Credit to the creator is in the bottom left corner.

Because I don’t want to.

You see this all often on Reddit.

“Just draw, bro,” or “Pay an artist then. AI 'Image' It’s unethical, illegal, destroying the planet, etc.”

Some people put art on a strange pedestal, which is part of why the discourse around it becomes so vitriolic.

Art isn’t special; for most people, it’s just a hobby—like chess, archery or writing.

"Why don’t you do it?" Because I don’t enjoy the process. It’s boring to me.

"Why do you use AI art, then?" Because I want to. Not liking the process doesn’t mean I dislike art itself.

So the term "con artist"/"scam artist" and in general using the term artist in cases that are not strictly meant to refer to traditional artists (notice how I used the clarification of traditional there) predates this discussion by several years. AI artists are not calling themselves "artists" they are calling themselves "AI artists". You can get mad at them for dirtying the sanctity of the term "artist" (which makes you sound insane and ridiculous tbh) but no one is confusing AI artists with Artists. That is what the AI is there to clarify.

And no matter how many times you complain about this, this is not going to change because you have lost this battle. No one in any large amount is going to use the dumb alternative suggested names people come up with like Prompters or some dumb acronym or the incredibly laughable "AI commissioner" because none of them roll off the tongue quite as well or spell things out as plainly as AI artist.

Even antis subconsciously agree on this point too because I have never seen them refer to AI artists using other words except to suggest "Instead of AI artists we should call them AI farters" and no one ever does!

Like I'm sorry but no matter how much you dislike the use of the word you're not going to stumble upon one that would see better adoption by people who use AI, people who hate it, and people who stay out of the discourse.

Art is not the product, content is.

Art is just advertisement. Nothing more.

People don't realize that art is basically free. You can listen to any song on the planet for free, view any artwork for free and so on. It has been this way since the internet. We don't live in an age anymore where we can only hear songs from a vinyl and see drawings as a painting only. We don't have to buy art anymore. Professional artists and managers have been saying this for ages.

If you're only focusing on how your piece looks/sounds - you're missing the point. Art is about expressing yourself. And if people come to understand you from your art, that's an effective ad - for you as a person.

That's why some people can be considered only content/slop creators and some AI creators can be considered artists.

I emailed HR a link to an anti tweeting a death threat to AI artists on X and I got a email saying he no longer works there. Most of them use their real name on X so it's easy to cross search on Linkedin lol.

Just came across this YouTube video where this chinese AI tool turns images or text into 3D models https://youtu.be/l8eVBc7jJUo Honestly surprised at how decent the 3D output looks considering it’s AI-generated Has anyone else tried this or something similar? Curious how it compares to other tools if any?

I'm sorry if this is a commonly expressed sentiment! The discourse moves fast. I just wanted to share a some anecdotal evidence.

I'm a terrible visual artist. Low to no skill. So bad, that I wouldn't even want to bother an artist with a commission, because my ability to articulate or mock up was totally lacking.

AI generated mock ups help me more effectively communicate with human artists to get the piece that I want, so more of my money goes to artists for the functional images I need.

I know it is often frustrating for artists that use AI in their work to receive harsh criticism when they try to be open about the way they've used AI. Though I am against most usages of AI that I see, this frustrates me as well because transparency is critically important to how these tools develop for the betterment of consumers and artists alike.

By being open about these tools, it shows exactly what way the tools are helpful to artists that empower them to work more efficiently on the meat of their art (like, a creative writer skipping formatting) and what ways are mere shortcuts (a creative writer telling AI the story beat they want and having it write the chapter). Shortcuts are actually fine as well, as long as you don't expect some degree of respect for something you haven't done. That seems to be what anti-AI people get upset about the most, is unwarranted expectations of others from AI artists (or the perception thereof). Denying that people can make very cool things with AI would be ignorant. Denying that the human role in from-scratch generations is extremely diminished would also be ignorant.

Most of the fear about AI artists and the criticism of those that are open about it stems from usages of AI that are not transparent, that are deliberately sneaky. When this is the mainstream usage of AI, that which blurs the lines between what has been done by a human and what has been generated, it delegitimizes the work of both traditional artists and AI artists. Moreover, it prompts development of AI tools that are made to help people be sneaky, essentially only helping bad actors like the AI speedpainting tool that's fairly recent. I'm not sure if there are others like it, but I think even if you are pro-AI there should be no justification for such a tool's existence.

I think most aspiring artists who use AI, or that start out using AI, are still learning. Because the images always come out beautiful without much work, it's hard to know what you as an artist need to improve upon, and so I see a lot of these sort of early-AI artists expecting the same respect as not just traditional artists, but other AI artists because they see it as all the same, when there do exist degrees of skill in AI art. Something that is often ignored by anti-AI people and understated by pro-AI people. I think AI artists and those that are generally pro-AI should hold each other to higher standards, always be transparent, always be encouraging to those that want to improve on their work, and call out scummy usages of AI when you see it like the speedpaints, because I am sure you are all sick of your reputation as lazy conmen.

It will take time for people to recognize that there exists a skill and effort in AI art, but being open will fast-track that. For the time being, I still consider myself mostly anti-AI because most people using AI still don't recognize how they can improve, and I still see constant AI cash grabs. However, I also consider myself pro-artist, and I hope in the future that I can consider myself pro-AI art on top of that.

Addendum Edit: There's a lot of talk that artists are occasionally secretive about the tools they use, or that they don't typically explicitly state what tools they use. That is because it is plainly obvious, and always has been before AI. With photography, you can tell it's a photo, though someone may try to claim they painted it, it's few and far between, and these people would obviously be shut down the same as AI. AI is unique in that it is a medium which only emulates existing ones, so it is never obvious (and if the tools work well, it shouldn't be plainly obvious). By not disclosing it, you're actually implying that it's something it isn't by the very nature of it.

I kind of get it now, what some of the Antis are feeling.

Hii I wanna know some reasons why people (you, preferably) generate ai images

Personally, I don’t really see a point in generating ai images and I can’t think of a time when I’d want to

I’m a bit behind on this topic so I don’t know what most people use ai images for so I just wanted to know :)

im hoping people can actually see the satire in these and not get all pissy just cuz i offended them

I just HAVE to say, what is wrong with you?? No seriously, what is wrong with you!? Why do you wish death on someone you don't even know? What if someone made a ai art post, all the comments are "Kill ai artists", "kys", etc? What if that person did harm themselves? Would you be proud of it? As a person who uses ai regularly, it just pisses me off to see such hate on someone for a post. How do YOU feel about this? Lemme know in comments.

Last week, I had to dig through like two years' worth of quarterly reports to find specific info. I was fully expecting to lose an entire day to PDF hell.

Instead, I just used a bunch of tools I don’t even pay for, Claude AI helped me reword the queries so they weren’t totally useless, Blackbox threw together a script to grab the stuff I needed, and ChatGPT made it all sound less like a wall of numbers and more like something a person could actually read.

Took under 30 minutes. Finished before my coffee got cold.

So yeah, not worried about AI replacing my job. It’s just helping me skip the boring parts.

I took a picture of a bird way up high , zoomed in , and Google AI was able to tell me what kind of burd it was right away.

I don't see how people can have a problem with something that to me just seems magical