I wonder how bad the reception was when ARP and drum machines were introduced

But how is AI anything like a paintbrush? A painter needs a brush or stick or some kind of object to put color on a surface. The results of their work are tied to the time and effort they spent wielding the paintbrush. What is the equivalent of this in using AI?

The capitals suggest you mean Alan R Pearlman synthezisers? But im guessing you mean the arpeggiator function on keyboards?

Braindead comparison #293.

Yes

lol im not implying they were to the levels of AI generative capabilities im just wondering about the landscape at the time and general population + musician reception

interacting with the dreamworld/active imagination states is literally 500000x better, will give more interesting results 100% of the time, and its free

A paintbrush doesn’t decide what to paint, you do. It executes your vision through your control of color, stroke, and texture.

AI works the same way .. You choose the idea, the vibe, the subject, and the composition through prompts and references.

the two could not be more incomparable you melon

a lot of people still won't accept those

Just say you don’t wanna think for yourself bro

Why not ? You melon

god damn y’all are stupid

using ai is like telling someone who can paint, what to paint. it's not at all like picking up the brush yourself and learning the craft. in fact it's actually not at all like telling an artist what to paint, because ai has been trained on nothing but stolen art. it's completely devoid of any relation to commissioning a painting from a genuine artist and working in conjunction with them to bring your imagination to reality. it's more akin to thievery

AI models don’t store pictures like a database .. they learn mathematical relationships, patterns of color, form, texture, and composition. They’re not copying anyone’s pixels. they’re generating new combinations based on probability.

And honestly, we do the same thing as artists. When we study others, when we take inspiration from what’s been done before , we’re training ourselves on existing art too. The difference is, AI just does it faster and without any conscious intent behind it.

Bet you can’t say I said anything wrong 🤣

man you're way too cool with extremely rich ppl tryna take everything beautiful in the world and commodify it

Yeah, I get that.I don’t like billion dollar companies taking advantage of artists , that part sucks.
But the tech itself isn’t the villain. AI is just a tool, just like a brush or a camera. The problem is who’s holding it and how they’re using it.

But my main point WAS AI is no different than a paintbrush. do you agree with that you melon???

the only reason the tool exists is because it took advantage. without that, it would never have been developed. so it's ability is inextricably linked with that. it's nothing like a brush and never will be.

Should we ban cameras because it replaced sketch/painting realism ?

it didn't do that

Yeah, that’s fair you got that. cameras didn’t completely replace painting, but they did change what painting was for.

Before photography, painters were hired to capture realistic portraits, and moments.