There was a post on here recently on how someone designed their logo by asking DALL-E a load of questions. The rationale could be that it might not remove that job, but it would certainly be a powerful tool for a logo designer to take on way more clients, thus driving down the cost of logo design.

If I'm thinking of the same post that logo is poorly done / chosen. I know the author wanted very specific imagery in it and achieved that but I don't think that logo would be considered "good" by most.

That was the first instance. These sorts of things only get better over time.

i feel like this boils down to a client-side misunderstanding of where graphic designers actually spend the majority of their time. i'd actually argue that working from spec or even a crude doodle on the back of a napkin is a lot easier than dealing with a client who is married to a poor design that DALL-E puked out for them. one of the most important things about the sketch phase is to be able to iterate without too many assumptions while also being able to recognize and play upon the strengths of individual drawings. this is not a time consuming process but it also isn't something you want to rush anymore so than you'd want to rush the plastic surgeon performing your nose job. depersonalizing the design process in favor of volume does not particularly serve anyone and, moreover, it responds to a need that i don't really think exists. this is not to say that i don't think these kinds of image generators are without uses, but right now we are still in the phase where people are being impressed by graphical fidelity[which was already incredibly cheap] rather than usefulness. imo this stage of ai will primarily work well for tasks that benefit from randomness while also being relatively low stake in the overall production pipeline. training a network to generate typefaces or to randomize npc portraits for an open world game is precisely the sort of area where 'gluing things together' can potentially provide more benefits than headaches.

I was saying a designer could use it for first draft ideas, not their client.

I think it'll start by removing the need for editorial illustration and photography for a lot of blogs and websites, starting with the less reputable ones.

MidJourney is already good enough creating illustrations for articles, book covers, etc. Not something that The New Yorker will be interested in, but better than anything you can buy for a couple of dollars or small monthly subscription.

> I think it'll start by removing the need for editorial illustration and photography for a lot of blogs and websites, starting with the less reputable ones.

Stock photo sites and Google Images and basic graphic filters did that a long time ago. Sure, DALL-E has certain creative possibilities that those don't, and the niches like satirical memes or "first pass" concepts in agency brainstorming meetings where it could be absolutely revolutionary tend to not be deliverables the creators get paid for. The publications giving illustrators a reliable income are usually after their consistent style, fantasy world coherence or novel ideas which isn't exactly where DALL-E shines.

DALL-E is the writing on the wall for those with a competing talent to start looking for other (non-art) work they may want to do in the future. It would be an egregious error to think that AI art programs are some new tool to learn akin to photoshop. Maybe that will hold true for a few years at best.

There will come a point, much sooner than later, where the value in typing prompts into an AI is going to only be worth minimum wage.

Substitute "the camera" (and perhaps even more "the gramophone") for "DALL-E" and "AI art programs", and the 19th century wants its argument against the future of creative media back.

Cameras require skill to use. AI does not. You can just ask it to generate a skilled photograph. The AI completely fills the gaps that previous tech left for humans.

I just cancelled my plan of paying a graphics designer to prepare an android app (personal project) for launch. After playing with dall-e I'm confident that "I" can make a logo and some artwork "myself". Edit: ment too say icon, not logo.

That does now make me curious to what degree Dall-E could be prompted to do some more ux-type work. So far I've only tested it with photographs/paintings.

Augmenting jobs is more likely, from what I have heard. It would be useful for rapid prototyping of artwork and could help designers get design specs to artists quicker.

The initial impressions are that production ready designs will require an artists touch. But this discussion was in the context of AA-Games and up. For indie and small games fully AI produced art may be fine.

The people who do digital art illustrations for magazine articles are surely out of a job?