You can “bespoke” abstract reusable image if you want.
But the AI output engine doesn’t.
maintaining a catalog with a huge amount of “not quite fit but might be good enough images” isn’t free either
It is significantly cheaper and less energy intensive than generating new images on demand. That’s before you get into AI images as the same quality of “not quite fit but might be good enough images”
A human drawing a thumbnail in 15 minutes consumes 0.025 kWh. An AI creating an image consumes between 0.06 and 0.3 kWh, so between 3 and 12 times as much. Both have massive supply chains that go into producing and maintaining them.
15 minutes is crazy fast and assumes they just get exactly what they want first go. You need to factor in running your PC using Photoshop or equivalent, which is fairly resource intensive, sustained over what is realistically 40-60 minutes at best, sourcing assets from servers which are using energy to serve the images. Compared with AI which has high usage for sure but it’s extremely short bursts.
I don’t really have a horse in this race eitherway, but what about finding a person who can draw a decent looking thumbnail in 15 minutes? Probably that’s gonna be using various webservices such as fiverr or something along the way?
But the whole idea of comparing them is kinda funny. As if that human would just be turned off and not consuming any energy if they weren’t making a thumbnail for your blog. Though maybe they’ll make a cup of coffee they wouldn’t have otherwise before getting to work. You never know!
deleted by creator
Stock images can be used over and over and over and over…
deleted by creator
Isn’t the whole thing about AI that it generates “bespoke” images on demand rather than pulling from a prearranged catalog?
deleted by creator
But the AI output engine doesn’t.
It is significantly cheaper and less energy intensive than generating new images on demand. That’s before you get into AI images as the same quality of “not quite fit but might be good enough images”
Mental gymnastics
deleted by creator
We can admit that that is not the appeal of AI image generation and does/will not happen very often
A human drawing a thumbnail in 15 minutes consumes 0.025 kWh. An AI creating an image consumes between 0.06 and 0.3 kWh, so between 3 and 12 times as much. Both have massive supply chains that go into producing and maintaining them.
15 minutes is crazy fast and assumes they just get exactly what they want first go. You need to factor in running your PC using Photoshop or equivalent, which is fairly resource intensive, sustained over what is realistically 40-60 minutes at best, sourcing assets from servers which are using energy to serve the images. Compared with AI which has high usage for sure but it’s extremely short bursts.
I don’t really have a horse in this race eitherway, but what about finding a person who can draw a decent looking thumbnail in 15 minutes? Probably that’s gonna be using various webservices such as fiverr or something along the way?
But the whole idea of comparing them is kinda funny. As if that human would just be turned off and not consuming any energy if they weren’t making a thumbnail for your blog. Though maybe they’ll make a cup of coffee they wouldn’t have otherwise before getting to work. You never know!
Everyone is a NPC, they only activate when you’re close to them or when you contact them, otherwise they are in standby mode
Not to mention the power requirements for transferring funds digitally
Photography exists!
Are you saying paying a photographer to travel and take a photo uses less resources?
You’re doing very complex mental gymnastics just to simp for AI friend
Well, no. I’m just unwilling to handwave the associated costs like you are.
deleted by creator