use.
JimC says
That’s part of the concern for me: the unavoidable adoption of technology that ultimately supplants human creativity.
Matthew says
I don’t know how creative most people are though.
I think that AI art might be good for someone like me who can’t really draw. (Despite having a study art in junior high and high school.) That said I am not going to use it when I write my short stories.
JimC says
Right — I’d be in the same spot. Can’t draw a straight line. So… is there an ethical question about using AI instead of a human artist/designer?
Matthew says
That’s a good question.
lane batot says
It may dominate the art-world in various ways(mostly public commercial stuff, I’d imagine), but I think hands-on people-generated art will still continue–kinda like having “primitive skills” of various sorts goes on, even if they are “impractical” for most folks hunting/camping, etc. Black Powder guns vs. modern weaponry. Like me toting a spear around. Someone will keep the old ways going–the lazier ones will go for the easy way. There may need to develop labels stating the AI versus REAL nature of things portrayed, which will get lied about and abused, of course, just like various “genuine” things that get faked already! I was thinking about the differences in animals portrayed on film(Animal ACTORS–not Nature Documentaries), just recently(being a Critter Geek, you know), and how computerized animation of animals has about completely eclipsed using real animals in the movies. I fully understand some of the positive reasons for this, but you know? It just ain’t the same–not the same effect having what everyone knows are fake critters, versus watching the real things. Certainly not as “rich” an experience for the human actors either–although they themselves may get replaced by AI more and more, too! I had just gotten a DVD copy of an old Animal Attack movie from 1977–“Day Of The Animals”(I actually went and saw this in the theatre when it first debuted–I was just 17!), where animals affected by UV rays from the sun, more severe thanks to the Ozone depletion from aeresol sprays(ahem!) were going berserk and attacking everyone–some good actors of the era starring in it, and a bit better than most in this genera(and apparently something of a cult favorite nowadays!), but nothing but REAL animals(and some really good training involved!), and not a damn cell phone in sight! The whole premise of the movie likely could not have occurred if there had been cell phones back then! So, back to the subject–“primitive skills” will continue, if only in a limited, eccentric, or aficionado way,(like me still writing letters as opposed to calling on the cell phone or E-mailing folks)…….
JimC says
I think the analogy works. So what is a counterfeit representation? None of it is “real”, so what is fake? If CGI gets good enough that you can’t tell…
Matthew says
The reason I never believed that realism was an objective virtue in fiction is that any type of fiction is made up and there for not real. A “unrealistic” science fiction novel like Destination Moon is more real then a “realistic” novel like the Great Gatsby. We actually did go to the moon (despite what some people claim) no one ever created a fake identity to get back a girl he dated like once.
The problem is that we are starved for authenticity. There is so much that is fake and has been for so long. Particularly in politics.
lane batot says
“Hand made” versus “machine made”–we already have a good bit of that in other forms now!
JimC says
Is AI just a sophisticated iteration of “machine made”?
Quixotic Mainer says
I don’t have a logical reason to hate on AI generated images or even the “chat” creatures, but my instincts tell me otherwise. Even though, or perhaps especially because, a lot of the imagery is really striking. There is an unnatural sameness to it, something I can’t quite put into words that gets my hackles up.
I think that it may be an increasingly powerful technopalantir of sorts. We may use it at first, but how long til it gets an upper hand? What master does it really listen to?
JimC says
Technopalantir. Great descriptor for it. Powerful. Useful. Deceptive and dangerous…
Matthew says
There’s a tech company actually named Palantir
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palantir_Technologies
Quixotic Mainer says
Apt title for such a business, but a mite sinister. Smacks of “North Central Positronics” from the Dark Tower.
Matthew says
About the art it can be striking but your right it is missing something.
David Wrolson says
I am with the young warriors on this. War to the Knife against AI. The old men and women may like the copper pots-but therein lies death.
Not sure how to fight this war-but, simply put, that is the way I see it.
Mike says
Feels like I need a third option. I see the technology. Nothing about it screams ‘Better Life!!’ to me though, so I’m in no hurry to make use of it myself. Much as I enjoy Ed Abbey, also don’t know that I’m particularly committed to a life of tech sabotage even though I do have some long term concerns. I think I’m looking for a bit of an Amish path. I’ll use what works for me and do my best to ignore the rest.
Of course my grand philosophies could be nothing more than the fact that it’s ridiculously hot and I’m just feeling lazy at the moment…
JimC says
“Take what you need and leave the rest” is a pretty good operational doctrine. Problem with this level of tech is that it’s so intrusive that it is really hard to ignore. Requires a high level of discipline, which I’m trying to improve.
Wayne says
We’ve had fake fur for a long time and it’s pretty hard to tell it from the real thing at a distance.
You have to pull it apart with your fingers and examine the tight fur to tell it’s not the real thing. Still, there’s magic in fur grown by an honest-to-God fox, deer, or coon. I once had the chance to wrap myself in a grizzly fur at the visitors center at Denali National Park, and it thrilled me. Wouldn’t have been the same if it had been fake fur. No computer will ever produce a da Vinci.
JimC says
Truth.
Paul McNamee says
I could go on at length, but suffice to state I don’t like AI in the creative space.
I had a co-worker, once, who thought baseball should just create a “steroid league.” You know, all those juicers could just be open about it. If there are disclaimers, I am more comfortable with it.
AI will be there. It will be abused.
However, even with disclaimers, there is still the matter of the content. Is it original? It is using work it has rights to? That’s already getting gray. Books have been loaded into analysis engines without permission. I suppose there is a legal loophole there – the book was bought and ‘read.’ But that does not make a moral loophole.
I would hope the ‘good folk’ are upfront when they use it.
And more, I hope the good folk put in the work true creative endeavors require.
This was discussed at NECON this summer. Some people were arguing it’s inevitable. Well, yes, the TECHNOLOGY is inevitable. Our response is NOT. We don’t need to roll over. We can formulate some kind of responses. Where you stand, I guess, will help formulate your own response.
I can’t draw a comic, either. Now, I see guitar necks with painted strings and digital whatever so you won’t hurt your fingers with playing calluses.
“Do the work.”
I’m all for “work smarter, not harder,” but there might be a limit to just how many shortcuts we can work into our lives before they become detrimental.
JimC says
Thoughtful stuff here Paul. I don’t get the desire to avoid the pain — or the calluses — of doing the work. That’s what brings the satisfaction. I think the shortcuts have already become detrimental in that regard.
Jean says
The first thing about AI art is that it doesn’t have the warmth of hand made art. In some ways it’s too perfect. In other ways it just lacks the same kind of glow that can be made by a really great artist. Compare today’s Disney cartoons to those made in the 40’s and 50′ and today’s look really cold.
This piece you’ve put up looks compelling partly because the artist kept it dark. The darkness makes your senses fine with a lack of warm reflections.
The cost of doing real art is the reason we’re getting so much AI. I’m hardly an expert artist, but in general, one of my painted illustrations takes about 30 hours, start to finish. No one out there is willing to pay for that.
JimC says
Very good points. Part of the problem is that people want their content for free, and the downward pressure on creators— from music to writing to painting— just keeps growing.
Jean Nave says
Amen!
Jerry N says
Since I just received this dispatch, I probably don’t have much of value to add to the excellent conversation. That said, like all technologies, once developed, it’s here to stay. I don’t believe there will be a happy ending to anything that tries to replace God or his creation no matter its stated purpose or proposed benefit to society. I for one will try to stay off that trail as long as I can.
Jean Nave says
Jim, since you’re asking your folks questions, I’d like to ask them something. I’ve met a 78 year old who was a cowboy, among other things, years ago in Central Oregon. He’s written a poem and asked me if I would help him publish it. I love it, being a horse person who always played the Indian, during cowboy and Indian horseback games. Other women have read it and liked it but I haven’t got any men to input on it. I’m looking for very honest input. And it seems like you pack do a lot of thinking.
Twister
A Tribute to a Horse and the Nez Perce Nation
Blind and old they put him down, such a nice gesture.
You can look all you want but he’s no longer in the pasture.
He’s gone from the sight, but not from the mind.
What a horse he was—for sure, one of a kind.
So where’s your faith? Just look up to the sky.
Count your blessings, this Appaloosa didn’t die.
Returned to Lapwei, to his nation of pride,
Back to his ancestors, to teach the youngsters to ride.
He’s there now, where the Appeys got their start,
Long, long ago, even before the buggy and the cart.
He’s taking the braves and squaws to bitterroot and camas.
Up the rivers, the Snake, Salmon, Clearwater, and even Lolo Pass.
On his back, they’ve carried the haws, chokeberries, and pelts.
In his mind he remembers the travesties the whites have dealt.
He may have been there when Lewis and Clark first found the magnificent herds.
Probably remembered the chase of General Howard, how absurd.
And how a nation upon Appaloosas made their flee,
And how Chief Lookingglass nearly brought the army to their knee.
He may have been on that trek through Targhee Pass
to Yellowstone and past,
And saw Colonel Miles catch up, in the Bear Paw Mountains,
and there the tribe’s fate was cast.
Twister’s ancestors carried Joseph, the Chief.
He surrender to save the Nez and their horses,
But not to his belief.
Though this was a mighty effort, and truly a great endeavor,
Joseph made a promise and said, “I will fight no more. Forever.”
So, just as Joseph never spoke with shame,
Twister’s life was the same,
Clearly, a horse of fame.
Ashes to ashes, and dust to dust.
Twister’s remembrance is a must.
Jerry N says
Jean,
I am not an expert on literature or poetry, so technical feedback is not something I will attempt. However, the piece elicited a pathos in me as one who has experienced the loss of a good warhorse. There is some good Northwest history there, although a bit disjointed. I am not well versed in Nez Perse ethos, and I fear Twister and Jasper would have been on opposite sides of that war, but I liked it and I understand the depth of feeling and admiration the author felt for his horse.
Lynda A Sanchez says
Regarding AI. You all have made some really dramatic, traumatic and truthful comments. We are in a real fix in this world…maybe it is because we are all getting older as the younger folks tend to be getting lazier. Their lack of being out of doors makes their fantasy worlds so cold, dark and dishonest. (mostly–but of course we do have exceptions)
I would love to have artistic talents, but I don’t. And for my books and articles I am always looking for something to portray what is in the heart and soul of the material. AI is not one of them because while it can make our work easier, it is not better. It is not quality. Looking at that bear at first blush I saw a painting, but then once I realized it was basically faked I looked closer and saw the coldness as with most things high tech in the bear’s eyes. Formatters can put such things together and will no doubt appreciate the ease of working with AI.
I don’t think anything will stop AI. For medical fields it might be great but for so many other items that make us human as with all of your commentary above–well it does not work for me. We are bombarded with fakes. Photo shopping is yet another factor that creates but is not creative. Cost is a factor. There are just so many things to consider it is truly mind boggling. We must push for our younger generation to be out and about in the forests and deserts so they experience the real thing and can determine if they like faked AI better than what they came up the creek with…It is like we are swimming against a tidal wave.
When I saw Spartacus and all the Greek army aka real people by the hundreds, perhaps thousands, and then saw some of the more modern computer generated films with modern day actors…well you all know it is not the same. The awesome feeling of those armies running to battle just wasn’t there. But that is only if you know what to look for.
Jim and all, there is no easy answer. Lynda A. Sánchez (Smoke Signals Gal)
PS: ending on a positive note: looks like people are already getting tired of AI
ChatGPT loses users for first time, shaking faith in AI …
Washington Post
https://www.washingtonpost.com › 2023/07/07 › chat…
Jul 7, 2023 — OpenAI’s chatbot has been heralded as spurring a revolution in the tech world. But its spectacular growth has suddenly slowed down.
and
Is the ChatGPT and Bing AI boom already over? – Vox
vox.com
https://www.vox.com › technology › openai-chatgpt-…
3 days ago — Recent reports suggest that consumers are starting to lose interest: The new AI-powered Bing search hasn’t made a dent in Google’s market …
Jean Nave says
Lynda–Love is at the base of the human soul. AI isn’t love centers like handmade art. Instinctively, we can feel it. I spent years working with 4th,5th, and 6th grade kids. They are always looking for authenticity in people. Maybe they will begin looking for it in art.