This is a weird topic for me personally.

I made my living as a writer and illustrator for over 25 years before I retired. Yeah, I’m old (still running 5K's tho!!). But I think we’re on the edge of something pretty awesome creative-wise, if people would slow down and think for a minute. As in as much fun as the 1960's underground alt comix movement.

I’m not bothered by AI art. If I were 14, stuck in my bedroom, you can bet your ass I’d be using it. When I was coming up, people cried about Photoshop. Now it’s accepted. Video games were 2D, and if you didn’t go pixel by pixel, you “weren’t a real artist.” Now nobody cares. Drawing on tablets was once bitched about. Now it’s industry standard.

All of that tech, are just tools.

I remember the first computer-animated Disney film causing a massive shitstorm because it wasn’t “traditional.” When Toy Story was in production, it was the talk of the circles I was in around San Francisco. Some people were fascinated. Others were horrified. Now nobody questions whether it’s art.

I feel same way about AI. It’s a tool. If you don’t have a good idea or a clear direction, yeah, it sucks. But if you’re a filmmaker, you plan your shots, you block scenes, you know what you want, and you like the end result, then have at it.

The irony is I’ve been defending myself against AI accusations last few days, even though I don’t actually mind AI. If it fit my needs, I’d use it without hesitation. I’ve seen genuinely great AI work. I'm fine with AI being posted to my comm. I don't give two shits, because I think it's sparks more creativity than it kills.

There’s a difference between AI art and AI slop, just like there’s a difference between Photoshop art and Photoshop slop. The end product is what matters. If the result matches the creator’s intent, then it works.

If a movie director directs a film, but the crew is broke, the actors are volunteers, and the director didn’t write the script or act in it, is the result still art? Most directors don’t do everything themselves. Are they suddenly not artists?

What Lemmy really needs to understand is that everyone under 13 right now has zero hang-ups about AI. Some of the next generation’s most creative people are staying up late on school nights, making stuff. Right now. I know, because my gf has a 13 year old and a 12 year old. And that rules.

I don’t have a hate-boner for AI at all. Hell, I might start using it if I get an idea that actually fits it. As for the jobs, water usage, electricity, blah blah blah, new tech has always been a pain in the ass like that.

I’m excited about the future. AI included. It still comes down to creativity. No one is forcing anyone to use it. If you want crayons, use crayons. If you want to write a book longhand, do it. If someone wants to use AI, go for it. Art ain't a fuckin religion. Do whatever ya feel is right.

And about jobs: no job is guaranteed. Never has been. Never will be. Tech always knocks people out of work. Real creatives make things because they want to, and most of the time it doesn't involve getting paid shit. My graphic design graduating class (1989!) had 63 people in it at a small Midwest college. One other dude and I were the only ones who turned it into a career. It is what it is.

So yeah, I think this is an exciting time for art and creativity, not a scary one.

I’ll probably get on my soapbox and make a proper post about this later. I just needed to get it off my chest now, since I was accused of using AI because someone thought the hair in a comic panel sucked. Two days ago someone told me my font was AI. It wasn’t. I even took screenshots.

Hell, if the comic, Woke Cat, can be considered art, then anything can. haha

tl;dr: I made my career as a writer/illustrator. I don't mind ai at all.