https://recordcollectorma...0-years-on

.

Decent article with some nice quotes and stories, but most of the illustrations with the article are horrible AI generated crap.

.

.

.

.

bizzie said:

https://recordcollectorma...0-years-on

.

Decent article with some nice quotes and stories, but most of the illustrations with the article are horrible AI generated crap.

.

.

.

.

just got it today and agreed

(especialy about the cringe Ai art!!)

bizzie said:

most of the illustrations with the article are horrible AI generated crap.

Indeed. The second one, in particular, is awful.

[Edited 1/22/26 13:44pm]

bizzie said:

https://recordcollectorma...0-years-on

.

Decent article with some nice quotes and stories, but most of the illustrations with the article are horrible AI generated crap.

.

.
Record Collector is a respected magazine with history – I can't believe they would go as low as featuring AI-generated images. I mean, the article is about two of the most photographed people of the 20th century, not about Bigfoot...
Is this going to be the norm for self-respecting publications too?

Ugh. Why would they do fake photos like that?

Kares said:

bizzie said:

https://recordcollectorma...0-years-on

.

Decent article with some nice quotes and stories, but most of the illustrations with the article are horrible AI generated crap.

.

.
Record Collector is a respected magazine with history – I can't believe they would go as low as featuring AI-generated images. I mean, the article is about two of the most photographed people of the 20th century, not about Bigfoot...
Is this going to be the norm for self-respecting publications too?

exactly, I expect this from low-qaulity 'music' magazines like Rolling Stone, not from Record Collector.

Leave it.

The AI imagery is something that i see like bad handpainted artwork.

The third one is for me even as bad as a drawing.

Say what you want about AI, it's NOT going away, and we old MF's can keep on complaining as much as we want.

I for one am open to it. Let it all come. I can still chose what i like or not.

-

I'm pretty sure that Prince as well as Bowie seprately would play and fool around with AI.

Especially Bowie, even more than Prince i think... (IMHO).

Vannormal said:

Leave it.

The AI imagery is something that i see like bad handpainted artwork.

The third one is for me even as bad as a drawing.

Say what you want about AI, it's NOT going away, and we old MF's can keep on complaining as much as we want.

I for one am open to it. Let it all come. I can still chose what i like or not.

-

I'm pretty sure that Prince as well as Bowie seprately would play and fool around with AI.

Especially Bowie, even more than Prince i think... (IMHO).

Well, your humble opinion is wrong. Both were authentic musicians. They would both absolutely hate the idea of entering prompts to have AI create what they both authentically created.

And yeah, I'm an old MFer, but I'm also a traditional visual artist. AI is just another way of letting something else do all of the work so that the playing field is equal for anyone and everyone.

Well, it's not going away.

That's for sure.

I don't see any reason to be against any form of technological progress.

For sure there's a lot of crap and bullshit being made. I agree.

For now, I'll just sit back and let it all the low-life-fun and fakeness pass me by.

-

Shame Bowie isn't among us anymore.

He would've had his very own interesting thought on it.

Certainly in the use of a creative way.

Even more than Prince I think.

Just my thoughts.

Vannormal said:

The AI imagery is something that i see like bad handpainted artwork.

Except bad handpainted artwork takes at least some kind of effort. AI-generated crap doesn't. So there's an abundance of AI-generated crap. The important thing: it doesn't need to be that way. You don't have to be complacent about it.

olb99 said:

Vannormal said:

The AI imagery is something that i see like bad handpainted artwork.

Except bad handpainted artwork takes at least some kind of effort. AI-generated crap doesn't. So there's an abundance of AI-generated crap. The important thing: it doesn't need to be that way. You don't have to be complacent about it.

Sorry. To me, it's often an equal bad taste effort.

But that's worth another debate.

-

For sure, no one should just accept it, that's precisely the point.

But being completely opposed to it, is obviously pointless, knowing that AI has been present in our everyday lives for over tow decades now.

So, the fast popular visual results that everyone is talking about here are indeed pure nonsense and downright simple and mostly reprehensible, form an approching-art standpoint of view.

But that too will change, because most people who create these kinds of visuals are simply not creative, and are all too happy to use this as a quick fix.

These visuals are usually flat, from a male (masculine) point of view.

Often vulgar and downrigth stupid, I agree.

In the porn industry AI was obviously an instant hit, nuff said, right?

This kind of quick commercial tastelessness always demands attention first.

Quality always prevails in the long run, that's what ithink.

Again, such a pitty that great creative minds like Prince or Bowie aren't amonst us anymore.

WHo else in the popular music scene is capable of transforming and using AI into something worth while these days... Gaga? The alternative indie scene? Young artists maybe?

I can't wait.

Robbie WIlliams video for Pretty Face seems AI driven.

I like that, for exaple, if it's the case.

.

.

.

I can live with the idea of that first picture. Nice idea. We all know it's just a simple assemblage of two excisting pictures. Still could've been done so much better, with some information added to it.

The second is awefull and plain ugly.

The drawing is shit (to me). Bowie was a bit taler thatn Prince by the way, no?

Propably this drawing is aso AI.

Vannormal said:

But that's worth another debate.

Indeed, we should debate this until we're sick and tired of it. I mean, not necessarily here on the Org, but generally speaking. We're facing technologies that have the power to destroy humanity. This is not hyperbole. And if you think it is, listen to what people such as Tristan Harris have to say. At the same time, I'm not necessarily a "doomer", whatever that means nowadays. I'm pretty sure the same technologies that can destroy humanity can also save it. Anyway, all this to say that this is not the end of the world if Record Collector uses AI-generated slop. It's just... disappointing and kind of sad.

[Edited 1/30/26 9:20am]

olb99 said:

My main issue with AI, other than the fact that it always looks shit, is that it's driving up the price of PC components and I wanted to upgrade my PC this year but with rising costs, I probably won't be able to do that. Thank Christ I upgraded my RAM last year though.

Vannormal said:

WHo else in the popular music scene is capable of transforming and using AI into something worth while these days... Gaga?

Tears For Fears & Duran Duran have released A.I. music videos on their most recent albums. I think Peter Jackson used it on The Beatles Get Back (the new version of the 1970 Let It Be movie) on Disney+. The new remastered version of Free As A Bird also used AI on John Lennon's vocals, so did the new song Then And Now. John's vocals are real, but the AI got rid of the cassette noise from the demo. Before he passed, James Earl Jones gave Disney permission to use AI of his voice for any future use of Darth Vader.