>>1027615
Wow you gonna have to tell the AI board

File: guru.png (22 KB, 579x211)

22 KB PNG

>>1027615
his argument isn't "wrong", exactly
it's just coming from a very cynical corporate viewpoint of generating more content for more profit
which maybe is great if your life's ambition is to make a bunch of billionaires slightly richer
and shortsighted, as well, because those corporations are not gonna give a shit if a snotty artist has "full control" of the positioning of every element in a scene. they'll just replace him with a marketing department and pump out whatever tests well enough with the target demographics
also, let me take this opportunity to vent about pic related
I'm so fucking tired of this "well, all the technological advancements we use today were just as maligned as AI :)"
motherfucker, this wasn't that long ago. most of us lived through most of this stuff. it's not the same

>>1027625
>I would have lost my job
What fucking job? Dude's a grifter that does tutorials and scams people with materials. He's never worked on a production in his life. He thinks that because he's been making tutorials for beginners for 15 years he's suddenly an expert on the industry and it's practices. He's a perpetual beginner himself that never progressed past the wall, and instead pretends to know what the fuck he's talking about.

That being said, I think AI in 3d has its merits. It's just another facet of procedural generation, which artists already use to fill a scene with detail that they don't have to do themselves. Genning models of clutter or other BS objects I think is fine and it gives more time to work on the main aspects of a scene but still keep an extremely high density of detail. If someone's not using genned 3d as a way to fill a scene or make it do a team's worth of work that they wouldn't be able to do themself in a decent timeframe, and just using them as their main focus, they're a fucking retard just like Price over here.

andrew's a prick but i do think arts as a profession as it exists today, is mostly doomed
some of the most prized positions in arts are stable, salaried, jobs at large coroporations where artists are mostly there as crafstpeople in big pipelines to create products that can be sold for profit
games is fucked, vfx is fucked - those industries have responded by reducing headcounts. any opportunities to cut costs, they will take.
capital is unsentimental in prusuit of profits.
disney will not save you.
the system of ip law that been bent and shaped by capital will not save you - the same one that everyone hated just a few years ago
the marketing machines which shit on vfx (it's all le practical, bro) will not save you
the directors who do the same will not save you
the public which wants le practical effects will not save you
the best you can hope for at this point is that the machines come for everyone else's jobs too

>>1027615
I saw that "is it 3d" twitter account dunking on this because of the polycount which seemed like a retarded form of attack. I doubt AI will take over 3d modelling for the simple reason that there isn't many 3d models avaliable to train AI on. If you think about it, very few people upload 3d models. For every 3d model uploaded there's probably 100 million photographs. I'd imagine the data isn't there. I don't know how meshy works but you'll probably get something that takes 2d image generation and interpolates into 3d (probably poorly). High poly 3d takes a crazy amount of time so you can imagine there's a lot of energy and money there to negate it

Long term you probably wont even need the 3d model desu, you'll just have some stand in and the ai will generate everything on top and your models will just be queues to engineer some kind of ai generated outcome, like those videos that AI GTA to make it look more realistic but for a whole game

did he disclose any payments from ai companies? buying influencers to say dumb stuff is cheap.

>>1027639
> Long term you probably wont even need the 3d model desu, you'll just have some stand in and the ai will generate everything on top and your models will just be queues to engineer some kind of ai generated outcome, like those videos that AI GTA to make it look more realistic but for a whole game
Nah, what you propose is not enough because it's not stable enough.
People actually want to "bake" it into 3d model that stays consistent afterwards.
> there isn't many 3d models avaliable to train AI on. If you think about it, very few people upload 3d models. For every 3d model uploaded there's probably 100 million photographs. I'd imagine the data isn't there
Very true.

>>1027615
every "teacher" is a failure. he always came off as a passionless faggot.

To be fair, there is a correlation between high experience level and taking AI easy. I'm way more confident using AI in programming for example, than in art. Because I perfectly understand everything its doing in code, and I don't really understand all of fundamentals of art and I'm not really sure about quality on technical level of being able to say why something is bad and how exactly it should be fixed (other than "I don't feel right about this"). It's basically insecurity due to lack of experience and lack of confidence of being able to fully QA the results properly. And there are people who simply don't care and only care about getting things done. It's all different attitudes.

Dude's been on the NFT grind in the past, only dumbasses didn't see this coming

>>1027615
He makes doughnuts. What is there to look up to?