Are you f#@!ing serious': Controversy erupts after a video generated by AI is declared the winner of Pink Floyd's animation competition

[Windows Central]

Damián Gaume's entry for "Any Colour You Like" was generated with Stable Diffusion, and Pink Floyd fans are unhappy about it beating out animated works of art from human artists.

Are you f#@!ing serious': Controversy erupts after a video generated by AI is declared the winner of Pink Floyd's animation competition : Read more

 

[fdruid]

In a few years we're gonna laugh at this kind of backlash. Well, I am laughing now to be honest.
AI generation is another kind of tool. It shouldn't be rejected as such. It's like questioning a book for being written on a computer instead of a typewriter.

Actually reminds me of back in the 70s when artists like Queen made a point to say they didn't use any synthesizers in their records, because it was considered to be "cheating". Look at how absurd that proposition sounds now, but then it was actually a matter of art or creation being dishonest and artificial.

I don't even need to explain how synthesizers have changed music, to make it more easy and accessible to create (have a string sound instead of an orchestra, which also didn't make string players disappear) and how they can indeed be used as their own thing, to bring different textures and tones. Not to mention music genres based entirely on using synths.

See? Technology is a tool, let's not fear new ways to do things like prehistoric men were afraid of fire.

 

[John McIlhinney]

In a few years we're gonna laugh at this kind of backlash. Well, I am laughing now to be honest.
AI generation is another kind of tool. It shouldn't be rejected as such. It's like questioning a book for being written on a computer instead of a typewriter.

Actually reminds me of back in the 70s when artists like Queen made a point to say they didn't use any synthesizers in their records, because it was considered to be "cheating". Look at how absurd that proposition sounds now, but then it was actually a matter of art or creation being dishonest and artificial.

I don't even need to explain how synthesizers have changed music, to make it more easy and accessible to create (have a string sound instead of an orchestra, which also didn't make string players disappear) and how they can indeed be used as their own thing, to bring different textures and tones. Not to mention music genres based entirely on using synths.

See? Technology is a tool, let's not fear new ways to do things like prehistoric men were afraid of fire.

I agree and disagree. Yes, AI is a tool and it makes sense to use it if you can produce the same or better results then that's fine. If you're doing it for advertising or entertainment then the ability to attract customers or entertain them is what matters. In the context of an animation competition though, I think it's a bit different. It doesn't necessarily even take any animation skill to get AI to generate an animation for you and I think that most people would agree that an animation competition is intended to test the animation skills of the competitors. Even if it was the best entry, I would still not reward an AI-generated animation in this context, because it's not the result alone that matters but also the skill required to produce that result. If there's little to no skill involved, the result is irrelevant, in my opinion.

 

[Rumpystiltskin]

This is a competition. We are trying to see whose abilities are greatest. Not who can use technology the best.

Imagine how all the weightlifters, gym bros, and strongmen would feel if the next World's Strongest Man competition was won by some dude named John Smith, a crane operator from NYC. People would say he cheated, that it's not fair. Do we laugh at the strong men for trying to pick up heavy things with their hands and arms and legs instead of letting technology do all the work?

Now maybe you think, "Well obviously cranes can't be allowed." So do we say AI tools are not allowed in animation competitions?

 

[fjtorres5591]

The contest rules explicitly *allowed* AI tools.
And, unless somebody was doing cell by cell animation ala old school Disney, everybody was using software of one kind or another.
Pearl clutchers.

 

[Rumpystiltskin]

The contest rules explicitly *allowed* AI tools.
And, unless somebody was doing cell by cell animation ala old school Disney, everybody was using software of one kind or another.
Pearl clutchers.

100% right. It's there in the rules. People are mad because either they didn't think of it or don't know how to use the tools. I mean if I trained and trained my muscles and got beat by a crane...yeah I'd be mad too. I wouldn't have a leg to stand on...but I'd be mad.

 

[fdruid]

I agree and disagree. Yes, AI is a tool and it makes sense to use it if you can produce the same or better results then that's fine. If you're doing it for advertising or entertainment then the ability to attract customers or entertain them is what matters. In the context of an animation competition though, I think it's a bit different. It doesn't necessarily even take any animation skill to get AI to generate an animation for you and I think that most people would agree that an animation competition is intended to test the animation skills of the competitors. Even if it was the best entry, I would still not reward an AI-generated animation in this context, because it's not the result alone that matters but also the skill required to produce that result. If there's little to no skill involved, the result is irrelevant, in my opinion.

Well it's an animation contest, what is judged is the product that is a finished animation, it's not a contest about how authentic, original or great is the process. In this case to me this style of animation really fits the concept and music style. Won't be as appropiate for other works. Like with glitch art or digital noise, it's just a color in the palette.
Also honestly I don't think generating an AI video like that is completely devoid of skill. But even if it was, we're back to questioning the very nature of art, back to debating whether Duchamp's urinal is art.
Maybe precisely because AI generation is the most anti-artistic tool (supposedly), using it for making art is what's revolutionary here.

We shouldn't even be talking about gatekeeping in art, everyone should create the way they want because that's the point.