RE: Testing & Testing and... AI
But that’s not what I’m talking about, because I’ve been using it as a search engine! (Every search engine displays the AI’s answers first, above the websites, and these answers are conclusions that are incorrect or, worse still, calculated assumptions generated on the basis of certain outdated ideas used to create a ‘truth’. A ‘truth’ that is the opposite of what it really is. This poses a major danger and also wastes a lot of time if you do or try what the AI has suggested.)
I can imagine it was helpful in your situation, but what if there were no AI? Who knows, it might have motivated you to learn to draw and find different ways to be creative and find something suitable for your voice to film. These could also be clay animations like Chicken Run or puppets like in The Muppet Show, a shadow play, a play, you name it.
And what is your art? The use of your voice or the story you wrote?
I wonder if an audio drama with the appropriate sounds would really have been so bad. Just something you can listen to with your eyes closed instead of being distracted by AI-generated images and not paying attention to the text.
What AI productions generally lack is creativity and emotion. All the voices sound the same when it comes to intonation. It makes listening to the best content tedious (YouTube is the best example of this). The same goes for photos. You recognise them straight away.
Just look at how platforms like Pixabay have changed. Everyone has a phone with a camera, but good photos are becoming increasingly rare and are all being replaced by AI-generated images.
I could say that it doesn’t replace the real artist, but I’m already seeing digital oil paintings and I doubt anyone would spot the difference if this image were shown online.
Let’s be clear: the average person has no interest whatsoever in art and, even if they were interested, would happily hang any reproduction of a digital image on their wall.
There is also a good reason for digital art: buying something you cannot hold or touch. A kind of illusion where the digital artist is rarely motivated to put time into it, which to me is a good reason to say: it lacks personality, invested time, feelings and therefore it is not art.
I guess I am not familiar with the essence of your search efforts. Are you talking about the Google search engine? More importantly, if you are not satisfied with the quality of the results, can’t you search the good old-fashioned way, which, I presume, was more effective?
I use GPT for searching and am usually happy with the results. I also use it for programming and for creating still images with its image generator. These stills are necessary for a video generator, since it interpolates action between two stills based on your instructions.
Learning to draw is not something one can do easily. It takes years. And when you are working, it is practically impossible.
Writing stories has been my hobby for many years, and seeing them turned into a movie — or at least a voice-over — is very rewarding. In fact, I participate in a couple of literary contest sites where all the participants would be happy to have such a capability.
Right now, I am going through Aaron Sorkin’s MasterClass lessons on screenwriting. It is quite interesting.
As for digital art replacing real artists, it is hard to say. Every new technology carries some positive and some detrimental features. I am not sure whether I am right about this, but I think digital painting will evolve into its own art form, just as photography did in its time.