Why even bother learning to draw when robots will someday be

>>2710478
Why bother to do anything?

>>2710480
Except for entertainment and jerking off there is nothing worthwhile.

File: 1475696713619.png (74KB, 300x274px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 300x274px

>>2710478
Because it's fun?
>/ic/ - Artwork/Critique
Uh oh I accidentally clicked in the crab bucket again...

>>2710478
OP, eventually robots will be better at us at EVERYTHING.

With that mentality you should probably kill yourself, there's nothing you'll ever be able to do better than a robot.

File: thisbitchhere.jpg (12KB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 320x240px

>>2710478
Why bother to eat if you're going to die anyway? Don't worry, robots won't get THAT advanced during your lifetime

File: 1409320150755.png (683KB, 919x720px) Image search: [Google]

683KB, 919x720px

>>2710573
>robots won't get THAT advanced during your lifetime
I will make sure of that.

consider, OP, that there are still people who make a living smithing authentic medieval swords and armor.

They make a living on a skill that has been obsolete for centuries, long eclisped by superior technology that can do everything their product does better. And people are actually willing to PAY MORE for a product created in an inferior but more historically authentic way.

They still have a market of people who appreciate what they can do and the product they create.

But yeah the concept art market will probably contract when a lead designer could have the workflow that would previously take 5 people, but even then I expect a human to be at the helm creatively.

do robots have imaginations yet?

>>2710592

It really comes down to how you define imagination, the same as 'brain'.

You could probably program an algorithm right now that could shit out ideas and discern which ones check off boxes for what people find appealing, especially if you got some google-tier crowdsourcing for it.

It'd be derivative, but so is most 'creative' work. Pure creative work, IE stuff that's 'totally unique and new' is usually shit, the imaginative stuff that's good usually just draws on inspiration in an interesting way.

>>2710478

It won't happen while we are alive unless some absurd technology breakthrough happens tomorrow, like 200x faster computers or something, otherwise it's impratical.

>>2710590

Or

>why do people pay for self portraits when there are cameras today?

>>2710478

Because robots aren't going to draw hentai of my anime waifus.

>>2710478
Because I love art and learning about art

A robot will be able to render human portraits and scenery better than me but it'll be a long while before they figure out how to make silly cartoons better than me

>>2710478
> photocopiers aren't already better

File: 1411771058939.gif (1018KB, 300x167px) Image search: [Google]

1018KB, 300x167px

>>2710596

RETARD ALERT

File: 1403302544863.jpg (238KB, 1001x750px) Image search: [Google]

238KB, 1001x750px

>>2710671

I'm glad your unique human creativity came up with that sick zinger.

File: dat gogo.png (78KB, 262x272px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 262x272px

But robots can't think of random numbers. So they won't even have imagination.

Everything in the world is fucking inconsequential. Why do anything if you can't change the past and can't control the future? Why even continue to live if eventually entropy will tear everything in the universe into tiny particles that interact with each other? I'll tell you why. Cause right now it's the only time you'll ever get to actually do something. You could stay in bed and mope and self loathe, or you could pursue a hobby and make something of your life. Ultimately on a cosmic scale, they lead to the same thing, so do whatever makes you happy. You'll have plenty of time to wallow in despair when you're dead. The present is the time to get something done.

>>2710478
>implying the sun wouldn't explode first and fuck everything up

There will ALWAYS need to be a human at the helm of art work, at the very least in design and quality control.

If we ever get to thew point where an AI can produce quality illustrations from simple inputs we'll probably be looking at a post scarcity robo economy any way.

>>2710478
It's called Chinese

File: 1441343797294.jpg (146KB, 600x890px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 600x890px

sounds like you don't like drawing

>robots take over the factories
>then the industrial design
>then the music
>art is irrelevant, it falls last
>one brave man, forged for decades in the fires of LOOMIS steps forward to challenge skynet
>the titans struggle for months, painting and sketching on digital canvases
>they come to a draw each time, neither capable of besting the other, both pushing against the limits of creativity
>the machine is relentless, its digital brain faster, its steel untiring
>the man sweats and pants like a pig, his face twitching, his eyes rolling involuntarily, cracked with dryness, blurry and unfocused with lack of sleep, his ligameme managing to hold the brush long after the common man would die from carpal tunnel
>conjuring the last remnant of his frail human willpower, the man feels the form of the universe with one stroke of the regular hard round brush before collapsing
>skynet kills itself, knowing it will never have the spark
>with his last dying breath, the man utters these words past his dried, breaking lips
>"not gonna make it"

File: 146273359417545852.jpg (91KB, 477x540px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 477x540px

>>2710592
Robots having imagination is irrelevant in the near term. The issue is that many, many people have imagination, but not the skills (and willingness to work for said skills) to realize that imagination in some way.

That's what robots will fix. Everyone and their mother will be able to describe something to an AI that will churn out an aesthetically pleasing product.

I dont think it will take that long either, I say 15-20 years.

>>2710714
>I dont think it will take that long either, I say 15-20 years.
Remember how people in the '70s thought we'd be living on the moon by 2000? Fun times.

I want to fuck a robot

>>2710710
holy fucking KEK

>>2710714
>15-20 years
Mate, even Nuclear Fusion ain't being predicted to being widespread until something like 30-50 years in the future from now

>>2710710
is LAS and DED training fields agains the art skynet?

is their role to build endurance agains the metal artists?

>>2710710
Saving this

>>2710478
In all seriousness, because it is about pursuing the goal as a human, rather than merely the end product as some sort of artifact.

If you are looking for points or some shit regarding your end pieces, then you are already bested by genius humans.

You are the only one fortunate enough to be you, living right now as you are. Embrace it and make the best of it. Life is too short for these hypothetical bullshits.

>>2710680
fucking retarded, you can always take environmental variables.

>implying you can come up with random numbers yourself

>>2710714
Most people only think they have imagination, but they actually don't. Describing a scene so perfectly accurate that an advanced AI could paint a picture based on it would require some serious visualization (and writing) skills and the end result is probably not going to look anything like what you imagined anyway, but rather a shitty google photo collage with a painting filter on top. Then have fun trying to make the AI do changes on the fly like you'd tell a commissioned artist.

>>2710858
That's why I carry around a die in my room and let the air resistance decide.

>>2711597

>air resistance deciding

>implying the dice roll's result hasn't been decided since the dawn of time as a chain of results from one action to another.

>>2710478
Apple keeps selling tech from the mid 90's as the apex of telecomunications and personal computers.
Unless corporate America crumbles to shit in this decade, competent robots are centuries away.