News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Don't Fire Your Illustrator. Parent comment

Re:Don't Fire Your Illustrator by thebooktocome on Monday August 21, 2023 @01:46PM (#37212909)
> Overall I think this is a net win, especially because I don't think this needs to be the end of the road for human illustrators, but this will force them to adapt and bring more sensitivity to the needs of their clients.

The advantages of AI that you crow over simply can’t be met by any human professional artist. A human can’t do hundreds of revisions profitably. There’s increased “sensitivity” and then there’s needing to read the client’s mind.

If you think this isn’t a death knell for human illustrators in this particular market, you’re deluding yourself.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Don't Fire Your Illustrator by jononor on Monday August 21, 2023 @03:15PM (#37214039)
A professional artist that is proficient in the latest generative image models can increase their ability to attend to client needs.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Don't Fire Your Illustrator by thebooktocome on Monday August 21, 2023 @03:54PM (#37214500)
The client "needs" in question here are low cost overall, low marginal cost for each revision, and a totally-interactive "do what I mean" interface.

Shoving a human artist in the middle is a liability on each front.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Don't Fire Your Illustrator by jononor on Monday August 21, 2023 @05:41PM (#37215718)
Your definition of the needs does not have any requirements on the fitness of the output, nor on time spent on customer side. That does not seem realistic.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Don't Fire Your Illustrator by thebooktocome on Tuesday August 22, 2023 @07:23AM (#37221172)
They’re not mine; I pulled them directly from the parent comment.
[ Parent | on HN ]