You must log in or register to comment.
When was the last time you bought art?
Um, I’m disabled and impoverished. I’ve relied on piracy all my life.
Thankfully there is an archived version and it’s every bit as pretentious and dumb as its thumbnail and its title suggest. And then they have the nerve to sign as if they were speaking for Artists writ large.
Wow, such a sad article written by an artist.
When was the last time you saved for months so you could own a one-of-a-kind piece—something made by a person, with a body, a history, and a point of view—instead of another interchangeable object stamped out by the thousands?
FUCK those people who care about others wellbeing but didn’t spend their hard earned saving on arts, amirite? And i bet majority of people here can say “just last week” because videogame is art. This basically saying you shouldn’t care about others if you don’t directly helping them. Since we cannot directly involved on helping palestinian other than protest and boycott, fuck them, amirite?
I rarely use this comic but i feels like it fit so well here
This article definitely need a rewrite.
I think some articles are written specifically to be rage bait. Says a lot about our society.
I buy handicrafts as gifts quite a lot. As someone who does handicrafts I have a deep appreciation for the artists/artisans who work on those. As you guessed I also regularly buy/gift video games and almost exclusively indie titles. I also regularly rent books from the library and probably buy one every month or two to have to loan out or as a gift. I have commissioned two original pieces from traditional artists but have received neither. One I did get an (incomplete) refund for. I imagine my experience isn’t the norm, though I’m sure I’m not alone.
The fact that they act like being vocally against AI isn’t helping their cause is idiotic. Even if I had done none of the above, the sentiment that AI art “doesn’t count” will definitely discourage people who are interested in flaunting their acquired art from viewing AI art as a suitable replacement.
How ironic would it be if they wrote that article with AI? Lmao
Fuck the adtech industry, too. Fuck corporate consolidation and Big Tech. It’s absolutely destroying anyone but clickbait farmers; this problem is bigger than just generative ML.
I’ve seen a few creators say they don’t know how they’re going to continue. They can’t out compete spammers, clicks and views basically make them nothing, no one seeks anything beyond algorithms anymore.
Hence I’ve been throwing more money at Patreon or similar artist subscriptions recently, even if in short bursts.
I buy art directly from artists all the time. It may not be expensive one of a kind paintings, but a shirt directly from the designer of the print is something I’ve done several times this year. A record directly from the band who recorded it is something I’ve done probably a couple dozen times this year. Prints of paintings, posters directly from the artist. These are all things I get fairly regularly.
Am I allowed to complain now?
I’m sorry the economy is fucking you like everyone else, but you’re childishly lashing out at the wrong people.
Buying art is for “good times”. Most of the people I know barely pursue their livelihood. When you can barely pay your rent, barely buy your groceries, buying art is way below on that bare necessities list. Because you cannot feed your soul before feeding your flesh first.
And this has been on a downhill before “AI” was a thing.
Worse, the whole project of “AI” is about privatizing what used to be public information and moving it behind a monthly subscription cost. If the AI firms get their way, people will have even less to spend.
I am very much on the anti-genAI side, but this is stupid.
First there are other reasons to be against it.
Second that way to consume art directly from the artist is an exception since way longer than gen AI existed. No, most people never commissioned a freaking poet or oil-painting portraitist. Who are you, a Florentine patrician from the 17th century?
People do consume art though. They can be selective in what they get and hopefully support stuff actually made by people.
Really? So what?
A lot of people are either poor or simply don’t have a need for art, which is why they don’t buy it. The buyers are the appreciative, non-poor individuals. Before GenAI, artists had a market, they produced work for these buyers, whether for legitimate use or pure appreciation.
Now, GenAI is eroding that market. Legitimate users just use GenAI for “good enough” results, and appreciative buyers lower their standards by flooding themselves with GenAI content.
Meanwhile, the poor folk push back against the normalization of such art which wrecks the art industry. They’re doing what they can.
Even if it was true that people didn’t spend on art anymore, which it isn’t, that’s still an appeal to hipocrisy. You may not have enough leftover money to spend on unique art pieces, which I consider to be a luxury, but you can still critique the emergence of generative, generic art.
I’m fortunate that nearly all of my close friends own something I’ve made. But online? In comment sections? In all the loud posturing about the impending AI takeover?
I keep coming back to the same question:
When was the last time you bought something directly from an artist?
While I understand the sentiment I think focusing the buy to be directly from an artist is a bit weird.
Does me visiting the local theatre not count?
Does me buying a vinyl with music not count (none of my musician friends has the tools to make vinyls, that’s for sure)?
Does me buying an older oil painting from the local auction not count?
Does me buying a 4k UHD movie not count?
Do I not support an artist when I buy the poster they designed as a commission from the company that sold it? (Kirsten Tinds posters of edible plants and berries and so on sold through Koustrup & Co. are gorgeous: http://www.kirstentind.dk/Plakater_og_Kortmapper.html)I’ll add to that:
Does me lending a book from the library not count?
The article is too much about direct remuneration. It reeks of a failed business-person’s bitterness.
It’s not all about the money, and every artist should know that.
The article is just ragebait. And it’s 10 months old. It speaks poorly of OP that they felt the need to share it. There are much better ways of starting this discussion.
I also pay for products and services that spend a portion of the revenue on artists. Just about anything I buy at a physical store with packaging had to hire an artist to design that packaging. Anyone that produces advertisements had to hire artists to create them. Anyone with a website that comprising of more than stock photos would’ve had to hire an artist for the visuals. Paying for any of these indirectly puts money into the hands of artists. I want the money I spend to continue doing so.
It’s not just about artists though. At the end of the day, what I care about is that the money I spend goes towards improving the lives of as many people as possible.
What the fuck are you doing about it—other than complaining?
He complained while doing nothing about it.
What an idiot! 🤮
deleted by creator
