I will admit when writing articles, sometimes I have used mid journey to create the cover art.
I am no different to any of these folks who may come along and use udio.com to generate some background music for whatever.
When I do it, I honestly don't care too much about how the art looks, as long as it works for the article.
I'm a hypocrite, and I'm part of the problem because I am doing the same thing to visual artists as others will now do to composers.
It's a particularly vicious issue, because on the one hand, creators need quick art or music to bang out an article or a video, and they often don't have the budget to pay an artist much if anything. That's capitalism 101 - get 'er done as cheap as poss.
On the other hand, it's this very behavior that is going to hurt us all.
I don't have any good answers. I bleed for us composers, and for the visual artists I myself have been helping to put out of work. It's all insidious and horrible and I feel bad about it. I don't know what the answers are.
Yeah, and? So what, you're a hypocrite or you're just looking out for yourself. So is 99.9% of most people who are concerned with making sure they can get what they want and don't care about how it's affecting other people. That's how tech moves.
What happened when digital cameras became affordable? There was an explosion of people who all of a sudden thought they were "photographers". They did cheap weddings and flooded stock libraries as a "side hustle" because now they didn't need to know how to deal with film (because learning how to load a camera is too much for some people!). Photoshop ensured that they could fix everything later and not worry about even having workable skills. But with a credit card, they bought their way into a field they had no business in and decimated it. I'm sure plenty of people complaining about AI shoot with digital cameras and may even have a foot in the photo world, too and do low level work, taking work away from legitimate photographers.
What happened with digital movies? I had a friend who was a professional projectionist for 40 years. Guy was considered a god among his peers - one of the best projectionists ever. The skills he had were legendary - being able to splice, cut, edit, and repair film
while it was on the spools and running through the projector! Then digital movies happened. After a 40 year career being one of the best ever in the business, at the end the only job the projectionist union could get him was teaching the theater managers how to hit "play" on the digital projector. Now? He makes ends meet as a salesman in Lowes housewares. Or as he puts it, "I look like Aladdin in this stupid little red vest". Ever gone to see a movie in recent times? Have you exclaimed how amazing films look now that that they're digital? Most people do without a thought of the tons of people that were displaced and put out of work in their 50s and 60s - probably the worst age to be out looking for a new job. You're virtually unemployable. Or people who owned one hour photo labs? What about them? Or the countless other people involved in film processes? No one gives a damn about them because you get to take a picture and instantly see what crap you made and that's worth them losing their jobs. I mean, time and tech marches on! Evolve or die!
VIs made people with lower budgets and tight wallets hire less musicians. No one worried about that because it benefited them. Why call a bass player when you can just use a bass VI and step record stuff. The advent of DAWs and digital recording put many smaller studios out of work - people who invested tens and hundreds of thousands of dollars in their smaller studios put out of work by people saying, "Come to my basement bro, I can record your band now!"
Tech always displaces professionals. Plenty of people working in music now who have no business being there but sneak in because tech lets them use it as a crutch. People who can't play but cut and paste on a piano roll. People using algorithmic stuff like scaler and programs like that to make up for their lack of creativity, knowledge, and ability. Just check the Synth V subforum. All of a sudden, who needs vocalists? No one cares about if vocalists get called less for sessions because it benefits the people here who are too insecure to interact with a real vocalist. But all of a sudden everyone has a vocalist on their music. Or how many people here have used chat gpt to write lyrics for them? Why not use a lyricist or collaborate with someone? But all that's OK because it benefits the people here.
I'm not saying people shouldn't be allowed to do it on their personal projects on their own time but if this was the 70s and 80s, none of these people would be working in any capacity in the professional sphere and picking off work from professionals.
Now everyone's screaming about AI because that threatens all the people I mentioned above who are here so it's a big problem. Although I suspect the people screaming loudest about how AI is going to take every composer's job are probably the people using tech the most as crutches, So they stand to lose the most. But I guarantee you the people screaming about AI have most likely participated in many of the things I listed above without a second thought to those they displaced or put out of work.
See, when you're actually a creative person then creativity is part of your life and you can always find ways around a problem or a new way to approach something. When you're not really creative (or refer to yourself as a 'creative' which is always a sign that someone isn't creative at all) then you're threatened by tech, because tech is the only way you can fake any kind of creativity.
TL;DR - So you used AI art in something and feel guilty. Big deal. Pretty much everyone here has used tech that displaced or put someone out of work and they didn't feel guilty. It's only because it's threatening their so-called livelihood now that it's a problem.
www.udio.com
