Fantasy Art, AI Images, and Where We're Probably Going With It: Part II
Last week, I gave some interesting examples of how Google Gemini, for example, can be used to create some passable fantasy art with little prompting. I talked about how a content creator, with adequate knowledge of how AI prompts actually work, could probably generate fantasy art on a production scale and at a level of quality no real world artist could match.
As I pointed out, WOTC is doing it although they’ve repeatedly sworn off the stuff like a wino church member. Look for other big companies to follow suit; my guess is Paizo will (though I really hope they don’t) because they’re in a money crunch after getting royally shafted by Diamond Distributors.
Now that I caught your attention last week, here’s my personal opinion on why creators geared toward fantasy works should avoid AI like the plague.
Drawn by Erol Otus
Above is the weapon rack from the Moldvay D&D Basic rule book.
That’s where I started.
Literally.
I originally thought D&D was too weird for me, but that image is the one that forced me to take a closer look at the game.
Drawn by the legendary Erol Otus, it drove home to me a fundamental aspect of D&D and fantasy RPGs in general: you can affect the game world through your actions… in this case through picking up a heavy weapon and defeating something with it and gaining something from that.
Let’s face it: Erol’s art was sort of weird. Nothing looked natural. Everyone had weird helmets and those sock-like boots. You really didn’t want to real world meet up with anyone depicted in his art.
There were other artists with TSR at the time who were technically better (Trampier and Easley come to mind right off). However, Erol Otus had the ability to draw weird scenes and convey the gravity of the situation depicted in a special way that others couldn’t quite meet.
AI can’t do that. AI will never do that, and the reason it never will is because AI cannot create… it can only emulate.
AI art can be technically superior and come out faster, but it will never be able to reach human emotions in the way a human artist can.
Once, there was a professional photographer named William Mortensen. Ever heard of him? No? I’ll bet you’ve heard of Ansel Adams though, right?
The reason you’ve never heard of Mortensen is because Adams hated his guts and got him essentially blackballed. That’s a whole other story.
Mortensen was well known at one time… well known for composing professional images which were subconsciously disturbing. He even wrote a book about his technique for compositing shots titled The Command To Look. It was out of print for decades, but Feral House Press brought it back. If you’re an artist, it’s well worth the read.
Mortensen laid out several aspects of art that instantly capture the attention of the viewer and force emotions upon him.
Read the techniques Mortensen used to evoke emotions from his viewers, and see how many you can find in this image.
AI can’t do that. AI cannot create images that reach into the primal emotions of the viewer.
Again, it cannot create, it can only emulate.
And damned few artists can really create, while we’re on the subject. Take a stroll through the ninety gazillion splat books TSR churned out for 2nd Edition AD&D; the art work is, by and large, atrocious and uninspiring… so having a human hand in the creation is no guarantee either.
That crap wasn’t exactly flying off the shelves either; it would sit there for months at a time before Waldenbooks finally sent it back to Random House.
In the end though, as I pointed out last week, fantasy AI art is unfortunately here to stay. It’s here to stay because it must be. Production companies with a lot of money at stake will be forced to churn out more material to market for their customers at an increasing rate (that’s what killed TSR, by the way) and that will call for short cuts.
And short cuts usually wind up being the longest route.
As usual, the comment section is open to anyone who would like to voice their opinions on this subject, so feel free to chime in.