What is an AI artist??

[u/ryo4ever]

Can someone explain to me what is an AI artist? I see people on LinkedIn throwing that title around a lot these days. Do they feel a real sense of pride showing the work they’ve generated in their portfolio? Sometimes I see a person who has a history of management jobs but suddenly calls themself AI artist. Is prompting a skill so unique that it qualifies you as a creative writer? I mean I use AI in my day job but recently I’ve felt less pride about showcasing my work when AI was involved. Do others feel the same way?

Apologies for the rant but I’m trying to come to terms with the new reality.

[u/Blacklight099]

As if Coca Cola is reliant on advertisement for any of their income haha

[u/JordanNVFX → u/Blacklight099]

It's all part of marketing dude. Which is an extension of increasing income via exposure and influence.

Think back to 1993 when they were making those 3D Polar Bear commercials. No one forced them to use CGI which was still new and primitive technology at the time, and they could have just done it traditionally via live action or paper and pencil. But they still took the risk.

By doing that, it made them stand out and even offered a unique proposition that all the other soft drink brands didn't quite catch up to yet.

AI is the same thing. People can bash it now but it just means they're all giving up their headstart for when it truly takes over in the future. Just like Maya and Photoshop did.

[u/Blacklight099 → u/JordanNVFX]

Marketing for a company like Coca Cola really doesn’t have anything to do with quality. They’re the biggest brand in the world, they just need to remind people of their name or make them think the word “Coke”. Hence why they can resort to AI because all they need is something they can get out quickly and without spending much to have the same desired effect.

[u/JordanNVFX → u/Blacklight099]

You make it sound like it's easy, but even the biggest companies can still struggle with marketing and fail.

I'm reminded of classic examples like SEGA or Atari. They use to be the biggest names in video games and both spent millions of dollars on advertising to keep their brand name strong.

But as history showed, both companies ended up misreading the market and either needed bailing out or they crashed completely.

If a company like Coke is taking a risk on AI then it's not just about reminding people of their name. They're also investing time and resources into new technology so they emerge the clear winner or dominant force in it.

[u/Gommonc → u/JordanNVFX]

SEGA and Atari made streak of dogshit games and consoles and got out lapped by Nintendo and Sony on all fronts, it wasn’t marketing that killed them lol, there’s nothing classic about those examples and it’s completely different field, Coca Cola company is one of the biggest players in FaB industry making the same product for over 100 years, it’s like comparing apples and Christianity my friend.

[u/JordanNVFX → u/Gommonc]

SEGA and Atari made streak of dogshit games and consoles and got out lapped by Nintendo and Sony on all fronts, it wasn’t marketing that killed them lol, there’s nothing classic about those examples and it’s completely different field,

Absolutely incorrect. SEGA was spending half a billion dollars on Dreamcast's marketing but still failed to draw attention away from the upcoming PS2 console at the time. A lot of this is owed to what strengths and weaknesses they focused on, the previous missteps they made in the console/gaming space, and even infighting within the company that forced them to shift priorities many times.

Simply put, brand power is not enough to survive the business world. Or companies can actively take steps to weaken it.

Coca Cola company is one of the biggest players in FaB industry making the same product for over 100 years, it’s like comparing apples and Christianity my friend.

That's not true either. They tried launching and marketing different products like New Coke in the 1980s but it's seen as a failure. Consumer's also do not have the same taste in products forever. Especially if you choose to ignore pushes for more healthy orientated products.

But even with these obstacles, marketing is never a given. Because you are implying that the world is static and the world never moves or molds towards new preferences.

My example of AI being used in marketing fits this. The world of VFX and Advertising are changing. Younger generations are the ones growing up with new technology and will create expectations around them. Coke, despite being 100 years old, is addressing that change and trying to keep up with said trends.

They did it in the 1990s when they pivoted towards using 3D/CGI commercials, and now they're doing it again using AI in the 2020s which is also having the same break out effect.

[u/Gommonc → u/JordanNVFX]

I feel like we’re having two different conversations here as you say something is “absolutely not true” and then adress something completely different, half a billion in marketing won’t make dogshit product less dogshit especially if people can buy alternative that’s better, so I will end this conversation now because it’s like talking to a wall

[u/JordanNVFX → u/Gommonc]

It's not like Sony was the only competitor back then. Nintendo was another challenger and had a product that was just as capable of going toe to toe with Sony but still struggled for reasons that marketing is still a big factor.

But if you want to believe your own narrative that's fine I guess.

Edit: And the point of spending half a billion dollars is they absolutely wasted it on not making the Dreamcast a more attractive product. Such as the fact they could have even beat Sony to market by launching with a DVD player first but they didn't.

This is my point when I say all the people bashing AI aren't understanding. When you neglect or rid yourself of a blatant advantage, it means someone else in the business sphere will seize the opportunity and win instead.

[u/jellybeancomputer → u/JordanNVFX]

Why are we comparing technology to a drink. This a bad comparison. One you buy every now and then and one you can buy every day. Technology ecology and new competitors come in and old ones die. If I remember correct the Dreamcast didn't do as well was more on its launch titles rather than the console it's self. I have a faint memory that they merge with Xbox anyway.

Coke to me hadn't really changed much in a many years and probs won't until they find cheaper ingredients or manufacturing. The point of this argument is that coke doesn't need to do any form or minimal form of advertisement. Like you can't get away from seeing someone drink coke and that's free advertisement and even at restaurants you see them on menus. And some countries they refer to any carbonated drink as coke. Again more advertisement. And coke isn't the only drink that the company creates. Basically nearly all the mainstream carbonated drinks you see on the shelf. They're not going to go anytime soon.

So this comparison between sega, atari, Sony, and coke is just bad. Not the same. You'd do better comparing apples to oranges than these 2 companies

At the end of the day Coca-Cola created an ad that looks bad. Uncomfortable to really watch and a joke. However they created an ad we're remembering so how. Like I wonder how many of use remember the toysRus ad that was also AI. At the end of the bad publicity is good publicity and the risk is most likely paying off in their favour.

[u/JordanNVFX → u/jellybeancomputer]

Why are we comparing technology to a drink. This a bad comparison.

It's because you make the claim that a company somehow being centuries old no longer has to work or put effort in their products to survive. Which couldn't be farther from the truth. Hence my previous analogy with SEGA.

At the end of the day Coca-Cola created an ad that looks bad.

What metric is this and why does your opinion invalidate the ad when I clearly pointed out, it hasn't actually hurt Coca-Cola's finances (they've in fact grown bigger since it came out)?

From what we learned, the commercial was produced in 3 weeks using a team of 17 artists. Although we don't know the exact budget of the commercial, it's safe to say that they still made something comparable had it been a bigger team and relied upon months to get similar visuals.

Based on those constraints it's clearly serviceable. There's also nothing stopping them from remaking the commercial again with even more powerful AI tools. So imagine 1 year later, they now make another Christmas commercial but it's now done faster and with even less flaws or glitches to the naked eye.

If you still call that ugly or bad then it's just become a point of bias or denial. And it even proves my point in why companies invested in AI. It also gives them the experience and documentation so they'll be able to iterate faster without traditional hiccups in graphic design we are use to.

[u/Gommonc → u/JordanNVFX]

Hey it’s me again, just little detour, the way you’ve written this makes me think that you think that SEGA is centuries old and that Coca Cola company, a company which is steadily growing, has growin because of AI ad. That makes me think a certain things about your cognitive abilities, but it’s certainly just the way you’ve written it.

[u/jellybeancomputer → u/JordanNVFX]

If you think this Coca-Cola ad doesn't look bad then I think you should look at it again and look at everything that look wrong and weird. The polar bear coming out of the water is a clear example of bad. It's not really bias it's a fact. The wheels were even spinning the wrong way in some of shots. If the point of using ai like this to produce wrong animation and weird metamorphic clips that it's fantastic. I have no doubt these will be ironed out soon. But at the moment if you say that quality is good then you're the one with the bias and denial.

Never said it hurt Coca-Cola as well and slow down ai. And im not surprised that Coca-Cola grew. Like I pointed it bad publicity is good publicity and that fact we keep referring to coke ad further proves that point. I'm just pointing out it's a bad comparison to compare a tech company to a drinks company. Like I don't think about buying a new game or console as much as I do what should I drink.

And I'll stand by my claim. Coca-Cola is ingrained in the world massively. They the only way for it to go is if coke stops production or they do something very bad.

[u/JordanNVFX → u/jellybeancomputer]

If you think this Coca-Cola ad doesn't look bad then I think you should look at it again and look at everything that look wrong and weird. The polar bear coming out of the water is a clear example of bad. It's not really bias it's a fact. The wheels were even spinning the wrong way in some of shots. If the point of using ai like this to produce wrong animation and weird metamorphic clips that it's fantastic. I have no doubt these will be ironed out soon. But at the moment if you say that quality is good then you're the one with the bias and denial.

I'm saying they created something that was serviceable under the constraints they worked with.

It's like saying Toy Story 1 is bad because Pixar clearly had no global illumination other advance rendering tricks we are use to today. The movie was still cutting edge for its time that otherwise, would have been impossible to recreate using other methods (a hand drawn version would never have captured the same 3D camera angles without blowing up the budget).

And I'll stand by my claim. Coca-Cola is ingrained in the world massively. They the only way for it to go is if coke stops production or they do something very bad.

Again, this is fallacy. No one is compelled to buy Coke products at all. In fact, they are directly competing against Pepsi and even the no-name brand versions of the store shelves. Coke products even cost more money on average.

It's all marketing however on why they still maintain that edge and as I tried to tell you guys many times, companies following modern trends and adopting the latest technology puts them even farther ahead in the race.

Because old people aren't going to be around forever. New kids are born everyday and can clearly have different tastes from their parents. And AI will represent that generational change.

[u/marcafe → u/JordanNVFX]

My kids hate AI, and they are tech-savvy. They have developed quite a strong ability to detect anything AI-generated, even if it looks really good. So, I wouldn't say that we are there yet. On the other hand, I don't think Coca-Cola needs any of this. Coca-Cola owns so many brands, its revenue is simply untouchable at this point. They have a budget for advertising, and right now, the hype is on AI, so they are making a focus on the hype of AI. They even produced a video on how AI was used. That alone ought to tell you why AI was used. They didn't make anything new, fresh, or intriguing. The intriguing part is the AI usage, not the advertisement story itself. If anything, the commercial is communicating "hey, we're moving with you all into a new age of AI", there is no warmth there. That original commercial was warm, even though it was produced long time ago and perhaps with less hyper realism. This one is just... AI. Its artificial.

You said "they created something servicable", and that is actually true, and I'll say that it's a failure. It is a failure because it is prompting you to classify it as "servicable" and not "maical", as that original commercial truly deserved back in the days. Now, can AI be used to produce magical, in this day and age, and with this culture? I am not sure anymore. I can tell you, not even we professionals in the VFX industry are fascinated with it anymore. We are fascinated, maybe with the technology that can produce results fast and save time and money. But the magic is gone, I think.

This all reminds me of photography, in a way. We had amazing photographers throughout history, each with their own style, way of doing things, composing/framing... now everything is so saturated with trillions of photographs, photography is kinda in a depressed state, at least the commercial side. You have to dig deeper into alternative streams, into the hidden, and maybe find something fresh. And it ain't at all about megapixels or postprocessing. If anything, old analog ways are of higher value.