I don’t understand why are “artists” so against AI?
All the arguments against AI art are arguments people used against digital drawing software.
I dont understand why are artists so against AI?
I don’t understand why are “artists” so against AI?
All the arguments against AI art are arguments people used against digital drawing software.
AI bad
This but unironically
Also the people who push hard for AI are the slimiest homosexuals possible. It's people who want something for nothing.
>how dare you put clothes in that washing machine! what are you lazy?
You forgot to call him a luddite
You forgot to give a legitimate reason why being able to get something for nothing is wrong.
Nice non-sequitur
Answer the question
No
I don't think that's a good analogy. It should be something like taking someone else clothes, putting them in your washing machine and claiming they are your clothes now.
>It's people who want something for nothing.
You say that like it's a bad thing.
It is
Failed art degree detected.
AI is used all the time. Image theft + AI is bad, which is what programs like MidJourney are.
I didn't know software was stealing my art to try and sell it
I mean now it is, now that they're trying to force their AI shit into those pieces of software
afaik it's only photoshop. clip studio paint will never incorporate ai into their software iirc
You know you're right. I know you're right. Deep down, even anti-AIgays know you're right. You're only here to stir up shit.
If you want to argue AI art is a valid form of art, then that's fine. But denouncing human-made art as lesser than AI art? There's no logical argument for that, you're just motivated by spite and owns.
>there's no logical argument for that
And there's no logical argument for why you should kys you troony but you know you're going to. Instead of using logic use your eyes if you still have them, and look at the image OP posted. It's not ai, and it's inferior to anything made by ai anytime in the past few months.
They denounce it because half of them entitled morons who expect artists to be able to draw all of their waifu/fetish requests for free and see AI as a way to do what they want at no charge (the megacorporations also fall into this category), the other half because they're brain rotted by politics and culture war bullshit who believe that they're "owning the libs" because they want to put artists out of work because they believe all artists are communists. There's a huge overlap between the two, of course, and naturally they're also complete morons with no taste at all.
There's a small subset of these who are Indians and techbros who approach Technology with a cargo cult mentality and thus see AI as something approaching a divine entity.
wouldn't communists support ai since it bring power to the plebs? whatever most leftists are fake communists anyway always looking to make a quick buck in the capitalist system
You can't really make sense of a culture warrior, especially the right-wing ones. It's largely a bunch of blackpilled bourgeois b***hing and cope.
Art isn't a quick buck
have you seen the modern entertainment industry?
entertainment industry =/ art
Art is a lot of things and most artists don't live from their art alone, or work for big corporations.
>wouldn't communists support ai since it bring power to the plebs?
No, because it doesn't.
This software benefits people that have bleeding edge GPUs and $2000+ rigs. Anyone else is going to get a CUDA error trying to generate anything bigger than 1024 pixels locally.
Actual plebs are going to have to use paid services, which are already censored to shit.
Anyone that claims it's going to remove gatekeeping or democratize anything is just reading a press release for shilling or trolling purposes.
I still don't even understand the gatekeeping argument. It's never been easier to access learning resources for art and reach an audience
>It's never been easier to access learning resources for art and reach an audience
Pfft, silly anon. People just want to skip from step zero to the final step, not actually LEARN anything.
it's just a different skillset, just like how photography uses a different skillset from drawing. in ai generation, there are parameters, model training, and countless of extensions to improve the generated image
>it's just a different skillset,
This. It takes a lot of effort do press that download button on civitai.
now now remember that he has to download the extensions too
>bad post, shitty post, Cinemaphile, reddit buzzwords, /misc/ talking points, logical fallacies, image macro, image meme, greentext, meek, posturing, unrelated to original topic
There, I just generated a Cinemaphile post. It was very hard. Please gib to me monies.
Using an extension that someone else built is not a skill.
damn my modded Bethesda games doesn't prove my great skills?
More culture wars
>Some artists are left leaning
>Therefore artists are coastal elites.
>Therefore they're gatekeeping conservatives like me. (The fact that I never picked up a pencil is their fault.)
>AI might make them suffer.
>Therefore AI is good and removing gatekeeping and killing the elites
actually schizophrenic. people like shitting on artists cause they hate their guts or think they’re pretentious. You actually bring the culture war you hate so much by making it a left vs right thing you Americc**t.
those things come down with price over time
also $2000 working for minimum wage is still less time than practicing to draw
And what does that mean economically? Drawing doodles in your spare time does not give you much more power as an economic agent. Generic AI slop is not going to immediately start making you money.
Yes, leftists are always ai apologists
This. The people most annoying about AI and the discourse surrounding it are tasteless homosexuals that are upset artists aren't drawing their fetish shit for free (or if they actually manage to snag someone who does requests, they act like karens at Taco Bell upset over the Mexican-American food being spicy).
So then... AI good? Those kinds of people get what they wanted then and don't bother artists with their weird fetish shit? You're not selling me on the downsides if it means artists have to spend less time making fricking diaper shit because somehow someone was given actual money at some point and this is how it's spent. Then those obviously better artists are going to just, I dunno, do something else? Win for those creepy fetish fricks, win for the artists who don't have to draw it, everyone wins, right?
No you don't understand these worthless subhumans should be paying me to do this task I consider beneath me.
Hell, I use AI art to draw fetish shit, but that's because I have some very specific kinks and no money to pay artists. I can still acknowledge that AI art is a toy that can't replace real artists, because even when I have all the right prompts the result can look fricking horrific. AI voices may produce some surprisingly good cover versions of songs, but even those sound scratchy and yowly. It's a wild west now, but somebody's going to crack down on this shit eventually because it's opened up about a hundred dozen cans of worms.
>food analogy
It's so hard for these people to not make one.
Almost like food is a universal thing across the entire species or something
The absolute hypocrisy and irony of these entitled Black folk screaming "THEY DONT DO REAL WORK LIKE I DO" when they make shitty pages like this
What's the hypocrisy? Is the comic AI generated?
Who's the real entitled Black person here? The person with very real concerns that their career that they worked hard for is in danger, or all the psychopathic jealousy-driven manchildren who want to create art without having to put the time or effort in to acquire the skills, and are now acting like schoolyard bullies who stole a toy?
If you're afraid of a machine replacing you, maybe you weren't that good of an artist to begin with.
moronic take. It takes time and skill to become a master artist. Discouraging artists from creating because they aren't the absolute best in their field is asinine. You don't like art.
If you want to create for you, you'll create regardless tho. Moron.
then why didn't aigays create anything before ai was publicly available?
They're not even creating anything now. Just repeating the same arguments over and over.
What if your girl uses a Dildo instead of you? Or goes black?
Honestly look at MC Donalds and how shitty their Burgers are, just to make them cheap and fast zo serve.
good artists don't want their work being used as data homosexual
Then argue about the law and how to avoid this scenario rather than b***h about whether AI art isnt art.
All you homosexuals have anger but misplace that anger and approach the problem from the wrong side.
well its not art since its not made by people so that's already ruled out
the people using ai image generators are just doing it for novelty at best, or trying to make money for nothing at worst
People didn't let people who're butthurt they're going to lose a job when automation moved forward stop them, why do you think you and your fellow artists will beat the odds when no one else has?
>my job is being replaced by a child and I'm in the right
>art majors
>not manchildren
>not playing with toys
you wouldn't say that about hitler
The lazy homosexual b***h who thinks they have a monopoly on artistic expression is in the wrong, that being you
>who thinks they have a monopoly on artistic expression
???
Just pick up a pencil
Why should I? I can type some words for more time efficiency
i like that appeal but for me a. i'm not the most verbally eloquent person and b. as someone with an artistic background i can get easily dissatisfied with the generations, so i have to keep generating until i get the desired results, which can be a waste of resources
you were complaining about gatekeeping before not efficiency
Bruh moment
I never said people who support AI are good, you're jumping to conclusions yo. That being said dont reply to me again because artists who make petty comics like this will always be low tier artists byeeee
Is this the part where you start pretending that muh classic artists totally didn't work for commissions and money and only for "muh passion"?
You're exactly the kind of person who expects artists to be happy with breadcrumbs
day of the rope soon drawslave
>2 more weeks sirs!
hey! thats a new one drawslave
I thought the artists were more open and tolerant of other races, I think with everything that is going on (apart from rotting in the street soon) the Drawslaves are becoming more desperate and end up removing the blm from their bios on social websites. So sad.... try to remove your ass with was/here next time okay? :^)
every notice how aishills will use wojaks and pepes instead of ai images to react to anything?
ACK!
im not reading that, but did you every notice how aishills will use wojaks and pepes instead of ai images to react to anything?
>AI removes weak homosexuals from the gene pool
I take everything back I like this shit now
Maybe they should learn to code kel
>their career that they worked hard for
Oh no, they'll have to get a real job like the rest of us.
>when they make shitty pages like this
>Simplified shapes for a cartoon strip
>comic's message comes through perfectly
>Somehow that's bad
What? Did you want a symmetrical shittily rendered ULTRA REALISTIC, 4K, MEDIUM SHOT ,THREE PANNEL COMIC, OCTANE RENDER? Frick off, AI images have 0 soul
>Poo in the loo is 75%
of course
>BUNDA is 56%
god fricking damnit
Asked and answered yo
mcdonalds don't serve tomatoes with their burgers.
What?
If you take photoshop away with me I can still make art. Because it's a skill I learned how to do.
If you take AI away from "AI artists" they can't make shit, because all they know how to do is type prompts.
>implying 99.999% of modern artists can survive without complex layer tools and overlays, the color wheel, sketch layers, warp tools, and fancy hair/grass/texture brushes
kek
>pic
>implying you can just plop a prompt in and get something halfway decent, with no hand or face issues
>implying it's not more like you're standing over a moronic fry cook, micromanaging them and making sure they do it the way you want
>implying McD is even good at all
lol
Realtalk though, most artists only hate AI because it lowers the skill floor required to make art and be an artist, and that even the awful AI outputs look better than the bottom 40% of most art sites.
One thing I'll never understand is why "collaging" became the scapegoat. AI isn't collaging/photobashing images, that's not how it works, but most anti-AI guys get all frothy in the mouth at accusing AI of stitching stolen art together. I wonder how the actual collage/photobash artists think of it, their medium getting trashed as something that should be burned at the stake and sued to oblivion.
Of course they can you fricking dingus, the base of drawing are always the same.
whether or not you think it's art it's objectively the easiest thing into the world to make AI art. You can b***h and moan about how hard you had to type in prompts to get one with no hand or face issues but anti-AI people know you're full of shit and deep down you know it too. You have no talent in this field and you are putting in no genuine work
*takes away your pen and paper*
what now?
Brush. Finger. Toothpicks. Wall. Canvass. Wood plank.
Cum and shit on yer walls. I'd do that anyway tho.
Im not against people making it or have any moral issues without it I just have no desire to consume it myself and finding it unappealing
Some people see this view as hate
Good morning sirs
Japan's not on the list? That's surprising given that they want to involve AI in their government
>1.000+ adults
1.000 adults in India is 0.000071% of the total population
1.000 adults in China is 0.0000708% of the total population
>unable to comprehend sampling
post hands
>Sampling
>Sample Size: 0.7e-4
>Population Size: 1.48e9
Let me guess, white American?
ai is good enough to repleace the extremely shitty simpsons porn
that photographer argument is a pretty good one
Very few photographers only press a button. Lighting is important, the settings on the camera, if it's an action shot you need to account for timing, framing and composition is important...
Its the same with ai, you can generate tons of bad images with it you need to know how to make good ones.
a bad photographer only presses a butoon
a good photographer considers a ton of factors
That sounds like the same for prompting. There's a lot of chucklefricks who go slam in a generic prompt and are happy with the bland results, just like some 20something white girl with a cheap digital camera (or just a phone camera nowadays I guess) taking a black and white photo of a pool chair at sunset and acting like it's profound.
Only if you have no real idea of what goes into being a good photographer
A photographer did not create the landscape or sunlight for a photo of a mountain. Some will make the shot look better with more techniques. Similar to how some pajeet will shit out AI garbage for NFTs is not the same as some autist meticulously planning out his AI art.
>All photographers do is push a button
It's usually because they don't know how it actually works (e.g. OP comic) and/or they got riled up by overexcited or malicious people overselling it.
In what way is that not how it works for proompters? They're making an order for an image
Aside from
>food metaphor
it's visibly ignorant of the actual process. Don't mistake this for saying prompting is meaningful effort. If we want to keep to the >food metaphor, it's more like going in to McDicks, asking for a burger, and then in the kitchen they roll some dice, look at the time of day, and consult a chart on whether to come back to you with the hamburger you ordered, a completely different kind of hamburger, a burger that looks almost exactly like what you wanted but it's actually a turkey burger upon closer inspection, something vaguely resembling a hamburger, a grotesque lump of flesh seated between round sandstone rocks, or a hot dog. And then you have to decide whether you just take what they gave you or you keep re-ordering until you get something you actually want.
You know, I'll be honest, this metaphor is losing track as well.
I don't think picking the best burger from a bunch of them would really change what the artist is trying to get at.
Surely the point is that it's silly to pretend you're a chef when you didn't make the food yourself. I don't think it matters whether you pick the first thing the AI gives you or you have to be a more involved curator.
Even if prompting was really difficult and tedious, as long as it's only curation and creation of the art, it would be silly to pretend the prompter was an artist.
I think a less abstract analogy would be a regular person [the prompter] commissioning an artist [the AI].
No matter how often the person asks the artist to redo the picture or change something, no matter how much effort they put into describing exactly what they want from the artist, nobody would ever call that person an artist.
>hey artists, guess what, I can use this software to create anything I want and now I don't need you anymore and you all are going to starve to death because I hate you all after one of you drew my wife Gadget with the stupid fly and now you're going to pay for it!!!!
>>uh, kay, I don't like that software then, I'll try to get it banned
>noooooooo you can't attack my poor software, why are you such a luddite? don't you realize that it's literally just like photoshop, you hypocrite? god I hate you so much!!! also Gadget is still MY wife and she never was with the stupid fly!!
AI shills must be lynched
>free software shills must be lynched
>noooo pay those artists they're starving
>free
Drink bleach
???
>Hello, my fellow artists
>Do you want a tool that will make your life easier
>Let us take what you, a human being, made and throw into a meat grinder and feed what ever slop comes out to the beasts who hate you.
>All the arguments against AI art are arguments people used against digital drawing software.
Not really, most arguments seem to be more in line with everyone against tracing and plagarism though though.
first of all ai doesn't do anything remotely similar to tracing and second of all, all artists are plagiarists by that logic because they all copy eachother, some even get paid specifically to do that, if you work on an animation you have to copy the exact artstyle of the character designer
>all artists are plagiarists by that logic because they all copy eachother
Not even remotely true.
Bingo
show me one artist who never copied anyone his entire career
Rory Hayes
what was his training regiment if it didn't involve copying other artists?
Being a schizo
fair enough
>Not even remotely true.
Hold on, don't discredit the art history that's brought us to this point.
>There are two kinds of scientific progress: the methodical experimentation and categorization which gradually extend the boundaries of knowledge, and the revolutionary leap of genius which redefines and transcends those boundaries. Acknowledging our debt to the former, we yearn, nonetheless, for the latter.
This is as true for art as it is for science.
>the revolutionary leap of genius which redefines and transcends those boundaries.
this doesn't happen
Yes it does
No it doesn't. Everything is built on what came before, and in the case of science any "revolutionary leap" is based on years of experimentation and reproduction. General relativity didn't just randomly occur to Einstein the day before he published it.
It's just new and scary and sounds spooky. For real, now. If it was called something boring and technical instead of LITERALLY SKYNET THAT WILL MURDERRAPE US ALL people wouldn't give that much of a shit. But because it's called AI, people super overestimate the effect it'll have.
Take artists for example. And I'm talking, like, real artists and not nepo babies with industry jobs.
All artists draw porn. It's gross, it's an uncomfortable truth, many will deny it because they still like to pretend they're doing something super spiritual here but if you want to pay rent this month you draw porn.
These people saw those shitty pinups AI makes and shat their fricking panties out, but the truth is, that's all AI can do. Shitty pinups. And people toyed with them for a while and got bored of them because anime girls standing and looking at the camera with soulless eyes isn't enough to make them coom.
Same with AI voices, same with AI writing, same with AI coding. It works, but it's super mediocre.
>Inb4 it'll get better! Just two more weeks!
No. AI hit a ceiling about, like a year ago. Unless something new drops, which none of us knows about, an assumption of the same level of 'aliens will invade next week, for sure', it's stuck.
AI image gen hit a bit of a ceiling, and most upgrades and updates are little and scattered. Text AI is exploding, and videos are getting better. Voice AI is going bananas, that shit's crazy, sometimes I like to poke through AI covers while I'm eating lunch.
Text AI has gotten gimped and actively dumber than it was a year ago.
You could have proper convos while now it does shit fricking cleverbot did a decade ago like forget stuff you were talking about a couple posts later.
Voice AI is in the shitter too, especially after eleven went paypig only. The AI covers are a completely different thing and the tech existed for a while, they just got popular in the past six months.
>You could have proper convos
lol you guys are morons
>technology will just stop progressing forever because...because...WELL I'M NOT SEEING IT RIGHT NOW
if AI were as good as shills claim they'd do requests.
>Peeps b***hing about IA the most can't draw for shit
Tells you all you need to know.
I'll be honest I would have never been smug as frick about the whole AI Paranoia from 'Artists' had they not been so delusion and looked down on the working-class for doing manual labor to make ends meet at a time when 'AI will solve everything and make your line of work obsolete'.
Do you homosexuals have a script to follow or something? Every fricking thread it's the same "artists told coal miners to LEARN 2 CODE" which isn't and has never been true.
Then you're ignorant.
Prove it. It was journalists that pushed that narrative, and most artists struggle to make a living doing just art and need multiple jobs to get by, oftentimes working class ones.
>Do you homosexuals have a script to follow or something?
He's using a wojak. The fricking Swing in my Step of memes. What do you think?
I bet they'll post that collage of headlines next which actually don't show any condescension from artists let alone from the journalists covering those government funded initiatives to help coal mine workers. These pajeet dumb fricks keep projecting their own self-victimization and can't even produce one shitty twitter screencap of a nobody to validate their claims.
It's 100% people just straight up fricking lying. Most of the people b***hing about muh eltists art class are just full of shit.
Wait...are you trying to tell me that people on Cinemaphile would just straight up lie / cherry pick obscure things and pretend that's the normal opinion in order to push a narrative against people they dislike?
He's not lying though. Artists are okay with everyone else's job being automated. They talk about it all the time when the topic of AI comes up.
You got any screencaps to prove that?
Meanwhile back in reality Judge Dredd, a comic that's been going for almost 50 years has had stories about people going crazy from losing their jobs to robots and having nothing to do...
Wtf are these artist? Most of them are complaining about not being able to survive on their work and having to be star bux baristas on the side.
The only big money ones were ones drawing furry porn, money laundering elites (who have plenty of other reasons to laugh at you with their 7 digit income), and the rare break out one who just does ok.
Meanwhile your average person said frick manual labor and went off to college or claimed those jobs were immigrants only.
>Wtf are these artist?
He saw one huffington post article from over a decade ago and decided
>huffington post is left wing
>artists are left wing because they have pronouns in their twitter bio
>therefore, artists believe what huffington post says about this
>Be artist
>use AI to make art based on my pieces
>Furry girl OC in swimsuit
>nude version
>Cut the hands and feet so no one notices
>PROFIT
IT'S THAT EASY ANONS!
>Be artist
>use AI
Pick one
I would love to see a single instance of a prominent artist telling manual laborers they deserve to lose their job.
And no, some random furry on Twitter you got in an argument with is not a prominent artist.
I hope AI puts every "artist" out of a job.
why'd they make that lil fella so cute if he's supposed to be the antagonist?
Well why were people against digital drawing software?
Mass scarping of data without permission.
technically speaking this means Social media sites like Facebook are more ethical then Stability.ai because they atleast put in the TOS that they can use any data you give them so it's your fault and yet everyone pretty much agrees facebook is an evil site so what does that say about companies like stability? I can understand why Stability did it, this technology needs all that data to get anything good but it's still a dick move.
It doesn't really make a difference people will just make their models in china or vanuatu or whatever
>Vanuatu
hey that's my favorite super-obscure country no one's ever heard of too
are you an alcoholic expat?
I'm pretty sure stable diffusion v2 was trained only on open-source images.
but we don't talk about that here
oh woe is me, i get to miss out on creating furry porn for degenerates to be rich like people said 🙁
I need to make a bingo card for these threads.
These threads are always the same back and forth of ignorant fricktards seething at each other.
Because AI enables grofters and hacks. Think about how fanfiction sites, Calarts, Poser3D and Deviant Art hurt the overal quality. Now add all three and multiply it with 100 hundred. There are porn picture sites that are flooded with samey AI pics that you have to wade through them to get the pearls!
>A friend of mine, a highly successful and very well known painter, calls to say hello and to invite me to an opening.
>I get a great kick out of this guy because, unlike some artists I’ve met, he’s totally unpretentious.
>A few months back he invited me to come to his studio. We were standing around talking, when all of a sudden he said to me, “Do you want to see me earn twenty-five thousand dollars before lunch?” “Sure,” I said, having no idea what he meant. He picked up a large open bucket of paint and splashed some on a piece of canvas stretched on the floor.
>Then he picked up another bucket, containing a different color, and splashed some of that on the canvas. He did this four times, and it took him perhaps two minutes. When he was done, he turned to me and said, “Well, that’s it. I’ve just earned twenty-five thousand dollars. Let’s go to lunch.”
>He was smiling, but he was also absolutely serious. His point was that plenty of collectors wouldn’t know the difference between his two-minute art and the paintings he really cares about. They were just interested in buying his name.
>I’ve always felt that a lot of modern art is a con, and that the most successful painters are often better salesmen and promoters than they are artists. I sometimes wonder what would happen if collectors knew what I knew about my friend’s work that afternoon.
>The art world is so ridiculous that the revelation might even make his paintings more valuable! Not that my friend is about to risk finding out.
He's right thats why I just print out anime figures as cutouts instead of buying plus shipping and handling.
>I’ve always felt that a lot of modern art is a con, and that the most successful painters are often better salesmen and promoters than they are artists
Unironically true
Why do all these threads always start with OP complaining about people not liking AI?
If so many people were up in arms about AI, you'd think there would be more threads about why AI is shit.
If anything it just seems like people don't really give a frick about AI, or the shit it puts out.
Its the pajeets and AIshills seething that Cinemaphile isnt their personal army
Since apparently you haven't noticed it yet, an easy way to bait anons into arguing is to put words in their mouths.
oh, how the aiBlack person despises artists, yet he wishes to join their ranks. he once dreamed his hands could be used to create, but he has given up on that dream. now he uses his hands to destroy in petty, spiteful acts. he deserves no pity. only disdain and dismissal.
>>AI: *puts 14 misshapen blob-claws on yet another glassy, dead-eyed, 3 1/2 shoulder-having, 6 different kinds of haircuts going on, 12-collared-shirts-wearing, “big tiddy” anime chick made for the millionth loser cooomer to submit the most original prompt ever*
AI advocates are the new NFT bros
they're literally the same people
they're called innovators
grifters chasing a quick buck
Let's be real here
A twitter artist could have the most infallible air tight argument against AI in existence
Something that no one would be able to logically come up with a counter for on any kind of moral or intellectual level
and it still wouldn't matter
because there's a 99% chance the art they draw by hand looks like utter dogshit
You know that's not remotely true. Threads like this are so boring
AI art just looks weird.
and thats what makes it so interesting
I can't believe you're farming viewers like this.
>All the arguments against AI art are arguments people used against digital drawing software.
ai shill are unhinged to the point of embarrassment, holy shit
at least we're winning
>2 MORE WEEKS SIR
It all looks gross, and the same, line being all done by the same artist.
Each and every one a computer Shadman monstrosity
There's a particular bland Shad/Ilya style that waifu prompters seem to converge upon, presumably because it's consistent or they're just lazy frickers. I don't care for it myself. But that's hardly the only thing that AI can produce.
>But what if I were to purchase fast food and disguise it as my own cooking?
Funny how these artists hate on AI for being derivative of other works while being derivative of other works themselves.
Sorry, that one was already used
>Yes, and you call it "art" despite the fact it is obviously AI generated.
This is embarassing. How can you just complain about ai art when your shit looks like this? Ai art actually has soul now and it's not just your average hekkin quurky youtube shorts animator garbage. Look at it it's just a circle with two dots and a line. It's not even colored. Using ai probably takes more effort for the human than it takes to make this shit. Idk how much effort it takes the robot though.
>Ai art actually has soul now
lmao
Take a look at the "human" "art" that OP posted and then take a look at this.
>cuts off hands
>looks exactly like every other AI art out there
lol
lmao
Holy shit you got btfo and you're just going to say you didn't get btfo and think people will buy it? Just go, you're obsolete, and I don't just mean your "drawings". You have nothing at all for this world. You are only a drone, a twittergay. You have no soul. You have no brain. You have no personality, and now with the ai you're not even useful anymore to your masters.
homie the b***h in
either has downs or is in the middle of a stroke judging by the lips alone. You make a mockery of human expression and only see a means of making a profit. You are a plague just like all the other corporate stooges that also believe crap is enough instead of actual craftsman.
Who do you think you're talking to? I don't sell these.
lol christ
aigays may have the worst taste imaginable
You're saying that you think Op's poop is better, which is the same as admitting that you have the worst taste even possible.
alright rajeesh
OP's art is inoffensive and obviously heavily stylized. Saying it's ugly or horrible just makes you look moronic and like you can only imagine anime style / heavy realism is the only valid one
So you think there are only three styles, mass produced youtube shortslop, anime and realism? Thanks for letting me know you're stupid anon.
>innofensive
It pisses me off you dumbass.
>heavily stylised
I don't have that buzz lightyear meme. But you know it and you knew it when you posted this. You only lied.
>It pisses me off
Then you're mentally fricking ill tbh
>buzz lightyear
>you lied
Bro never go full schizo. The frick are you on about?
>you're mentally ill unlike me who think's I'm a woman
God is not happy with your choices.
>what are you on about
You know that this "style" is mass produced slop that thousands upon thousands of internet "people" make daily. But you lied and called it stylised.
a method of stylization being common doesn't mean it isn't stylized
ok now make a comic
Why? I don't even like comics, I'm a cartoon guy.
Why is her top disappearing into her shoulder and merging with her hair?
Why is her nostril swollen shut?
Why are her bottoms melting into her skin?
What the frick is happening to her ear?
Why is her torso so long and misshapen?
Don't worry. They'll say that you can just fix that in 5 minutes. They won't do it, but they'll say it
Didn't notice any of that stuff. Noticed the soul though. You know why you saw that stuff? Because you are looking for excuses.
>Noticed the soul though.
Just because a computer managed to trick your brain into filling your dick with blood doesn't mean the computer is alive
I mean souls aren't even real thats not what we're talking about here
Here, I'll give you another opportunity to move the goalposts:
What are you talking about
how the art looks, whether its bland or it looks like it actually has some inspiration
Okay, I'll bite.
The image posted is absolutely, wholly uninspired. There's no intrinsic meaning to it, there's no process or skill on display, there's no life experience being shared, it's just a vaguely human shape cobbled together by an algorithm.
OP's comic, meanwhile, demonstrates actual cognitive thought in how it's presented and has a message that it's conveying, inspired by their own frustrations with a common argument used to defend AI image generation. I'm not saying it's groundbreaking or revolutionary, even that it's very good, but a thousand times more thought and inspiration went into the creation of OP's comic than from the computer generated image you posted.
Honestly just the fact that OPs comic managed to generate 200 replies and counting whereas any of the generic airbrushed kronenberg waifus the shills post can't do that is all the proof of soul you need.
If OP's tumblr comic were the true soulless thing then it wouldn't merited a resonse.
Didn't happen though. I'm not a coomer like you. There's more to life to me than that. Kys.
>posts lust-provoking image and claims it's "soul"
>pretends he doesn't exclusively look at AI art for jerk off purposes
I'm not you. You are a soulless moron freak who lives in a bubble, a fake world of your own design in which there is nothing but cum. K.Y.S.
well why do you like that image, then
and don't say "it has soul"
>I'm not allowed to give a good answer
It has soul, frick off.
I accept your concession
It's not a concession you just decided I wasn't allowed to give you the real answer for no reason. Kys bro.
"it has soul" isn't a real answer
>computers don't have souls so they can't make things with soul
>literally pure logic
>not a real answer
exactly, saying you like AI art because it has soul isn't a real answer because it's objectively false
Because why? Because you say so? You're moronic, not a mom.
Don't you talk to your mother that what, young man.
It doesn't have a soul you worthless freak.
I didn't say the image has a soul, I said it has soul. You are worthless for defending the op image. Worse than that actually you're a detriment.
Now give it a dick bulge
>no hands
So? Why does everyone keep saying this, is it a meme?
AI is bad at drawing hands, so lazy AI art either has shit hands or hides the hands. The irony is that it can actually do hands pretty well with a minimum of effort, so it's an easy way to identify lazy artists.
Because despite us all calling it AI, the truth is that stable diffusion is kinda moronic and can't really make sense of things that have fine details. The important thing to remember is that it doesn't KNOW what anything is, not really.
It's good at the macro level but the more detailed oriented the subject it's trying to generate is the less its method of mashing up thousands of pictures in a second works, because they all start to blur and merge those fine details together.
The human hand is just one of those more notorious examples of this, because you've got five fingers with 14 joints and those can all be bent and posed in an absurd number of angles and combinations and the machine just kinda freaks out at that level of granular variability.
Hands are one such example, but text is another. It "knows" (for a given value of knowing) that a hand is attached to a wrist (usually) but beyond that it needs a fair amount of extra help to figure out anything past that.
There ARE ways to get good hands (negative embeddings trained specifically for that is the most popular way) but you still need to actually put in that add on.
Food and text are other examples. It doesn't know what letters are, but it knows letters are a collection of lines so it'll spit out those lines. It doesn't KNOW that the bun goes on the outside of a hamburger, just that a bun is involved somehow.
>Using ai probably takes more effort for the human than it takes to make this shit
LOL
LMAO even
It's true and you know it. It's just a circle three times. Why are you even trying to defend the homosexual? You one of them?
Shut the frick up bot.
that circle with two dots is pretty cute ngl
Of all the recent twitter CURRENT THINGS this is the most emotionally driven and doomed to fail. AI isn't going anywhere ever.
I casually make AI art and I must say that most AI art looks boring and you'll need some extra artistic and sometimes coding skills if you want them to look good. Also if I have to be honest, AI art can be more frustrating that manually drawing since you have more control for the latter
it probably looks boring because of your subject choice
true. with its limitations ai generation is mostly limited to single subjects, which can get boring really quick. You can do multiple subjects with regional prompting but if you want to use multiple Loras to depict diverse characters, that can be really hard. even the creator of the regional prompting repo said that there would be more problems faced when using multiple loras in regional prompting.
Do not feed the AI.
Why?
>just stop making art
I don't know why you're so obsessed. Who gives a shit if someone doesn't like some random slop you generated? You want mommy to put it up on the fridge or something? I swear you gays are more desperate for validation than furry troons on twitter.
If AI is so good how come when you ask someone to prove it all they have is insults?
Not true in fact it has already been proven. The insults come from you sucking.
>Not true in fact it has already been proven.
No, it hasn't.
Curated off topic stuff isn't proof. Doing it on demand is proof.
AI can't even compete with the drawthread. You want to prove it can beat "artists" but it can't even make deliveries.
because you can't prove an opinion
ya dumbass
I like to draw. I also like ai machine go burrrr. Two aren't mutually exclusive nor should they be.
> pretty lights
which reminds me, i should go download sdxl and try to generate some random fun
We've had enough of these threads that I'm starting to realize that most of the AI shills don't even use it. They're just here for shitposting and culture wars bait. That's why when you ask them to make anything to back up their claims they start making excuses instead.
There are ironically more people like you, "artists" incorporating it into their workflow and catching strays from these shitposting pajeets.
>"artists"
I don't know if that guy has any actual ability but I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt because I can draw but I use stable diffusion to give me things like figuring out lighting.
There ARE ethical and constructive ways to use this tool. But the discussion in favor of it is being led by morons that are just fishing for gotchas.
or maybe because you could just google ai art and get hundreds of images
>or maybe because you could just google ai art and get hundreds of images
Which proves nothing but that an anon has the ability to google. And even then I doubt they're doing that. They're probably getting their "evidence" and talking points spoonfed to them via a youtube like every other culture wars homosexual on this godforsaken pit of a site.
AI should've never evolved past the "weird abstract shapes" stage, in this form it's great to take a prompt's output, extrapolate and interpret details with your actual thinking brain, and create something from it.
I like that one Tiktok that does weird cosmic landscapes with AI and writes little backgrounds for them
>millionth low effort AI bait thread made exclusively to stir up shit
>morons on Cinemaphile keep biting the bait and melting down until thread hits bump limit
When will you Black folk learn
AI being used on copyrighted material is bad. That's really it
Since when does Cinemaphile, a board that runs almost entirely on pirated media, care about fricking copyright? You homosexuals will literally bend over yourself to shit on something
they started caring about it as soon as ai started violating it
When money is involved with smaller artists that can prevent them from getting money due to their permission not being asked, then it matters
I'm okay with AI art so long as it is free. If I see someone charging for AI prompts I just know they're a Black person.
It's funny when you realize there are sites for prompts, making paying anybody for them absolutely unnecessary, so they look even worse
Don't put this evil on us. Blacks trace anime with a pencil until we're able to do it from memory. This AI shit is the Indians at work.
*a pajeet
get youre racism right this is bigotry 101 you are on fricking Cinemaphile of all places
Isn't katsop tomatoes ?
it's tomatoes with some other stuff added
>I don’t understand why are “artists” so against AI?
It is very simply explained in the image that you posted yourself.
>All the arguments against AI art are arguments people used against digital drawing software.
They are almost completely unrelated.
>It is very simply explained in the image that you posted yourself.
Because they don't understand it?
pajeet thread
they are getting paid in clean water again to shill
I don't care what people say about AI my fetish is obscure as frick and now I can literally generate endless content for it everyday thanks to AI. I'm never gonna stop using this great tool
Sounds healthy
>my fetish is obscure as frick
No it wasn't. Anything with enough material to train an AI to be able to replicate/produce is far from obscure. That's the real pain of using this shit.
Now I'm curious what it is
people have b***hed for years now about media as a whole being SOVLLESS and repackaged, and now NPC's have invented a tool that does the SOVLESS repackaging for them with minimal human input, and a slew of useful morons are eating it up
Right but it's souless stuff FOR THEM.
The hard sell here for traditionalgays is the undeniable bonus of AI generated art being so readily available is that any single user finally gets something they personally want. Instead of "It's not for you" for whatever reason, they get ~Thing they want~ exactly as they want it, and if money keeps flowing into it eventually they'll get entire movies of ~Thing they want~ or the like. Shit, for some, it's a bonus the computer can only work with what's imputed into it. Imagine, since this is Cinemaphile, someone who really fricking wanted, say, Killing Joke in the style of the original comic book, colors and all. If they wanted Killing Joke now, they'd have to settle for a way fricking worse movie with a crappy Batgirl subplot shoved into the front to "Empower" her and looking pretty much nothing like the book they wanted. Or imagine they wanted an accurate representation of Dune, instead of DUNC. An animated She-Hulk that follows the comics to a T in look and style, no matter how long. An entire sci fi series made of prompts you yourself made. You can call it soulless, you can call it lacking art, you can call it whatever, but if artists and creators want to stop it the only real way is to offer them something better than something exactly suited for them, and that's hard. It's just hard to tell them "This is what you should have instead" and then show them pic related, and expect them to be on your side. Meanwhile, an AI art generator wouldn't even know one of these existed unless you put them in, and with models being made mostly by fans, well...
Gabe Newell once said "Piracy is almost always a service problem and not a pricing problem". Well, AI Art is not a service problem either, it's a content problem. How do you solve it, when you're not delivering a service they think they need more than their own ideas?
>imagine a magic machine that is perfect instead of what actually exists
So, how long do you think it'll take before full AI animation is more readily available? Timeframe wise. Besides the ones already out there that look decent, of course, but in general. A year? Two? Ten? Consider last year exactly to today and the differences and give a timeframe you think until someone could just put a prompt in a machine and get a full animation?
>Besides the ones already out there that look decent
lol
>Besides the ones already out there that look decent,
I've said it before, I'll say it again.
AI can't even currently compete with drawthreads to produce a single picture on demand. Feel free to come back when it can do that. Until then, this is just roleplaying bullshit about stuff that does not exist.
>AI can't even currently compete
So what's the big deal then? Artists don't throw a fit that there's a billion kids with crayons who can make shitty drawings faster than them.
A thread died for this spam.
AI shills are the new bronies.
I'd love an ai board Cinemaphile is too...well its Cinemaphile
>we can't compete
>also ai is all inferior
What do you think you're even competing in itt? Shitposting?
>being so readily available is that any single user finally gets something they personally want
So make something for this thread.
tl;dr
good artists hate ai too idiot
>The hard sell here for traditionalgays is the undeniable bonus of AI generated art being so readily available is that any single user finally gets something they personally want.
oh okay then give me a page of the Killing Joke in the style of the original comic colors and all
I don't get the point of weighing in on this argument yet. But I have my doubts it isn't going to get better as time goes.
Art is only the beginning
do you think you're safe?
How come it still can't do text yet?
That's really not that impressive, given that it's just extending static backgrounds and ruining the framing of most shots.
It's neat and all but the rule of thirds exists for a reason.
>extends the frame but does nothing to the actual animation
>deliberately cuts off when the animation would extend past the original frame
classic
Frick artists
Frick /ic/
It's August of 2023 are we still whining about ai art?
Grow up
Thats not an option. We need to return to the past.
Imagine unironically sticking up for AI . Shameless and soulless.
>nooo don't embrace new technology, think of the people who might make less money if it's popular
>Oh yes embrace the one thing which WILL DESTROY your rights by making human labor obsolete.
If Skynet will give me an unending supply of anime girls with no fuss, I'm okay with them taking over.
the "ai" take over is gonna be a lot more boring than terminators killing everyone or everyone being put into the matrix
its gonna be government agencies who have an agenda using "ai" to easily shift through the data they got from spying on you to fine and arrest you more easily for wrong think
whats the point of ai images? like no really, for the person using it whats the point
on one hand you have people who just have fun with the novelty. its a new toy for them
on the other its people just trying to make money off it at the expense of other people and communities
>whats the point of ai images? like no really, for the person using it whats the point
It's about being able to cum to whatever character you want in whatever scenario you want without having to be artist or pay one. That's literally it.
>whatever character you want in whatever scenario you want
Is whatever AIgays want just deformed bimbos doing generic standing/sitting portraits? Cuz that's all I see.
Haven't you seen the last 50 years of sports illustrated and pinup posters? They want a HELL of a lot of that.
Nobody gives a frick about Sport Illustrated
>want without having to be artist or pay one.
>Still have to buy/subscribe to the models that don't come out looking like cthulu spawn
I don't think you thought about this.
>$15-$20 a month for lots of images I can manipulate and refine with photoshop or even a free program like Krita.
vs
>$100-$500 for an image I have to wait months for because the artist "got busy" suspiciously around the time a new Nintendo game out.
>"Yeah here's the rough I finna take your money and go be depressed for three months."
Oh people have thought about this.
You've never commissioned a single piece of art
Sure I have. Still waiting on your rough btw.
No, you haven't. Someone who enjoys art enough to drop 500 bucks would not find the quality of AI art acceptable.
>They pay it because they love me.
Oh sweet summer child.
I'm not an artist
Then shut up.
No. You've still never spend a single cent on a commission
They don't "enjoy art" they enjoy their specific fetish you absolute moron
Is their specific fetish a generic pinup girl?
Yes. Don't act like an algorithm that can generate naked pictures of cartoon characters isn't a boon for frugal coomers.
Do they not know of the existence of the many, many websites that host images of naked cartoon characters?
Yup, and they're being overrun with AI images that are obviously artificial upon inspection but convincing enough to bust a cheap nut to.
I guess I don't have coomer brainrot so I don't understand.
In the short term. Long term you get a self referential feedback loop. You're just getting a copy of a copy.
Why is it always either LARPers or people who think the high end is all the commission market is?
>2023
>still hating AI art
two of those are Cinemaphile fanart, though
Which one? The generic anime? The coward hiding behind realism? The pretentious surreal? The /misc/paganda?
>AI art i bad
>this is why it gets so many replies
OP's posted comic got more replies than any AI art posted here did, sorry anon.
every AI thread reaches bump limit
and?
that doesn't disprove what I said, moron
thats because they keep recycling the same arguments without moving the conversation forward
That'd be impressive if they ever made it past 10% images.
AI can produce good art now. That's literally the only reason. Do you think there would be this much seething about AI if it sucked?
Because they're afraid of losing customers, that's literally it
>I don’t understand why are “artists” so against AI?
>All the arguments against AI art are arguments people used against digital drawing software.
the real reason is they make a lot of money on the side drawing porn of copyrighted characters with fake twitter accounts.
If they want to buy a few extra games, they just draw shego with a wiener railing out Kim possible for $125. Or some ponies having an orgy for $350.
AI is going to replace that part of their income
Why are you shills so obsessed with commissions?
Why are you surprised that a bunch of people using their NFT machines are looking for the next money making scheme?
because that could be nasty porn money THEY could be spending on video games
Don't be ridiculous. They've never commissioned a single thing
>use someone else's ingredients to make a burger
Wait, are cooks the AI artists of food?
pretty much I'd be more impressed if some autismo grew fricking wheat crops and bred chickens just to make bread and meat so he could flex on chefs
don't matter if the quality isn't as good I always respect a dedicated autist
i like that sentiment but do those autists get compensated by society as a whole?
i just find it sad that nowadays we live in a quantity over quality, results over process world now
If the product is good, yes. There's places who buy raw goods from farms run by family and use those ingredients to make fresh bread, burger patties, bean patties, and more. Tastes real good, so people come in droves.
>are arguments people used against digital drawing software
People say this as if there aren't decades of complaints about digital art and animation compared to doing it hand-drawn. Hell, digital art was supposed to make it easier for artists to work and reach a level of quality/output that would be unreasonable/infeasible to achieve by hand, along with opening the door for amateur projects via easier access and use, and it instead lead to a ton of low effort garbage. AI stands to do the same
>digital art was supposed to make it easier for artists to work
People really like to forget the part where you still have to learn how to draw
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/Ynt6Eh8ufrQ?feature=share
all that means is that ai is a more significant technology than raster editing programs and drawing tablets
no, it just means that ai shill don't actually have good arguments
and your argument is?
HEY GUYS LOOK AI BAD
There are legitimate concerns about fuzzy intellectual property questions (e.g can I train an AI on your art and then sell it without compensation), but mostly artists are just afraid they'll be replaced. AI isn't about to paint the next Mona Lisa or whatever, but most art isn't masterpieces that hang in museums —it's cereal box graphics and images for corporate training slideshows and fat fetish porn of your favorite anime character. Most art doesn't need to be good, and that's what keeps most artists afloat, even if they're capable of really really good art. So they're terrified now that they're realizing a robot can do "good enough" for free
>Most art doesn't need to be good
Hard disagree. That mindset has led us to where we are today. Look at advertising art from the past versus today.
I stopped caring about this AI argument when the Neco-Arc AI covers started coming out. Im all for those more then any artist I have ever known.
I use Stable Diffusion and Midjourney regularly. I'm also close to loads of artists
AI "artists" are split into 3 camps
One are the creative types who want instant gratification or an easier way to realize what's in their heads. Typically they stay quiet and don't act like buttholes and often still support human artists anyway they can. Sometimes they get overzealous and spam prompt outputs on artist spaces, but they quickly apologize and stop. Thanks to the blowback to AI, they almost never speak up or out themselves or post anything, but ask around and you'd be surprised how many there are.
Then there's the Proompters. These are the shitsacks who are obsessed with crypto and NFTs, think of AI as a get rich quick scheme, and actively bully artists for caring about their craft. They are either libertarian white boys, Pajeets, or Chinks who think that prompt engineering GPT-4 will make them rich in a month.
The third are Singularity nerds. They typically haunt /r/Singularity and hate their lives, want their own waifu bots, and have a visceral hatred for humanity. I mean if you hold a 5 minute conversation with these types, you just get this horrible coldness and nihilism from them where they await some Singularity AI rapture to bring about their hyper technological utopia and end the rest of the world. Really sad stuff.
i feel like a combination between the first and third type. i like to explore ai for creativity purposes and i would mostly post them in my tiny space. but i also cope with my loneliness by chatting with ai chatbots. being autistic doesn't help, either
Which would you classify yourself as, out of interest?
Hard first, shifting over into proper artist now that I'm getting the hang of composition and perspective in drawing.
Hey man that's genuinely great to hear.
In a thread of dumb monkeys you are by far the most based.
What program are you using?
>muh fence sitting
lol nice tactic to change the narrative rashid. no creative people like ai art
you only have prompters and singularity nerds, mostly pajeet prompters
>New IP
>Ignore arguments
>Start flinging shit
Begone discord bot!
I'm in the first camp, but I also like discussing the tech often. Personally, my desire is to see the tech used to expand the possibilities of media, namely video games, like having a character in an RPG who's voice you can manually adjust or for AI to be used to make open worlds feel more alive and dynamic.
Yeah, I think there's potential for making interesting procedurally generated games with AI components. Have to practically work on something like that in secret now with the way people treat anything AI related.
>Not Cinemaphile
As always.
I agree, but the thread has gone in the direction of general AI discussion so we're talking about other stuff. I haven't seen much good AI Cinemaphile stuff, still haven't seen AI Spumco for example. I don't think AI can do cartoony stuff well because it requires more soul than AI is capable of.
Within certain limits, AI can only do what it's trained to do. You've got a million chinks training it with anime and asian models/idols, so it's good at those. You've got maybe a handful of nerds training it on old cartoons, so it's bad at that.
Simple as.
>I agree, but the thread has gone in the direction of general AI discussion so we're talking about other stuff.
So it belongs on Cinemaphile or /trash/
>so we're talking about other stuff
You decided to post a non-Cinemaphile image. Never in these threads do you see a Cinemaphile image. At best, it's some generic DC/Marvel hero.
> I don't think AI can do cartoony stuff well because it requires more soul than AI is capable of.
Cartoons and comics are not only extreme shit and capeshit. You have Winx loras, W.I.T.C.H loras, Webcomics loras, Wuya, Melusine, Amber, Gwen Tennyson, Gwen, Gwyn, Helen Parr, Ladybug...
A lot of people shit on artists and support AI, not because they hate humanity or want the singularity or whatever. Some people do it because some artists act like they're actualizing the human spirit and what they have is unique, special, and something only a human can do. I'm impressed by the skill and dedication good art takes, but I hate fart-sniffers.
so tl;dr you want people to die because they annoy you
nazi
Total nagger death.
Nice effort with the willful misinterpretation, but you overplayed it by calling me a nazi.
You care more about being a contrarian to the people you dislike than about the actual issue being discussed. In other words, your opinion on this issue is worthless and driven by nothing but personal bias and spite.
Artists are annoying, but AIgays are worse and it isn't even close
It's the new NFT.
no ones making money on this shit thats the whole point
are you kidding? the biggest shills of ai are people trying to sell their models to people and spam any market place that allows them
are they making money? doesn't really matter when it takes them seconds to start flooding places
I've never seen ads for models. Any source?
did you try turning off your adblock
>flood
>did you try turning off your adblock
Am I dealing with stupid? Just tell me now before I spend time and energy.
ai gays flood marketplaces like fiver and artstation trying to
i see advertisements for people trying to sell ai models on social media, even here on Cinemaphile
Do they post outside of the AI section? If yes, source.
>even here on Cinemaphile
Even better, we don't need to leave. Source?
well we're getting spammed right now. there's like 6 ai threads that got made in the last few hours alone
also
>spoonfeeding
Jesus fricking Christ, I told you to tell me if you're stupid. Ads, you idiot. Where are the ads?
>do my homework for me!
what do you think this is butthole
He's an AI gay. Of course he wants you to do the work for him.
This is the driest flood I've ever seen.
well that's just your objectively wrong opinion
>The guy that claimed the desert is flooded is saying I'm wrong
Well, thank you.
Look you can make all the art you want the only thing is maybe you won't be compensated for it.
As much as I hate to say it, this has kind of always applied to art anyways.
>All the arguments against AI art are arguments people used against digital drawing software.
They were thinking about AI but shouting at the wrong tree, digital artists don't consider themselves traditional artists nor their digital art traditional art.
Don’t know, don’t care. I just use AI for porn, and so do a large majority of the artists I know.
>Perpetuate a system that produces such bad results that the people who, ostensibly, should love it the most (talk about it all day on the internet) want you replaced by a computer.
And you have the gall to pretend to be blameless? Your “principles” went out the window when you decided to submit to the corporate zeitgeist instead of actively working to better it.
>instead of actively working to better it.
When they try that anons just start screeching about woke marxism
If your biggest problem with modern cartoons are that you’re not getting paid enough, or there’s not enough blacks/gays in them, you’re not an artist, you’re a clown.
McDonald's cheese burgers don't have tomatoes
Same reason the luddites wanted to smash the looms. The bosses are going to stop paying the weavers and artists because machines can do it faster or cheaper. And the end-product has reached that "good enough" level.
And that resulted in fabric and clothing that was affordable and reliable being available to the masses, which was objectively better for the lower class/working class than a few loomers having to change jobs.
>Ok loomer
Sorry I had to.
You had never heard of the luddites or the looms before an AI grifter described them to you.
>If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe.
gottem
I lost. Is this even the same thing? I mean I'm on the ai side but the ai is the one who makes the art, it's not really a person using a tool.
What's the problem with food analogies? I'm fat, but I do believe it is the easiest way to show a comparison in which most people in the world, currently, would understand.
How would burger feel if you hotdog understand the problem nuggies analogies?
forced soul
This site usually gets a bunch of AI promotion threads whenever some ML company gets into some legal trouble or bad PR or whatever.
>look up recent news about AI companies
>"ChatGPT In Trouble: OpenAI may go bankrupt by 2024, AI bot costs company $700,000 every day"
There we go.
i thought it's because of the scooby doo fan project using ai
This is why all the big name AI companies are trying so hard to get widely adopted and entangled everywhere. That way they can get subsidized and/or start squeezing their captive consumers once they become "too big to fail."
People who do photography don't claim they made the thing they're taking a photo of unless they literally did.
Completely nonsense argument. Someone who uses AI to make a picture of a tree doesn't claim to make actual trees.
Photography is considered an artform, despite only creating copies of things that already exist. AI art is way more creative than that, and yet people claim it's not real art. Also, when photography first started becoming more common, "artists" used the exact same arguments against it that they now use against AI art.
>whether or not it's real art depends on how much money you spend on it.
Congratulations on being the dumbest person in this thread.
>Someone who uses AI to make a picture of a tree doesn't claim to make actual trees.
But the person in
is claiming to have made the burger.
Gee, it's almost as if the original comic is a pathetic strawman argument and bandwagon-hopping morons like you who have no idea what they're talking about only start to realize this obvious fact when it's turned around applied to something else.
It's funny how it's always the people who know absolutely nothing about how AI art works that come up with arguments like this.
Saying "AI art is just pushing a button and hoping it works" is exactly the same argument as "photography is just pushing a button and hoping it works." Both are equally moronic, but you can't realize that because you know nothing about either photography or AI.
Both of you are so blinded by mindlessly following the herd that you completely missed the hypocrisy that the photography edit is pointing out.
So the original is a pathetic strawman but the edit isn't?
They're both pathetic strawmen, that's the entire point. The edit is highlighting the fact that midwits like you only become aware of the strawman when it's pointing at something that's already accepted by the mindless masses.
But the point of the comic is claiming you made the burger. Which a photographer isn't doing
Neither is an AI artist, that's the point. They're both just making pictures. God, I severely underestimated how incredibly dense you people are.
>Neither is an AI artist, that's the point
Except the ones who actually are like that scooby doo guy who made extra effort to try to 1 to 1 the voice actors. Using AI to generate assets that dont exist or assist in it is one thing, using AI to replace something that does is why people have issues with it.
Okay, since you're extraordinarily stupid, allow me to explain it for the fourth time: If someone creates a picture of a tree, they're not claiming to create trees. It doesn't matter if you're a painter, a photographer or an AI artist. You're creating a picture. Absolutely nobody is going around claiming they create trees. At most, you're designing the way the tree in the picture looks based on factors like your knowledge of real trees with maybe some creative or stylistic spin on it, but a painter does that as well and even a photographer chooses how to portray the tree in his picture. They're all just creating pictures that interpret something else, nobody is actually creating that "something else".
Voice actors being replaced with AI is a real concern, but it's also irrelevant here because it's a completely different argument.
Your analogy doesn't work because we're not talking about physical objects and nobody gives a frick about a singular still image of a tree.
>we're not talking about physical objects
Either we're talking about the cheeseburger as the physical object being imitated (the tree) or we're talking about the cheeseburger as the imitation (the picture). The analogy doesn't work either way.
THAT'S MY ENTIRE FRICKING POINT YOU INCREDIBLE moron. THE ANALOGY IS moronic TO BEGIN WITH BUT YOU MINDLESS DRONES ARE ONLY CAPABLE OF ACCEPTING THAT IT'S moronic IF IT'S TURNED AROUND AGAINST YOU.
I'm done with you. It's impossible to educate someone with brain rot this severe.
The OP image is showing that he didn't make it himself yet claims to. Simple
The difference is choice
A photographer has to make a choice in what they shoot and how they do it. If you’ve ever pointed a camera you’ll understand that
Ai is making a commission and hoping it’ll be good
You have choice with AI too. You can choose what pose to use (ControlNet). You can choose what character, background, clothes, style to use (LoRA). You can add details of your choice (img2img).
You have more choice making a soul calibur character
How?
>he doesn’t know
>You can choose what pose to use (ControlNet).
Controlnets fricking suck. I put in depth images and it just completely disregards them. All Controlnet does is add an extra 10-20 minutes to generation time.
Skill issue.
Gatekeeper.
>Gatekeeper.
>Controlnets fricking suck. I put in depth images and it just completely disregards them
Post the depth map, the result, and the settings.
>All Controlnet does is add an extra 10-20 minutes to generation time.
It shouldn't be doing this. Something is very wrong.
Tried getting a Cinemaphile related one just for you but as you can see it just completely disregards and obliterates the arms. It also took 4 attempts to get a remotely SFW image I could post despite SFW being the second goddamn prompt.
NTA, and i haven't been using the depth module (i would use the pose model for things like this) but try specifying the pose in the prompt, like how she has her fists held in front of her. also maybe adjusting the control weight may do the trick
Openpose sucks even worse in my experience.
Gonna try
next but I'm not holding my breath.
Anon, your image is too fried. I'm searching my stuff to see if I find more examples, but both Openpose and Depth work fine. With Openpose, you can even draw the skeleton.
>your image is too fried.
NTA but what does this even mean?
Oversaturated and too sharp. Usually, this is an embedding and/or lora conflict with the model. Lowering the CFG, Lora weight, and removing badhand were quick fixes to this.
>the cape gets erased.
That's because I told you to lower Raven's strength to 0.7. Add (navy-blue cloak, cape:1.2) to the positive. For the hands, send to inpaint, mask the hands, add badhands to the negative and generate as "only masked" at CFG 4, Steps 28~40 and strength 0.45~0.55
>For the hands, send to inpaint, mask the hands, add badhands to the negative and generate as "only masked" at CFG 4, Steps 28~40 and strength 0.45~0.55
lol. 32 steps, it made them worse.
left hand is missing the index finger still
I could've drawn a more on model picture in this same amount of time and it wouldn't have taken me 40 failed gacha rolls.
Granted, it wouldn't be an generic airbrushed overly rendered style, but that's not necessarily a bad thing.
>I could've drawn a more on model picture in this same amount of time and it wouldn't have taken me 40 failed gacha rolls.
Anon, you tried to extract the depth map of a depth map. You don't know how to use the tool, so of course you'll work faster with a tool you know how to use. I'm giving you instructions from the top of my head, but there are lots of variables that I don't know. I don't know the model you're using, the version of the embeddings, the tags used to train the Raven lora, the model used to train the lora, etc.
When you draw, do you pick the first brush you see, and try to draw with it without changing anything? Or do you change the size, the color, the type of brush, etc.? It's the same here.
>When you draw, do you pick the first brush you see, and try to draw with it without changing anything?
Yes. The default settings are usually enough to do the job.
So you don't change the color you're using, the brush size, the type of the brush, anything? So every time you make a mistake, you only use CTRL+Z? When you start coloring, you use the same brush you used for the lines?
The depth map's depth map makes sense now.
Well, it got the pose at least. Too bad the hands still suck since I had to remove the badhands embedding and and making the controlnet more important means that the cape gets erased.
So this is still a fail, just not a fail for that particular aspect.
Remove the preprocessor. You already gave it a depth map. You're extracting the depth map's depth map.
Use only easynegative as the negative prompt, your image is too fried.
Add "hands up" in the positive prompts
Decrease the CFG to 8 and change control mode to "ControlNet is more important."
Decrease Raven's lora to 0.7
>whether or not it's real art depends on how much money you spend on it.
Wow, a lack reading comprehension. oh where oh where did I say that in my post? so let me kindly give the "Dumbest person in this thread" award back to it's true owner.
Photography is interpretation and has never been anything else. Even with zero editing of any sort and the most painstaking efforts being taken in the name of authenticity, a photograph will never be real to life because what was in the shot has been bent and transposed and mutated by the photographic process. The trick is in learning how to make this process work for you.
>Photography is a pretty expensive hobby to get into if you are doing it
Well, no, not unless you're really specializing but there's a hideous amount of geargayging. Some of the most famous images in history have been taken with consumer-grade cameras and kit lenses.
explain how this is similar
Photography is a pretty expensive hobby to get into if you are doing it seriously(travel, buying lenses, buying equipment...etc), unlike AI which can be done for free if you spend a day doing your research and use the cloud.
if you take ai image generating seriously it can also be quite pricey. if you don't spend money on a dedicated GPU, you often need to spend money on renting them alongside with cloud space. and the longer you spend time trying to train a lora or getting an ai image right, the more resources are used
>dedicated gpu
>pricy
????????
the rtx 4090, which is the current go-to for AI-related projects, is really expensive and even if you buy it, it uses up a lot of electricity
It costs the same as a fricking ipad you moron. It's absolutely not comparable to the cost of photography. Not that investment cost matters because
is still fricking moronic and can not explain how the two are similar at all.
>Ignores electricity
Hmmmmm, I wonder why.....
>ignores
and
hmmm i wonder why[insert esl ellipsis]
>Still ignoring electricity
Hmmmmmm, maybe you don't have an answer, hmmmmmmmmmmmm?
Anon, I literally don't give a frick and said that it's not relevant because you're arguing about "does a GPU cost more than photography" instead of the actual thing people were talking about. You're so desperate for someone to concede a fake internet point to you because you have no actual arguments.
Living in a first world country, a little more on electricity isn’t that big of a deal raj
A 2k camera is an expensive no matter what
>Living in a first world country, a little more on electricity isn’t that big of a deal
>"Trust me bro"
>Ignores UK
Why should I trust you hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm?
>uk is a first world country
Lol, lmao even
>Moving the goalpost
Don't have more excuses, hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm?
>he thinks I’m taking his “arguments” seriously
people arguing from dishonest places deserve fallacies
>He thinks I'M taking this serious
Dude, I'm just doing the Stewie bit. I already had my fun, and you can have the final word.
i thought we were having steamed clams
>thread is literally pic related
I have right click saved as many many arts.
I dont think I've saved a single AI art.
>All the arguments
I can already tell you aren't arguing in good faith but whatever this is Cinemaphile so I didn't expect you to.
AI uses other people's art without permission and essentially steals money they would have made from commissions because the AI users couldn't draw it themselves otherwise.
To me that seems like the largest issue along with people selling AI of other people's work or even their own and charging unfair prices
You can already see it even in AI covers of songs with gays just pressing a button to make whatever character sing a song(they even go as far as to ask you to credit them for putting sound bytes in a software that does all the work) then asking you to donate to them
If every Disney movie that came out was completely AI with a budget only to pay the one dude typing out prompts they would still try to charge you full price at the theaters.
If I knew something was completely made by AI I would want to pay prices proportional to those costs which would be essentially free
>Nobody tries to refute me because I'm right
>Too scared to even shit post against my argument
I win
""""""artists"""""" that are mad at AI buy furniture at IKEA and not from an independent carpenter btw
>nooo, automization is only good when it's other people's professions!
I buy antique furniture.
>makes assumptions about a whole group of people
>also admits that automation is bad because it affects people's careers
So what did the animation industry ruin for you that made it a personal enough for you to want them to suffer?
I studied bioinformatics and have a rough idea on how machine learning/AI etc. works and what it can be used for in research. I just hate how everyone is praising it as a second coming of christ when the technology is decades old and can't do half the shit people imagine it could be doing. Throw in quantum computing and the quantumshitstorm is perfect. Guess I'm just a jaded shit and hate stupid people in general. Covid/Vaccine debates and war in ukraine didn't help (I'm slavshit) so now I'm actually seeking psychiatric help. That's how far you dumbasses pushed me.
Thanks for reading my blog, I was the first poster in this thread. I was just to tired to put my words into text yesterday.
Lofti Zadeh tossed my salad and it was GOOD.
It's because right now they can do something others can't. When everyone can do what they do, as good as what they do, they won't be special anymore. If they're not special anymore, they don't get to tell others how they should vote or what to think. They'll just be run of the mill autists no one will listen to.
I've had a lot of ideas for comics, and my art is ok but not professional level. I've talked to "artists" who want to charge me thousands of dollars to draw my scripts, which is not affordable. If AI art allows me to produce something professional looking for minimal cost, I'm all for it.
>literal idea guy
that anon has written scripts, though. so they're a writer
I'll believe they prompted scripts but that's all.
It probably won't, not unless it can become truly consistent. Right now I can't imagine that based on my knowledge of how this works, they can probably get the freaky eyes and hands hammered out, but teaching it to always produce an on model version of a character with all the clothing details tied down would require a very different system of generating images. At least I believe it would, there's every chance I'm off the mark, but even the most impressive animations out there right now all have the same issues with clothing details, and clothing varies drastically between subjects it's not just getting the right number of fingers on a hand or making two eyes match.
>but teaching it to always produce an on model version of a character with all the clothing details tied down would require a very different system of generating images.
For an original character? You'd need to have data to train it on. You could theoretically generate a bunch of images and then wean out enough to train a data set but that'd take a long time and it'd result in Hapsburg level inbreeding problems in terms of quality.
Yeah I know you can do that, but even with a good lora the clothing is very very inconsistent. I could generate 10 images that look great, but there'd be no chance that the clothes maintained consistancy between all 10 of those images.
That's something I've noticed the supporters don't understand. The idea is sold to them as working perfectly out the box and easy mode by grifters and shitposters, and they're unaware of flaws and extra work they'll be dealing with.
They literally can't see it. The images tend to contain somewhat subtle errors, and because of that they're very similar to images you find used in actual IQ tests. For example in an IQ test I've seen one was a picture of a woman wearing glasses, but the part of her glasses just above her nose is missing, it's a small detail you can overlook and slow people can struggle to pick on that detail, if at all.
Thats a good point. Personally there's this wrongness about AI art that sticks out even when the fingers and details are fixed. It's too clean, shiny, or plastic looking and really uncanny valley. Or the anime ones look too doll like.
The problem is that you're still going to need an artist to touch up your work. AI art programs still have issues and flaws, most of the 'good' art you see has been photoshopped to fix limbs and other flaws.
>2 AI shill threads and constant AI bait threads since yesterday on here and Cinemaphile
and you morons still reply to them
>Nooooxwhy do people think our art looks worse than what you can generate with a click of a button?! Surely it’s not because our art is objectively ugly, it must be a raid!
Go back jerking off to emma watson on Cinemaphile shitskin
>since yesterday
how new?
jannies are getting paid to let literal raid threads up jej
AI isn't fine tuned enough to produce commercially usable results, sure the image looks fine at first glance but it's full of small artifacts, and if you have to draw anything more complex than a girl in swimsuit most of the details aren't gonna make a shred of sense
It can't design a new character and is mostly good at reproducing stuff that has a lot of preexisting art of it and it can't do complex artwork with multiple subjects
Because it's such a black box you can't even integrate it in the drawing process since it's only gonna produce finished pieces and can't do partial work
It's worthless as a tool, and not good enough as a replacement
Digital software allows you almost complete control over what you produce, AI only barely allows you to skew its results
Caring about it at all in any aspect on either side in any way makes you a gay.