Everyone who makes AI of anything deserved to be drag into the streets and shot in back of the head
Why is it only Cinemaphile that's like this? I understand being against AI art, that shit is trash, but why is everyone here against the use of a shitposting tool? The other boards had so much fun with stuff like 11labs before it fricked itself, it's only Cinemaphile who has a massive stick up their ass about it and refuses to have any fun.
Cinemaphile is the most normie-like board mainly due to industry shills being regulars. Anybody with an IQ above 100 knows AI was going to take over all forms of media eventually. It was just a matter of when.
[...]
The alternative is trying to hire both the VAs for Peter Griffin and Spongebob to make a Linkin Park cover just for you. Good fricking luck with that.
This, it’s also funny to hear cartoon characters say racial slurs too. Something which the actual Seth Macfarlane or Tom Kenny wouldn’t do
>Cinemaphile is the most normie-like board mainly due to industry shills being regulars. Anybody with an IQ above 100 knows AI was going to take over all forms of media eventually. It was just a matter of when.
I don't like your mindset either. I don't want AI to take over anything. I just think Plankton singing BEGGING YOOOUU about the Krabby Patty formula is funny.
>Anybody with an IQ above 100 knows AI was going to take over all forms of media
It's the other way actually. Anyone that actually know how AI works instead of watching Sci-Fi movies from the 80s know that the current form of AI will never replace humans in anything.
You need a completely different type of AI that is borderline fiction to have a change against us.
You also need to give it life otherwise it'll never truly understand abstract concepts like humans do.
So humans need to become Gods to create an AI that can compete with us, let alone surpass us.
I'm talking about "sentient Ai" just think about it.
Deep learning isn't even close to that, not at all.
>This, it’s also funny to hear cartoon characters say racial slurs too.
Tbf, if your favored form of comedy is “swear word funi!” I don’t think you can claim your IQ is beyond the double digits either.
>Why is it only Cinemaphile that's like this
why are ai shills like this?
they come into boards and try to shill their crap, when met with resistance they spout blatant lies like this
saying that "its only Cinemaphile who's like this" when you're in Cinemaphile you say its only Cinemaphile, when you're in Cinemaphile you say its only Cinemaphile, etc...
>it's another "Cinemaphile goes all or nothing on AI with zero nuance" episode
Wtf are you talking about? I'm not sure what Cinemaphile's stance is since I don't browse there, but I was literally in the Cinemaphile vocaroo threads when everyone was posting fresh content. It's only Cinemaphile who gets their panties in a twist over AI to this moronic degree. On the art side of things, I do get most of it, there are shills acting like some dumb program that can't even draw 5 fingers on a hand is going to replace real artists. But the raw aggression against AI, especially voice AI, is so fricking weird to me. I do get there's worry they'd take jobs away from real voice actors, but were any of you really going to pay people to be Peter Griffin singing Linkin Park in the first place? And it's not like the AI removes people's ability to still do that themselves.
By the way, it is absolutely moronic to call people AI shills while they're blatantly criticizing it. I have no idea what this angle is, Cinemaphile does it all the time and it's so confusing. AI art looks like garbage, it's not real art, and I don't want AI to replace people. AI is a tool that has right and wrong uses, and frankly I think people using AI to make the Stanley Parable narrator say Black person is the least of its problems. Does that make sense?
This is the part where you reply >didn't read indian pajeet shill kys
and nobody learns anything or understands a perspective different from their own and we have this exact thread again and again and again with the same arguments like fricking groundhog day.
>AI art looks like garbage
For now, give it a few years >it's not real art
Raw unfiltered cope >I don't want AI to replace people
What is there to gain from letting those filthy leftist californian israelites have all the power? Let the machines have them all die, things will be better
Maybe there would be room for nuance and shitposting fun if it wasn't so blatantly obvious how often outside marketing teams keep coming by to get new users to help train their models and promote their garbage. The stupid outrage farming strategies they use also just leave people annoyed and bitter.
>to get new users to help train their models
I'm not even sure how you believe these things to work that would lead you to the conclusion that crowdsourcing would have any conceivable benefit.
11 months ago
Anonymous
He does have a point regarding crowdsourcing about them giving us a taste of their tech before they paywall it to get us to cough up cash just to use it again. But it's still moronic to foam at the mouth over the technology as a whole because shills made some shitty bait threads. That's always used as the justification for why you're never allowed to do anything with AI whatsoever >Cinemaphile had to deal with AI spam for months on end!
Okay, and that's terrible. But I'm not quite sure how that addresses the points raised if you're not talking to the spammers at fault. It makes it sound like they're saying it has made people here so irrationally bitter that they're just straight biased, but I feel anons would get offended by that implication.
This - all this AI stuff, it's just toys to play with. But people take things too far, by making edgy bullshit or acting like this crap is going to put every artist out of business. People were having fun, then the techbros decided they were going to push some culture wars shit and oh dear, yet another bit of frippery has been sacrificed to the fauxtrage dipshits, so now nobody can enjoy anything, because c**ts like
>that can't even draw 5 fingers on a hand is going to replace real artists.
You say that as though the current state of AI is just perpetual, and that there can be no progress made in that field. Literally just 3 years ago AI couldn't even make an image of a dog if you begged it to, now it can create photorealistic versions of the exact breed you ask it to. Acting like the current state of an emerging technology is already the peak and that it's going to remain stagnant is pure moronation.
My actual issue with AI art is that it tends to all have very similar features because it can't actually produce novel content, only content based on what it's aware of and given the input of the user. That's something that's going to be a much, much harder obstacle to surmount than anything to do with fingers, because that's an obstacle that's fundamentally imbedded in what AI currently is as a system as opposed to a current technical flaw. At current rates of progression I give it about 2 years before the finger issue is entirely resolved, if not much sooner.
keep going "g-g-g-give it more time!!!"
Anyway, to answer OP, this one's pretty fun: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DP9EY4xMlTE
>that can't even draw 5 fingers on a hand is going to replace real artists.
You say that as though the current state of AI is just perpetual, and that there can be no progress made in that field. Literally just 3 years ago AI couldn't even make an image of a dog if you begged it to, now it can create photorealistic versions of the exact breed you ask it to. Acting like the current state of an emerging technology is already the peak and that it's going to remain stagnant is pure moronation.
My actual issue with AI art is that it tends to all have very similar features because it can't actually produce novel content, only content based on what it's aware of and given the input of the user. That's something that's going to be a much, much harder obstacle to surmount than anything to do with fingers, because that's an obstacle that's fundamentally imbedded in what AI currently is as a system as opposed to a current technical flaw. At current rates of progression I give it about 2 years before the finger issue is entirely resolved, if not much sooner.
Cinemaphile is full of delusional dweebs who think that they're going to become professional artists some day, so they hold a vendetta against AI as a whole due to the rise of AI art.
It's because Cinemaphile is probably in the top 3 for most number of content creators, and currently AI images are the hot button topic that's spooking a lot of artists.
As for the >pajeet thing, I think there's one guy doing that, he types the same way and only seems to stop by a few boards. Needs a fun nickname like Barneygay does.
Incoming text wall, I need to burn off some time IRL:
>months of dogging AI because the hands suck
Hands are fixed in most not-shit models now, or you could just use Controlnet/Posex if you're not lazy >AI art has always been blurry because it's trained on a model limited to 512x512, also all images are square
Most not-shit models nowadays go all the way up to full-HD without needing upscaling, of any image ratio. >AI can only generate existing things using existing art styles, and they all look the same
That's mostly just lazy people being lazy, usually because they're copying off other prompts.
Current image gen issues:
1. Posing is wack, even with posing tools, there's only so much you can do
2. Most models suck at pictures from behind (except for ass pics)
3. Skill floor is way too low, and idiots gen 100000000 lazy images and post them all to art sites like a tidal wave
4. Too many people use old models because they don't know any better
5. Too many black-box model mixes out there with no way of knowing how they were made.
6. Really inconsistent lighting. AI images suck at keeping lighting consistent, and anyone who even pays 1% attention will notice.
7. Too many models where the creator had a stick up their ass about something, like feeding the model too many redheads because he likes redheads, or making an "all-purpose" model that was only fed women, or the creator only feeds the model good art which means the model has no idea what's bad
8. There is no 8, I burned off all the time I needed to burn.
>As for the >pajeet thing, I think there's one guy doing that, he types the same way and only seems to stop by a few boards. Needs a fun nickname like Barneygay does.
AI shill trying to boogeyman the whole sane side of Cinemaphile as one person lol
You think they're gonna be able to scrape another 5 billion images in that little time? Especially now that Google images and other hosting sites are now already completely littered with AI in all of its mistakes?
While that is a valid method... >just get
Is it really that easy? What if you're going for Frank Sinatra or something? And most likely they won't do your shitpost for free.
True, but not every request will be done. Again, especially if it's something tough like Sinatra. AI at least guarantees you'll be able to get something.
good,now all I have to do is: wait for this threads to come up, (if ever) hope somebody in it ,can do a good impression of a character I'm specifically wanting and ask nicely this person to make a video for me for free!!!
I don't get this logic. It's like getting mad at Photoshop because it has brushes that can do effects that would take a lot more effort to achieve in MS Paint. More impressive, yeah, but why does that matter for a shitpost? It's called a shitpost for a reason.
>And good MSpaint drawings are still admirable
I'm not denying that, like I said, it is impressive. That doesn't mean people shouldn't use Photoshop, that we have to intentionally handicap ourselves for integrity. Integrity is a fluid concept. If you create anything, however you do it was probably considered the wrong/soulless way to do it until people got used to it. Sentence mixing is funny, but it was only done because this technology didn't exist at the time (although I guess AI voices are still sentence mixing on some level). I'm not saying sentence mixing is going to die nor should die, they're still impressive, I'm just not in favor of forcing people who just wanna hear Spongebob sing Take On Me to go through all those tedious hours of sampling/sourcing if there's a quicker and smoother way. You also need a degree of music talent to make sentence mixing sound good, not all YTPMVs have the same quality.
they rely on mixing familiar things with another familiar thing
even if it was a real person doing this i'd find it tacky
but it being ai, it can be made in seconds and be used to spam my feed
frankly, i block these channels on the spot
https://vocaroo.com/1g2QqMQH4G7O
I frick around with it a bit just for fun.
Made Donald Duck sing beach boys here and it made me laugh. Generally they don't sound good but sometimes you hit something nice, like I got one of Carl singing Don't Wanna Close my Eyes and it sounds great imo
There are two kinds of annoying people.
1) The tech bros who go BRO THIS IS CHANGING THE WORLD GET ON IT NOW THIS WILL REPLACE ARTISTS ITS EPIC HAHA GET WITH THE TIMES LOSERS
2) The babies who go OH MY GOD DID YOU JUST POST AI I DON'T CARE IF YOU'RE AN ARTIST OR IF YOU'RE JUST SOME butthole YOU ARE PROMOTING SOMETHING SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED TO ROB ARTISTS OF THEIR LIVING HOW DARE YOU
like stfu it's just a fun toy, I get to hear Carl sing my favorite songs
is a well known fact that new technology never replaces old technology.
face it Pajeet bros, there are no such mumbo jumbo as "digital painters" or "music softwares" and nobody uses "photoshop" or whatever you call it.
I think all the moronproof, accessible ways are paypig only now. Last time I checked Cinemaphile has a general with free options like Tortoise, but it's a bit on the technical side.
I made short 25 second AI covers couple years back for da luls. It was fun at the time since not a lot of people were doing it like they are today. However the voice generator I used at the time was utter garbage because the AI still sounded robotic and overall crusty. Now new AI shit sounds close to natural.
I will admit that all these zoomers making full cheesy AI covers using popular songs is getting pretty annoying and it is the current fad of today on YouTube, it's almost like that one shitty fad called "Alvin and the Chipmunks singing X popular song" back in 2007 and onwards where people with just change the pitch of a song and upload it to YouTube.
Also LMAOing at the contrarian homosexuals saying it's le bad now when they were also participating in those 15.ai + Vocaroo threads back in 2019/2020.
Cinemaphile AI threads boil down to artist-hating shills arguing with virtue signalling normalgays, and anyone who isn't a crazed moron getting accused of being part of group A by group B or part of group B by group A.
>anyone who isn't a crazed moron getting accused of being part of group A by group B >Cinemaphile AI threads boil down to artist-hating shills arguing with virtue signalling normalgays
the irony is rich
There are 3 groups
People who are rabidly pro AI (actual spam shills)
People who are rabidly against AI (virtue signalling homosexuals)
and people who aren't tribalistic morons and have sensible opinions on AI tech who are constantly accused of being 100% pro or against
It was cute at first but now they're getting old. I feel like no one's trying to use AI tech in a way that's actually groundbreaking for creative content.
AI animators show up saying that it looks so good, but when you watch what they post everything's so jerky it comes across as the Ed Edd and Eddy animation team having a stroke. OR worse, they spent who knows how much money to make a glorified Instagram filter that just looks like bad rotoscoping.
Right now its only people mucking around with it for a laugh since the legality is still very unclear, and the corporations aren't going to really start using it until they know how its all going to work
Soulless but give it 2-3 more years
Why is it only Cinemaphile that's like this? I understand being against AI art, that shit is trash, but why is everyone here against the use of a shitposting tool? The other boards had so much fun with stuff like 11labs before it fricked itself, it's only Cinemaphile who has a massive stick up their ass about it and refuses to have any fun.
Cinemaphile is the most normie-like board mainly due to industry shills being regulars. Anybody with an IQ above 100 knows AI was going to take over all forms of media eventually. It was just a matter of when.
This, it’s also funny to hear cartoon characters say racial slurs too. Something which the actual Seth Macfarlane or Tom Kenny wouldn’t do
>Cinemaphile is the most normie-like board mainly due to industry shills being regulars. Anybody with an IQ above 100 knows AI was going to take over all forms of media eventually. It was just a matter of when.
I don't like your mindset either. I don't want AI to take over anything. I just think Plankton singing BEGGING YOOOUU about the Krabby Patty formula is funny.
>I don't want AI to take over anything
Shut up seeething artist, you lot will die thanks to AI, and thats a good thing.
Anon you're just the flip side of the moronic coin to people who get unnecessarily butthurt about AI technology existing.
>I don't want AI to take over anything
First they came...
Well see when they fix hands
>Anybody with an IQ above 100 knows AI was going to take over all forms of media
It's the other way actually. Anyone that actually know how AI works instead of watching Sci-Fi movies from the 80s know that the current form of AI will never replace humans in anything.
You need a completely different type of AI that is borderline fiction to have a change against us.
You also need to give it life otherwise it'll never truly understand abstract concepts like humans do.
So humans need to become Gods to create an AI that can compete with us, let alone surpass us.
I'm talking about "sentient Ai" just think about it.
Deep learning isn't even close to that, not at all.
>This, it’s also funny to hear cartoon characters say racial slurs too.
Tbf, if your favored form of comedy is “swear word funi!” I don’t think you can claim your IQ is beyond the double digits either.
>Cinemaphile is the most normie-like board
>/soc/
>Modern /LULZ/
>Modern /b/
>Out/
>Biz/
Did you forget these?
/diy/
>Why is it only Cinemaphile that's like this
why are ai shills like this?
they come into boards and try to shill their crap, when met with resistance they spout blatant lies like this
saying that "its only Cinemaphile who's like this" when you're in Cinemaphile you say its only Cinemaphile, when you're in Cinemaphile you say its only Cinemaphile, etc...
what kind of shill tactic is this
>it's another "Cinemaphile goes all or nothing on AI with zero nuance" episode
Wtf are you talking about? I'm not sure what Cinemaphile's stance is since I don't browse there, but I was literally in the Cinemaphile vocaroo threads when everyone was posting fresh content. It's only Cinemaphile who gets their panties in a twist over AI to this moronic degree. On the art side of things, I do get most of it, there are shills acting like some dumb program that can't even draw 5 fingers on a hand is going to replace real artists. But the raw aggression against AI, especially voice AI, is so fricking weird to me. I do get there's worry they'd take jobs away from real voice actors, but were any of you really going to pay people to be Peter Griffin singing Linkin Park in the first place? And it's not like the AI removes people's ability to still do that themselves.
By the way, it is absolutely moronic to call people AI shills while they're blatantly criticizing it. I have no idea what this angle is, Cinemaphile does it all the time and it's so confusing. AI art looks like garbage, it's not real art, and I don't want AI to replace people. AI is a tool that has right and wrong uses, and frankly I think people using AI to make the Stanley Parable narrator say Black person is the least of its problems. Does that make sense?
This is the part where you reply
>didn't read indian pajeet shill kys
and nobody learns anything or understands a perspective different from their own and we have this exact thread again and again and again with the same arguments like fricking groundhog day.
>AI art looks like garbage
For now, give it a few years
>it's not real art
Raw unfiltered cope
>I don't want AI to replace people
What is there to gain from letting those filthy leftist californian israelites have all the power? Let the machines have them all die, things will be better
poopjeet shill on suicide watch
Maybe there would be room for nuance and shitposting fun if it wasn't so blatantly obvious how often outside marketing teams keep coming by to get new users to help train their models and promote their garbage. The stupid outrage farming strategies they use also just leave people annoyed and bitter.
This gets said every thread and I still don't understand the logic.
>to get new users to help train their models
I'm not even sure how you believe these things to work that would lead you to the conclusion that crowdsourcing would have any conceivable benefit.
He does have a point regarding crowdsourcing about them giving us a taste of their tech before they paywall it to get us to cough up cash just to use it again. But it's still moronic to foam at the mouth over the technology as a whole because shills made some shitty bait threads. That's always used as the justification for why you're never allowed to do anything with AI whatsoever
>Cinemaphile had to deal with AI spam for months on end!
Okay, and that's terrible. But I'm not quite sure how that addresses the points raised if you're not talking to the spammers at fault. It makes it sound like they're saying it has made people here so irrationally bitter that they're just straight biased, but I feel anons would get offended by that implication.
This - all this AI stuff, it's just toys to play with. But people take things too far, by making edgy bullshit or acting like this crap is going to put every artist out of business. People were having fun, then the techbros decided they were going to push some culture wars shit and oh dear, yet another bit of frippery has been sacrificed to the fauxtrage dipshits, so now nobody can enjoy anything, because c**ts like
keep going "g-g-g-give it more time!!!"
Anyway, to answer OP, this one's pretty fun: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DP9EY4xMlTE
>that can't even draw 5 fingers on a hand is going to replace real artists.
You say that as though the current state of AI is just perpetual, and that there can be no progress made in that field. Literally just 3 years ago AI couldn't even make an image of a dog if you begged it to, now it can create photorealistic versions of the exact breed you ask it to. Acting like the current state of an emerging technology is already the peak and that it's going to remain stagnant is pure moronation.
My actual issue with AI art is that it tends to all have very similar features because it can't actually produce novel content, only content based on what it's aware of and given the input of the user. That's something that's going to be a much, much harder obstacle to surmount than anything to do with fingers, because that's an obstacle that's fundamentally imbedded in what AI currently is as a system as opposed to a current technical flaw. At current rates of progression I give it about 2 years before the finger issue is entirely resolved, if not much sooner.
Yeah, I guess that's fair. But it's still never going to replace artists.
>But it's still never going to [blank]
You are wrong, yes it will. Just give it some time.
As long as there are people who believe in the concept of soul/soulless art, real artists will never be replaced.
This. Cinemaphile, /ic/, /gay/, /lgbt/, /y/, /cm/ stand together!
Cinemaphile is full of delusional dweebs who think that they're going to become professional artists some day, so they hold a vendetta against AI as a whole due to the rise of AI art.
>Why is it only Cinemaphile that's like this?
because we give a shit about art and animation
>because we give a shit about art and animation
>Cinemaphile
>[INCREDULOUS REACTION IMAGE]
i see now the error of my ways
It's because Cinemaphile is probably in the top 3 for most number of content creators, and currently AI images are the hot button topic that's spooking a lot of artists.
As for the >pajeet thing, I think there's one guy doing that, he types the same way and only seems to stop by a few boards. Needs a fun nickname like Barneygay does.
Incoming text wall, I need to burn off some time IRL:
>months of dogging AI because the hands suck
Hands are fixed in most not-shit models now, or you could just use Controlnet/Posex if you're not lazy
>AI art has always been blurry because it's trained on a model limited to 512x512, also all images are square
Most not-shit models nowadays go all the way up to full-HD without needing upscaling, of any image ratio.
>AI can only generate existing things using existing art styles, and they all look the same
That's mostly just lazy people being lazy, usually because they're copying off other prompts.
Current image gen issues:
1. Posing is wack, even with posing tools, there's only so much you can do
2. Most models suck at pictures from behind (except for ass pics)
3. Skill floor is way too low, and idiots gen 100000000 lazy images and post them all to art sites like a tidal wave
4. Too many people use old models because they don't know any better
5. Too many black-box model mixes out there with no way of knowing how they were made.
6. Really inconsistent lighting. AI images suck at keeping lighting consistent, and anyone who even pays 1% attention will notice.
7. Too many models where the creator had a stick up their ass about something, like feeding the model too many redheads because he likes redheads, or making an "all-purpose" model that was only fed women, or the creator only feeds the model good art which means the model has no idea what's bad
8. There is no 8, I burned off all the time I needed to burn.
>As for the >pajeet thing, I think there's one guy doing that, he types the same way and only seems to stop by a few boards. Needs a fun nickname like Barneygay does.
AI shill trying to boogeyman the whole sane side of Cinemaphile as one person lol
You think they're gonna be able to scrape another 5 billion images in that little time? Especially now that Google images and other hosting sites are now already completely littered with AI in all of its mistakes?
I'm against all AI in creative media.
The alternative is trying to hire both the VAs for Peter Griffin and Spongebob to make a Linkin Park cover just for you. Good fricking luck with that.
Or just get people who can do pretty good impersonations like every internet parody before AI?
While that is a valid method...
>just get
Is it really that easy? What if you're going for Frank Sinatra or something? And most likely they won't do your shitpost for free.
There have been many, many vocaroo threads over the years full of anons doing shitposts for free.
True, but not every request will be done. Again, especially if it's something tough like Sinatra. AI at least guarantees you'll be able to get something.
good,now all I have to do is: wait for this threads to come up, (if ever) hope somebody in it ,can do a good impression of a character I'm specifically wanting and ask nicely this person to make a video for me for free!!!
and pay?
I find more entertaining when these covers are off-key
Everyone who makes AI of anything deserved to be drag into the streets and shot in back of the head
>AI
Mass-produced slop
Learn to sentence splice existing dialogue. It's more impressive and funnier.
I don't get this logic. It's like getting mad at Photoshop because it has brushes that can do effects that would take a lot more effort to achieve in MS Paint. More impressive, yeah, but why does that matter for a shitpost? It's called a shitpost for a reason.
We could use less unfunny low effort zoomer shitposting. In fact shitposting as a term should have never spread onto the wider internet
And good MSpaint drawings are still admirable
>And good MSpaint drawings are still admirable
I'm not denying that, like I said, it is impressive. That doesn't mean people shouldn't use Photoshop, that we have to intentionally handicap ourselves for integrity. Integrity is a fluid concept. If you create anything, however you do it was probably considered the wrong/soulless way to do it until people got used to it. Sentence mixing is funny, but it was only done because this technology didn't exist at the time (although I guess AI voices are still sentence mixing on some level). I'm not saying sentence mixing is going to die nor should die, they're still impressive, I'm just not in favor of forcing people who just wanna hear Spongebob sing Take On Me to go through all those tedious hours of sampling/sourcing if there's a quicker and smoother way. You also need a degree of music talent to make sentence mixing sound good, not all YTPMVs have the same quality.
>low effort zoomer shitposting
>something that’s been on going since the early 2010s, but it’s le bad now cuz zoomers made it
newbies showing their true colours today. And I hated the le lenny shit that I’m glad it’s fricking dead.
>It's more impressive and funnier
Most YTPs were dogshit, you only remember the good ones
>put effort into a shitpost
Naw.
I love the Sinatra covers.
It's genuine magic
They can be good.
they rely on mixing familiar things with another familiar thing
even if it was a real person doing this i'd find it tacky
but it being ai, it can be made in seconds and be used to spam my feed
frankly, i block these channels on the spot
Peaked last year with the MGR Spongebob ones, thats about it.
I like them.
Mistakes into miracles.
Demonic. By degrees, these videos are turning us into cyborg slaves of Satan.
https://vocaroo.com/1g2QqMQH4G7O
I frick around with it a bit just for fun.
Made Donald Duck sing beach boys here and it made me laugh. Generally they don't sound good but sometimes you hit something nice, like I got one of Carl singing Don't Wanna Close my Eyes and it sounds great imo
>What's Cinemaphile thoughts on AI covers?
>AI
Kill it with fire!!!
>These homosexuals will make Spongebob characters sing anything.
>except the one song that deserves to be covered
I preffer Sentence Mixing
based
AI has always been a crutch for those who can't create
There are two kinds of annoying people.
1) The tech bros who go BRO THIS IS CHANGING THE WORLD GET ON IT NOW THIS WILL REPLACE ARTISTS ITS EPIC HAHA GET WITH THE TIMES LOSERS
2) The babies who go OH MY GOD DID YOU JUST POST AI I DON'T CARE IF YOU'RE AN ARTIST OR IF YOU'RE JUST SOME butthole YOU ARE PROMOTING SOMETHING SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED TO ROB ARTISTS OF THEIR LIVING HOW DARE YOU
like stfu it's just a fun toy, I get to hear Carl sing my favorite songs
Finally, someone who isn't moronic.
I hate both of these groups so fricking much.
I love this one
It goes so much right.
They are awesome.
is a well known fact that new technology never replaces old technology.
face it Pajeet bros, there are no such mumbo jumbo as "digital painters" or "music softwares" and nobody uses "photoshop" or whatever you call it.
https://vocaroo.com/1oWjVoDcdKOX
Carl - Country Roads
https://vocaroo.com/19GbbCXIAnR7
Mr. Krabs - Don't Wanna Miss A Thing
https://vocaroo.com/1luySnJHOwOs
Kanye West singing Ponyo (so still Cinemaphile related)
How do you make a custom voice?
I think all the moronproof, accessible ways are paypig only now. Last time I checked Cinemaphile has a general with free options like Tortoise, but it's a bit on the technical side.
Love it
wanna make 'em but have no idea where to start
am involuntary linuxgay
https://github.com/RVC-Project/Retrieval-based-Voice-Conversion-WebUI
thanks friendo 🙂
How are people making these AI songs.
What programs are they using? Are there any FAQS or forums for this?
Look two posts above yours moron
The Plankton ones are unironically God-Tier to the point where some of the track are better than the original ones.
Thanks I hadn't listen to the Plankton AI songs yet; you're right they are good. Here is some more Plankton AI songs I think are good.
Some of my favorite ones
>Boys Who Cry
>It starts with
I need someone to make Gaara and Rock Lee singing In The End
Somehow this low effort shit keeps spamming my youtube feed.
interesting
I made short 25 second AI covers couple years back for da luls. It was fun at the time since not a lot of people were doing it like they are today. However the voice generator I used at the time was utter garbage because the AI still sounded robotic and overall crusty. Now new AI shit sounds close to natural.
I will admit that all these zoomers making full cheesy AI covers using popular songs is getting pretty annoying and it is the current fad of today on YouTube, it's almost like that one shitty fad called "Alvin and the Chipmunks singing X popular song" back in 2007 and onwards where people with just change the pitch of a song and upload it to YouTube.
Also LMAOing at the contrarian homosexuals saying it's le bad now when they were also participating in those 15.ai + Vocaroo threads back in 2019/2020.
Boy this thread got really contentious really fast.
I just wanna grill (by which I mean listen to dumb AI covers)
Those dumb AI covers unironically sometime have more SOUL compared to the original song.
It's not 100% perfect but it's damn near 98%
Cinemaphile AI threads boil down to artist-hating shills arguing with virtue signalling normalgays, and anyone who isn't a crazed moron getting accused of being part of group A by group B or part of group B by group A.
>anyone who isn't a crazed moron getting accused of being part of group A by group B
>Cinemaphile AI threads boil down to artist-hating shills arguing with virtue signalling normalgays
the irony is rich
There are 3 groups
People who are rabidly pro AI (actual spam shills)
People who are rabidly against AI (virtue signalling homosexuals)
and people who aren't tribalistic morons and have sensible opinions on AI tech who are constantly accused of being 100% pro or against
AI is poojet tech.
Extremely soulless but not bad for ehat they are. I would love to see actual voice actors doing it.
It was cute at first but now they're getting old. I feel like no one's trying to use AI tech in a way that's actually groundbreaking for creative content.
Some are, but when they do it looks like shit.
AI animators show up saying that it looks so good, but when you watch what they post everything's so jerky it comes across as the Ed Edd and Eddy animation team having a stroke. OR worse, they spent who knows how much money to make a glorified Instagram filter that just looks like bad rotoscoping.
>create society changing technology
>only make ytp-quality homer simpson madonna covers
i don't know guys, this seems like the best direction for us
In hindsight, it does make all that gloom and doom over the advent of AI voices seem a bit silly.
Right now its only people mucking around with it for a laugh since the legality is still very unclear, and the corporations aren't going to really start using it until they know how its all going to work