>The four-panel comic shared by Ammaar Reshi featured Batman rushing to save Robin from the menacing Joker. The style of the comic appeared to draw inspiration from artists Brian Bolland and Mike Allred.
>Some comic book artists expressed their dissatisfaction with the “A.I. art” creation. Javier Rodriguez compared it to cutting and pasting other comic books into a new one, questioning its authenticity. Ramon Villalobos mocked the results of the comic, while Daniel Kibblesmith also made jest of it.
>Comic book writer Sarah Horrocks called out the use of Brian Bolland’s work, highlighting its lack of originality.
>Justine Bateman, a former actor and vocal opponent of A.I. usage in the arts, pointed out the need for legal protection of such usage in the future. She emphasized that DC, the publisher of Batman comics, must take action to safeguard against unauthorized utilization of established artists’ work.
https://asumetech.com/controversy-erupts-over-batman-comic-created-by-a-i-art-comic-artists-and-fans-react/?amp
 Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68 |
 UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68 |
This is the same guy who sold the controversial AI children’s book last year
Oh it's this gay
Literal manufactured outrage.
Im still surprised this AI stuff has managed to get this far.
Building your platform off copyrighted images seems like something that should have been shut down fast
Looking at an image and remembering what it looks like isn't illegal.
>your honor I didn't use a reference therefore no copyright infringement
It's not illegal to draw Batman.
No but it might be illegal to make the Infinite Batman Drawing Machine and start monetizing it
It's not illegal to sell pencils.
Imagine spending all your time making a pencil that can’t make anything you can actually copyright
>Imagine spending all your time making a pencil that can’t make anything you can actually copyright
What is with the goalpost moving here? First it was AI will never be good at drawing, then it's THIS IS ILLEGAL BECAUSE OK, then YOU CAN"T MAKE A MACHINE TO DO WHAT ARTISTS DO B-BECAUSE OK, and now you've resorted to BUT YOU CAN"T COPYRIGHT IT WHY ARE YOU MAKING YOUR OWN ART FOR YOUR OWN USE.
This has become seriously pathetic.
>”Y-YOU ARE IN ALL CAPS AND SILLY, I AM SMART!!! GOALPOSTING”
Cope. Seethe. Dilate. None of it is good. None of it is legal to make your business off of. Your only cheerleaders are desperate for attention Indians and Elon Musk. good luck with that.
I don't give a shit about copyright. If Disney lost all its copyrights tomorrow I would be filled with joy, undeserving necrotic company.
Before the AI haters started whining I wanted to end copyright, so shut up with acting like this is an ultimate answer
> he drew it
> he didn't use a Microsoft product that embedded a copyrighted property on its model without the license to do so
I't is if you can cause confusion about what you're doing and the actual official product, I guess your only defense would be that AI it's so shit no sane human being could ever confuse it with the real stuff
Ah but what about humans that aren't sane?
I never imagined I'd see people unironically defend corporations just because of their massive hate boner for AI.
They're not defending corporations. Copyright is an automatic status conferred by the act of producing a new work, not something corporations generate. It exists for the purpose of protecting the rights of creators so they can profit from their efforts while barring others from doing so.
They're not remotely comparable. The AI copyright issue begins and ends with the fact that AI is infringing on material it literally does not have the right to use, and it is directed to do so by actors who are definitely open to standard prosecution. This isn't new technology, it's just a new way to commit theft that will take a little time for legal systems to adjust to.
>They're not remotely comparable.
The fact that you can't see that they are is exactly why luddites keep losing this argument over and over and over throughout history.
no ammount of screaming luddite will make
ok.
>please let our billionarie company use and monetize your private data and personal work, you aren't against progress are you?
frick off.
Let me know when you get to Bargaining.
man this shit can't even enter the entertainment industry because people aren't entertained by fricking AI.
Who the frick is going to watch a John Wick movie where Keanu is entirely AI generated? would you pay money for that shit? because I wound't., Who the frick will pay to see a basketball match that is all entirely AI generated? shit is fake, Why the frick would I pay to go to a concert where there is no singer, shit is all AI generated? even fricking vocaloid has artists behind it.
It's all like a tech investor scam fundamentally not understanding why people even like things to begin with.
I'm betting that there's shit that will be entirely ai generated that will sell. I mean hatsune miku is a thing. Skibidi toilet is a thing.
There's also going to be a massive flood of cheap, shitty AI garbage that nobody wants.
>hatsune miku
>Software voicebanks are the same as AI generation
>PressXtoDoubt.jpg
>Skibidi toilet
>ai generated
>What is Gmod?
>What is SFM?
>It's all like a tech investor scam fundamentally not understanding why people even like things to begin with.
To add to this, there's also fact that these tech companies and investors have spent decades pushing this type of stuff yet they're so out of touch they still can't ever convey how ML technology would be implemented to replace people who do work which that requires specific directions and ingenuity. Unlike computers, human beings deal with everchanging variables on a regular basis when doing most tasks.
"AI art" won't take off for the same reason "ai programming" and "self-driving cars" won't take off.
Please please tell me who on Earth said that AI artwork will have no human involvement whatsoever
That's your straw man because you know that your position is indefensible
>That’s not a place you want to be if you’re stalking your future on this.
Lmao at your blacklisting from the comics in animation Industries threat. Guess what buddy they've been pissing me off about that subject for so long I've got them whining and crying rn. That culture is DOOMED.
1. I draw, if you need to assume that I don't then your position doesn't work just from that one fact 2. Artists also extrapolate from information they've picked up from real life and the work of other artists
Again, the industry doesn't want people learning from anything before Gravity Falls, they have the SAME ATTITUDE about both humans and AI learning
I think you’re blacklisted because you confessed to raping your niece, if they’re even aware of you.
If you’re not Anthony and are just LARPing as him, please stop. There is no honor in it even for shitposting standards.
It's if you use a pre -existing image and just touch it up in Photoshop to make it look slightly different then try to pawn it off as your own.
Which is essentially what AI art is. It would be different if they taught a machine how to draw and asked it to do things, but this is literally insane manipulation of an ending copyrighted property.
The difference is a human copying the art and create something new while AI just steals it and copy&paste stuff together.
Besides artists who trace stuff from other artists and dont point out that this is a homage gets shit on for tracing or stealing.
You know Greg Land?
Greg land is good for other reasons.
His dynamic compositions and angles were different at the time, it sold comics just on how it looked.
Not everything needs to be good anatomy and perfect draftsmanship, it's not the only skill in drawing.
I dont mind his tracing but he is going the easy way. And it feels like a develution from his earlier work.
Thats probably what the companies fostered.
>but he is going the easy way.
Work on art for 20 hours
Work on it for 2
It will still cost the same in the comic, you will get the same pay, and people will read past it just as fast.
But the 2 hour art will never be touched again. Alex Ross or Kirbys art and comics are still read.
I agree that this also i,ploes the wroter is good.
His dynamic compositions were copied from other artists. He copied McFarland and Liefield in particular.
>AI just steals it and copy&paste stuff together.
the more you subhuman troony morons keep repeating that lie, the less sympathy you're gonna get from me
Sure it doesnt look like pic with just paste on Allred astonished mouth. I didnt read his comic but the possibility that a similar reaction panel exist is very high!
if you think these models just copy and paste from preexisting images like a collage tool then i'm afraid you've got Black person tier IQ
good morning moron
Sure dude
Good morning baiter(s)
This. Seriously, learning what latent diffusion is and how it works is a 2 second Google search away. At this point, it's womanish stubbornness.
Explain it then
AI training process for dummies:
>take a preexisting image and describe it
>create versions with various amounts of noise, from adding a few random pixels to turning it into an unrecognizable mass of pixels
>use it to train AI into recognizing the original image from the versions with noise and given description
Image generation process turns description and random noise into a picture, going through a number of iterations that fix the picture by a couple of pixels per step.
It is a glorified pattern recognition, which determines if it is more probable for 0 or 1 to be in a given sequence.
>>take a preexisting image
gg no re
more of a fair use than posting said image as a single frame on a random YouTube video
I think they tolerated Greg Land because he worked with their ridiculous demands and did whatever they said without ever having an independent thought. They dont really care about the ethics of the artist as long as he turns in something.
Just like Ewing and his screaming antisemitism.
Machines don't have the same rights as humans
No one is trying to sell AI created stuff because they know it's on incredibly shaky legal ground.
>Building your platform off copyrighted images seems like something that should have been shut down fast
Yeah, Getty has been riding that wave for too damn long.
Holy shit. I bet stock image sites are the biggest ones against this, more than any artist, writer, voice actor could ever combined. They already hate magic erasers for stock photos.
Fair use. It's not illegal to produce art of copyrighted characters, it's illegal to sell it. And honestly that's only illegal contextually. If I pay an artist to draw a picture of a copyrighted character sucking wieners, did we just violate copyright? I dunno but if so we are in a bit of trouble.
shit, if ANYTHING, the real author is the AI. Why didn't his b***hass give it the credit it deserves, seeing how willingly he shills it?
Punchable
it may help his case if he didnt wear such a shit eating grin
It's the pajeet way.
AItrannies never change
>y-yes I want to copyright my shitty tumblr art style, but you're the troony here!!!
There’s something to say about this new wave of soulless husk attention prostitutes who very blatantly put out and make shit that they know nobody likes, but still wear a shit eating grin and act like they’re the next Steve Jobs for inventing the infinite plagiarism machine. All while paying Daddy Elon to use Twitter.
Shut up troony
I'm already putting it into my webcomic, which is going to involve AI development anyway.
If you can't figure out how AI is going to contribute to an artist's work, you just lack imagination.
And you act like every single industry artist spends a decade studying the fine details of classic creators, when in reality they just copy a superficial social media style and in fact they often hate creators of the past. Your rhetorical meritocracy tactic will be dismissed
Yes yes, we all know AI is the only thing that will make your “raping my niece” bio drama comics, you don’t have to tell us twice Guy
Now they should try to draw another panel where the created poctures still use the same design for Btaman, Joker, Robin and the Batmobile.
The big odss are that the Batmobile will look different in each panel.
>Now they should try to draw another panel where the created poctures still use the same design for Btaman, Joker, Robin and the Batmobile.
>The big odss are that the Batmobile will look different in each panel.
And it will always be like that, because AI will never advance to the point where it can consistently replicate the same design across multiple angles.
>always
>never
look, dude, I hate improper use of AI as anybody else, but you should really avoid saying embarrassing shit that won't last.
Yeah bro be careful what you say here! your words on this anonymous image board will come back to haunt you, everyone's gonna make fun of you for being soooooooo wrong in the future
indeedy.
You have a point with adding an asterix for at the moment and possible for the near future. But you can see that anon was about how it doesnt show any solution in the near future
>And it will always be like that, because AI will never advance to the point where it can consistently replicate the same design across multiple angles.
Why not?
>Why not?
Because I said so!
Indeed, it will always make it anew. If your promp said frog perspective of batmobile it will take batman adventures design because the comics never had a frog perspective.
souless tasteless shit that they can't see as bad because "muh technology!" blinds them
It is honestly impressive that it managed to copy Bolland’s style.
why is it always indians
They like to compensate their skill by doing it for pennies.
AI lost.
Bitcoin lost.
Altcoins lost.
NFTs lost.
VR lost.
AR lost.
Metaverse lost.
The Google Play Card has been redeemed.
Quit hating the future just because you hated yours, troony
Whatever you call it is better than how industry artwork looks. With some cleanup you're easily going to be doing better than "Batman rants at you about being a white man who should give away his money"
I'm more passionate when it comes to Future haters
>Whatever you call it is better than how industry artwork looks.
That doesn't matter. It still looks like shit even if real artists draw other shit so it's worthless. Start shilling it when it doesn't look like shit And anyways I don't read normie comics because I have standards.
>AI lost.
...No.
>Bitcoin lost.
The bubble still hasn't burst, so no.
>Altcoins lost.
Ethereum is more widely used than Bitcoin at the point, so no.
>NFTs lost.
This is really the only one that is true. NFTs are fundamentally stupid and they're no longer something anyone wants to associate with unless they're deliberately trying to be edgy or trolling. This is mostly a strawman when trying to argue with Pro-AI people though, especially on Cinemaphile where not a single person is actually into NFTs.
>VR lost.
Not really, it just hasn't gained much popularity over time. But people still use it and the technology is advancing even if the average consumer is someone who wants to have gay ERP sex in VRChat. VR could be improved through FDVR in the future with the assistance of AI.
>AR lost.
Same as above. It's not really able to be implemented properly yet with our current technology.
>Metaverse lost.
I don't really know much about Zuckerberg's "Metaverse" besides the fact that no one uses it, but if you define "metaverse" as a sort of term for any virtual world, it's never lost. Even in the early internet "metaverses" were a thing, and VRML paved the way for MMOs which are still popular today. Roblox for example is the most widely used virtual world program thing that has ever existed and only continues to grow.
GOOD MORNING SIR
>>>AR lost.
>Same as above. It's not really able to be implemented properly yet with our current technology.
The tech isn't the problem
The human body can't tolerate the dissonance between the image of moving around vs the reality of being in a single spot for more than an hour or so.
Honestly we should simply be halting tech development and tech sector profits untill the mess that society has turned into is cleaned up.
Frick investor hype, frick making company CEOs even more billionary, these idiots don't need any more money.
why the frick are we spending resources and precious, expensive energy on fricking generative AI when you can barely walk on a big city like LA or NY and not see a horde of Black folk and crack addicts thrown to the pavement like fricking zombies.
You frickers can't pay for colelge without getting in debt for life, you frickers can't pay for rent in a decent place, you frickers can't get a job after spending all your money on the college scam because now "progress" demands all intellectual jobs to be replaced by AI.
frick this society, frick progress and frick the idiots trying to make this shit a thing, progress is making sure people can get jobs and a living wage by producing shit that valuable on society.
none of that shit is progress, bitcoin ,NFT, VR, AI, Metaverse, it's all a fricking scam, only smoke to make tech companies extract more money from society while producing ABSOLUTELY FRICKING NOTHING in return.
>Honestly we should simply be halting tech development and tech sector profits untill the mess that society has turned into is cleaned up.
This is the same argument that luddites have been making and losing for 10,000 years.
The same homosexuals who unironically argued against the space program, screaming NO MORE SPENDING MONEY 'OUT THERE' UNTIL WE FIX ALL OUR PROBLEMS 'DOWN HERE', while obliviously using technologies developed or perfected as a result of the space program are the same homosexuals screaming that we should just stop all fricking technological progress until a fricking miracle occurs and all our problems somehow miraculously fix themselves.
>why the frick are we spending resources and precious, expensive energy on fricking generative AI when you can barely walk on a big city like LA or NY and not see a horde of Black folk and crack addicts thrown to the pavement like fricking zombies
Throwing money at "solving" that would do nothing. Our treasonous political class does the bidding of stateless capital and the globalist business class. The collapse of our systems can only be turned around by the end of their dominance before the Global Barrio is in place. And the prospects for that ain't looking great. What machine draws some fricking superhero kiddie shit is of less than no consequence.
>four random assorted images
>joker grows a third row of teeth in his laughing panels
>a car that is about to ram Batman in the first panel
>joker growing some random abstraction out of his chest
>the broken mess of cars in the back of the batmobile
Dude frick this homosexual and all the other AI-shills. Its all a bunch of "BUY OUR MODEL NOW LOOK AT THE RANDOM CRAP IT CANT GENERATE DONT THINK JUST BUY"
Id feel confident about this crap not replacing good artists and storytellers if it wasnt for the fact that executives are so out of touch that the promise of saving a couple of bucks is enough to sway them.
>ammaar reshii
Oh, it's this guy again doing the same "I just made [X] in just [amount of time] using AI programs" shit, and it's always just a bunch inconsistent and nearly unrelated images put together.
>muh controversy
This is the type of individual who can only ever hope to get attention by spreading his asscheeks in public and shitting everywhere because he has no skill or ambition to do anything meaningful or beneficial to society. The only way to get them to frick off is to ignore them.
>AI shit
>3k+ likes
Frick off Twitter. Frick off.
This trend is going to die faster than NFT
>This trend is going to die faster than NFT
Nope, artist jobs are going to be taken out back and put out of their misery though. It's the best thing that's ever happened.
Realistically, they'll be on the same tier as those free assets from the Unity store or royalty-free game models. It's looks glamorous at first, but its the smaller imperfections and lack of consistency is what's drawing it back. It's a cheap thrill because it's cheapy made, and monetizing it openly is going to open a lot of legal clusterfricks.
The Diffusion Models still needs human-made art improve itself, so saying "You're going get replaced" isn't the smartest thing to say to artists who will fight tooth and nail against this form of image generation. Unless you just outright steal other people's work.
It's a neat gimmick and all, good for a laugh and low-effort memeing, but I also feel like it's going to go as fast as it came. It maybe free now, but it's not as "free" as you think it is.
Lmao animation person it's obvious that you're gearing your rhetoric to grooming Zoomies on social media, might want to put on a fig leaf
>It's a neat gimmick and all, good for a laugh and low-effort memeing, but I also feel like it's going to go as fast as it came.
So the future is just going to stop and technology will cease. Hilarious.
>Unless you just outright steal other people's work.
Learning == theft, going to keep saying this until y'all give up on your greed motivated nonsense
> So the future is just going to stop and technology will cease. Hilarious.
People won't allow their paid work to be scrapped so it can be monetized by companies, it's not going to fly.
like it or not considering AI depends on artists, and it still can't be copyrighted, artists are the cultural gatekeepers to the acceptane of AI in professional fields, if they don't want it used it won't be used, simple as.
It's not the future, it's simply tech used as an attempt to use people's work while circunventing paying for it, once regulators stipulate the fees and royalites that must be paid, the taxes that companies using AI will pay, the illusion of the economic advantage will vanish in the blink of an eye.
>People won't allow their paid work to be scrapped so it can be monetized by companies, it's not going to fly.
As use of low rank adaptive models (LoRAs) to fine-tune production of broader AI engines increases, we're eventually going to see companies look at hiring artists to produce proprietary training material. They'll convince the courts that the use of materials made and copyrighted by artists (or companies hiring artists) to produce fine-tuning models will be just enough human involvement in the process to make the produced materials copyrightable as well, and then the arms race will be on between studios
>artists are the cultural gatekeepers to the acceptane of AI in professional fields
Not really. Even if artists dig in their heels the technological knowledge for effective deep machine learning is out there and literally every other field is figuring out how to take advantage of it now, rather than resist it.
>once regulators stipulate the fees and royalites that must be paid, the taxes that companies using AI will pay, the illusion of the economic advantage will vanish in the blink of an eye.
The use or attempt to use government regulation or political pressure to try and impede new technologies in the market has literally never succeeded in the history of human civilization. It didn't work for the textile workers in the 19th century, it didn't work for the 'friend of the farmer' politicians who tried to ban tractors in the early 20th century, it didn't work for all the auto workers who tried to oppose robotization in vehicle manufacturing, it's not going to work now. What artists *should* be doing right now is trying to figure out how to adapt to the new normal, not dying on a hill trying to oppose technological advancement.
> we're eventually going to see companies look at hiring artists to produce proprietary training material.
> will be just enough human involvement in the process to make the produced materials copyrightable as well
good luck with that, considering every single fine tunning needs a base model that used billions of copyrighted work to even be able to function, by the time word is out that you are using one of these massive models the number of lawsuits will be just enough to burry your company in litigation before you even have a chance to pledge fair use.
> The use or attempt to use government regulation or political pressure to try and impede new technologies in the market has literally never succeeded in the history of human civilization.
Tell that to Napser, did it prevent P2P protocols from becoming a thing? hell no, but it nipped their monetization scheme in the bud, if your bussines model is stealing to derive profit from it, it's just a matter of time before regulation cracks down, with AI is the same, you will have the tech, but you won't be using it the way it is now.
Shutterstock is trying to lower the compensation for using a photo from $0.20 for photographers to $0.0078 per photo used on AI, considering the existing licenses never allowed for this use, and considering none of the photographers ever agreed for an opt-in of this use, they are simply fricked The monetary gain from AI comes simply from the wrong assumption that companies don't have to pay for the private data they used to train it, some people are naive enough to believe this will work, most can see the shaky legal ground from miles.
The entire bussiness model of gen-ai is thieft, and people don't like being stolen from. if you think the EU, USA, Australia are going to throw away their entire legal copyright framework that supports the billionaire entertainment industry so that a few tech startups can make a quick buck, I have a bridge in the moon to sell you.
The argument for copyright claims against the baseline models becomes legally flimsier and flimsier the larger the training library becomes. When the training set was a few million images, mostly scraped from people's deviantart pages or photo archives, to the point where 99% of the images that were being generated would have crude facsimiles of artist's signatures or watermarks showing up in the image - yeah, absolutely. But that's several iterations ago and the training sets for most stuff like DallE or Midjourney are pushing into the billions or tens of billions now. The legal argument becomes moot once you're starting to argue whether your image contributed to pixel #18573 in an image having a blue value of 201.41 instead of 201.43.
Similarly, the argument for copyrighting materials produced solely off of the baseline models also becomes flimsier and flimsier as the model gets bigger. Copyright is very clear when it comes to algorithms and mathematical formulae - even long before the most recent arguments. You can't copyright a method of calculating or programming or executing something, but you *can* copyright specific applications of that algorithm.
As the baseline model has become larger and larger, it requires more and more fine-tuning in order to produce consistently high-quality results and, as I said, that's where a real argument over copyright starts to become viable. LoRAs require significantly less data to fine-tune results than the baseline models do. Small enough sample sizes that an individual artist or studio could very feasibly create in-house training content for a character, setting, aesthetic, etc. and have legal standing for the training material (and content fine-tuned with the models developed on that training material) to be copyrightable.
You may think it sounds scary, but ultimately it's going to be the path that gives artists the most opportunity to still be employable as the technology continues to develop.
Ok, so let's make a mental experiment, if your argument that "it uses so much data that it become ok because it's all dilluted" has any worth.
why don't companies train music AI datasets on the entirety of the Universal Music Group catalog? oh I am pretty sure it would be such an easy legal argument to support.
> Your honor, we used AI on the UMG catalog but it's not copyright infringement when we profit from the generations because -ACK
funny thats exactly what StabilityAI claimed when they said DiscoDiffusion will use only copyright free music on their datasets, because they KNOW they can't use the data from big labels to profit, they are just trying to get away doing it with everyone's else data, since it's so abundant and freely avaliable, why don't we monetize it tehehe? oops we used 5 billion images to build our profit driven AI company, we can't pay for that now can we?
Yeah buddy I've already dedicated myself to destroying the industry's gatekeeping, quit talking to me like I'm a Zoomer. When you speak of those things I don't hear "the hard facts of life", I hear "societal weak points to advance my own interests and the interests of others to have a good future".
I don't give a shit what they think they can "allow", hardly any of these people can actually make things people like, they came into artwork to grasp for control rather than entertain
Go ahead and explain why AI learning from visual libraries is different from humans learning from visual libraries. Mockery isn't going to work, and on top of that the industry culture condemns learning from anything before Gravity Falls, they don't want people to have expensive visual libraries, that's already an established fact.
dude at least use GTP-4 now, these AI talking points are at least one year old now, you're deprecated.
> Yeah buddy I've already dedicated myself to destroying the industry's gatekeeping,
great future you have as prompt engineer, will you open a patreon? will you work at disney lol? funny enough the gatekeeping is so easy to break even a toddler can make art, all you need is a pencil and some paper, AI users will be kept away however, as you are below toddlers in effort and worth.
You don't get why people are entertained at art, you don't get it's purprose, effort, craftsmanship, skill, all these things are what gives art it's value all you need to enter the "gate" is to put some effort on your art so people can admire it.
>muh gatekeeping
just draw homosexual, git gud, a toddler with a crayon can do it, your lazy ass can't.
>why AI learning from visual libraries is different from humans learning from visual libraries.
A machine isn't human. It "learns" by copying and warping the visual data its fed to. An machine cannot make an original image out of nothing. A human mind can draw and create something new and original out of nothing. Without the data, the machine cannot making anything that it can call its own. A machine isn't recognized as an artist, and not everyone is moronic enough to call prompters artists. You can b***h about actual artists gatekeeping until the end of time, but that's not going to change the fact that you need said artists for these machines to make your infinite goyslop.
guy, your shitskinned moron, you haven’t done shit besides rape your niece. take your meds and frick off with your tl;dr bullshit you wannabe industrycuck.
>Learning == theft
>Machines
>Learning
>Data-mining isn't theft
>"going to keep saying this until y'all give up on your greed motivated nonsense"
Okay cowboy Cuck-uss, keep telling yourself that.
>This man only sold 800 copies of his book, most of which was probably from delusional AI losers.
>Theres no real story to be said here
>people are actually going to respond to this with emotion
Pic related is what I think whenever I see someone say AI will never be able to rival human artists.
That's funny, because pic related is more accurate.
Does ‘improvement’ indicate the quality level that AI is at or the rate at which it’s increasing said quality?
AI is done improving, chud. Even though it can now do normal faces and hands and poses and text, it still can't quite arrange them in the most optimal manner, and it will never be able to.
I disagree. AI art has a huge barrier right now that's the sole thing keeping it from being viable for a lot of projects: The fact that it can't maintain consistency between images. What you're seeing right now is a drop in the pond compared to what will happen the moment that weakness is overcome. AI art won't plateau until it hits that milestone.
What’s the big deal about this new AI?
Couldn’t this already be done with the previous AI stuff?
Sort of kinda of
Each one is different in what it can and can't do
It depends on the programmers
Dall-E 3 is a lot better.
Remember all of those "AI imperfections" that anti-AI people would make fun of AI for? Dall-E 3 has already almost gotten rid of them completely
So now artists are back to being scared and extremely butthurt
So post a perfect picture example.
the hands still suck though
>What’s the big deal about this new AI?
For one, all the words in the images look like real English words instead of squiggly dream text or jumbles of quasi-roman characters.
it can do better text, that's about it
I've generated like 200 fetish images of Haruhi Suzumiya getting digital perms over the last several months, using roughly the same prompts. With Dall-E 2, it would take 10-20 images just to get something with the quality of the two on the top. With Dall-E 3, about 50% of the images look like the two on the bottom. Here are some observations:
>Dall-E 2 generated generic anime girls who look nothing like Haruhi. Once in a while you'd get lucky and get one that looked like Yui from K-on, but they absolutely never looked like Haruhi. Dall-E 3 generates girls that look almost like off-model fanart of Haruhi around 75% of the time. Most notably, I've never seen 2 try to incorporate a sailor uniform or yellow ribbon into the design, while Dall-E 3 does it often.
>The curlers are pretty consistently attached to her head now. Before, they were sorta growing out of her head half of the time and looked like bizarre hellscapes the other half.
>Strangely, the prompt specifies the curlers should be black, like a digital perm machine, which Dall-E 2 did consistently. Dall-E 3 ignores this and makes them whatever color it feels like.
>I haven't gotten a single image with Dall-E 3 that looks like a melted abomination
Overall it makes a HUGE difference. I feel like, with enough time, I could eventually generate the image I've been wanting instead of having to settle for whatever is the most coherent.
None of those look like Haruhi though.
Haruhi has tsurime eyes. All those are tareme.
Don't double post to try to make an impression on minds
You're making up a fake masturbatory conversation
+200 messages, eager for more? Because I'm going to be looking up everybody hating on that guy on X to message. Literally all you have to do is stop making comments.
As you can see here AI extrapolates the look of my smaller creatures, from a description in the Bible
Trying to hard. Guy is at least half as unhinged sounding
>there are faces in the bug wing horns
that's kinda cool
They don't, but they get enough details right that you can tell it's attempting to generate Haruhi. That's a HUGE improvement over what it was doing before. It loved generating girls with long black hair and hime cuts before.
None of these look like Haruhi Suzumiya
Dude the bottom two dont look anything like Haruhi, they are still just as generic as hatever DALLE2 shitted out. Is the yellow band that merges with the other crap on her head enough for you?
Dude for all the hype this new version is getting it feels like it produces the same crap that the trained models from the last version shitted out. I dont get how its creating this much hype. It has to be spammers.
>they are still just as generic as hatever DALLE2 shitted out
No. Absolutely not.
Is this supposed to help? Showing me more generic girls?
For comparison, the left cluster of four images and
are the very last 8 images I generated with Dall-E 2. They're a completely random sample.
Meanwhile, these Dall-E 3 images aren't cherry-picked. The servers are being raped so hard that I've only been able to generate 12 images so far, and they're NOTICEABLY closer to generating something that resembles Haruhi than anything in the past 200+ images I made with Dall-E 2. Once the servers open a bit, I believe that I'll get an actual decent Haruhi within 20 images.
God bless you anon. Keep chasing that purple dragon.
>I've generated like 200 fetish images of Haruhi Suzumiya getting digital perms over the last several months, using roughly the same prompts
BASED AND KNOWS HIS FINGERCURLS FROM WAVE CURLS.
>I could eventually generate the image I've been wanting
wait a second. You made hundereds of fricking images of her in curlers, and you still don't have what you want? Exactly what the frick is it you're looking for?
>average artist is tasked to get familiar with a design in order to replicate it in different scenarios
>has to look at a few references and do some sketches
>they now have the design down
>average AI prompter is tasked to get familiar with a design in order to replicate it different scenarios
>has to spend several months scraping any possible screencaps and official promotional images while also prompting dozens or even hundreds of times
>STILL can't get the design down
Yes, but it's faster, better, crisper. Easier to control. Fewer obvious glaring errors.
Tort vs crime. And giving the megacorp IP holders power to lock shit up infinitely isn't desirable either.
If I don't give a frick about copyrighting it, why not?
It's far less complex.
>pic related
Much easier. The next step is generate button on twitter and tiktok.
> Ammaar Reshi
What is with indians and the incapacity of understanding that using the work of other people isn't crating new shit?
Why is Adam West driving the Burtonmobile?
The guy creating it probably doesn't know there's more than one incarnation of the batmobile.
There's literally different Batmobiles, one closer to West, in the comic.
> Pajeets are still trying to ride the gen-AI grift
You can't make this shit up
it should create controversy for looking like shit
Wrong, it looks generic and clearly stole art from other artists.
Damn, he found a whole new way of getting DMCAd
I get real third world vibes from AI. The slum amorality, the destruction of middle class skills, the sucking up to titanic globalist corporations. This is Pajeet's Revenge.
>destruction of middle class skills,
Anon... artgays fapped to the thought of the middle class to be made obsolete by robots.
These were journalists dumbfrick.
>destruction of middle class skills,
Art is not a middle class. The industry explicitly gatekeeps to keep them away.
>its da joos fault i can't pick up a pencil
lol guys like you are just going to play around on bing's cucked servers for a few days until you get bored and then go right back to sucking hollywood's teat "ironically" because outrage is the only thing you can invest any sort of effort into.
See, this is why everyone hates artists. "JUST DO IT, BRO" is a shitty response to people trying to get into a trade. Some people simply lack the natural ability to draw, and you know that. But you still insist on being an butthole about it, elitist twat.
Talent is a cope by the lazy to justify a lack of effort and their own cowardice. Everyone has the ability. There are guys out there drawing with their tongues and feet because they don't have working hands.You've just convinced yourself that you need some magic pebble in order to avoid the reality of having to put in work or face criticism.
AI isn't going to suddenly change that. The failure was in you all along.
On github.
>On github.
Where?
I can't find it
>Everyone has the ability.
No, they really don't. It's a genetic trait, either you're born with it, or you're not. No amount of yelling "git gud" is going to make someone magically able to draw.
>It's not a "natural ability",
Yes it is.
>Yes it is.
No, it isn't. Stop being a fricking moron.
Yes, it IS. It's a physical ability that some people are more naturally inclined towards than others.
Yes jus like me sir. i am enable to draw any sir frickinng next door sirs baby young son Raneesh mog me i crie
No, it really isn't. If you spent the time you spent whining on actually learning how to draw, you'd be able to do it. Instead, you just want to whinge and scream about how you're not "genetically predisposed to be able to draw", like that isn't completely fricking moronic.
>"JUST DO IT, BRO!"
See, you're literally too stupid to comprehend that no, most people physically CAN'T just do it, so you just parrot the same old propaganda like you always do.
>most people physically CAN'T just do it
Like I said before, you'd rather b***h and moan while screaming about how "OH NO I CAN'T DO IT FOR 'SCHIZO MADE UP REASON'."
The reason you can't do it now is because drawing is a skill that takes a long time to learn.
>JUST DO IT, BRO!
It doesn't matter how many shitty practice drawings you make if you weren't born with the ability to make good ones.
>Youtubers
>stick figures can be a viable means of expression
Opinion discarded. You "people" are completely moronic.
You're making up moronic reasons in your head as an excuse for not even trying. That's not how it fricking works, you aren't just "born" with the ability to draw. That makes zero sense.
>you aren't just "born" with the ability to draw
Yes, you are. I have tried your oh so sacred practice, and it was godawful shit every single time. Some people can draw and some can't. Just the way it is.
homie, you can't draw because your brain and hands aren't wired for it. Stop falling for the propaganda.
no, what happened is your ego was too fragile to withstand drawing godawful shit enough times to improve, so you make up the excuse that it's a sacred ability that you don't have so you don't have to feel bad that you weren't tough enough to make it through.
And exactly how many times do I have to scribble down something that makes me want to kill myself before I magically become the next D'Vinci?
Do you think Da'Vinci rested on his laurels?
It's a constant effort to improve. That's the point. You don't just get to press a button and say you're done. Wanting to do that is lazy.
Da Vinci spent years in apprenticeship learning from better artists, and after that, spent the rest of his life still doing studies and learning
I downloaded a shitty gif instead of ripping a webm because I'm lazy, like you.
The only propaganda here is the one you sold yourself to justify being a lazy piece of shit. Might as well put a gun in your mouth now, because I guarentee you're not "wired" the right way to write either.
>objective fact is propaganda now
You're a fricking idiot.
>Its objective fact because I say it is
Die 1000 deaths you moronic moron.
It is objective fact because it simply is. What, you gonna claim the sky is polka dot so long as it lets you mock and bully people who want to express themselves without possessing natural talent?
D'Vinci was born with the right stuff. Simple as.
>ACTUALLY saying it's an objective fact because you say so.
I'm choosing to believe you're actually just a genius of comedy and not a worthless moron, because that was too genuinely hysterical to be serious.
Post work. I don't think you ever actually practiced at all and are just desperate to bump your shill thread.
Nta but you're clearly seething about ai destroying the market and possibly making it even harder to make a living as an artist. Cry about artistic integrity all you want, but anyone who hates ai art is a tard that was expecting to commercialize their art and make a living off of it.
>Y-you're seething!
No anon. By all means use AI to make your art. It's just a tool
It's STILL going to require hard work and effort to not look like shit, but guys like
think that hard work and effort are myths and you're born with talent. He's not gonna learn how to prompt or controlnet or inpaint. That's too hard and he's a lazy ass b***h.
>hard work and effort are myths and you're born with talent
That is indeed the reality of it.
And if he wasn't born with the ability to paint, all of that would've been for nothing.
>And if he wasn't born with the ability to paint, all of that would've been for nothing.
whatever helps you sleep at night. I too know I'm not a basketball player pro because I don't have the talent, rather than the fact I didn't practice and allowed myself to grow fat.
You're probably not that tall either, so you are indeed fricked if you're trying to go for a basketball career.
even someone shorter can become a good basketball player, even if they have to work harder at it, and even if they won't be at a level someone taller has more ease getting into.
Yes, maybe there's some inherent talent thing that allows some people to be artists easier. Picasso could paint at an adult level at age 9. But he was still born into a family of artists and even as a kid spent his childhood practicing it.
Nature vs Nurture. Nature matters, but Nurture always matters more. And even more so with stuff that's not as physically intensive, like illustrating. You absolutely can compensate whatever Nature disadvantage with an increased Nurture advantage.
But it's easier in the ego if you just act like it's something else's fault. I get it, I know how to draw, but not how to model 3d. It's easier to go "well I just don't have the time to learn" than to admit "it's hard to feel at level 0 in a skill again, and more comfortable to just keep doing the skill I already know".
That's fine. But it is a choice, and it is one you should admit to yourself you're doing.
>even someone shorter can become a good basketball player
only if they have certain genetics.
Ah, so not only does one need to be born with talent, you should also just happen to be born into the right circumstances. Cool. Dumbass.
You already were born into the right circumstances. Head over to /ic/, you'll find more resources for free to learn from than most artists had for all of human history. Buying a ton of paper and pencils is cheaper than ever. All the opportunity is at your hands to learn, but you'll have to surpass yourself.
>You already were born into the right circumstances.
I was most certainly not born into a family of artists.
Now address the rest of the post. If your complaint amounts to "well, I wasn't as lucky as Picasso", then tough shit man. If you're gonna let that stop you you might as well have a nice day because you weren't as lucky as Elon Musk to be born into a rich family.
All those "resources" don't mean shit if you lack intrinsic talent.
Someone who creates "art" without talent are not artists at all.
Talent ain't real, "I don't have talent" is just the feel good way to say "I'm lazy"
>Talent ain't real
Yes it is. If everyone was capable of making art, everyone would.
>there's no requirement to be "allowed" to be called art.
Roger Ebert convinced all of human civilization that video games aren't a valid medium.
Here's what I don't get. You've spent a good six hours now saying you can't be bothered to try drawing because you think your work looks like shit and you don't want to be called shit.
Yet you say this in defense of AI shit, that looks like shit, gets called shit, and what's worse, all looks generic and interchangeable so you can't even claim real ownership of it. Isn't that a lateral move at best?
I'm not defending anything. I just hate artists and I want the AI shit to make them obsolete. Because frick you and your gatekeeping elitist bullshit.
>gatekeep
What do you mean by gatekeep? There has never been more free and cheap resources to learn how to draw. Every single piece of knowledge ever, out there for free. Courses of all kinds, books, free software.
if you can't draw, I'm sorry, you are just moronic, an aphanty, or both.
(The answer is "moronic")
>What do you mean by gatekeep?
You push this propaganda about how one needs to just try, instead of offering any kind of practical alternative, because you know full well that "practice" is complete bullshit.
I want you to tell me how the frick one can make art without having to be born with supwerpowers. But you won't do that because you want to make yourself feel special. So frick you, I'm rooting for the AI stuff.
>practice is complete bullshit
Ok, so you're just a lazy sack of shit. Got it.
You expect to pick up a skill, and be an expert from the get go without doing anything.
>offering any kind of practical alternative
So you're just mentally ill? Learning literally any skill is study + practice. There are no "alternatives" you lazy sack of human shit.
Not just art, literally any skill works this way. You just want instant gratification without any effort like the mentally stunted child you are.
The next bend in this circular conversation is "but I don't have the talent"
Art isn't a skill, it's an ability. You're an idiot if you seriously think it's a thing anyone can just do by trying really hard. Here, I'll become a sorcerer by just wanting it really badly. Dumbass.
>There are no "alternatives"
No, there are, your narrative just depends on people believing otherwise.
>Here, I'll become a sorcerer by just wanting it really badly.
Art exists, magic doesn't.
I'd love to hear about these magical "alternatives" that people don't share lmao
You are clearly somebody who tried to learn how to draw, tried doing the same thing everyday expecting results, and got nowhere. Now you hate artists out of frustration because you simply don't understand how to foster a skill.
I feel kinda bad now though, you are clearly mentally ill, probably low functioning too, so I'm sorry for berating you. Stay away from websites like this, they do no good for people like you.
>I'd love to hear about these magical "alternatives" that people don't share lmao
Notice how "artists" are so pissy about the AI stuff. Just saying.
>Hey quick question. How come your genetic determinism outlook doesn't apply to the process of using AI tools?
Because it's a tool, dumbass. You don't need to be born with the ability to use a wrench.
But apparently, according to you, you do need to be born with the ability to use a pencil/brush/etc? Curious!
>doesn't address any points ever
I'll accept your concession.
Ask ChatGPT to talk for you next time. It'll do a better job
You didn't put forth any points. You just spewed more of your elitist "JUST DO IT, BRO!" bullshit.
Except art isn't a skill, it's an ability. If you can't do it naturally, then it's just not happening.
>Its just not happening.
Yeah, just like all the AI tools in the world will never let you make something of worth because you're a fricking homosexual. Sitting on your gay little sideline going "oh woah is me" will not translate into anything worth shit. You're the definition of a loser.
He's already made something of worth. I've seen the AI art he's made from prompts and it's BEAUTIFUL
Its it, dare I say... BREATHTAKING!? Wholesome chungussy even?
Fricking hell lol well at least I understand the type of people who flock to generative models. There's nothing wrong with entertaining yourself with the slop making machine, but framing it as revenge on people who continued practicing when you didn't is insane.
>Because it's a tool, dumbass. You don't need to be born with the ability to use a wrench.
Pencils and Paintbrushes are also tools.
And? Their function is in service to something complex and esoteric. AI is a wrench because the image being created is like a clothes rack. You just need to assemble the pieces.
Okay, level with me, please say you're doing a bit. I refuse to believe anyone is this buck broken.
Bit? Dipshit, if someone can't draw, then they can't fricking draw. Are you seriously this ignorant of human physiology?
>You just need to assemble the pieces.
You still need to be able to
>Train your own models/lora
>Know the proper prompting language
>Source or create images for controlnet
>Master inpainting
>Touch up everything in post production for cohesiveness and quality.
All AI does is add a random dice roll element. Look at
.
He generated over 200 images of a concept and he STILL hasn't gotten it. He's just gotten "closer".
And you expect us to believe that you, who think picking up a pencil is too hard and too much work, are going to ALL those steps ad nauseum to get something?
>Because it's a tool, dumbass. You don't need to be born with the ability to use a wrench.
The only tool around here is (You).
Hey quick question. How come your genetic determinism outlook doesn't apply to the process of using AI tools?
How do you know your bloodline has the ability to prompt correctly, or inpaint, or train models? Isn't it more likely that's just something else you're destined to suck at? Especially seeing as how you're already determined to be incapable of fixing the flaws in post?
Nobody's told you the One Neat Trick to suddenly know how to draw well because there isn't one, not because it's a guarded secret. Multiple people have already said you at least have to *try* and you're refusing to do even that.
I HAVE tried, and it didn't fricking work. You are full of shit, you elitist piece of garbage.
I'm going to guess "trying" in this case means tried to draw a couple times and was discouraged by not being very good at it. Improvement requires continuing to practice from that point, which obviously requires more dedication than you are capable of.
>being an artist requires you to actively torture yourself with constant repetition of garbage before you somehow magically become good
Uh huh.
There is world of difference between the function of a pencil and a wrench.
No, not magically. Gradually. Every skill is like this. You being unable to understand this demonstrates you have no skills whatsoever.
> because you know full well that "practice" is complete bullshit.
Okay Andrew Dobson.
Bro I agree 100%. I picked up a guitar the other day for the first time ever and I couldn't play a full song. FRICK MUSICIANS AND THEIR PROPAGANDA, they never offer any kind of practical alternative, just say moronic shit like "HURR DURR PLAY THE INSTRUMENT" Frick those c**ts.
Wouldn't the magical concept of Talent be the gatekeeper in this scenario? And you want to jealously punish the fortunate recipients of its fickle blessing?
lmaoing at your life anon.
AI is already dead in the water and it took just a few months, go learn an actual skill.
Why you think I'm going to give a frick about one guy's statement about one medium is fricking beyond me
Completely untrue. Unskilled art is still art, there's no requirement to be "allowed" to be called art.
You're actually a failure and need to have a nice day asap. You'll never make anything with the insane mindset of "I was born without the skills" homie you've got to learn skills. That's what makes them SKILLS. I can't draw worth shit and its certainly not because I was born that way, I just don't have that dat damn patience!
I guarantee you can draw better than that anon.
I like how you guys make this cope about how you need tons of natural ability to get good and popular at drawing as if one of the most popular youtube animators got there on literal stick figures.
When no, it turns out even stick figures can be a viable means of expression if you PUT THE GODDAMN WORK IN.
Oh god, are you that same moron from /hyw/ that thinks people are born knowing how to draw?
I assure you that someone who creates art regardless of talent is a better artist than someone who only cries about the concept of talent.
>Some people simply lack the natural ability to draw, and you know that.
It's not a "natural ability", it's something that you have to invest time and effort into. It's just like any other hobby or skill, you need to actually put effort into learning how to do things.
Notice how he referred to it as a "trade" rather than a hobby or skill? That right there was the tell.
He's one of those gays that just sees it as a money making venture, not something with intrinsic value because of the time and effort you've invested into it. Or god forbid as a means of self expression. He just thinks he's entitled to the fruit of the labor without tilling the soil or planting the seed.
It is a trade though, lol. That doesn’t make art any lesser, but it’s one hundred percent a trade.
Yes, but it's about where the focus is.
>muh starving artists!
Are you seriously spewing this pretentious drivel right now?
>self expression
Nobody gives a shit about peering into someone's soul or whatever, they want a story with designs they can jerk off to.
>See, this is why everyone hates artists. "JUST DO IT, BRO" is a shitty response to people trying to get into a trade
This isn’t a revelation, anon, people have always hated tradesmen. Why do you think the DIY scene is so popular? Everyone thinks they can do it until they frick up their piping, then they get mad at the plumbers for charging what they need to in order to get it done.
lmaoing at watching you try to justify being a lazy piece of shit. further proof that the majority of AIgays that aren't pajeets are just lazy, bitter, and jealous of those who actually worked to hone their skills. maybe one day AI will take over and all the artists who said mean things about you on twitter will lose their jobs but you'll still never be an artist and it will be no one's fault but your own because you were too lazy to pick up a fricking pencil.
homie, nobody here draws. If so, then head to the draw thread.
>i want a pie
>then learn to cook
That's how he sounds.
I want to reply with something funny but I’m kind of dumbfounded at how stupid this “gotcha” is. Do you just not cook for yourself, ever, anon?
>how do I become a chef?
>learn how to cook and work hard
>no I don't want to work hard
That's how he sounds
No matter what the implications of the comment chain is, it was pretty pants on head moronic to just outright say 'yeah well I don't like working hard'. Who the frick says that with no sarcasm or irony?
Phrasing it that was was stupid comment and completely shot himself in the foot.
The underlying sentiment that others have expressed, though, I can understand. Telling someone who's just looking for a funny meme or a wallpaper for their desktop to "just pick up a pencil and draw" when you're one of the lucky and talented few who's been able to build a career out of doing nothing but drawing all day every day for 40 years is a bit like an elderly physicist telling you "just pick up a piece of chalk and derive" when you just want a simple answer to why something you observed did what you saw it do. Developing talent as an artist takes years of dedication, just like developing expertise as a physicist, just like developing skills as a surgeon, just like developing athletic abilities, etc. and very very few people have the aptitude (or the free time) to master multiple skillsets that require that level of devotion.
Sometimes you just want a funny picture to chuckle at for a minute and don't have five years to spend practicing your drawing.
Sometimes you just want to know why a neon light emits the colors it does and don't have a decade to learn atomic physics.
Sometimes you just want a piece of pie and don't have two hours to spend making it yourself.
Ok but the poster in that pic didn't want a funny meme or a neat wallpaper, he specifically asked "How can I make art that looks like Tomm Moore's?" and the answer to his question, regardless of how much free time or aptitude you may have, is learn to draw.
>Why yes, I have no cooking skills what so ever, how can you tell?
>That pic
That person just stole the steamed hams joke but cut out the set up
Ironic
It's really more akin to cake mix.
Every artist b***hing about how people who don't have the aptitude or time to train as professional artists should be ashamed of themselves for taking advantage of technological shortcuts would happily turn around and liberally abuse an AI that could churn out new gadgets for them to play with or vidya to play and would smugly laugh at anyone telling them "just pick up a multimeter and learn electrical engineering" or "just download unity and learn to program a game"
>Every artist b***hing about how people who don't have the aptitude or time to train as professional artists should be ashamed of themselves for taking advantage of technological shortcuts would happily turn around and [shit I made up]
Do tell
>Some people simply lack the natural ability to draw
No they don't.
People aren't born drawing. People aren't born electricians either.
It's a set of trainable skills.
Why do people think art is fricking wizardry?
It's just accumulating information, theres a lot to know but it's just that.
>Why do people think art is fricking wizardry?
Because
>It's a set of trainable skills.
Most people never need to learn anything to get by so think actual skill is magic.
>>Most people never need to learn anything to get by so think actual skill is magic.
I think the issue is some children have spent the time sitting alone in their room learning some of those skills.
Five year olds draw at about the same skill level but by the time some of them are 10, the ones who draw every day have shown 5 years of art growth. This is the difference between art and say- fixing electronics. The skill is something some children choose to learn so it feels magical to the other kids who don't relate to learning anything at all.
Lazy buttholes like to think that people who are good at things are “naturally talented” because they can’t imagine actually working at something difficult. Behind every great artist are thousands of hours of working on their craft and, despite what you think, most of these artists do not come from rich families. They draw when they can where they can and constantly push themselves. AI bros think prompting is the same sort of work because they’ve never put in real effort, and they think creating through AI is the same because they can’t actually visualize things in their head. They just put the coin in the slot, pull the lever and then look,at what it spits out and marvel at how creative they are
>literally soulless art
>nerds cheer it on
Man comicsgate really fricked you guys up
It's not just comicsgate, I've come to despise comic books, comic creators and fans as a whole. Comicsgate is a bunch of gays as well. Frick everyone.
Can you imagine this led to companies lobbying for a federal generative AI ban, that would be amazing.
>companies lobbying for a federal generative AI ban
>companies
Are you kidding? Companies can't wait to start implementing AI. It's the artists who are afraid.
Companies are already jockeying for position. I don't think you want Disney's idea for how the future should look.
Doubtful. They may become slave number one though.
The decent people are making shit, but not making a big deal about it or drawing it to your attention. It's already 100 percent in many pro workflows.
Anons? pajeets are gonna destroy the entertainment industry?
>destroy the ~~*entertainment industry*~~
WTF?!?!? I love ai now!
Of COURSE it's a Pajeet.
Look at that honker
>artists push for a change in copyright laws to "protect" styles, completely blind to the fact that if style is copyrightable, literally everything will be owned by Warner or Disney, and those artists won't even be legally allowed to draw anything if it isn't with those corporations' approval
>more so, happily ignoring the fact that if Warner or Disney want to train their own ai models with their copyrighted styles to replace artists, they'll be legally allowed to do so anyway
It's so fricking obvious that the best protection against ai stuff is to keep it and its derivatives uncopyrightable. Someone uses ai for a single panel of a comic or a single scene of a movie, the entire thing becomes public domain, everyone else can download it, share it, do whatever they want, the ai "artist" can't complain.
Literally the best protection against people taking advantage of existing stuff is to remove those people's power to benefit from copyright laws, not to give more power to the corpos that own everything already.
>artists push for a change in copyright laws to "protect" styles
Gonna pull out a source for this or are you just vaguing to whatever losers you follow on Twitter?
Because I agree, the correct course of action is sticking to the arguments that have legal precedent, but I imagine most people actually know that as opposed to the 18 year old suggestive artists who got 5K followers out of nowhere for drawing somewhat titillating anime girls with poor anatomy.
Obviously refusing copyright on machine generated stuff is an effective solution, but there ought to be a law against using copyrighted material in training data. It's not like a human artist using reference or tracing, they are more limited in how they can exploit someone else's drawing and their ability to copy expires when they die. Machine learning software and their reference data can exist in perpetuity, shared between parties and used to produce copies with unprecedented ease.
>but there ought to be a law against using copyrighted material in training data.
No, that’s dumb. All this will do is inevitably give more power to lawsuit hungry corpos that want to hoard as much IP as possible to sell it back to you. Keeping AI output unenforceable for copyright or trademark nips the bud at the attempts of trying to make easy money without human artists involved, and new generators like DALL-E 3 have an opt out function if you really don’t want your work in the dataset.
AI art is weird because I’d love for it to just be a curiosity to mess with and see what it can inspire me conceptually, but almost all it’s current iterations are just built on the grounds of circumventing people while aggregating and stitching together a response just like ChatGPT. At that point, I’d rather just look at the actual sources of inspiration (reference and other artist work)
The difference is a human artist will not completly copy it. It will be different. An AI just carbon copy that.
>An AI just carbon copy that
Then how can I tell it's an AI copy and not the original artist. Everyone can tell it's not the real deal and make a stink about it. So even if it gets close, there is definitely a difference.
Everytime a guy uses AI art i just have a incredible sixth sense of his writing being mediocre amateur shit and 90% chance of him being a moronic butthole. I dont know why.
Most people have the self awareness to not post something made with AI and claim they made it as if it had any merit to it.
Keyword, Most People.
There is no controversy with copyright protection. AI produced works have consistently been ruled as invalid for copyright protection. This is functionally no different than someone tracing Bolland to make a fancomic, legally speaking. In fact, cutting up a real comic then pasting various characters and panels together to make a fan comic would have a stronger claim to copyright under the notion of a transformative work.
SIRS DO NOT REDEEM THE GODDAMNED BATMAN
>Have to be a member of an elite clique or a porn xerox to make it in art.
>Everyone else does it as a hobby anyway.
>AI kills the snob and the coom enabler.
>Everyone else will just keep doing it for kicks like granny knitting socks when industrial looms in Thailand manned by children exist and make a career knitting socks impossible anyway.
>”I want my entertainment to be like fast fashion”
I know this is a shitpost, but good job perfectly encapsulating how dire the AI evangelist’s vision of the future is.
Based post
>Artist so ass blasted about people not wanting to throw money at their woke garbage they have to pretend the truth is bait
Have you ever bought fast fashion, anon? Shit doesn’t last after the day you use it.
>"""artists""" have the gall to b***h about AI when they're all a bunch of plagiarists themselves
Nah, frick em. That's what they get for being hypocritical gatekeepers.
>hypocritical gatekeepers.
Gatekeeping you from what?
Art gays mad lmao
Just get some other job.
Yes like prompt engi- oh wait
Good morning
Shut the frick up bot!
>Ammaar Reshi
Every time.
>DEY TOOK MER JERB!
Jesus loves (you), let's celebrate the birthday
I dont care about israelites.
>The joke is he said it in a funny voice
Gee Cinemaphile, I can't imagine why people are going to manga instead.
Hey
Gotta say, the western market has done a wonderful job marketing eastern material to the west.
I like how your example is 3 years old and didn't even come out. Totally objective.
Anon, please don't pretend things have been improving.
Its just sad.
Capeshit is shit for reasons beyond politics and your inability to separate the two is a big part of why the problem will never be solved.
I don't buy comics so it ain't my problem.
So your hobby is whining about culture wars in an echo chamber?
Admittedly, it is pretty funny to see how far you guys can cope with your media.
My condolences, maybe the pendulum will swing one day.
Name one thing the toads achieved worth telling stories about.
ate a big beetle
Terminally /misc/brained interpretation of the comic
Nta but politics are integral to why they are shit currently. Other reasons existing doesn't change the fact that no on woke shit in their marvel and DC capeshit
>Twitter screencap
>User options are in an unrecognizable foreign language
Opinion discarded.
I dont think the headline is true. The entire Demomslayer? Comic produced in one month? Cape comics?
If you look at the actual source it was some random ass blog that mis-cited some other site but no one bothered checking until after the "story" blew up. That screencap is just a favorite of our resident EAST VS WEST culture war spammer.
India went all in with pushing engineering to be more "productive" (seriously, check out all the engineering schools in India) which is similar to the mindset of Silicon Valley tech worshipers who treat anything outside of their field as worthless. Despite this they yearn for that coolness and mystique they attribute to creatives without understanding why people might make something for reasons outside of "make numbers go up."
>EAST VS WEST culture war spammer.
Ok, thanks for the clarification. I was already wondering it wasnt One Piece or Dragonball.
>I want to cook food without the knowledge, tools, and skills to cook the food with
>I want to make games without learning basic coding, game design, and art
>I want to make movies without writing a script, hiring the actors, and filmiing with cameras
AIgays are the absolute worse people. They should all die.
People with 0 creativity having access to high quality generative programs will truly be the death of us all
We had enough of these people in Hollywood but now you will have to surf through a sea of shit to find the pearl among the garbage
Uncreative people should stick to what they are good at
Eh. I wish most of the western anime/manga scene would get over their boner for Shueisha shit, tbt. Like there’s so much genuinely cool shit, but all anyone wants to talk or post about is Japan’s equivalent of capeshit
Mecha should make a real comeback is what I’m saying.
Kek, I live in a small town, and I've seen several people wearing Demon Slayer merch.
>Another AI thread
All that work just to make loss.jpg
bunch of dinossaurs afraid of change are b***hing about AI again?
It's more like deluded artists panicking about people being able to make entertainment without obnoxious California based worldviews.
More like seeing the problem of companies s“outsourcing“ stuff while it is just more repeat and stolen stuff from the creators.
Anon we've all been over this. It's doing the same thing humans do just faster. I'm just gonna make my own shit or watch/read stuff made by people with actual good stories to tell. "Artists" should make non woke garbage then they'd have a leg to stand on
>stolen stuff from the creators.
copyright is straight up thievery. For most of mankind's history, stories were shared from person to person. no one had to own them for art to exist. then some buttholes decided they had to own ideas. frick copyright.
Call me when someone gets the source code for the program so we can start making some actual good stuff without regulation from the companies
It already exists.
It just takes effort. Which is more than 99% of you guys are willing to put in.
I'm not scared of AI because it turns out the shills are right. It's still just a tool and your results are determined by the work you put in.
A bunch of terminally online lazy homosexuals that make complaining about people that put the work in their entire personality aren't going to compete even with all the newest technology. They'll make a bunch of identical looking shitposts sure, but they're not going to bother training their own models and loras or inpainting or doing any sort of post production work. That shit requires effort and they don't respect any sort of process enough to put that effort in.
This is all a big nothingburger from attention prostitutes.
>It already exists.
Then where's the source code for this new AI?
This. The real problem is thr best AI being closed source
You can tell the artist who are really struggling with how much ai seethe is in some of these post
Why do millennials and trannies hate AI? They don’t b***h when the brand new IPhone (Made by child labor btw) comes out. They also don’t b***h when people protest for children to get their breasts and weenies chopped off. So what’s the problem with AI?
GOOD MORNING SIRS !
It is already afternoon
So applogy sir
GOOD AFTERNOON SIRS !
AI needs to be destroyed and all of its proponents executed.
We were so close to having genuine Cinemaphile threads with AI, but the reactionaries brought everything back to square one. I'm done with this shit board.
It's funny when people who aren't me are mad.
this is the worst thread on Cinemaphile
Tourist?
>bunch of morons and baiters on this thread
>bunch of homosexuals taking it
the west can burn to hell. im becoming a Black person in Africa
Good by sir !
>People are now defending tracejobs to "own le AIgays."
lmfao
lol even
is the controversy that it looks like shit
>reee you're gatekeeping by telling me i can do it if i try.
This thing is a lot of fun and rather than pissing into the wind artists should be trying to leverage it to improve and speed up their work flow. Real artists (by which I do not mean comics-adjacent b***hy art hoes on twitter) actually have a huge advantage here because they can disguise the AI tells, or just adapt it into their own styles.
All the content blocking is homosexual though.
What exactly can you even incorporate from AI art? When artists study one another, it’s not just the technical how-to they want to pick up on, but the reasons why the artist did what they did and what they like from it. You understand your own sensibilities better as well whoever you’re studying, and can remix, reinterpret and incorporate it into your own body of knowledge for whatever you’re working on.
You can learn a lot by studying any working artist from past to present. All you learn from AI is making art that looks similar to what an image generator can do, and we already have the image generator for that. It’s like asking ChatGPT for writing lessons.
I've been using it to color my line art for me.
But it's kinda hit and miss and honestly I don't think it's saving me any time when I have to fix everything because when the controlnet says "pixel perfect" that's a fricking lie.
Let’s say I’m a comic book artist and today some shithead writer decided to make me draw Batman fighting 20 gangsters and oh yeah it’s due by midnight.
“Computer, give me a group photo of a whole bunch of ugly gangsters.”
Now I have some weird and interesting designs to work from, and things won’t take as long, so I’m a little more excited about the drudgery ahead of me, which improves the work overall.
>”What if ChatGPT as a search engine, but art???”
Didn’t really answer my question either. Just kind of a theoretical about practical application when the question is “What does an artist gain from incorporating stuff from AI art into their skill set over actual reference?”
In an age where search engine returns for reference materials are increasingly restricted to a small handful of paid services like Getty and Shutterstock, the ability to generate new original reference material through machine learning interpolation is tantalizing. We had a fun thread a few weeks back where anons generated images of characters and superheroes and junk using Perchance and then used them as reference materials for poses and composition to make their own drawings.
The bigger problem is that correcting the pictures is more work than drawing it by yourself.
And the AI interface is dumb. Theremis no validation and prompts are more like luck.
>Starring Samuel L. Murphy as Spider-cop
This captures the spirit of classic comic books much better than industry people are capable of, which is the real reason why they whine.
There is so much homogeny of styles in comics that it's laughable to complain when AI does the same thing. If you're going into the industry, you copy a safe style instead of coming up with your own expressions
Frick off Anthony
>AIjeets: Finally I can create my dream series without the TYRANNY of artists!
>Their dream series: a four panel batman comic
So can we make a compelling comic about the daily life of big breasted girl
like the trainwreck that is golden girl?
it was a shitty idea then and its a shitty idea now
So long as it doesn't involve her holding anything.
it still has the gay AI look. Can you guys save the shilling until AFTER it develops sentience? It's really annoying and all this art looks like shit.
People critical of AI right now are right up there with "the internet is just a fad" people.
They want to say
>This artwork doesn't look like my artwork
>This voice clip doesn't sound like my voice
>It doesn't look or sound good
and in the same breath
>Stop it because you're taking prospective money out of my pocket and stealing a large aspect of my identity
If it sucked, they can ignore it.
Nobody really gave any kind of a shit about 15.ai when some horse-fricker at MIT gave the world that little toy.
But now all the liberal wienersneezes of the world are rattling their cages now that technology is once again doing what it always does: destroy the idea of a craftsman.
It's disingenuous to say this is hypocritical because even if AI "art" does look like shit there's a real chance corporations will pursue it as a cost cutting measure and put a bunch of people out of jobs. And it remains to be seen if audiences will accept AI slop or not.
Anons will. Because as they prove time and time again, they'll accept worse than usual slop so long as it aligns with their identity politics.
>>But now all the liberal wienersneezes of the world are rattling their cages now that technology is once again doing what it always does: destroy the idea of a craftsman.
So you also hate AI generate images? You just find the arguments libby types use to be annoying.
Fundamentally I think AI generated shit eventually eliminates all artists in all forms.
If it gets easy enough to use, even little kids won't draw on their homework or whatever.
If it can generate videos, people can request entire movies eventually.
If you are bothered by "jews" or capitalists controlling the media then this is the peak of that. No human hands but the owner of the AI generators, parameters to generate propaganda out of every prompt you feed it. And of course the death of aspiration, there is no dreaming of being a creator when everyone "is"
Let them seethe
BTW my name is Annabelle Michelle Crudo, I'm trans and I pooped my pants just now and I'm gonna eat it. Not sure if any of that matters.
and it's everything
>You will never be a real artist. You have no skills, you have no discipline, you have no passion for the arts. You are a lazy man twisted by instant-dopamine and hubris into a crude mockery of nature’s visionaries. All the “validation” you get is two-faced and half-hearted. Behind your back people mock you. Your parents are disgusted and ashamed of you, your “friends” laugh at your ghoulish ~~*art*~~ behind closed doors. Men are utterly repulsed by your porn. Thousands of years of evolution have allowed men to sniff out frauds with incredible efficiency. Even AI images that “pass” look uncanny and unnatural to a man. It's lack of bone structure is a dead giveaway. And even if you manage to get a guy to believe it's real art, he’ll turn tail and bolt the second he gets a whiff of your pajeet, poo-covered streets. You will never be happy. You wrench out a fake smile every single shitpost and tell yourself AI will replace actual artists, but deep inside you feel the depression creeping up like a weed, ready to crush you under the unbearable weight.
>Ammaar Reshi
It's time you left brain weenies felt the sting of automation replacing that skill you have been using to hold your industry. Welcome to the pit! Put on your hat and bring in the carts!
>industry
most people seething draw pin-ups for 50$ on Twitter or at least wish they did while they charge 8$. I doubt actual pros are that worried, they're organized and bring in more customers with their name than their skills. If they were this easy to replace they'd have done so years ago, going to Japan/South America/SEA to get better artists or equally skilled but cheaper ones would be the norm instead of that one thing they do every now and then as a fun experiment.
AI Art must be allowed to exist. It opens up art creation to all people. Anyone standing against it is anti-human and should be executed.
wow, it sure is good at putting two characters together and not having them interact at all
This is a known weakness, but it's greatly improved in the new version.
Clearly, America is the greatest nation!
Of course. It's comparable to the shift to photography. It's a very different thing.
Can't help but notice your shining beacon of creativity is uh two characters made by other people
Why not just learn to draw? Too lazy?
I find drawing boring.
NTA - but I tried. I used most of my downtime during the Covid lockdowns to practice drawing, started with fundamentals and worked my way up to "okay", sort of where I was back in high school when I was drawing 2-3 hours a day every day. But once regular work started back up and it was back to ~50 hours a week plus dealing with emails and shit from home for an hour or two every night my progress ground to a halt at best or started to regress at worst.
Developing and maintaining creative skills takes time, and lots of it, and while there's certainly a reward and sense of accomplishment to be found in that effort - I certainly don't regret the time I spent trying - but not everyone has the kind of free time that requires. Sometimes you just want a funny meme or a piece of concept art and you can't or don't want to have to commit a thousand hours to retraining your artistic abilities to be able to fricking do it.
I think a good parallel to drawing is sort of like working out; Most people want to or thought about being in better shape, but most people don't put in the consistent effort into working out.
There are "alternatives" to looking fit, be it surgery or steroidal supplements. But a lot of people frown upon those who take shortcuts to looking fit because they can see that person took the path of least resistance.
A lot of these AI-prompters don't value art or the process that comes with it. That's the catch though; if they're not willing to value others artwork, then why should anyone value their mass-produced "art"? There's no name behind any of it, no real sense of identity to it. When people call AI images souless, that's what they mean.
People value the craft and person who put in the effort for it.
That's fair, but like I said, the counter to this is that some people simply don't have the time, even if they're willing to put in the effort. I would love to work out every day, but as it is I barely manage to set aside a good ~90 minutes on the weekend.
Very few people have the time to do the things they need to do, let alone the things they want to do.
The problem (at least as I see it) isn't AI stuff existing it's people trying to claim they deserve the same clout as people who did it themselves, to go back to the fitness metaphor, it's like a guy who got lipo and then got fake muscle implants acting like he's Mr. universe material
We do deserve clout. We're better artists than them.
NTA, but that's totally fair - it's ridiculous to pretend that mastering this technology makes you a talented artist... *but* it's similarly ridiculous to pretend that the people who are actively pushing this technology aren't also talented in a different way.
Not the homosexuals who enter one sentence into an SD or DallE prompt and then smugly post their shit online pretending they're now a fricking artist, but the people actively experimenting with LoRAs and new algorithms and techniques or manually editing and touching up material generated with MLMs, etc.
To me it's like a guy who does character modelling or a guy who does physics engine programming telling the other that they aren't a *real* game designer. Or like a guy who designs car bodies or a guy who designs car engines telling the other that they aren't a *real* car designer. These activities require very different skillsets, but both are different facets of the same accomplishment. And just as the game designers would agree that the guy who posts a paragraph on Cinemaphile about his totally awesome idea for a game and then gives up two posts later isn't a game designer, and just as the car designers would agree that Homer Simpsons walking up and slapping his crudely drawn ideas for The Homer on the board isn't a car designer, both artists and people experimenting with machine learning can agree that someone who enters five words into a prompt window on a website isn't making art.
But I'd like to think both could agree that the other is capable of creation.
Give a self proclaimed prompt whisperer a clear yet somewhat complex (like two paragraphs complex) commision and he will not deliver. All AI art is them playing gacha. Unless they are inpainting heavily, which they refuse to do because that shit is too much work.
Inpainting looks really cool and I'm eager to experiment with it - it's just a b***h to get working on a local install.
>It opens up art creation to all people
It literally already is.
t. homie who can't draw
you could also learn to draw
That's boring. Why when I can just input?
>Your free trial has ended
>Also we noticed that you have a cracked version of another software downloaded so we deleted that
>we also notice you have tons of porn of cartoon minors in sexual situations and have reported the police but said it was the real thing
>This was part of your terms of service
>"Due to high demand of DALL-E 4/5/6, we will now be charging users $20/month to gain access to requesting prompts"
>future DALL-E versions becomes another always online service
It happens more often than you think.
But remember, it's the 99 cent pack of pencils that's the REAL gatekeeping.
Why would I when with these tools I've already surpassed the greatest artists of all time?
Surpass in what conceivable way lol
All of them.
Seriously, attempt describing one thing- or do you need a prompt generator for that?
not not get laughted at.
no, you know what, nevermind, keep doing what you're doing lmao.
With this you have no real control, how much of your life is going to be automated? eventually the company that owns this ai is going to control you since you have built no skills of your own
He really does has a hell of a vacant stare, there.
"written by chat-gpt 4"
FINN STOP STANDING THERE LIKE A moron AND BLOCK THE FRICKING BALL!
NARUTO IS ABOUT TO MAKE THE FINAL BASKET IN THE LAST SECONDS OF THE GAME!
AI isn't real art. Pick up a pen and draw.
These look like shit.
So none of them?
>NPCs using an imagination machine.
Pic related.
I don't understand what these so called "AI artists" hope to gain.
If AI ever reaches a point where it can produce commercially viable work, these AI shills won't be able to actually do anything with it because there'd be no reason to buy or sell art when anyone can just make their own for their own enjoyment.
The closer these guys come to perfecting their tool, the closer they come to just ending commercial art as we know it.
Pajeets are just trying to cash in on their bootlegs before the bubble bursts.
Sooner or later people will realize spending money on anything made by an AI is a scam, so they have to aggressively shill their shit now so they can make their quick cash.
>The closer these guys come to perfecting their tool, the closer they come to just ending commercial art as we know it.
Why do you think that's a bad thing? Some people just have ideas in their head that they want to express, stories they want to tell, but lack the skills to express them. It's not always about making money.
Does not excuse theft.
>It's not always about making money
The road to hell is always paved with good intentions.
>moronic internet grifters attempt to leverage a novel technology to make money by tricking moronic internet users into thinking they know how to make money
Okay, and? This has been happening literally since the internet was conceived, if you fall for it then it's nobody's fault but your own you moron.
>t's not always about making money
with how much AI shit is on patreon I don't think you actually believe this.
>Some people just have ideas in their head that they want to express, stories they want to tell, but lack the skills to express them
SD isn't a soluton to that unless their ideas are derivative to begin with
Most people's ideas are.
>SD isn't a soluton to that unless their ideas are derivative to begin with
Debatable
Okay anon, here's a thought. Go look at Amazon and see how many AI-generated trash books have clogged up everything.
What people don't understand is that your ideas are meaningless when everyone can share them in the same way. Artists exist and become popular because they create their own unique art style, same for writers and any other creator. AI slop cannot be anything other than an imitation, the stories you try to tell will be drowned out by the billions of others.
AI's getting pretty realistic ngl
Y'know, i don't mind AI. As a fa/tg/uy, AI art is *great* when you watn to find quick stuff like character art. That's okay, i don't mind it. I don't mind AI in of itself, but i fricking hate "AI artist" with a passion
They are, ALL OF THEM, without question, some talentless hack (usually a pajeet) who just pumps out mountains of soulless generic garbage and thinks it's "le art". These are the people who genuinely think they will replace normal art and that they're skilled for mass producing ChatGPT goyslop.
>inb4 but they were already producing goyslop anyway!
Yeah, sure, but now they're going to DROWN the internet with it. You won't be able to find the rare good stuff made by soulful artists because you'll have to wade through millions of moronic garbage made by pajeets sitting at a screen.
>Yeah, sure, but now they're going to DROWN the internet with it.
already are. Pixiv has been ruined.
I'm torn because both anti-AI and pro-AI people are some of the most worthless people in human history.
>Pro-AI: literally go insane if ai is used at any point in the creative process. Doesn't matter how insignificant or supplementary, these homies will go ape.
>Anti-AI: Comically bitter at artists because they lack the ability to create their "dream image" which tends to be on par with a chinese bootleg. Not a single original thought or actual idea exists in their head.
Oh I accidentally swapped the pro and anti AI people. Freudian slip oops
im not angry at artist. i appreciate them. im actually an artist of music myself. i just like how im able to create any images i want with just some text and clicks.
>literally go insane if ai is used at any point in the creative process. Doesn't matter how insignificant or supplementary, these homies will go ape.
Why should AI be accepted at all? Any artist serious about their craft will avoid the taint of AI like the plague.
All who start using AI will eventually go full-on proompter parasite because they had no principles to begin with. I know a few of artists who bought into the "jus a tool" meme and who already are decaying because of it.
There is no compromise to be had. Either be a parasite shitting out filth, or don't be one.
See what I mean?
You are playing. No one is so goofy they actually believe it when they say stuff like that. You are yanking my chain
Holy shit, you seriously don't know what neurons are. Like, everyone's brain is wired different, meaning some people are capable of certain things while others aren't. This isn't a matter of "git gud", it's biological fact.
You are intentionally posting insane things for a laugh. The is no actual way you invented this bizarre pseudoscience interpretation of neurology just to feel better about being bad at drawing lmao. There is no way.
>See what I mean?
Answer my question.
Give me any reason whatsoever to employ AI in my work.
Everyone hates you except the most subhuman of consoomers. I don't care appealing to these "people" in the first place.
Sure AI might take over garbage tier niches like coom, adverts and YT toddler schlock. Art for people who don't give a shit about art in the first place.
And sure it's sad how commercial stuff just keeps decaying by the year but this isn't a new trend and ultimately I don't give a shit because I haven't been invested for years in mass market shit.
Though the most disgusting thing is AI gays grooming newbie artists into their degeneracy. Drawing a hard line is more necessary now than ever.
>Give me any reason whatsoever to employ AI in my work.
NTA but I use it to eyedrop color choices for lighting and shading ideas.
It's good for that indeed.
If you post AI images online you are braindead tho.
Way to throw away your integrity. And it will only get worse with time. Might as well stop drawing now.
A tool for the worthless.
I just hold myself to certain principles, as all good artists do. Dysgenic consoomers and hedonist insects will obviously find this idea intimidating.
Forgot your cat. Trying too hard.
ywnbaa
Pics or gtfo
not gonna dox myself to your troony-tier cult, sorry
And it's not like a proompter could tell what is and what isn't good art to begin with.
>No pics
Fake artist
Like I need your approval proomper parasite. It means nothing.
Stay a worthless failure.
>I'm really an artist guys! That's why I don't have a single picture to post.
Suuuuure you are.
Even if I weren't an artist, it means my bait was successful. I win either way.
>still no pics
Got you covered, here you go.
Lmao he seething. Tell your friend to post his work already.
See what I mean? Gay as hell. I bet this dude hasn't even actually drawn a picture.
No, you're clearly a gay moron. It's a tool, you'll either use it or you won't.
I don't care about being hated by artists who are being eliminated because they use outdated tools. I'm certain owners of carrier pigeons were furious when that business went belly up. AI art will take over everything. Artists have had it coming for years. They've arrogantly attacked the common man , thinking that art was theirs to withhold from the world. Now it's for everyone and they're terrified. Good.
Nice fanfic
You've only proven to be another insect with a purely consumerist relation to art.
Your opinion is worth the same as that of any AI gay - nothing.
Wait a minute, Mr. Pseudoscience is that you? It is isn't it! You really are a master of imitating the insane. First the psychobabble and now this, you've got to teach me how you do it!
The frick are you sperging about moron
Ah you can't fool me! Playing both sides of the fence, what a truly artistic move! I'm glad my initial feeling was right about you. All those posts about how art was something you're born with really were too insane to be true. And now this, my hat is off to you my friend.
dumb schizo
Ahhh, of course of course. Well, keep on being a silly billy
AI will be accepted and embraced. Its the way of the future. We won't need pretentious artists anymore. Art will be for everyone and artists can't stop it.
Toddlers can scribble semi-coherent intentional shapes lol art is already accessable. I think your entire concept of what art means to you might just be fricked
>>Pro-AI: literally go insane if ai is used at any point in the creative process.
There are literally artists ITT that say it has a place in their workflow and isn't the end of the world if it's incorporated.
And there's a dude right above you literally going insane at the mere idea it might enter his mind.
Is he? Or is he asking what benefits it might have?
If he is, he should actually ask someone who uses it or does art, because I don't frickin know. He sounded gay as hell though so he should also no ask anyone else to spare them the sperging.
I think my point has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt at this point.
This one's really convincing.
Have you noticed how all Ai art being posted all the time is just based on things created by Artists?
Where's the originality hmm? Can't help but notice that.
what artist made this
The founding fathers.
Even if AI is a tool, there's going to be people inherently better at using it.
You cannot draw because you've psyopped yourself into thinking its impossible.
I cannot draw because I am lazy.
We are not the same.
>AI-gays using the "muh genetics" argument
lmao, what are you guys fat too?
The fricking irony of Cinemaphile arguing against genetic predisposition.
give me something Cinemaphile related to generate
Lmao I didn’t realize it was supposed to be a sequential story, Robin is driving up to him in panel 1 for fricks sake
>cutting and pasting other comic books into a new one
Collagebros... it’s over
>AI Voice Good
>AI Voice Bad
Or at the very least
>AI Voice barely generates anger (until fairly recently)
>AI Art had always generated anger since it’s inception
AI voice I'm honestly more hyped for than anything. The ability to redub voice lines in films, television, foreign cinema, anime, etc. has *enormous* potential.
Imagine being able to retroactively *recast* an animated film to replace phoned in celebrity voices with character actors, or simple redub anime with the original voice actors in flawlessly translated languages.
We've already seen some promising first attempts at this concept
>AI voice I'm honestly more hyped for than anything. The ability to redub voice lines in films, television, foreign cinema, anime, etc. has *enormous* potential.
Same if only because it means voice acting will become just another expectation that video games have and large publishers can't use it as a selling point anymore, plus the entire american voice acting industry sucks fricking ass.
>muh guilt by association
No I will continue to hate poos and still use AI as my personal art making tools while also fapping to human artists work that are actual quality. None of these 3 things are mutually exclusive.
>AI
>personal art
honorary poo. kys hack
Looking at how Dall-e 3 has taken Twitter by storm proves to me that the hatred of AI Art was always conditional and always about accessibility. We now have an AI model that can produce competent results in very few generations that isn't locked behind a paywall. Most people when trying out an AI model type something in, get a total mess and then give up while not realizing the idea is to find a good image in the lot and gradually refine it. This new model can now produce decent-ish looking shit on your first or second try as long as you're specific enough, it's normie proof.
Sure, most people are using it for shitpost memes or wacky fanart but that's honestly enough fto grab people. It's enough to normalize the presence of AI art and make it much less of a nebulous boogeyman in the eyes of the general public. Pic-related I shat out of this new thing in one try. The hat symbol is messed up, Sonic is wearing a handkerchief for some reason, and Spongebobs fingers are huge, but we've come a long way.
> Looking at how Dall-e 3 has taken Twitter by storm
what the frick I don't see any of it on mine, I mostly follow artists
>Looking at how Dall-e 3 has taken Twitter by storm
Who cares? Twitter is mostly blue check morons desperately stealing shit for their own clout.
> Looking at how Dall-e 3 has taken Twitter by storm
This site is literally the only place I see actually trying to talk up DALL-E 3, at most all I’ve seen is Princess Jane shit, arguably, and people always memed with it back when DALL-E Mini was what most people could use.
> It's enough to normalize the presence of AI art and make it much less of a nebulous boogeyman in the eyes of the general public
You guys are genuinely starting to sound like the NFTbros back when that was spiraling out of the general zeitgeist. That’s not a place you want to be if you’re stalking your future on this.
>Looking at how Dall-e 3 has taken Twitter by storm
You're actually going to use this an example even with Twitter's history of manipulating user algorithms? Besides, even if you do trust the algorithm as legit in this case, the prominent example in the OP is an AI shill post with around 3k likes after a couple a days. Meanwhile, there are artists posting silly drawings within the same time frame and they've naturally surpassed the likes the AI posts get.
I'm back to liking AI again, I can now have Orcs in 1980s Japan in good fidelity.
I still do think Pajeets trying to profit of this are cringe though
All I can ask is why Justin Bieber is in 1980s Japan there in the left corner
can't wait to see what this technology can do in a couple years
I'll be sure to use it to create my own comic featuring a punisher rip off who kills criminals but she's also an edgy waifu that losers can jerk off to
it'll be dope trust me dudes
>You will never be a real artist. You have no skills, you have no discipline, you have no passion for the arts. You are a lazy man twisted by instant-dopamine and hubris into a crude mockery of nature’s visionaries. All the “validation” you get is two-faced and half-hearted. Behind your back people mock you. Your parents are disgusted and ashamed of you, your “friends” laugh at your ghoulish ~~*art*~~ behind closed doors. Men are utterly repulsed by your porn. Thousands of years of evolution have allowed men to sniff out frauds with incredible efficiency. Even AI images that “pass” look uncanny and unnatural to a man. It's lack of bone structure is a dead giveaway. And even if you manage to get a guy to believe it's real art, he’ll turn tail and bolt the second he gets a whiff of your pajeet, poo-covered streets. You will never be happy. You wrench out a fake smile every single shitpost and tell yourself AI will replace actual artists, but deep inside you feel the depression creeping up like a weed, ready to crush you under the unbearable weight.
don't want to be an artist, I want waifus
I have a real job with monthly income and a house that I own, why the frick would I ever want to be "a real artist"
Because AI generated crap sucks. Draw your own waifus. Get good at drawing.
I can barely utilize MS Paint, it'd never be worth the effort
tell cool stories I suppose
>I can barely utilize MS Paint, it'd never be worth the effort
LOL skill issue.
What would use your "waifus" for anyways?
>I have a real job with monthly income and a house that I own, why the frick would I ever want to be "a real artist"
Because you clearly hate it? The funniest thing is seeing people lament the fact that they can't do anything creative so they rely on AI slop to generate poor trash for them when the reality is that you hate your job and the fact that you can't sit down and focus on creative endeavors.
People want a shortcut to release their 'creativity' but without doing anything to enrich it.
>Because you clearly hate it?
Holy frick the projecting
Not a single thing he said even implied he didn't like it.
That's been my understanding from every single person that pushes the AI slop and so far I haven't been wrong. You have people on the more extreme end arguing that they actually created the works generated by the AI and then go after other people (in the biggest fit of irony), plus a bunch of others including in this thread wanting it as a shortcut to a creative outlet.
The reality is you need little art skill to start. It's a matter of actually starting that scares people. Look at the MS paint shitpost games that end up popular.
>The reality is you need little art skill to start. It's a matter of actually starting that scares people. Look at the MS paint shitpost games that end up popular.
>MSPaint doodles are now too high of a hurdle for proompters
>MS
>Fricking
>Paint
Don't ever be surprised at the ridicule you receive AIgays.
>Because you clearly hate it?
I don't know what about not dropping my job to waste thousands of hours learning how to paint because I have a neat idea for a character makes you think that I clearly hate my current job
I find my job quite rewarding if anything
I'm a writer. Published, even. I cannot draw for shit. And believe me, 99% of visual artists can't write for shit. If they built an AI that could write a story exactly like Cormac McCarthy I wouldn't begrudge them for using it, I'd just despair that my career is over.
Fortunately literature is a lot more abstract than visual art because it requires constant manipulation of language, and the AI itself IS language, meaning that in order to have an AI that can write as well or better than, say, I can, it would need to be a Strong AI.
And at that point I don't give a frick, we are now in the singularity and the entire question is irrelevant.
Remember ai has great potential
Yeah, for shitposting. Nothing else.
Friendly reminder that AI will only be good for shitposting and nothing else. Eventually they'll put more restrictions on it and then it will start sucking again.
Restriction for corporate abuse should have implemented long ago, ai use by corporations to demean and belittle working artists is just of a bigger problem, the worsening state of unrestricted capitalism
That's when you switch to open source that has no restrictions.
you must choose: simp for big media conglomerates or big tech conglomerates
The media congomerates openly hate me. The tech congomerates only sort of hate me, and ocassionally give me free shit.
>muh AIslop
you can't stop the technological revolution grampa
you're going the way of the candle maker and that's a good thing, maybe you should learn to code or something lmao
AI art is not real art.
You fricking Hylics don't even know what "art" is. Every explanation I get is fricking moronic, "durr it's anything made by an artist" which is a tautology, "durr it's anything that is intended to make you feel some way," that's just all communication moron.
Here's an easy definition, watch this. Art is a work whose purpose is to aesthetically change the world in a deliberate way.
That's it. Well, I have bad news moron, AI itself is a work whose purpose it is to aesthetically change the world in a deliberate way. So AI itself is art. The "Art" you disparage is the aesthetic change that it affects.
Jesus christ you people get a small, watered down taste of "creating" something and you start spewing the most inane, brainlet, pretentious shit, you're like a hivemind.
>the grind is the whole point
Most American animation productions now end at boards and character sheets and a bunch of overworked Korean inbetweeners do 90% of the grind. So what exactly is lost if that side of the process gets automated?
AI has given me way more, somewhat closer to model coomer art than any artists ever and for FREE. FRICK artists is what I say
>Implying it'll be free forever
>I'm a writer
>Source: Just trust me bro
>Fortunately literature is a lot more abstract than visual art because it requires constant manipulation of language, and the AI itself IS language, meaning that in order to have an AI that can write as well or better than, say, I can, it would need to be a Strong AI.
>When they came for the artist, I did nothing because I wasn't an artist. When they came for the writers...
>Art is a work whose purpose is to aesthetically change the world in a deliberate way.
Art has been diluted to the point that pretentious fricks try to scam people into believing a banana taped to a wall is ~~*art*~~
I know what "art" is, and that's not what people want. People appreciate artWORK, not just "art". An artistic production, an artistic work with one or more people making and refining it. It's something you put time and work for. That is want makes artwork, the craft and care behind it. Not some nebulous postmodern hipster commie gobble that forces other people to call ~~*ART*~~
I don't want your infinite valueless "art", I want Artwork.
>implying automating animation will improve it.
>The advent of the camera is exactly analogous to the advent of computers. It made the art of creating pictures easily accessible to people who could not, in a million years, paint. It enabled generations of people to look disdainfully at portrait painters and say: “Artists… we don’t want you; we don’t need you.”
>Will your Kodak FunSaver 35 produce a visual work on par with the Mona Lisa? No. That’s not the point. The point is, it doesn’t have to. Artists can, and do, continue to express themselves. But they no longer have a lock on pictorial pieces of history.
The camera didn't replace the painter and if people want a painting, they can still get one. Painters aren't out of business and neither will artists be in general.
>Implying it'll be free forever
ok so it's either free forever or not. What is the argument again? because artists aren't free at all for my requests
Pehaps it is a good thing artists if are relieved of your autistic requests
Great so everyone wins, why cry about AI then?
ok and? I had no options before, now I do. Why would I care for what may happen down the line? when the alternative is nothing at all to begin with? what a silly argument
>Great so everyone wins, why cry about AI then?
Because by using AI you are commiting theft.
KEK
No one likes a thief. You can't get around that.
o well, not my problem
why are you crying again?
>o well, not my problem
It is, if you want to share your "creative" endeavors with the rest of world.
I don't, I just wanna coom
most creative proompter
>o well, not my problem
Have fun paying $20/month for DALL-E 4 then.
>Now you know what it was like for the common man when you used to mock him day in and day out.
>Citation: None.
I'll just stick with 3 or not pay at all? what do you not get? before I had nothing, now I have something. If I lose that something I just go back to have nothing so I don't really care?
🙂
>I'll just stick with 3 or not pay at all?
>Implying that'll be an option in the future
>before I had nothing, now I have something. If I lose that something I just go back to have nothing so I don't really care?
>YouWillOwnNothingAndYouBeHappy.nwg
you are actually moronic m8
no one's crying, ranjid
but artists are crying? have you been through this thread?
>I had no options before
>Practice?
>Commissions?
>Drawthreads?
>WAAAAA THAT'S TOO HARD, HELP ME AI Black personMAN
You will relying on an online system that can and will frick you in the ass later down the line. It's no different than a drug-dealer; The first hit is free. Why advertise your new AI image software when you can get other people to do it for for FREE?
Peter David predicted this back in 1994 and I'm loving the artist seethe.
https://www.peterdavid.net/2011/01/31/words-and-pictures/
>And with computers, artists’ monopoly on animation and comics will likewise evaporate. I firmly agree with artists who say that visualization is the most important aspect of comics. I think it’s self evident that excellent art can elevate a mediocre story, whereas a superb story can be made unreadable by lousy art.
>But if artists such as Kricfalusi think that they are the be-all and end-all of animation and comics… that the lack of drawing ability by one segment of the working populace means that that segment is inherently inept, untalented or inferior… then such artists are kidding themselves.
>If the notion of artwork on computers remains unthinkable to you, well… I presume that, ten years ago, the concept of lettering and coloring on computers would have likewise seemed absurd. Here’s news: It’s no longer absurd. It’s routine.
>History and progress says that artists do not have a lock on their “elevated” position in the hierarchy of visual entertainment. Not by any means.
>Kricfalusi’s bellowing about all writers of comics and animation being, by definition, bad, does not make one think of an informed opinion. Rather, it evokes the indignant screams of a prehistoric creature, caught in the tar pit of technology and being dragged down without quite understanding what’s happening.
>In summation, all that’s left to say to comics newcomer John Kricfalusi is:
>Glub.
>Glub.
>Glub.
Damn
>>Glub.
>>Glub.
>>Glub.
absolutely savage
>Javier Rodriguez compared it to cutting and pasting other comic books into a new one, questioning its authenticity
Andy Warholbros... We aren't authentic
thats not a comic, closer to fanart. you can clearly tell from where the program copy pasted.
Just like Andy Warhol
What an artist
lol at this artist seething over anyone now being able to create art. Good. Now you know what it was like for the common man when you used to mock him day in and day out.