Pretty astoundingly clueless take from the author of the article:
Procreate’s statements may align it with some gen-AI critical artists, but it is in my view, a little odd and inconsistent of a stand to take for a brand that readily embraced other disruptive tech — such as touchscreens and styluses and pixels — that also competes with more traditional art techniques (e.g. painting or drawing on paper).
In addition, the idea that by rejecting gen AI, Procreate is supporting “human creativity” is a little bit of a straw man argument to me, since humans also still need to enter the prompts and adjust them — sometimes many times — to create images with gen AI applications as well. Even in the case of gen AI software, humans are still driving it.
Oof. I like how they always seem to ignore the insane amount of human created art that goes in to creating these models that is uncredited and uncompensated.
Yeah but what about the time it takes to write “big titty anime girl, digital art” into the prompt field? That’s a lot of creative work apparently!
