Even as a hobby?
It's hard for me not to feel like, what's the point now, let alone in a few years as the tech get better and better.
 Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
 DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68 |
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
Shut the frick up with your gay ass demoralization thread.
Have you considered utilizing the tool?
Why should anyone?
Why shouldn't?
Don't answer my question with another question.
>t. answered
with a question
Just because a certain sect of non-artists online have decided to utilize AI for their own specific purposes, doesn't mean that everybody else (including artists) has to as well. There's various ways of creating art. There's no reason one method has to die in favor of another.
Which type of art is dying because of AI art?
I didn't say a specific method was dying out.
I was referring to non-artists.
No, you're not going anywhere with those goalposts.
Shut up.
If you can't defend the position you initially presented, why present it?
You've barely addressed my point. You're just bugging me with stupid questions.
>You've barely addressed my point
Do you have one? Because you seem keen on backpedaling and non-answering, so far.
>non-artists
How do you know that absolutely zero artists are using AI?
>There's no reason one method has to die
From using AI, yes.
because that makes me feel like I'm not actually drawing
(because if I use it im not)
>what is a toolset?
You can use it for backgrounds or textures or other shit. Doesn't have to encompass the whole of your artwork.
don't care never using it
every work I do will be my work and only my work
And it will still be, if you use AI.
>don't care
There it is, really. You don't care to hear anything that might change your mind on a subject, so why engage at all?
I mean I tried, for a month or two I relied on it. But it just made me feel like shit. I like doing everything in my work
>You can use it for backgrounds or textures or other shit.
So long as you never have to have anything complex like food in the background anyway
Whenever I use AI my brain becomes zombielike
Because I’m not a pajeet and/or without a soul, I’m afraid
This. Why should AI be any different than photoshop? You can draw your style in photoshop, train your own personal AI with it, and put out more work than any other artist previously in history. You don't even have to do nothing BUT AI art, you can use AI for some things, and be totally organic about other things. There's no reason AI has to be the death of art. Corporations will use it to the fullest extent to exploit it, but AI art also means the average indy artist can now pump out as much animations as a korean studio. Really the only ones who should be scared of losing their jobs are the Koreans, but NO your average artist is a "Feels first, brains second (if at all)" type of individual. Those of you who are smart enough to learn and utilize the tool, in addition to your artistic skills, will become bitcoin rich. The rest will be left seething in the dust due to their own choices.
then it's the "ai" that drew it not you so what's the point
What part of "as a tool" are you not getting?
lol a hammer and a robot with a hammer arm are absolutely not the same moronic shill
You know you're being disingenuous, right? I'm asking because it's actually surprisingly common for people not to know.
Yes they are, you still control both
You're the one who came up with the style, the ideas, the information that trained the AI. The AI is just a Rube Goldberg machine to mass produce what you created. At every step of the way you can even touch up, edit, or do whatever to whatever the AI puts out, so you don't even technically have the excuse that it wouldnt be your art. If you still honestly feel like it's not your work, because a machine drew up a bunch of copies, then that's fine, sit there and do nothing but stagnate and seethe. Other artists who are ready to make their own indy cartoons, and get rich off of youtube will leave you in the dust.
>Other artists who are ready to make their own indy cartoons, and get rich off of youtube will leave you in the dust.
If everyone mass produces that amount of sludge, hardly anyone's going to get rich off anything. Only those who already have the money for marketing.
Plenty of shit artists make stupid money off of what is essentially shit sold to morons with no taste. And i'm not referring to any one industry, art, style, or anything here, so apply your own biases.
There's billions of us at the moment, and you can get viewers from around the world on youtube. Even if you dont make money off americans, there's australians, spaniards, slavs of all kinds, and asians who might eat your shit up.
There's really no excuses left.
>Plenty of shit artists make stupid money off of what is essentially shit sold to morons with no taste.
And plenty more fail to make any living off their work at all. You're severely underestimating how many other people are going to be doing the same thing as you if creating animation becomes that easy. It won't matter if you upload it onto Youtube or any other global platform, everyone's going to be buried under a mountain of AI slop like none that's ever been seen before.
I disagree entirely. Though people do slurp up shit at a record pace, there will still be room for winners and losers in the AI environment. A measure of quality will still be a determining factor in someone's success.
In fact, in an environment flooded will mindless AI slop done by hacks, the israeliteels will end up standing out more I believe. People who put in a measure of effort will get ahead, while those create more banal shit will fall behind or be lost in the tide of garbage.
How will anyone find those israeliteels if they're instantly buried under a mountain of crap that will grow exponentially bigger all the time? Again, only those with the funds for marketing will come out on top.
>How will anyone find those israeliteels
How does anyone find anything they like?
A lot of people seem to depend on algorithms, but ones like Youtube's already have a problem with promoting every quality video out there. Searching will also become much more crawling through garbage.
Again, AI will exponentially increase the amount of shit out there far beyond what there is right now. It will be so much harder to stand out when everyone has the same capabilities. Every single person who dreams of using AI to make animations is already thinking that they'll be the ones to stand out from everyone else, I'm sure. It won't work out that way.
That still requires money at the end of the day.
Word of mouth won't be nearly enough in that kind of environment bloated with content. It sure as hell wasn't enough for a ton of comics, shows, etc. that were cut short.
That was the case before. So nothing has changed for you.
Not even marketing is required, you just gotta pay for the algorithm to promote you to everyone.
Do what so many others do. Shill around the web. Namedrop your shit on social media. Word of mouth can get you pretty far. You don't necessarily need millions of dollars from some media studio to market your shit. Cinemaphile may have no shilling rules and shit on people who shill, but there's question that it gets some people traction.
>You're the one who came up with the style, the ideas, the information that trained the AI. The AI is just a Rube Goldberg machine to mass produce what you created
so it's doing the work for you
>at every step of the way you can even touch up, edit, or do whatever to whatever the AI puts out, so you don't even technically have the excuse that it wouldnt be your art.
so you're taking a shortcut because you just want to make goyslop and not have to innovate or be creative
>you still honestly feel like it's not your work, because a machine drew up a bunch of copies, then that's fine, sit there and do nothing but stagnate and seethe. Other artists who are ready to make their own indy cartoons, and get rich off of youtube will leave you in the dust.
there's not a single ai comic that hasn't looked like complete dogshit though so I doubt that.
>Other artists who are ready to make their own indy cartoons, and get rich off of youtube will leave you in the dust.
>t. worthless idea guy who will never be an artist and his shitty comics will get flooded out by millions of teenagers and children using the same ai as him
Even if you're just animating with CG models, it's good to at least be able to draw well in perspectives and anatomy so that your creativity isn't limited. Copying perspective is only going to get you so far when the dataset becomes a loop. It's like saying not accepting that future animation is now all rotoscoping with an AI filter means you're stagnating.
A spatula is a tool used for cooking, buying a meal from McDonald's isn't. A tool does not supplant the entire act of creation.
>buying a meal from McDonald's isn't [analogous to using AI for art]
You left out some words.
What's the difference between commissioning art and using AI to shit out some output (beyond the quality of course). Hell, you have even more control when commissioning because then you can have a human fine-tune the details to your specifications to a far more exact degree. Neither of those things make you an artist.
>the difference between commissioning art and using AI
You have more control over the AI.
>you can have a human fine-tune the details to your specifications
You could do that yourself, with multiple iterations and even a bit of PhotoShop.
>You have more control over the AI.
How? AI might as well be a shitty image gacha at this point. At least by commissioning something you can point at specific details, give specific instructions, and actually get a result that you might want beyond vagueries.
>You could do that yourself, with multiple iterations
Like I said, image gacha.
>How?
You have control over the prompt and seeds used to generate the image, and after that, the resulting image doesn't have to be the final product.
>with multiple iterations
>Like I said, image gacha
It's really more like applying multiple filters.
You forgot controlnet. Poses, regional prompting, etc, if you have the VRAM, you have a lot more tools at your disposal.
>Like I said, image gacha.
Or... cleaning and changing a rough?
cleaning up roughs has more control than re-rolling in SD
>cleaning up roughs has more control
Yes. That's the point. You don't have to just mindlessly sit in front of the image generator until it slot-machines the Perfect Image that's never going to generate.
Just to clarify are you saying that inpainting is actually good? Because in my experience it sucks and is just a time waster.
>reminding someone that something is doable means you're necessarily endorsing it as a fun activity
You know a good way to spite them, then? Using their tools and telling them you won't be replaced.
I'm almost sorry it took just over 200 posts for you to read that.
>You should spite them by buying the product they're selling!
Are you serious?
>buying
>what is free and open-source?
>it's free to play, how is it shilling?
>free to play
If your only comparison point is shitty video game business models, when we're talking about something you can self-host and use entirely on your own terms, I don't know what to tell ya.
Freemium is a well documented strategy. Big tech companies are well known to introduce something for free or at huge discounts as a way to capture the market and then lock consumers in. That's why people like Emad Mostaque and Sam Altman are so eager to make their products easily accessible and widely adopted even as they're burning money right now. They want to become entrenched in everything so that they'll be too big to fail.
Even with self hosting people are going to get wienerblocked by needing to buy a good graphics processor and then having to run their computer like a workhorse. It sure would be a shame to look up who owns and has shared interests with the major graphics card makers.
>Freemium is a well documented strategy
Exactly, which open-source has little-to-nothing to do with.
> people are going to get wienerblocked by needing to buy a good graphics processor and then having to run their computer like a workhorse
I know you guys love the NFT comparisons, but do you think this works exactly like crypto mining? Running non-stop to make image after image after image, instead of inputting one prompt at a time and tinkering with an output you like?
>algorithms
Is that how they did it before social media?
>Is that how they did it before social media?
Social media has technically been a thing since the first message boards opened up. But if you're thinking, say, pre-Youtube, things were a lot more personally curated by sites' staff back then. That's gotten much more difficult to do these days, and will get even worse with the advent of AI. Just look at how sci-fi magazines like Clarkesworld are already struggling with AI spam filling their free submission inboxes for short stories, and have talked about potentially having to stick to known authors or make submitters pay in the future. "Anyone will be an artist" indeed.
I take it word-of-mouth just doesn't exist anymore?
Not everything that's high quality gets enough word of mouth, no. You'll still need to get enough people to spread it.
>drinking the tech koolaid this hard
Enjoy doing their r&d for them for free and then getting fricked when they decide it's time to cash in. Ask Emad for an extra reach around while you're at it for the good work you're doing for him. Maybe he'll give you a shout out during his next round of fundraising.
the tech koolaid this hard
>doesn't know what "open-source" means
Ah yes "open source" the wonderful loophole to develop tech using everyone's data all the while intending to make money off it in the long run.
So NovelAI is free then?
Automatic1111 is. Of course you need an $800 or greater GPU but it's not like you don't have that already from mining crypto right?
They're just jumping at shadows, so afraid they are of "pajeets". Pathetic.
Are you just responding to yourself?
I don't know. Am I?
>NovelAI
>paid subscription service
Are you even?
paid subscription service isn't free and open source.
>Because in my experience it sucks and is just a time waster.
How much time did you spend using it? Are you able to use inpaint to add this costume to any image you want?
That looks like shit, can't even get consistent asscheek coverage.
Cool, now you're mindlessly attacking something a drawanon did years ago, but that's not the point. You were talking about how the refining process is just gacha using SD, and that you used inpaint and that "it sucks and is just a time waster." Can you do this costume to any image you want? If you can't, you don't know how to use the tool.
Not only are you saying (at least) two different anons are the same person, you haven't actually proven SD/Inpainting can do it either.
>Not only are you saying (at least) two different anons are the same person
If someone replies to me, it's obvious that I'll assume it's the person I was talking to.
>you haven't actually proven SD/Inpainting can do it either.
https://desu-usergeneratedcontent.xyz/co/image/1678/02/1678020777094.png
https://desu-usergeneratedcontent.xyz/co/image/1678/02/1678024509835.png
If this isn't enough, I can show you the original, the edit, and the result, a.k.a the refining process. If this is not enough, go to civitai, pick any Cinemaphile lora, post an image of a costume of your choice, and I'll use only inpaint and img2img to generate something.
>I can actually draw so it'd be faster for me to do it manually.
So can I, but that isn't the point. The point is that you said that the refining process is non-existent and that it's gacha based. This is a lie, and if you can't do it, you're spreading lies. You're causing more harm than good. By contributing to the mythos that anything made with these tools is RNG combined with the lie that everything takes just a few seconds without human input, can you see the damage this does to those interested in art and beginners? Can you imagine how demoralizing this can be to professionals?
These lies don't hurt these tools, it hurts other artists.
The point is whether or not it's quicker to use AI. To someone who can render quickly by hand, AI isn't interesting if it's more work to realize a render.
>and I'll use only inpaint and img2img to generate something.
On the first generation?
>By contributing to the mythos that anything made with these tools is RNG
What exactly do you think seeds are?
There's a non-negligible amount of randomness involved in the process. It would be worthless if it was entirely deterministic.
I can actually draw so it'd be faster for me to do it manually.
A young high school artist is contracted by a friend for an amount of money to make a poster for an event. Say a "Battle of the Bands". The highschooler draws up a poster, then verifies what he drew with the person who contracted him. The poster then goes to the copiers, so they can be pinned up around town, and handed out as fliers.
Is the artwork on the copies still the artwork of the artist? If not, why not? Does them being copies negate the original artists work? What about the prints people sell? Are people who sell printed copies of their art not selling THEIR ART?
>Is the artwork on the copies still the artwork of the artist?
Yes? What sort of moronic question is that. The only ownership conferred in a commission transaction is that of the physical object produced and/or IP, the credit behind the creation does not change.
>The only ownership conferred in a commission transaction is that of the physical object produced and/or IP, the credit behind the creation does not change.
That is exactly what I was driving at.
>and put out more work than any other artist previously in history.
Already fricked priorities.
He doesn't even specify it necessarily being good work lmao. Quantity > quality for these people.
>potential = priority
Not him, by the way.
Caring about the potentials already makes you a failed human being. If you only care about the future instead of the present you already failed at life.
>If you only care about the future
You're the first one to say anything like that.
>This. Why should AI be any different than photoshop?
There are literally thousands of scifi books written about the dangers of AI.
The dangers of photoshop? Doctored images have been around since the beginning of photography.
I don't see why anyone who likes being creative would want to use "AI" as a "tool" when it does 90% of the work for you so whatever you make isn't really your own.
it feels like you're just saying this so the people who don't like "AI" end up using it anyways.
>it does 90% of the work for you
You don't need to say "didn't read" twice.
it doesn't depend on the user because regardless of the prompt you put in it spits out a full image and draws everything for you...
Yes, and that is obviously the final product, and there is nothing else that can be done after that, you clever, clever son of a b***h.
>90% of the work for you so whatever you make isn't really your own.
This is the kind of attitude that causes purity spirals in the art community.
>Oh, you traced? Then you're not a real artist.
>Oh, you used reference? Then you're not a real artist.
>Oh, you used digital tools? Then you're not a real artist.
>Oh, you used photo elements? Then you're not a real artist.
>Oh, you used 3D models? Then you're not a real artist.
NO RULES.
JUST TOOLS.
Learn it. Live it.
>Oh you traced?
Tracing means you don't understand structure and other skills. References allegory doesn't work if it concerns something completely original [meaning outside of a current dataset]. With tracing, when a director asks you to make something all on your own, you're going to look like a jackass.
>Tracing means you don't understand structure and other skills
>what is learning?
When you learn you stop tracing.
Yes. Exactly.
tracing does not help you with structure though and it actively goes against the fundamentals because its practicing lines rather than learning form. Its dumb when you can apply 'learning' excuse to literaly everything.
>tracing does not help you with structure
Why wouldn't it? Like, at least through osmosis, you're learning how to draw complex shapes like faces and hands (ho ho, you're very clever).
>So this response
>what is free and open-source? (You) to this post
Are you serious? isn't accurate at all
No, it is. It's not remotely hard to find open-source, or otherwise just laissez-faire, image generators. NovelAI is just one paid service, I can only assume you intentionally chose as an example of the opposite of what I'm talking about.
>what is idiom?
I'd assume autism if I didn't already suspect willful misunderstanding in other areas.
>If You Have Nothing To Hide, You Have Nothing To Fear™
>No, it is. It's not remotely hard to find open-source, or otherwise just laissez-faire, image generators.
Yeah they all suck unless it's Stable Diffusion or something that's inevitably going to ask for a subscription model in order to support its datasets.
Dude. There's Dall-E, Midjourney, a bunch of other subscription sites already. Stable Diffusion is the backbone for a lot of other sites too. But you can still download the completely free version and models for yourself.
>in order to support its datasets
You can make your own datasets. If the software itself needs updating, after the mainline goes proprietary (or just plum does something a mass of users doesn't like), there are always forks.
You seem really concerned about deepfake getting restricted.
How are deepfakes relevant? Doesn't change the 1st amendment, which includes parody.
I'm just saying an example of why laws would restrict AI.
Despite protecting false speech, the first Amendment does not protect fraud and defamation.
Again, I don't know why you would be concerned about deepfake getting restricted.
I'm concerned with all restrictions on constitutionally protected speech.
So you don't think laws protecting people from revenge porn by going by the 1st amendment's guideline against fraud and defamation is a good thing?
There are already laws against fraud and defamation. These new laws don't matter a wit to protecting anything.
>the most evil thing a person can do with it is why we must restrict it for everyone!
Good pet.
There's already laws against fraud and defamation in spite of your surface level interpretation of the first amendment. It's just that revenge porn deepfakes are being identified as fraud and defamation.
>fraud and defamation
>these are the only uses for deepfake technology
Laws that won't make meme deepfakes that are identified as such illegal are still laws that restrict AI as they are still restricting malevolent deepfakes used for revenge porn, misinformation and fraud.
>Doctored images have been around since the beginning of photography.
Also, see
(top)
And? Doctored images are illegal if you're using them seriously for revenge porn or fraud. Meme Photoshops are obvious in that they're fake and even if they're convincing, the author would disclose that it's fake, so they're not the equivalent to a malevolent doctored image used for criminal activities.
>they're not the equivalent to a malevolent doctored image
Tell that to all the media pundits who called a slowed-down video of Nancy Pelosi a "malicious deepfake."
Yeah, because how are you going to enforce it without a massive network of state-backed spyware?
*sees what Chromium is doing* Oh, shit!
Above, but also
Why are they being brought up in the context of AI art, in the first place? Unless, of course, you just see the whole conversation through one narrow lens.
>Yeah, because how are you going to enforce it without a massive network of state-backed spyware?
I hate to be the one to tell you but that is exactly what is going to happen. Governments have already been talking about this. With more technology comes more surveillance and control. Ai is the perfect excuse to accelerate this. I'm sorry sweaty that's just part of "progress".
Of course you have to know how to draw without tracing, just like you need to know how to paint without using photo elements or AI.
But once you have those skills, and have developed solid fundamentals, you can use tracing to speed the process up on a particular piece, especially if you're tracing elements that require no particular design work to be done.
Same with AI. If all you're good at is punching words into a text box, you're useless, but if you can create and modify designs, you can use AI to churn out multiple variations of the same idea, or speed-generate non-essential elements that you'd probably have used photo-elements or stock templates for anyway.
It's overall less work to just do the compositions and designs yourself
ONLY ROCK ONLY PAINT ONLY HAND
This, AI is a good mannequin poser if nothing else
I used to commission, now I just proompt porn. However I’m writing a fantasy series and I have used AI to make portraits of many characters and background characters, it helps me to have a picture of them. It took me a few hours and I now have a thousand+ portraits of various cultural groups and ethnicities.
Real talk, I have a roommate who works graphic design for a MAJOR sports team, as well as making YouTube thumbnails for a bunch of famous comedians, and he uses AI all the time to expand backgrounds and shit.
First image is missing the top of her skull and it gets worse from there.
got excited and thought you meant gore... it's just a crop, lame
That’s just how the toddler camera roll look zoomed out. While obviously not perfect, they work well enough for my mental image of the characters.
But it’s hard to get non-anime characters. Getting a bald and ugly guy is near impossible.
all this shit is so boring. Like I don't like this style of art when humans do it. It's worse with machines.
just get some rpg/realism models or LoRA
Already got all I need, but maybe I’ll redo it all in a year when AI’s made more leaps forward. Again, hands and eyes and everything isn’t perfect but it still works as a placeholder for helping imagine the characters in my mind.
And then for cheesecake I have a different PROOMPTING style
homies all have moronic fricken cross eyes. I dont know how you gays can look at these and think "oh wow good enuff". And i am not even delving into finer detailed shit like skin melting into clothes, randomly missing lines as well as deformed body part
Filthy fricken low quality that is what it is
It ain’t eazy being preazy (prompt Yeezy).
I think that might just be that style, when I do more anime things it’s less blurry
But I only like this style for coin though.
*coom
This. I think the saddest thing about there being so many AI shills here is that it makes it clear how little quality actually matters to so many anons. For all their big talk about how comics and cartoons suck now they then go eat this slop? It's so transparent that they never actually gave a shit about stuff like writing or animation quality; it's always been identity politics driving their tastes.
And perhaps worst of all these homosexuals are proud that the mask is now off.
>desperate samegayging
damn
>only one people can dislike this goyslop.
you forgot to type "pajeet" too, friend
No, they saw how bad the industry is and decided to do something themselves. What did you do besides reactionary views? Post something you've been working on, and I'll post something I'm working on.
>I used to commission
>I’m writing a fantasy series
>I have used AI to make portraits of many characters and background character
>I have a roommate who works graphic design for a MAJOR sports team, as well as making YouTube thumbnails for a bunch of famous comedians, and he uses AI all the time
Wow, the usual bullshit claims made by shills but rolled into one post.
It has, yeah.
I feel like soon art will just be a hobby like collecting stamps, so the world will be an endless sea of artists who never see the art of others.
If the idea of le copyright-violating anime girl-pinup robot is enough to make you not be creative, then you probably were never really that creative to begin with.
fourth post best post
It hasn't. Helps to be passionate about it.
It really shouldn't demoralize artists and comics creators as AI art still has significant hurdles before it can be seen as "legitimate". Mainstream audiences will still be rather turned off by the teething issues of cutting edge tech, so it has that uncanny valley to overcome, whereas real comics live or die on their art, and so long as you have an agreeable art style, you should have no worries.
The pajeets who use AI are so obsessed with Emma Watson it's honestly kinda creepy
She's instantly recognizable, so she makes a good benchmark. And early models tended to recognize her better than other celebs.
You massively over-value the mass' taste and discernment.
A.I. is dumber than a housepet
>addressed nothing
As someone that plays tabletop games it's been pretty much a boon but only if you play typical dnd shit.
Sadly I want to run a superhero campgain but because art generators take from what they see online each prompt is always a amaglation of Superman Batman and Spiderman
AI is only useful for porn anyways
>only
Even if that's true, *for now.
I think it's too late for a *for now.
https://www.theregister.com/2023/07/21/judge_ai_art/
>rooting for a lawsuit that seeks to make artstyles copyrightable
Bye-bye artist tributes, I guess...
You can read the source code to see of it phones home.
Adobe wants to do that because they're interested in using AI. Still it would be funny to think AI's inevitable progress gets halted by lawsuits before it can make proper animations that aren't crap rotoscoping.
>Adobe wants to do that
And so does Sarah Andersen, per the statements to the judge.
>it would be funny to think AI's inevitable progress gets halted by lawsuits at the greater expense of artistic freedom
Bye-bye Calvin and Hobbes parodies...
So I guess lawsuits can halt the inevitable progress of AI.
If you like your own art being regulate the same way, sure.
What is going in one eye and out the other, for you?
But I thought AI is an unstoppable progress? Where's the *for now now? [what's to stop AI users to just suck it up and be pirates?]
I mean laws are going to made against AI anyways in order to stop deepfakes.
I would wait, maybe, until AI produces a single solitary worthwhile work before ringing the bells of Armageddon. That seems like a good line in the sand.
Like any tool, it depends on the user.
On it's own, AI can't produce shit. And a lot of normies are content to spend money on memejourney to get pics for facebook. The much memed about comic that failed to get copyright also used Zendaya for the character, so that should have been a nonstarter to begin with when it comes to monetization, but now people are coming up with ways to produce unique and consistent characters, so we may soon start seeing comics and shit with AI generated assets. Movie clips too.
>we may soon
If all flavours of "we may soon" are banned from AI discussion then what's left?
Mostly pinups and porn. Stock images are being AI generated too. Personally I'm working on a comic, but I'm not going to debut it until I fix some hands and thoroughly photoshop it.
>On it's own, AI can't produce shit.
Yeah which is why it has to steal (sorry, """train""") countless thousands of gigabytes of copyrighted shit before it can make "emma watson fantasy clothes tight with big boob"
>steal
What copies were destroyed?
IP theft is a legally recognised thing. If you want to argue for partial or total freedom of information then you should actually argue that, not ask some poor salty anon to chop semantics.
>IP theft
How is that related to saving image files off of Google?
If you're ignorant of the legal questions surrounding AI art, I'm not the best source to educate you. If you're just being deliberately obtuse, I'm not interested. So either way you're effectively choosing to end this conversation.
>If you're ignorant of the legal questions surrounding AI art
I know a recent court case didn't turn out in your favor...
>non-infringing fair uses
Are you NTA backing me up, or...?
NTA, just poiting out that google can use snippets and stuff of copyrighted material as fair use, and this case has been sucessfully used to defend the training of AI models on copyrighted material.
Ah. That's not the specific court case I was referring to, but that does support my point.
The law has already decided that AI generated shit has no human author and therefore can't be copyrighted itself, meaning companies can't make money off of AI shit. Now there are other cases going to court right now about AI's explicit usage of pirated materials that will render AI in its current state illegal in ADDITION to it not being able to provide capable of legally being monetized.
If you're an 85-IQ coombrain Indian who just wants to jerk off to Emma Watson in the slave Leia outfit or whatever I guess you can, but it's not going to "REVOLUTIONIZE SOCIETY" like the NFT shills of yesteryear are claiming.
>The law has already decided that AI generated shit has no human author and therefore can't be copyrighted itself
There's no law saying this, it's just the national copyright office's decision barring any potential legislation that may arise. As it is, I could just slap some photoshop over it and call it a day when it comes to copyright. You do NOT want to open this digital art can of worms, or all digital art is liable to lose copyright, meaning EVERYTHING. And besides, you can't copyright individual AI output, BUT a complete work using AI assets can be copyrighted.
>AI's explicit usage of pirated materials that will render AI in its current state illegal in ADDITION to it not being able to provide capable of legally being monetized.
so far this hasn't held up in court. Do you have any specific examples or are you just talking out your ass again?
https://www.thefashionlaw.com/court-inclined-to-dismiss-claims-in-lawsuit-over-ai-art-generators/
>The law has already decided that AI generated shit has no human author and therefore can't be copyrighted itself
Wait until it gets good enough, then suddenly it will, only it'll be Disney, Apple, Amazon, etc.
They have powerful lawyers to enforce their TRADEmark, and you betcha the mouse is going to get copyright for their proprietary models while working on legislation to hinder open source work.
Assuming AI isn't just outright banned to use if you're not approved.
>AI generated shit has no human author
Who wrote the prompt?
>will render AI in its current state illegal
Again,
>like the NFT shills of yesteryear are claiming
>yesteryear (past)
>are claiming (present)
>I don't have a thesis
Really, now.
>Really, now.
If you're not willing to make an argument for your case here, I'd settle for you ditching "assume a bunch of shit about your interlocutor" as the first step your future supposed Socratic dialogues.
>ditching "assume a bunch of shit about your interlocutor" as the first step
Take your own advice.
I was incorrect in assuming "really, now" was sarcasm? Or have we reached "I know you are, but what am I"?
This whole time, have you not been positing your own opinions of AI art as a whole?
Never once.
So
wasn't you?
No. That's why in my reply I mentioned him in third person. And it's not on me to clarify, unasked, that I'm not any other given anon.
Funny how you escape as soon as fanart was mentioned
OK:
You are the first person in the thread to mention fanart commissions. Why, if your position is intelligent and intelligible, not make a positive argument for it? I'm sure there's one to be made. Why were "but look at fanart tho" and "there's more than one definition of theft" the only responses to my sole, specific complaint that anon was dodging his responsibility to put forward a proper argument?
>anon was dodging his responsibility to put forward a proper argument
Is Socratic debate not proper argumentation?
It's not the Socratic method because I don't have a thesis. I'm a third party wanting to hear the pro-AI argument.
Saving an image is different from using said image commercially.
Generating a new and original image doesn't do that.
Imo then don't get pissed I'll steal all AI slop and draw over them and call them my own.
Go ahead.
>IP theft is a legally recognised thing
Anon, I want you to point on the doll where the naughty AI touched your IP.
How can you believe this while simultaneously defending artists doing fanart commissions?
Artists doing fanart commissions doesn't normally harm the IP holder. In cases where the IP holder does feel threatened by fanart they can and do send cease and desist letters to put a stop to it. AI inherently devalues anything it is capable of copying, and should always be considered a financial threat.
Not very complicated, a little kid could have figured that out without needing to be told.
>Artists doing fanart commissions doesn't normally harm the IP holder.
>AI inherently devalues anything it is capable of copying, and should always be considered a financial threat.
Not only both of these are opinions they are also incredibly biased. Explain why a gay porn commission of TLoZ is fine but AI art of TLoZ is brand damaging
>Explain why a gay porn commission of TLoZ is fine but AI art of TLoZ is brand damaging
Ai is designed to replace, it's satanic in its intentions, while fan art is supportive, even if you don't like it.
No one has used AI without the mindset "I am now better than anyone that ever once drawn and studied for years to get to the point this Ai is scalping from"
>No one has used AI without the mindset I made up just now
Do you really?
Hes not wrong. AI pajeets went on the attack from second one.
>No one has used AI without the mindset "I am now better than anyone that ever once drawn and studied for years to get to the point this Ai is scalping from"
Projecting those insecurities hard man.
It really feels like a lot of these guys have built their sense of self-worth on their art and AI is threatening that (which it shouldn't)
Everybody draws asses. A few thousand more people draw asses every day. Now add a few thousand more bots to that. It's like buying a lotto ticket. Not everyone gets traction. But if you don't neglect the social part of social media, you should be okay. I hate the social part of social media.so I'm certainly no threat to artists.
The quality artists are going to keep getting commissions so why not train to get better instead of spending 10 hours a week crying about AI on Cinemaphile as if that's going to stop AI?
Anon, I want you to point on the doll where I have stolen from your favorite artists and waifu. Go ahead. This is a safe space.
>Right eye looks deformed
>Now the whole face looks like she got a lobotomy
Oh no I'm scared about AI replacing me.
I know some AI can do it better, but it requires work similar to Photoshopping, so it makes the whole point about AI cutting out the work a moot point anyways and just means no matter how much AI advances in its accuracy it'll always be bogged down by people with no creativity or to egotistical to learn visual design
The whole point of pursuing art as a career or a hobby is that you supposedly love spending your time doing it. I'm open minded about experimentation and technology but when people start justifying it by "it saves me so much time/it cuts down on work" I instantly lose all respect. It's always beg tier artists who have a serious case of dunning kruger and are in no place to be giving out advice.
>The whole point of pursuing art as a career or a hobby is that you supposedly love spending your time doing it
Does that mean you have to love doing every single part of it? Even then, the "find a job you love..." adage only goes so far.
Then what does it have to do with the price of tea in China?
I love sketching. I don't like going through an image gacha to get the render I want and then do Photoshop anyways when I could just not waste time and go straight to Photoshop to make the render I want with more creative control if what I want is outside of the dataset.
>Does that mean you have to love doing every single part of it?
The part of it that ai roaches don't like is the entire thing
I like your optimism anon. I think part of that adapting is going to involve artists doubling down on gatekeeping against the slop. Gatekeeping has always been a reality in the arts. It works and there's nothing wrong with it. The roaches will be relegated to the galaxy of ai slop that the internet will become and will eternally cry to their hugbox that painters and animators refuse to associate with them while only bots will respond and updoot. The more ai hurts artists the more vicious artists will become towards them so the drama has only begun.
>The part of it that ai roaches don't like is the entire thing
Cool. Can you answer the question, now?
>Where's the *for now now?
In all likelihood the case still won't go anywhere, because copyrighting a -style- is insane. If that happens, is that what you want?
>restrict me harder, daddy
>AI laws are being made to stop deepfakes
>"restrict me harder daddy"
Oh no you can't do revenge porn.
Unless, of course, you're a major hollywood studio.
Again AI laws against deepfakes are definetly going to be a thing, so simple copyright probably isn't going to be the law that stops AI tech's "inevitable march to the Luddite's displeasure".
>AI laws against deepfakes are definetly going to be a thing
>and I don't care how much damage it does! restrict me harder, daddy!
Deepfake laws don't matter when generating a completely random person.
There's still going to be laws that restrict deepfakes.
So this response
to this post
isn't accurate at all, if you need to pay a subscription (not even a one time payment) in order to use NovelAI.
Seriously what does China have to do with the post you were responding to. Are you using fricking ChatGPT?
>but now people are coming up with ways to produce unique and consistent characters,
>posts another Emma Watson anyway
lol. lmao.
I'm not going to scurry to my PC just to generate a waifu for you, sorry. 😛
Has AI reduced your motivation to get a GF?
Even for conversation?
It's hard for me not to feel like, what's the point now, let alone in a few years as the tech get better and better.
>
AI is the modern equivalent to spirographs
Has Photoshop reduce the motivation of oil painters?
Probably yeah, there's a lot less of them now.
good morning sir
Not really. It's a passion project and I don't really expect to make much if any money off it. Hell, I may even utilize it.
if companies turn to ai to make cartoons shit thats gonna show on tv is gonna turn into the slop that children watch on the youtube kids app.
Kids have watched worse on Youtube. Wasn't there some big hullabaloo about it a few years back?
it didn't kill my motivation but it caused me to adopt a more abstract style. leave anatomical correctness to AI and it's enablers
>leave anatomical correctness to AI and it's enablers
You vastly overestimate my prompting skills.
>leave anatomical correctness to AI
But AI has the exact opposite problem. It's amazing just how AI shills are unable to discern wonky anatomy.
>AI and its enablers
>shilling for AI
Literally pick one.
I didn't mean (You) were one of the AI shills, just that AI shills are utterly blind to mediocrity.
>I didn't mean (You) were one of the AI shills
I know, I'm not. I'm also not that anon, either.
Yeah, basically creative flaws have now become valiable instead of realism, it's basically pointless since if you try to make AI take in flaws to make humans useless you actively make AI useless itself. Humans don't exist to be slaves as much as the highers think we are, life exists to enjoy life, appreciate it, live it. If flawed but fun art is what humans are left to, so be it. Frick recreating "idealized" realism.
Good morning sir
Im a button click away from splurging a month and a half's wage on a tablet to draw comics and other shit so, not really.
What usually does it is lack of time.
Why do you morons keep replying to these pajeet shill threads everytime?
AI has done nothing to effect my drive, since I'm not a moron. If anything, having new ways to exercise my creativity has been a net positive for my artistic ability.
If you are in art for money or attention, you should let AI replace you and spend your time actually contributing something useful to society instead of like and money baiting slop. It would be better for you and the world to spend a week working construction than spending X years drawing uninspired, marketable trash.
You morons are really giving (you)'s to rakesh just so he can spam his poorly photoshopped emma watson folder
This site really needs to rangeban India. California too but I know that's not nearly as likely.
Why would it? If people want the AI, they'll go for it. If people want my art, they'll go for that. The market wants what the market wants.
As much as the narcissist in me wants to tell you to give up so there's less competition for me, I cannot in good conscience stoop that low. Even in the all likelihood you're yet another outsourced tech shill, at the very least there's the chance a genuine human being and not a wienerroach sees this post.
Sequential storytelling is the actual gatekeeper for ai. You can try all you want, but you will fail every time. And I won't even bother entertaining you with some reasons why. In fact, I look forward in continuing to watch you scratch your head and wonder why it's not working out for you, despite having The Most Gorgeous Art In Highest Quality Trending On Artstation Massive Breasts.
are ai gays just seething aphantasia morons? imagine not being able to imagine an apple lmao
Losers have to train a computer for 9 billion hours just to imagine an apple for them lol
I genuinely feel so bad for them. I used to play movies in my head from start to (mostly) finish in my head before bedtime. Any cartoon idea I can think of. At least I heard of some people curing it through mental exercises.
>they will never know what its like to memorize a porn scene in the shower and fap there
>seething
God, this theater has a loud projector...
You're being disingenuous, but I will answer anyway:
Imagining something in your head is ephemeral, you might have an idea you like at one point and in ten years you will be scratching your head trying to remember it.
Something that only exists in your head is something that can't be shared with other people.
Technically both of these problems can be solved by writing stuff down, but it should be obvious that it has its limitations. Besides image generators have other perks, like a certain element of randomness that can create results you might have not thought about.
if you are capable of making pictures in your head you wouldn't be satisfied using an image generator. an image generator will never make the images in your head. at most it stays a novelty
few people can draw whats in their head, but the fact is you can if you learn how to draw. if what you want to create is important enough to you, you will try to get good enough to make it
I'm always confused, wouldn't it be better to just ignore AI instead of criticizing it? Wouldn't criticizing it improve it since you are pointing out the issues?
Nah. I made peace with the fact I’ll probably never be able to make a living doing comics years ago. I just like drawing and coming up with stories.
>I’ll probably never be able to make a living doing comics years ago
Not with that attitude. Anon, you should know by now that anyone with a comic worth making often won't make a living off of it, because they often don't publish through the industry. Now, if you were a brave troony woman of color, or a white woman pandering to wine aunts, then maybe you have a shot. Otherwise suck it up and do the proper research to market your shit yourself.
Opposite for me. I use the AI generated images as references for backgrounds. I also use it to augment and rephrase character dialogue so I won't need an editor anymore.
no, my soul crushing job that's breaking my body down does that.
AI art is cool as a barometer for what type of fetishes are currently in.
the encouraging thing about AI art is how homogenized it is on the amateur level, no one is generating anything resembling comic art.
To make art? No, but I definitely won't publish again. I am glad I have learned to enjoy art for myself and only myself.
>I definitely won't publish again
Why not?
I said that in the post? I enjoy making things for myself
It kinda looked like you were saying AI made you not want to publish anymore, and making art for yourself was something you "learned" to do as...
Should I use the "C" word?
The fact that AI proponents don't do requests on demand is all the proof you need that the tech isn't viable for good projects yet.
Hard to do that when we know you'll use every wonky, off-color pixel as a point against it, then label the entire enterprise trash and smugly go about your life "knowing" it will never advance beyond where it was before "you need to avoid your family because you love them" made sense to a disturbing number of people.
My dude I even said "the tech isn't viable YET". You don't need to double down on the two-more-weeks cope when I do it for you.
I get that you gays are following a script where you just post your dead eyed hermoines and say the same things over and over but you can at least try and post relevant responses.
>look! i agree with you!
>that's why i called it a cope!
I think AI posters on Cinemaphile are definitely paid shills, probably Indians, because they always have the same posting styles and the same dumb call-center-script-tier talking points they try and work people through. After they run out of talking points they will literally just act moronic and try to get people to keep posting because that's probably what they're paid to do by OpenAI.
>I don't care to engage, so I'll just let my seethe do the talking
It would require me to have motivation in the first place, so no.
I'm going to laugh at you ai gays when all of these greedy tech companies copyright all the generated work
>what is open-source?
>what are different policies?
what is taco tuesday
What is the price of tea in China?
>Stuff that can be written around
How do you "write around" a self-hosted piece of software---barring that, one that gives the user a free license to publish work derived from their software for commercial use?
>muh generated question
Try again.
By putting the EULAs in the models. Stable Diffusion can't do shit by itself. It needs models and loras to generate content. Civitai already has tons that say "no commercial use allowed".
>EULAs
Yes, like one that allows for personal publishing. That's what I said.
>Stable Diffusion can't do shit by itself. It needs models and loras to generate content
Relevance?
The relevance, chatbot, is that it doesn't matter if the program is open source if the technology it depends on to actually do anything isn't.
>chatbot
Okay, buddy. I'll still humor you, but okay, buddy.
>it doesn't matter if the program is open source if the technology it depends on to actually do anything isn't
The program is the technology, genius.
>The program is the technology, genius.
So is the models.
Do you not have any idea how stable diffusion works? It's not just a "press button get picture". It relies on the datasets fed into it to generate a response and those datasets AREN'T open source by default.
Just like how if someone gifts you a car you still have to pay for gas. It doesn't matter if the car was free, if it's got no gas it's just a brick. If the models/loras that stable diffusion uses have eulas attached that say you can't copyright shit then you're SOL, and that's where the actual legal battlegrounds hare being fought. On the basis of the models and model makers since they're the ones trawling artists' website and portfolios (and apparently classified medical studies) for training data.
It's not only a possibility, it's already happening. Some latest iterations of models are being trained on AI generated art which is making stuff like wonky hands even worse. It turns out when the curators can't tell good from bad that the data sets get a lot of shit tossed in.
What model was this one made with?
catbox it and I'll tell you.
If you can't tell just by looking, what makes you think anyone else will care?
People have filed lawsuits over less.
Scrubbed the data, huh? I'm still gonna guess Midjourney.
>Scrubbed the data, huh?
Nope. This is straight from my upscale.
>I'm still gonna guess Midjourney.
BWAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!
Bro we both know you were gonna claim I was wrong no matter what.
Anon, he's right. There are no relevant data on that image.
So there's no way to prove which model was used and what EULA was violated?
Anon, that is only one method. How can you assure me that there are no invisible watermarks on that image? That the right (in your case wrong) people don't have the necessary tools to decode it and track you? There are more ways to track you than you realize.
Then I'll be sued, and then I'll burn their house down. So what do you care?
>So what do you care?
I don't. Your argument was so stupid I had to reply.
because the tool used to generate the image is open source and contains no method to create watermarks on the image, and there is no way to implant an invisible watermark from a model into a generated image
>because the tool used to generate the image is open source
Lies. The front end is not the entirety of the tool.
>The front end is not the entirety of the tool
Correct. He downloaded more than just a frontend.
You know it's possible that the program itself doesn't write EXIF data, right? GIMP, for example, gives you that option (at least in older versions...), so even if that's not the default, the functionality is there.
It just doesn't copy over the exif data when I upscale. Dunno why. *shrug*
If he's using Automatic it's suspect as frick that the EXIF data would be removed from upscaling. It doesn't do that when I generate stuff.
>It doesn't do that when I generate stuff
Are you sure the two of you are using the same program?
There's a reason I said "IF he's using Automatic".
Fricking hell you'd think proompter threads would at least have people that think words matter.
>If he's using Automatic
The implication is that you're already assuming this.
Reading in implications is the result of your flawed human brain. If there's one bright side to the singularity it's that these word salad generators aren't going to read between the lines to look for things to b***h about.
>look for things to b***h about
I didn't "look for" shit, that's just how I read it.
>and there is no way to implant an invisible watermark from a model into a generated image
If that were true you guys wouldn't have to intentionally zero out the exif data in order to hide from culpability.
Catch.
https://files catbox moe/z3uxvq.jpg
>pajeet scrubs the exif data
lol so much for being open source. why hide if you did nothing wrong?
>It's not just a "press button get picture"
You're the only people who say that.
>It relies on the datasets fed into it to generate a response and those datasets AREN'T open source by default
Again,
>what are different policies?
Also,
. How are you going to enforce dataset policy if, for example, the artist (yes, artist) used it as a basis and built off of it? Like, you seem to think the only application for this is going from A to Z with just some typing and the click of a mouse. You know what a "tool" is, right?
>urr hurr yooooouuuuu?
Ha ha.
>We are eternal, all this pain is an illusion
Better.
>Indians
Weird they keep shitting in the street, when you let them live in your head rent-free.
>without a soul
How is it any more "soulless" than tracing over a photograph?
>wall of cope
YWNBAA
>Some latest iterations of models are being trained on AI generated art which is making stuff like wonky hands even worse. It turns out when the curators can't tell good from
Which ones?
Which it is, so you have no argument.
Stuff that can be written around if you have enough money and lawyers.
Get GPT to come up with a new question for you.
No because I'm not a pussy afraid of technology. God gave us brains and resources so we would use them.
Artists can easily use AI powered tools as long as idiots don't try to stop their development
>ai art floods the internet
>ai models start picking up existing ai art when seeking training data
>feedback loop ensues
Is this a possibility?
It's already become a problem, why do you think all the art sites that allowed AI shit or had their own models started instituting mandatory AI tags shortly after?
Funny, not even the AI that made the slop has any use for it. it really is just virtual trash, clogging up the arteries of the internet for no purpose
There isn't an AI scanning the internet to update the models. New models are curated and trained on hand selected images.
I can't believe how many gullible artists fell for this meme.
nah
in a way it's the opposite, i think people will start steering away from overly polished art.
i think more amateurish stuff will have a chance in indie places
and even if that's not the case it's more refreshing to me looking at uglier art now that i can find the completely soulless opposite in AI art.
I never developed the discipline needed to get good at art. AI might help me actually make stuff but at this point I think it is better I just give up completely.
I don't make them but as someone who reads them I haven't seen anything made by "AI" that's as good as my favorite artists or even really that good in general so I'm surprised to see so many artists be demoralized over it when it quite frankly sucks. Although I do understand being annoyed by the constant deluge of AI shill threads.
As someone who occasionally does commissions, AI will hopefully filter out the terminally online coomer trash who are allergic to storytelling and narrative in the comics they consume. The rest of us will be fine. I think actual writing and human connection through art will be seen as valuable in the way vinyl records have come back into style.
It's symptomatic of a general death of culture. Most normies will get lost in the dreck, while genuine artists will persist.
No homie, it was the work on my commissions and university work that forced me to put down my comic...
>mods will leave a blatant Cinemaphile thread untouched but not one on comic strip artists they personally don't like
Amazing!
I was always my own worst demotivator when it came to drawing. AI is just the latest excuse I use to cope with the fact that I simply don't want it enough.
No. You improvise, adapt and overcome. If we're all eventually forced to use AI in some way, we'll find a way to blend our hand-crafted work with the automation process to make something that can't be replicated by the machines alone.
Show me two generation of an original expressive cartoon drawing using line of action. And both of them are in sequential order.Then I want to see how many generations it took. for the sake of research because I rarely see AI generate anything cartoonish so I'm not sure how AI will interest a cartoonist.
comics are one of the things ai CAN'T do right now
the current models lack temporal coherence and needs 3d skeleton pose reference to make image that aren't standing poses
you can make plenty of one offs and fix the flaws in post etc, even character sheet turnarounds, but not actual comics
even those you can replicate if you train a LoRA on spastic toon poses as a specific style
but it will always just be that particular poses, w/o context, out of continuity
BUT as of now it simply can not be done w/o an artist going in per-sketching first and post correcting afterwards.. which may be as much work as making your own depending and w/o being able to confidently monetize it until all the lawsuits are cleared.
https://www.cnet.com/culture/ai-drew-this-gorgeous-comics-series-youd-never-know-it/
https://www.boredpanda.com/we-created-the-worlds-first-international-comic-anthology-using-artificial-intelligence/
they are a bunch of experiments
I wouldn't expect much, but there you go
Here’s the bottom line on AI art. It’s here, it’s not going anywhere, and it’s only gonna get better over time. It will be faster than you. It will be cheaper than you. It will be better than you. Fact is, in a decade or two, most media people consume will be custom made to their preferences by AI, with minimal human involvement.
So is that it? Is this the end of human artistic expression? No. As long as humans have existed, we have made art. We won’t be stopping anytime soon. And furthermore, I can’t believe I’m the only person in the world who prefers the media they consume to be made by humans, even if it is technically inferior in quality. Because it requires real effort, because it is an act of self-expression, and of communication. In the future, real, human-made art will become niche, but there will always be communities producing and consuming it.
>In the future, real, human-made art will become niche, but there will always be communities producing and consuming it.
That's still depressing as frick though. Humanity truly deserves the horrors to come if this is allowed go happen.
>Thread about ai comics
>not a single ai comic posted
name 2 ai comics
I think that was his point
I'm still waiting for
why are ai detractors always so anti-indian? also are these the same 3 anons from like a whole year ago?
I thought the anons just say paljeet because they associated tech with Indians so logically they would associate AI with Indians.
it's racist meme anons like to post on Cinemaphile (part of the DO NOT REDEEM SIRS, Indian scammer meme), whilst keeping pure on twitter where they prefer talk about artist right and soulful creativity
Emad is an British Indian CEO of StabiltyAi who released Stable Diffusion as the open source ai image app that been used to create all the porn and anime ai shit.
The other ones like Dalle2 and Mid-journey are pay-to-generate and are strictly censored.
Damn, all that feminist activism must've messed Emma up something fierce. She has a coke nostril, AND there's some right there under her nose! Sad, really...
>gaping hole in nose
>messed up fingers
>big eyes looking in opposite directions
>eyebrow stretching across the side of the head
>"the tech is getting better and better."
>Again, time efficiency was never the point.
According to who?
> The idea that these tools don't require human input, are controlled solely by RNG, and that every result is generated in a jiffy is a lie. If you think these tools are RNG based and the user has no control over them, here's your chance to prove it.
Every result isn't generated in a jiffy specifically BECAUSE it's a random crapshoot whether or not you'll get what you want from inpainting.
I think you might actually be agreeing with the Antis but you're so deep down the IT'S A VIABLE TOOL shill argument that you don't realize you're just echoing all the criticisms.
Newsflash dumbass, a tool that makes work take LONGER is a bad tool!
>According to who?
The conversation. The post I replied to, my answer, and the conversation was about control. I don't care about time efficiency because it has nothing to do with control. The closest thing to time I said was, "How much time did you spend using it? " because the more time you spend on something, the more control you have over it. I do not believe I have to explain this.
>Every result isn't generated in a jiffy specifically BECAUSE it's a random crapshoot whether or not you'll get what you want from inpainting.
I don't think you realize it, but you're saying that it takes time, not because you're refining it, but because you can't control it. And as I said, this is a lie. And if you combine this lie with the lies about lack of human input and speed, it becomes a dangerous lie. If you think I'm lying, go to civitai, pick a Cinemaphile character lora, google some clothes, and I'll give you a result using only img2img and inpaint. This is your chance to prove that control doesn't exist with these tools.
>I think you might actually be agreeing with the Antis but you're so deep down the IT'S A VIABLE TOOL shill argument that you don't realize you're just echoing all the criticisms.
You're kinda slow, right? The argument was that with a commission, you could ask for the revisions you want, and you'll get it. The response was that you could do the same thing with these tools. A conversation about control of the final result.
What's the difference between a commission's revision and you refining something generated? With the commission, you'll only see the final result, while with the revisions you make yourself, you'll see the refining stage and the final result. Why do I have to explain this?
>Newsflash dumbass, a tool that makes work take LONGER is a bad tool!
I'm running out of chars, so I'll be brief. 1 - The tool is in its infancy. 2 - How do you expect to work efficiently with a tool you lack experience in? R u stupid?
>If you think I'm lying, go to civitai, pick a Cinemaphile character lora, google some clothes, and I'll give you a result using only img2img and inpaint.
Raven, Wedding Dress. You have five minutes.
Btw, time's up, fricknut,
>What's the difference between a commission's revision and you refining something generated?
Intuition.
Human brains need less hand holding.
actually its done the opposite
its easier than ever to get so much done
Are you expecting to live for 1000 years or something? Best you can hope for from AI is some generic big eye Manga trash
reminder that if you make a profit of non-OC you draw you are STEALING
no, the opposite in fact.
I mess around with midjourney a lot because it was a fun inspiration slot machine or to shitpost, but to be honest AI never menages to put on paper what i have in mind, so i dont really care unless some pajeet invents a fricking matrix spike to draw pictures directly from your brainstem or some shit
I will be honest with you, no. The best AL can do is some shitty basic ass anime shit, it can't do dynamic posing, it cant do specific detailed request, it can't do emotions. It caters to homosexuals with low standard and those kinda gays werent going to commission in the first place
>it can't do dynamic posing, it cant do specific detailed request, it can't do emotions
*yet
There is no point arguing about what will be, only what is.
I am not interested in head canon and hopeful delusions
>head canon and hopeful delusions
Y'know, before, this shit couldn't even do faces? Back in the days of GANbreeder?
What makes you think poses and expressions are some unsurmountable challenge?
What makes you go on Cinemaphile and run your mouth about this amazing technology without ANY examples of your claims? If it's going to be able to do all this cool shit in two months, come back in two months and talk about it then.
>without ANY examples
>it's going to be able to do all this cool shit in two months
Your words, not mine.
I already know about the sdg thread so your reply has actually literally zero informational content, good job.
You asked for examples, and I can't run the Good Shit™ on my 7-year-old craptop. Take it or leave it.
>You mean a few hours ago?
GANbreeder is older than a few hours.
>Because if you think
>looks good
Looks better than it did in 2019...
>those aren't specific requests
Anon asked for examples. There they are.
>doing requests ala drawthread
Make some requests there, why dontcha?
NTA but those aren't specific requests so it still fails. Anons posting their best curated work isn't proof it can actually deliver on anyone else's demands. Only doing requests ala drawthread will prove that and nobody here is brave enough to pick up that gauntlet.
>aigays claim "the technology is constantly improving"
>nearly a year later and their generals are still filled with girls with deformed hands and faces
Top lel
I mean this thread is nearly 400 replies and despite every opportunity they've been nothing but "it's coming soon!" and "look at the butthurt artists!" I'm sure AI imaging will continue to improve but these clowns don't have any real concept of how or why or how fast. We all know the type.
>Haha look how bad the hands look
>Fixes hands
>Hey! Hey! This is not allowed! Are you trying to pretend this isn't AI? Shenanigans! Shenanigans!
You just want to react anon.
hands
The images don't have fixed hands.
>The images don't have fixed hands.
Except the ones that have and are accused of trying to pretend it wasn't made with AI.
>Y'know, before, this shit couldn't even do faces?
You mean a few hours ago?
Because if you think
looks good then you're moronic.
I am not an ALgay so you pulling all this historical Al fact out of your ass isn't helping you much, anon. I dont give a shit how it was a frickzillion years ago. I dont give a shit how it MIGHT be a gorillion years from now on. I see things in the now and what i see is pure unfiltered garbage
Miss me with that gay shit
I'm also not a billionaire yet, but any day now.
take a random comic you like, whether it be superhero shit, manga or whatever. Then try to recreate it panel by panel. You even have clear references, so it should be easy, right?
Well, as you will find out, it's not.
A single panel with a sexy character standing facing you? Easy. Everything else? Almost impossible.
ai will only get better
soon entire comics will be made using ai
>ai will only get better
probably
>soon entire comics will be made using ai
possibly
I've always enjoyed writing as much as drawing, so it's a win
inb4
>ai will also writer them
I'm sure they will try, and if the day comes when it's as good comics now... it will be quite believable since most comics are dogshit
what is it about AI that brings out the most obnoxious people to both attack and defend
its like AI both killed and is their grandma
both sides want to trigger and be triggered
they aren't interested in conversations here, just poop-posting
>both sides want to trigger and be triggered
I'm here to poke holes in, what I believe to be, flawed arguments. More flawed arguments are coming from the anti-AI camp, in my humble estimation.
anti-ai people have no argument, just moral outrage and empty posturing about "soul"
I think there is a genuine concern that, as the technology improves, something will be lost when the human element is all be redundant in the process of media creation. It's a shame the people tasked with defending that position put all their skill points into emotional indignation, though...
Worrying about far-off improbabilities is exclusively the province of the emotionally indignant. The majority response to AIgays is "Show your work. Oh, you can't? Nice talking to you."
>something will be lost when the human element is all be redundant in the process of media creation
this has been true and arguably so at every new disruptive technology
ai imagery as it improves is a big win for graphic designers who are adapt at image manipulation software, the Photoshop monkeys, not artists who actually draw
since there are way more designers overall who will benefit than illustrators who won't, it's an accurate statement to say ai art will help more people than harm them
but if yer the drawgay, and the end goal of the tech is total replacement of yer job, the innate hostility should be obvious
It's unclear how this would help graphic designers or the semiskilled. If anything their jobs are at much greater risk then bona fide artists.
ask them
https://www.adobe.com/sensei/generative-ai/firefly.html
What is this post even supposed to mean? Is this AI shilling AI?
>something will be lost when the human element is all be redundant in the process of media creation
>a drum machine could play a more technically impressive beat than a human ever could since its conception
>no one gave a shit
>a CNC router can make a carving faster and more precise than a traditional woodcarver
>no one gave a shit
Humans are biased towards human skill and effort. History has shown that just because a machine can technically do something just as well - if not better - it doesn't mean that it'll have any real effect in the long run. Old fashioned handywork is in just as high demand as it ever was, and just as expensive.
If the end product was all that mattered, no one would support local artists. No one would buy hand-carved or hand-made, they'd just buy reprints of Monet and Van Gogh, and the same moulded affordable swedish crap.
Actually given the obvious downside of prints I'm surprised painted copies/"legal forgeries" aren't more popular.
>both sides want to trigger and be triggered
nice classic hit
id like to see ai write a heartwarming comic about a them and their blobfish.
AI sloppa was a mistake
simple as.
i have no idea why anyone would ever want AI art. all of it is by definition soulless slop.
even garbage such as the Unfunnies is better than anything an AI could make by virtue of the fact a real human made it.
p. s. anyone who compares AI to photoshop is moronic and being facetious
>random gibberish
>no argument
I accept your concession.
>random gibberish
ENGLISH, motherfricker. do you speak it?
holy soulless.
Liefeld's art is ugly but at least it's organic
it doesn't matter if it looks good since all AI ""art"" is vile semitic slop
>organic
I hate tourists so much.
>p. s. anyone who compares AI to photoshop is moronic and being facetious
https://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/generative-fill.html
>people pretending OpenPose doesn't exist
they don't know ANYTHING about ai, just that it's wrong and wanting it gone
>another ai shilling thread with the same posts and off-topic deformed pinups
got you to reply 😉
>"ai" "comics"
soulfully vile and organically ugly
>soulfully vile and organically ugly
Nah, just bad.
>ugly b***h from spider-man
lol
even in ai you can't escape from that nog face, lmao
Ok, tell me what changes would be major enough and we can rest the case.
Not at all. I still write my shirt stories (not comics), then use Ai as an editor and take what i like from the ai and my original and rewrite my story.
Its like having a mate give his input, but without "needs more dragon" nonsesne.
when I first saw AI art, THAT, was the closest thing to pure magic to me.
I ran to Cinemaphile to tell my "friends" and they all pretended to be moronic and that this mind blowing technology is somehow "garbage"
it was obvious from day 1 that anybody saying
>AI sucks
>hands are bad or doesn't have "soul"
either have no foresight or is completely humiliating himself by projecting his insecurities in front of everybody.
so I had to make fun of them, is what we do. this is Cinemaphile god dammit.
the correct way to approach AI is mine:
I don't do art because I need money, I don't do it because I want to prove something to somebody or to gain accolades.
I do art because I love it. even if I was a homeless person I would still do art.
I'm a designer, and I hate this job. I hate working in general.
I can always get a blue collar job, I would hate it as much as I hate doing anything else.
I love AI art and receive with open arms, I love art and I hate people.
why on earth would a "real artist" not side with the robots?
isn't because you think you're more important than your art? isn't cuz you value people over what they create?
I will keep mocking people who are too juvenile to just admit it is good art
everybody knows it is good art and you're just lying to yourself
Black person
I do it for myself, an essential part of the hobby is about creation. If the end product was all that matters to you, you should just sell yourself completely to AIslop.
No. Never. The day i stop making comics is the day i am dead
Yeah it hasn't phased me in the slightest. My writing is my writing and my ideas are my own. I literally have no worries about an AI spitting out something even remotely close to my work.
Artists on the other hand, they got their work cut out for them.
I always wanted to start a AI appreciation thread, but Cinemaphile is not ready for that yet.
these images are from surrealistly and leviathanai on instagram
more soulless trash
What I notice first about these is they all feel like I've seen them before.
The only instinctual responses you can ever have to AI are "this feels weirdly familiar" or "this looks like absolute dogshit."
>"AI has progressed"
>posts generic anime pinup #46 million
Cinemaphile will likely always be too autistic for AI discussion
If anything it made me consider finally making comic when the technology is slightly more developed because I can't draw anything good enough to show others.
Lmao at everyone here considering it theft. Where do you think you are?
Don't hold your breath. You could learn to draw a whole lot faster.
Ai will make you obsolete
Instead of focusing on using ai to remove the laborious and menial tasks creative human efforts will go first
>10+ months of shilling and claiming "progress"
>aigays still spam samey portrait images of characters with disfigured faces and limbs
If you want to pretend AI hasn’t progressed, go ahead
At least post Cinemaphile related images
Don't worry.
Ai can't replace the greatest human artists.
Just mediocre ones like you 😉
Then do requests.
>work for free to please losers on Cinemaphile like a moron
lmao
just go make CP or furshit instead
Frankly, ai slop is no better than drawing for bots, lmao.
Prove it. Generate a side view picture of anatomically correct woman walking while holding a red skateboard.
try it yourself
https://huggingface.co/spaces/stabilityai/stable-diffusion
https://clipdrop.co/stable-diffusion
anyone can do it, that's the point
>anyone can do it
>but I won't lol
>guess it's on you to trust me and try 1000 times hoping for something that isn't utter dogshit
Because
>Bask, fools, at the great accomplishments of AI
What accomplishments?
>Great things
Could you show us some?
>Not for free
Golly, let me grab my credit card!
It's free. If you don't have a GPU, you can use free colab, paperspace, kaggle. The idea is that you're able to do this yourself, so why beg for free shit? Don't you have self-respect? Are you so addicted to freebies you're willing to stoop this low? This is sad. Get help.
>AI art is good, really!
Prove it
>Begging for free shit? Pathetic, sad, get some self-respect you loser, I don't have to stand here and take this, what are you hot for me or something, you need psychiatric help, I'm out of here
Good talk.
I mean, you can keep begging because, to a bunch of newbies, the attention leeches like you give them is addictive, so this is the perfect time to squeeze some freebies from idiots. But don't you have self-respect? Are you really trying to squeeze freebies in an AI thread?
Damn, you got us: everyone's just desperate to get that side view of a woman walking with a skateboard. This whole thread was actually an elaborate sting to scam that specific picture off you. We'd pay someone to prompt the machine for us, but none of us losers can afford someone of your artistic skill.
Anon, you can try backpaddling all you want, but look at where you tried the "Do my request to prove me wrong" shtick. Is this a control fetish? Do you get off of this false sensation of control? Get help before you burn thousands of dollars on that NPC craze. If you want to save face, stop replying.
FWIW the "do requests to prove me wrong" isn't that anon, it's me.
You are laying it on altogether too thick.
So why don't you do it?
Let's see we've got
>girl walking next to rock
>"lol no"
>girl standing on the back of unmoving oversized skateboard
>girl riding on skateboard while a second skateboard hovers near her hand
I tried it again for good measure.
>this is what people are saying will replace artists
Learn to proompt. Skill issue
"Oh, I’m an artist. Artistic enough to make you COOM! And I did it without your precious gifts, your oh-so-special talents. I’ll give them art. I’ll give them the most spectacular arts anyone’s ever seen! And when I’m old and I’ve had my fun, I’ll sell my promts so that everyone can be artists. Everyone can be an artist! And when everyone’s artistic… no one will be."
>AI is shit and soulless
>which is why I’m worried about it replacing me, and why I enter AI threads to purposely get worked up over it
What finally got to me wasn't just a random image like that, flaws or not.
But that you can generate one in 40 seconds, hundreds at a time with minute variations... forever.
It's pointless to resist.
Ai has made art pointless, and it's garbage.
The moment I realised that my extremely specific fetishes would be catered to at the small price of an extra finger here and there, I gave up on art and artists forever.
>another off topic elf picture
Nice four fingered hand, sirs.
>ai slop for ai shill thread
it's completely on point, moronic schmuck
>that thumbnail
>that "Has AI reduced your motivation to make X? What's the point?" OP
Why have you ai homosexuals come back spamming the site with these same threads again? Are LAION marketers trying to damage control for another bad PR event or something?
It's either marketers or the same autists obsessively holding a grudge against people who draw. Or both.
I think it's a mix of both but the Emma Watson homosexuals are 100% pajeets lol
It's a false flag. Pretend you're into AI and act as obnoxiously as possible to sway public opinion. Are you frickers really this new to the internet?
Good morning, sirs.
>going to dump the same images
yawn
AIgays think people are stupid enough to not see that they're Web3 gays who just changed the nouns of their script from a couple years ago.
>If you don't embrace crypto then you're stuck in the past and missing out.
>If you don't embrace blockchain then you're stuck in the past and missing out.
>If you don't embrace generative ML programs then you're stuck in the past and missing out.
Why isn't there a comic about Luddites? Their blight is understandable, the machines took their jobs.
>Has AI reduced your motivation to make comics?
no
if anything it has made me excited to make a 2000page novel or someshit
but it's kinda poopy now and not really good enough, I'll wait a few years I guess
>Has NFTs reduced your motivation to make comics?
>not a new IP
>conflating NFTs with ai
sure is 2022 around here, lmao
AH SHEEEIT
HE's POSTING DA MEMES
Oh no
And?
Is it really just one guy who keeps pushing the whole 'AIjeet' thing? Cause it seems to be a pattern of the same posts in the same line up.
ngl this situation inspires me to create a story about humans fighting against ai, code lyoko style
lets turn this whole debacle into gold so we don't feel mentally drained by it
hate the fact that ai took over platforms such as artstation who used to be a great site for references and inspo. i just think that ai art should be strictly separated from real art from a platform standpoint
What I don't get is why the people who like 'art' also like AI """"ART"""".
Like, why?
why wouldn't I like AI art? it is good art.
are you gonna reply with "muh soul"?
The stuff people post isn't good art. It's generic pinups. It'd be just as boring if it was made by a human.
Enjoy your garbage.
Bye bot, see you soon.
>people who don't like AI art are bots
Seems like it would be the opposite, but okay. If you called me a seething artist, I'd understand. But a bot?
Beep boop to you too.
chrome lords,the AI jodorowsky's dune, wes anderson's harry potter and star wars, this:
is generic?
That's not what the majority of the posts in the thread are.
>Bots posting shit
Wow, what a revelation.
I for one welcome our A.I. overlords
You know maybe the AI is not so bad after all.
At least make it Cinemaphile related
I don't understand why the shills don't have images for each board. Why not generate a bunch of Raven images and spam those instead of unrelated anime girls and Emma Watson?
>shills
I can believe that the Emma Watson gay is a false flag, but not the ones posting decent anime pics (like the painted one above). Those are shills
These are also false flaggers. They don't understand Cinemaphile, they have 0 passion for Cinemaphile so they can't do good Cinemaphile stuff, so they default to generic anime. Do you want Cinemaphile shit? I'm your guy. I do have a weird obsession with co, to the point of chasing On-Style On-Model even with AI. But I don't post outside /aco/ because it causes more harm than good. Not to the show, not to the tool, not to the board but to artists.
Very well
It could be cleaned up a bit but the mistakes prove its ai and it is possible, very nice
Is Frankie ok?
Damn, Model?
>AI thread
Reminder that if you tell Stable Diffusion to draw something simple like "a single red triangle on a blue background" it gives you dead eyed anime girls instead.
>you didn't do it right
A five year old could interpret that command
>you used the wrong model
Then you frickers screwed up by calling it "Anything".
Put 1girl into negatives
Simple geometric shapes have been solved by 3D rendering software so it's not really in the scope
I could also do it in MS paint in about thirty seconds. That's not the point though. The point is this much vaunted revolutionary piece of software couldn't.
The filename is the prompt in its entirety.
I asked for a SINGLE red triangle. There are at least two.
No, U.
>No, U.
Post prompt
>Ask for triangles
>Get triangles
I don't see the problem
>But I didn't ask for an anime girl
Yo didn't specify there shouldn't be one either
>A five year old could interpret that command
Are you asking a 5 year old to draw it? No?
Congratulations anon. On a thread filled with idiots, you managed to outshine every single one.
It gave you the triangles. YOU have to tell it to not give you the woman while using the one model that is literally used for anything ANIME