With all the fuzz about IA image “stealing” illustrator job, I am curious about how much photography changed the art world in the 19th century.

There was a time where getting a portrait done was a relatively big thing, requiring several days of work for a painter, while you had to stand still for a while so the painter knew what you looked like, and then with photography, all you had to do was to stand still for a few minutes, and you’ll get a picture of you printed on paper the next day.

How did it impact the average painter who was getting paid to paint people once in their lifetime.

  • Harrison [He/Him]@ttrpg.network
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    The program might have required skill to write, but that’s not an excuse for it to threaten entire industries.

    We don’t live in a world where industries exist just because it would be nice for them to and people need work.

    An industry is a productive environment that creates products for others to buy. If the people buying from the current art industry care about human inspiration and the uniqueness they add to art, they will continue to buy from humans. If they do not, why should the state use it’s monopoly on violence to cripple any other source of product?

    Are artists some special class of people above every other group of workers who’ve lost their jobs to automation?