>>17717362>simply generating an AI picture would immediately render the entire field of logo designers useless and put them out of workThat's literally the part of the job description I'm asking you to justify
>logo designas opposed to
>image manipulation and processingbut you're afraid to have the discussion because you think it's a losing argument. And it probably is but that's not the point.
Coming to a producer with your favorite AI-generated beat, after you've already picked from 30 others you made and didn't like as much, and asking him to recreate it, track it all out, so you can make a proper song with it, isn't going to be the same as paying that same producer hundreds/thousands of dollars to create a custom beat just for you. The producer will have a certain attachment to the beat THEY created, which could lend to more improvements and involvement in the future when the vocal recording process (or later, mixing/mastering phase) is underway.
Logo design is a good line in the sand because logos are art but they're also supremely useful to differentiate businesses from each other. Drawing a painting of a dog for me to hang up on my wall isn't useful to differentiate my house from others. Companies can and will sue each other over logos that look to similar, individuals don't file suit because their dog painting looks too similar to someone else's. It's a great starting point to figuring out what limitations and protections we should implement for AI images and soon videos, which are going to put even more creatives out of business.
If the best representative for creatives are going to be people like you, you're in a world of shit. You've done absolutely nothing to convince me to fight on your side against widescale implementation, you've done the opposite, I want all you fuckers to go out of business if you're all going to act like such cocksuckers when asked to justify your continued employment.
