That artwork would be decent if the artist had touched it up a bit. MIdjourney even has retouching tools if a pleb lacks Photoshop skills! But it looks like they didn't even bother. They just crapped it out and took the paycheck. What's most annoying is that they lied about it and the publisher didn't notice. LOL! I personally don't mind AI covers as long as the author is upfront about it. Heck, I'm glad to see books with pretty covers again. Dreary photobashes and crappy Daz3D models had gotten so ugly.
"Those with low ability to evaluate the quality of real art are also deficient in evaluating or even detecting AI art." This is accurate. They are fully at the mercy of the robot.
Thank you so much. I often feel like a lone voice, crying out against AI. And so many writers, artists, and other creatives seem to have accepted AI as "just another tool," something that "can't be stopped," something we need to "keep up with China." Sorry, but all we have to do is PULL THE PLUG.
We'll all be speaking Chinese in a few years if we don't pump trillions of dollars into LLM legal brief writers and deepfake porn makers instead of things that, you know, people want to actually pay for.
The crazy thing is how they would have gotten away with it if they had spent good money on professionals, but they either cheaped out or were the victims of a scam. I remember when some of the AI tools came out a year ago and they were better than the slop GRRM put on his cover.
In general, we should give credit where credit is due. For instance, even if there were no AI, creators of the images we use on Substack should always be credited. I know that a lot of folks leave off attribution not out of some evil motive but because they don't think about it. Because I taught English for so many years and had to deal with questions of attribution all the time, I'm maybe more sensitive to that than the norm. (I spent a whole day on plagiarism and copyright, reinforced by handouts and an instructional video on plagiarism that I created myself. Students might still do the wrong thing occasionally, but at least they couldn't say they didn't know.)
As far as AI art is concerned, to use it effectively, people probably need to spend some time refining with appropriate graphics software. That said, I sympathize with writers who have a small or zero budget but are still going to need a cover. Those of us who can afford to pay for a human designer should. Otherwise, there won't be any after awhile. (Ironically, that would also be damaging to AI, which needs a constant diet of new material. As more images become AI-generated, AI trains on its own output, which causes degradation.
There is one artist I know (legitimately skilled in inks and watercolors as well) who regularly illustrates anthologies and book covers with AI images, but the artist (whom I'll not name) is both very honest and open about it— "Cover art by [Name] using MidJourney" or whatever— *and* puts in the effort and care to get precise, high-quality images from the system and doesn't send polydactyl putty-faced slop to the publisher, who buys it in full knowledge of the medium used. (It's not me, in case you wondered.)
For me the issue is the artist's own honesty or laziness, rather than the medium in which he works. There's excellent AI art on occasion and high-quality 3D renders from Daz3D models often enough. When the artist's too lazy to master the tools he uses, he needs to stick to those he HAS mastered and not serve artless (in every sense) slop to those who commission his *work*. And never lie to the customers nor the clients.
Part of why I would only engage artists working in physical media for my own books. I also want to be able to buy the originals because I enjoy collecting art.
I have this fear for when I eventually commission a book cover.. how will I know the artist I contract and pay won't use A.I.? No one would ever know...
That artwork would be decent if the artist had touched it up a bit. MIdjourney even has retouching tools if a pleb lacks Photoshop skills! But it looks like they didn't even bother. They just crapped it out and took the paycheck. What's most annoying is that they lied about it and the publisher didn't notice. LOL! I personally don't mind AI covers as long as the author is upfront about it. Heck, I'm glad to see books with pretty covers again. Dreary photobashes and crappy Daz3D models had gotten so ugly.
This is why I prefer older art and literature. But.that said going to need to in a few months when I have the cash order Leper King.
Thank you!
Anytime!
"Those with low ability to evaluate the quality of real art are also deficient in evaluating or even detecting AI art." This is accurate. They are fully at the mercy of the robot.
I mean, it’s tragic, but I also don’t know how I can teach them to see it.
It should not be called art... that's that laguage game, we seem to lose..
Thank you so much. I often feel like a lone voice, crying out against AI. And so many writers, artists, and other creatives seem to have accepted AI as "just another tool," something that "can't be stopped," something we need to "keep up with China." Sorry, but all we have to do is PULL THE PLUG.
PULL THE PLUG
LET ME PASS AWAY
PULL THE PLUG
DON’T WANT TO LIVE THIS WAY
We'll all be speaking Chinese in a few years if we don't pump trillions of dollars into LLM legal brief writers and deepfake porn makers instead of things that, you know, people want to actually pay for.
The crazy thing is how they would have gotten away with it if they had spent good money on professionals, but they either cheaped out or were the victims of a scam. I remember when some of the AI tools came out a year ago and they were better than the slop GRRM put on his cover.
In general, we should give credit where credit is due. For instance, even if there were no AI, creators of the images we use on Substack should always be credited. I know that a lot of folks leave off attribution not out of some evil motive but because they don't think about it. Because I taught English for so many years and had to deal with questions of attribution all the time, I'm maybe more sensitive to that than the norm. (I spent a whole day on plagiarism and copyright, reinforced by handouts and an instructional video on plagiarism that I created myself. Students might still do the wrong thing occasionally, but at least they couldn't say they didn't know.)
As far as AI art is concerned, to use it effectively, people probably need to spend some time refining with appropriate graphics software. That said, I sympathize with writers who have a small or zero budget but are still going to need a cover. Those of us who can afford to pay for a human designer should. Otherwise, there won't be any after awhile. (Ironically, that would also be damaging to AI, which needs a constant diet of new material. As more images become AI-generated, AI trains on its own output, which causes degradation.
There is one artist I know (legitimately skilled in inks and watercolors as well) who regularly illustrates anthologies and book covers with AI images, but the artist (whom I'll not name) is both very honest and open about it— "Cover art by [Name] using MidJourney" or whatever— *and* puts in the effort and care to get precise, high-quality images from the system and doesn't send polydactyl putty-faced slop to the publisher, who buys it in full knowledge of the medium used. (It's not me, in case you wondered.)
For me the issue is the artist's own honesty or laziness, rather than the medium in which he works. There's excellent AI art on occasion and high-quality 3D renders from Daz3D models often enough. When the artist's too lazy to master the tools he uses, he needs to stick to those he HAS mastered and not serve artless (in every sense) slop to those who commission his *work*. And never lie to the customers nor the clients.
Part of why I would only engage artists working in physical media for my own books. I also want to be able to buy the originals because I enjoy collecting art.
David, your actions are contributing to damaging this artist's career. I recommend you read:
https://whitneyafoster.substack.com/p/ai-art-accusations-online-artist-harassment-protection
I have this fear for when I eventually commission a book cover.. how will I know the artist I contract and pay won't use A.I.? No one would ever know...
Raya Golden wrote "programing" instead of "AI." Why? And why can't she spell?