Why does Cinemaphile irrationally hate AI art again? AI art is already improving so all of the old arguments cease to exist as time goes on.
Why does?
Why does Cinemaphile irrationally hate AI art again? AI art is already improving so all of the old arguments cease to exist as time goes on.
I hate robots
You will never be a real artist. You have no skill, you have no knowledge of the essentials, you have no artstyle. You are a portfolio-less man twisted by laziness and software into a crude mockery of nature’s perfection.
All the (You)'s you get are two-faced and half-hearted. Behind your back anons mock you. Drawfags are disgusted and ashamed of you, your “fellow anons” laugh at your ghoulish multi-limbed generations behind 7 proxies
Artists are utterly repulsed by you. Thousands of years of artwork have allowed men to sniff out ai frauds with incredible efficiency. Even generated pics that “pass” look uncanny and unnatural to the viewer. The eyes and mangled appendages are a dead giveaway. And even if you manage to get a coomer to commission you, he’ll turn tail and bolt the second he gets a peak of the eldritch horror AI passes as a vagina.
You will never feel the satisfaction of drawing. You wrench out a fake smile with every soulless stolen picture you generate and tell yourself it’s your work, but deep inside you feel the truth creeping up like a deadline, ready to crush you under the unbearable weight.
Eventually it’ll be too much to bear - you’ll delete the software, deactivate your socials, delete all of "your work", and plunge into the cold abyss that is pestering artfags for weird fetish art. Your anons won't remember your name but will relieved that they no longer have to live with ai spam. They’ll make a throwback thread talking about the dark era of ai and every anon for the rest of Cinemaphile will know you were an imposter who couldn't draw. Your generations will 404 and go back to the archive, and all that will remain of your legacy is garbage that is unmistakably artificial.
This is your fate. This is what you chose. There is no turning back.
>You will never be a real artist
Name 3 real artists alive today.
Banksy
Mike Mignola
Beeple
>None of whom are drawing furry porn online for a living which means they have zero to fear from AI anyway
Really gives you the Big thonk.
"anime" artists are the ones really in danger from AI
>Banksy
haha
Bansky stole his graffiti style from Xavier Prou, the original "vectorized image" grafitti.
Banksy is a imposter, he painted over King Robbo's garffiti because "he never even heard of him" he inserted himself in the grafitti scene without knowing anybody
After he became famous, he stopped grafitti (as the fraud he is) he made a "spooky theme park" that bombed horribly
and after he made that "painting that self destructs?!?jeepers" publicity stunt. whoa! such a statement agaisnt aristocracy, yet he made millions of that same painting.
he is a hack and a clout chaser
Ok
Still art tho
Still an artist
Just because you don't like it doesn't stop it from being art
>AI steals
>Bansky steals
>name a real artist
>Bansky
>Banksy steals
With your logic Leighton stole from Goya
It's art because it makes someone have a reaction to it
Nobody is the authority on if something is art or not.
>AI art steals
With your logic Leighton stole from Goya
You know what AI isn't that Goya and Leighton were?
A person.
This monkey selfie is the same as AI art.
It's art but nobody is gonna praise the monkey or the AI because there's no actual creator of the IP.
It's a novelty but you can't sit down with the creator and have a discussion about the value of what the piece means to them with any depth at this current juncture. AI is so primative at this stage acting like artists are annihilated is the take of someone who has no idea of what makes art valuable.
Dadaism disproved if you need years mastering art everyday.
Fair enough.
Still art though because it makes other people have a reaction to it.
Just because something is art doesn't mean it is good art or ethical art.
So tell me.. do you have some years mastering art everyday? Because people cant really understand a field without it.
>It's art because it makes someone have a reaction to it
yes, I have no reaction to AI art, except threads reaching bump limit all the time on Cinemaphile
Absence of reaction is a reaction anon
therefore, AI art is art whether you react to it or not.
glad that we agreed.
>You know what AI
>A person
Exactly! is all just boils down to your ego.
if that monkey has built a rocket to popularize mars by himself using nothing but rocks, you're too arogant and full of yourself to give valid criticism
the world can't progress becuse YOU are not ready for it
But anon
currently monkeys aren't building rockets to Mars
currently AI isn't doing anything but copying with no understanding of what it is copying
One day monkeys may build rockets to Mars
One day AI will actually do what you're pretending they do now
Today is not that day so dancing around this thread sincerely parroting that the pimrative AI art we have is flawless is idiocy
>One day AI will actually do what you're pretending they do now
>Muskfag thinks we're actually going to Mars
Humanity is a dead species walking. We can't fix Earth, the idea that we can make Mars habitable is hilariously ignorant.
Everytime this urinal is posted it needs to be said that it was controversial even in it's time. It was a fuck you to the exhibit and modern artfags in the time weren't calling it beautiful, they were talking about if they were going to gatekeep the title of art. If it were good art wasn't really the question; you can agree that it's art the same way commissioned classical statues were art, but it just isn't nearly as good.
I just post it because unless you've been homeschooled you probably have had the discussion about context already and it's a great reminder that art is forever marching forward and doesn't care what you think counts as art or not. You definitely can argue what you said about commissioned classical statues! You're 100% right and based.
Very pretty copies
What was the artist's intention behind each piece? Why did they make the decisions they did?
Thank you, but one quick trip to twitter and every other thread where it's posted and you will find people arguing that contemporary people hate beauty and love ugliness because they think the urinal is beautiful. Arthomosexuals arguing about if high society elites get to control what is art with access to shows and museums as a platform is a worthwhile moment in history, but with the full contexts these anti-modern art types find themselves siding with the more patently elitist position. The rhetoric of being anti-elite exposes itself as cover for something else.
> these anti-modern art types find themselves siding with the more patently elitist position.
No not really.
You can be not an elitist and also acknowledge that the thing that makes art valuable is the parsing of all the info from life onto a medium.
Else every sunrise is a work of valuable piece of art.
It's not.
If a tree falls in a forest it doesn't make a sound.
Because there is nothing around to hear it.
Sound is the interpretation of vibrations in the air by an ear.
Someone capturing a sunrise makes it a valuable piece of art as the questions I asked about your collage actually have answers.
Most art before AI diffusion had those answers.
Until AI art has those answers anyone pretending the IP of an artist is inferior to something a machine spits out is fooling themselves.
>I'm not an elitist
>Here is my highly specific elitist definition of art
lmao get fucked
>no argument
lmao those bait thread are sadder everyday
>valuable art
>art
There's a difference and the fact I'm not discounting what AI makes as art goes to show you I am not arguing that AI art isn't art.
That's what an actual elitist would do.
Until AI art has those answers anyone pretending the IP of an artist is inferior to something a machine spits out is fooling themselves.
I miss the days when people complained about hands and not made up nonsense
>is only good if is made in may of a even numbered year
>Because there is nothing around to hear it.
things should only exist to me, for me and from me
why are we even entretaining this poster? normal people are not autistic like this and are generally receptive to AI art
eventually he will die and all this juvenility will go with him
>things should only exist to me, for me and from me
That's not what I said.
If there is no squirrels, no dogs, no elderly people with hearing aides those vibrations reverberate around the air and decay
there is no sound because it is unobserved by anything that has the capacity to interpret it using an ear.
What's your favourite piece of art from the 20th century?
Any medium.
Those against the urinal were literally elitists. AI art can be art, it's just a question if it's good or not and how much you change. The technical skill required to paint realistic looking landscapes vs the ability to have an eye for photography and knowing methods well enough to maximize effect is part of the use of AI.
And again, it was elitist because it wasn't about what's good or bad art, it's about the concept of what can be art.
Nothing you said is wrong.
But some of the people disagreeing with me take all that and go "therefore we're days away from the kind of art we get from diffusion methods being superior!' while neglecting the amount of value that comes from the parsing of a muse onto a medium.
It can't be art because you have not done nothing.
Art is a form of communication and expression of ideas. When you use AI you neither express your ideals or anything of yours. It like trying to communicate with a rock....
Okay grug
Ok Apu......
Andy Warhol has about the same merit as an AI artist. Techno sampling sounds counts as transformative enough to be art. Even if prompts are ripping off other works, it's just a question of ethics and quality not "is it art".
>Those against the urinal were literally elitists.
those against the urinal were anyone with a lick of sense, and that was the point. duchamp was proving that people will praise anything to suck up to big names. that’s why he submitted it under a fake name.
>art is forever marching forward but dont care what you count as art
>art is a entity that is entwined with technology and it wants what i, the consumer, wants.
This type of shit is what makes everyone know that you dont have any experience in art, or the most superficial entry-level with it.
>art is a entity that is entwined with technology and it wants what i, the consumer, wants.
who are you quoting here?
I don't really have a horse in the race of if we're going to Mars or not, and I certainly have tired of Musk.
beauty is im the eye of the "butt holder"
typical post modren bullshit
>I-its art because i said so
Aifags really want to have more knowledge than a craft running for centuries.
>Just because you don't like it doesn't stop it from being art
Oopsy daisy
All good arguments for ai art.
Banksy is still a hack point enjoyed by middle class suburban midwits
>samefag uses Californian bait even though
>he dont know artists outside mainstream porn because he isn't interested in indulging actual arts and only consumerism.
>isn't more skilled because even if his generator can do collage he don't have essential knowledge of shit, so he cant do anything substantial that can actually stand in a complete work because it's so complex and difficult for his ass.
>is a complete retard homosexual and all his characters would be the same losers as him, even non-normies wouldnt be interested in his NPC incel shit.
The sweet stench of a schizo coping.
>gets butthurt with only a line of dialogue and projects instead of giving a argument.
Just saying, you've been on this board too long. You schizo fucktard.
Fucking (You)r mom.
Make it stoppp
?
As the guy with the satan post, I'm anti-AI. It's just Cinemaphile can get so heated about AI they accuse other anti-AI anons and even real artists of being AIjeets. It seems to be because a surprising amount of people here don't draw, so for example, when artists talk about using references anons have conflated that with plagiarism and lack of creativity before, like it's no better than making AI slop. Anons have also compared using CGI to being an AIjeet and said that 3D is soulless and takes no effort, though this thread seems to be saying otherwise now.
Wait who are (You)?
Shadman
Incase
Ninjartist
Congratulations. I thought, what the fuck could be worse than a fucking blobfish thread? And I couldn't come up with an idea other than a combination of shadman and stonetoss, but you've managed to do worse than blobfish.
Shadman is alive
Me
Myself
I
Shadman
Ian Worthington
Danny Devito
Cool copypasta, sis
Low grade tabletmonkeys that sell porn just saw their "careers" evaporate so they're freaking out. These smut peddlers use photoshop and microwaves, there's zero morality behind their sperging they're just mad that their halcyon days are over.
Using this pasta is just such delicious ironing.
Went to a con recently, they banned AI art, but srsly...can you tell AI art from "artists" at that level? Both are generic as hell and if you can make $$$ on it, why shouldn't you? I mean, your still paying for a table at the con
this
Art is a fundamentally human expression and having AI slop-machines do it for you takes away from what art is.
not that a hylic NPC golem like you would get it, of course.
also this.
Oh I get it, AIfags likes AI because it's the only time they can feel grandeur in their shut-in lives.
Man you creatures really cannot into irony to save your lives can you
>cannot into irony
Self-awareness is a good starting point to think before you type.
>into a crude mockery of nature’s perfection.
What if that's exactly what I want?
Because shills who are animation students, wannabe voice actors, etc. come here and try to control the narrative for the sake of their financial interest.
Very simple explanation, but many are too big of pussies to go with it
CalArts graduates are not real artists
Who the fuck said they wanted humans to stop making artwork forever
Artists can use AI too, AI can generate my creative setting
>That image
Cool plot idea, consider it stolen.
This take on the YWNBAW copypasta is so cope filled that its shocking. Its so mald-filled that you wouldn't expect a Cinemaphilener to unironically post it.
Once AI learns how to do fingers, it's over for the human artist
ControlNet and inpainting fixed this issue months ago.
I dun't know nuthing about this, I still see ai generated smut with fucked up fingers all the time
Could be that stable diffusion hasn't fixed it yet.
Putting that aside, I don't know how people get good results with AI art. Everyone says "just write a prompt, bro", but it's like a slot machine with low odds of success.
Until enough idiots risk their entire bodies on human trials of brain chips it will forever be a slot machine.
AI circlejerkers will never admit this though.
I kek pretty heartily when I see people use services that expose the prompts they use when they list specific inclusions/exclusions yet it's obviously disregarding certain prompts because it's pure chance to get what you want, and eventually someone is just going to publish because it was good enough
>Elon brain chip
Why not just buy a gun it'd be faster and less painful then the thing that excruciatingly killed 200 monkeys.
that's because 50% of AIAutists just use raw checkpoints without LoRAs, much less ControlNet
And 40% still fucking use Midjourney
They're ironing out the finger issue now. The issue now is the fact the inner ears look like skrull ears.
They fixed it months ago
Can't be right.
People are still drawing manually. How is this possible?
AI is just a tool, artists will still make better pictures than normal people and will be able to use it in a more effective way, just like happened to CGI
Not really
https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.17493
A world flooded with AI generated content will only self-reference and it will bore you due to a lack of innovation.
Every brainlet thinking AI is a substitute will end up waiting for AI to catch up to the new art movements that innovate and move past the status quo.
Let's say an equivalent to cubism is developed.
AI can't understand the new style because it can only refer to the pool of existing data it was trained on
Currently it takes hours to achieve an end product that matches your intention for art styles known by AI. Meanwhile another human can draw inspiration from a new style immediately.
>the only way to get soulful art with some meaning or emotion attached to it will be to hang around in art circles where they try to do new shit
I never thought codefags would make an artfag out of me, but I guess I'll have to befriend some Picasso asshole
>a lack of innovation.
Anon, Marvel is a bunch of DC rip offs, DC is a bunch of novels rip offs, Star Wars copied the Fourth World and nevermind all those isekai and fantasy games, shows and novels that are just copying Tolkien
>irrationally
Lmao
It already learned it and it didn't help. AI pictures have an easily detectable air of fakeness to them. You can usually spot from a thumbnail whether a given picture is AI-made or not.
The illustration somehow looks better than the entire comic itself.
Let's see how AI writes full-on comic books.
Not just a single art, a retarded monkey could do that- but entire story. With characters, coherent plot and jokes. And, of course, draw this shit as well.
If (and we both know it will NEVER happen) this "comic" will sell like One Piece or Berserk, then we can have "oh no it's joever" discussion. Until then- lol. Lmao even. Enjoy soulless generic shit
Have you seen modern comic books? They're political propaganda drawn with poser art.
>Implying AI can't churn out a better script than Bendis or Snyder
Bruh...
>NEVER happen
Is it possible for a topic to come up where both sides don't develop stage 9 autism? It will happen but not today or in the near future. This shit is like the first car. Shitty, inefficient, and hard to train people on. If the coming population crunch doesn't press us back too much and certain mineral nations don't fall to warlords then we'll see exceptional growth in certain areas. No, Mexicans won't be replaced, no sex bots won't get rid of women, no we won't have pod ai cars on the magnet road in 5 years. You'll just have better organizational tools and more spam bots.
You would have a point if Marvel didn't traced google images in most of their comics.
That new Batman and Robin comic looks like AI sloppa
I'm not against the concept of ai art. I just think it's depressing that we automated expression and art before the boring stuff
Why was AI art not a problem in 2002 when they used it to animate battle sequences in Lord of the Rings?
Why was AI art not a problem in 1994 when the Lion King used it to animate a stampede?
It took work to do all that, not the click of a button
Because the loud minority of porn 'artists' didn't scream bloody murder back then.
Every element could be justified.
AI art from a text-to-image diffusion model cannot explain why something is placed the way it is, or how light works
It only can be justified as a best guess.
>Why is a program designed to accomplish a specific task that uses only its own custom assets and resources better than an industrial scale plagiarism machine that only creates generic slop?
That wasnt AI retard it was computer generated, those battle scenes and that stampede were still modeled and animated by real people.
The animations were created using AI. A program was used to animate everything procedurally. The assets may have been created by people but the sequences required AI to produce the final images.
CGI is not the same thing as AI, you dumb frogposter
The term "Artificial Intelligence" has been used in a lot of different contexts. In the 1950s, "AI" included tasks like sorting a list of words alphabetically, which is computer science 101 nowadays.
People are specifically talking about generative machine learning models, which are not what they used for procedural crowds. Those took rules written by a person and applied them to thousands of entities in a 3D scene, reducing tedium.
Software used to automate tasks that were so simple you could write fool-proof step by step instructions (that's all a program is, really). Most people don't like doing these tasks over and over, so getting a computer to do them was enjoyable. Software also made art easier to manage, like layers in painting programs, which reduced fiddling with paints or other materials.
Now, people are trying to use Generative AI to replace the fun parts of art, like design and illustration, which people like doing and would happily do full-time if they can still put food on the table. If it becomes good enough that companies use it, only people rich enough to not work will be able to dedicate themselves to art full-time, which would be a sad fate for the world.
how old is this comic? 1-2 years ago it would have been accurate
nowadays ai art is indistinguishable from the real thing
and of course some low rate artist who draws borderline stick figures is complaining.
soullless, artificial and rigid
Enough ranting about your mother, what do you think about AI?
>irrationally
slopfag detected, post discarded
AI-slop will forever be the most middlebrow, unadventurous shit
Nothing against the tech besides it stealing its samples, the people who use it are just annoying.
this, nothing has turned me away from AI arts more then aihomosexuals and their inane retarded arguments
Its like with nfts a while back. I mean, I actually hate the tech in that case.
Mug it's getting better
Until it can actually do an artist job AIshills just need to shut up, AI discourse is cancerous and annoying
Because it's filling my porn searches with absolute shit, nothing but portrait pictures with bimbo tits and half the time it doesn't even look like the character or person it's meant to be. Fuck that soulless shit clogging everything up.
You just described all of anime art
Yes but I can get rid of that by including the Western tag.
I'd be more open to if it AI-shills weren't annoying as fuck and just as antagonistic as actual artists
The fuck is this backpedalling "Waaah AI artists are mean" bullshit. This is why creative kids deserve to be ostracized.
>Aigenerators are dumb homosexuals wanting to everyone go down with their retarded shit
Fixed.
Like I don't have a problem with AI I just wish the people using it weren't so mean about it. You don't have to like artists to not be a dick, it's called being decent human being.
Another one of these threads huh
I have a gaming PC that can run Stable Diffusion locally so I prompt on a daily basis
I don't have a vendetta against artists and I don't want them to lose their jobs, I prompt for fun and I don't upload my gens anywhere besides here
AI currently isn't anywhere near good enough to be a substitute for art/animation and won't be for many years, anyone who says otherwise is talking shit
However, I do think trying to curtail and censor further AI development to stop people's feefees from being hurt is stupid, like it or not this stuff is still in its infancy and will only improve with time
Most of the hate comes from homosexuals like you, OP, that can't accept the fact that people exist that don't like or care about AI art
>pancakefag on damage control
nobody cares about your pancakes
anybody who is against AI art, is a complete bafoon a fool
Bloody badtard bitch
them fighting words
It's bad. The art is stiff the backgrounds are generic. There's no fucking life to them all they can do is copy what already exists.
Simple as, it's pointless and soulless. It's just an uncanny valley collage created from actual artists collected work. Why would that be interesting when the artists that it sourced the image from exist? Deep Blue can play chess, and an AI can generate a musical composition, but in both cases it's just an interesting benchmark in the development of AI, no one is interested in watching two computers play chess with each other or would attend a classical concert where there are no musicians and it's simply a generated track played over speakers. Whats interesting about art is that it's created by a human. That the person has used craft and creativity and effort to create something compelling and sometimes even beautiful. Even if image generation does improve, it's still just a algorithmic empty magic trick.
I'm sick of these threads
I'm going to make a stablediffusion LORA and start selling commissions and patreon subs just to spite all of you
Good fucking luck, coomer.
What i find funny about those threads is that people only bring porn commissions and Hollywood hacks because that's the only interaction they had with it all their lives, ignoring commissions are secondary money to sustain their careers and Hollywood is a nepotism shitshow that dont hire actual artists and AI will not change their system but end all reasons to hire actual artists that may had done something, instead creating endless formulaic slop even more.
AInaggers don’t actually care about fixing the industry, they only want to tear down real artists because they’re spiteful and impotent.
no
I care about art, not people and we are heading towards true great art reborning
I'm not gonna hold down progress for some mediocre artists having their egos hurt
AI will not solve any of the issues you keep bitching about and will make most of them worse. you support it because you are jealous of artists and want to tear them down.
you are the problem.
nah, I like good art I really don't care about you at all
>admits he is a coosomer and dont care about the future of the craft
Then just stay on your own and dont let others copyright it. That's not hard.
real question, no offence. Do you have autism? I don't mean to offend.
I was thinkin, why would a person that I don't know think that I'm " jealous of artists and want to tear them down"?
Do you? I never said you want to tear us down, just said that is fine to make AI collages if you dont let corporates copyright it.
>nah, I like good art
evidently not, seeing as how you support ai
tell me that this is bad so I can ignore you:
>no argument
NTA but that lady in the bottom right in bed is missing most of her body. She's just sort of melted into the mattress and that raised bump for the knee is anatomically impossible.
Not him but they're just vague random images with no specific meaning. A guy with an orange head stretching the liquid around himself while it pours into a bowl, with milk splashed outside the bowl? It might impress you if you're fucking stupid and don't grasp how these images are created.
But anon! Banana on a wall!
The banana on a wall got a reaction out of you. Obsessing over it means the banana on a wall guy successfully created a work of art that impacted culture.
see:
>But you gave that picture a (You) it's the same thing that's a reaction too! Witness me!
According to you then Hitler is the greatest artist ever since he got a reaction from the world
Well that begs the question doesn't it: do you consider human suffering to be art?
If so, Hitler pretty much is, using genocide and poor dictatorial governance as his medium.
>literally "He was just pretending to be retarded and won because he got (You)s"
good = white men made it and I can jerk off to it
always has.
Speaking as an artist, I don't understand why people want AI to succeed so much beyond not wanting to put time into learning to do something themselves and/or some weird borderline fetishistic hatred for artists.
Like out of all the jobs to automate, people are trying so hard to automate this one? The one that's often held as the essence of being human and expressing yourself, they'd rather a computer do it for them?
I just don't get it
Don't get me wrong, I DO want to see it be used as a tool in the future once we can iron out a lot of the legal and ethical wrinkles. One of its best applications would be easing out the tedium of animation and allowing it to not be so labor intensive. We could have actually decent 2D animation being made again without Asian sweatshops and puppet rig tweening all the time.
But that's all it should really be used for. Reducing tedium. Not doing all the work for you.
As a promoter, I've been terrible at art for my entire life, so the novelty of my ideas being somewhat realised just by typing a few words(even if most of them are just naked ladies because of my coomer brain) is appealing to me.
That what this shit is, or at least should be for now, a novelty.
As a prompter*
holy shit
Zoomers.
AI art may not be good, but it can created some interesting things.
I like this helmet and the insane cape.
The anatomy's fucked though.
This set's better than the last set.
Prompts were
train superheroine, lineart, style of h.r. geiger
negative prompts were
poorly Rendered face, poorly drawn face, poor facial details, poorly drawn hands, poorly rendered hands, low resolution,Images cut out at the top, left, right, bottom, bad composition, mutated body parts, blurry image, disfigured, oversaturated, bad anatomy, deformed body features out of frame, lowres, text, error, cropped, worst quality, low quality, jpeg artifacts, ugly, duplicate, morbid, mutilated, out of frame, extra fingers, mutated hands, poorly drawn hands, poorly drawn face, mutation, deformed, blurry, dehydrated, bad anatomy, bad proportions, extra limbs, cloned face, disfigured, gross proportions, malformed limbs, missing arms, missing legs, extra arms, extra legs, fused fingers, too many fingers, long neck, username, watermark, signature
I'll try again without mispelling H.R. Giger's name.
And some of it's not lineart, some or it ignores negative prompts.
I really have no clue what I'm doing with ai art.
I tried putting out-of-frame as a negative prompt twice and adding 'simple' as a prompt. I upped the CFG to 15 (less freedom to the AI to free-style)
Still lots of out-of-frame stuff.
Well, I'm much happier with the unicorn results overall than the human ones.
I'll stop now.
That's a lot of bicorns!
I did say 'overall'.
I know it still didn't produce what I asked for quite often.
yep I know I was just going for an easy joke there are some cool results thank you for posting
I like the invisible woman in the train station one.
I like the helmet on the one right above it. The rest of that image is bleh but the helmet is nice.
This is lame.
With all the resourses of the AI and you still only managed to make ill defined crap.
Technacaly impressive ,but still crap in execution.
I have moved on from human women and returned to monkey.
>style of h.r. geiger
That's the really shit thing about AI, that you are deliberately stealing someone's work
No wonder artists nowadays are watermarking and logoing the fuck out of their stuff they don't want you to use their work like that
>inb4 I can just remove watermarks and logos
and be open to a ton of lawsuits since commercial law is super into brand protection
>stealing
this shit again
call it violating the terms and conditions for usage
same shit
I bet you don't even delete your nes roms after 24 hours
Hr Giger drew a lot of train-based superheroines?
Doesn't everyone?
the fact that you are using his name as a prompt already makes you guilty
Guilty of what? Stealing Giger's train-based superheroes?
I always drew booba-based superheroines
>That's the really shit thing about AI, that you are deliberately stealing someone's work
I don't particularly like AI either but I think it's retarded when Cinemaphile moralfags about respecting copyright. Not only that, but it's a slip n slide away to the reference/plagiarism debate which is brain damage inducing.
an entire thread dedicated to farming >(you)'s
>farming
twitch terms
>if you're not with me then you're my enemy
Why does it HAVE to be AI vs human art? Can't you just like both?
Nuance is fucking dead, I swear.
I reckon it all went wrong with Cambridge Analytica.
People are irreversibly conditioned now to not be on the fence any more.
>"AI will replace artists!"
>Artists use AI to make backgrounds and just to generally make drawing less tedious
>AIbros proceed to REEEEEE and call artists lazy hacks
There's no winning with trend chasing douchebags.
few people are so optimistic about AI
if somebody is a writer, he can automize the animation process, if somebody is a animator, he can automize the writing process
is a win win
Because it has no soul.
Theft.
>Irrationally
Dude, it's literally a Cinemaphile tourist constantly trying to incite artist hate and advocating less rights for all normies for no reason. If you have to put down people to shill ai, then of course, people is going to be annoyed
If the ai is only using non stolen art where the artists are compensated, then there's no problem
the copium never ends
The evidence is literally on third post.
>entered the thread insulting
>gets insulted back
>they attacked me first
>Strawmans
I understand why you have no arguments, downplaying our personal rights that isn't exclusive to artists is just plain wrong and cannot be disputed
>keep insulting
>expecting me to insult back
ain't falling for the bait
Eh. It seems to overlap a lot with captionsfags and editfags and the low standards of those who are into that stuff.
How many of you are even artists who have actual careers to be made or broken by ai, serious question.
This is Cinemaphile. Most of us aren't even artists. It's why the anti artist argument crap is tiresome because it's a failed personal attack due to having no real arguments for AI copyright infridgement
Generative AI is just highly granular plagarism.
>I want a cake with white frosting and pink flowers.
Okay I'll bake you one. Pay me up front.
>Okay
Great will have it by next week.
>Hey it's been 2 months past "next week" how's that cake coming?
>Ummmm...I've been real busy and kind of depressed.
>Can I just have my money back?
Okay but need a while to get it, kind of spent it on video games. But don't you still want a cake?
>Yeah, I just went ahead and got an EZ-bake oven. Costs about as much as hiring a baker and the cakes are shittier but takes me half an hour to get a cake.
WTF YOU TRYING TO PUT ME OUT OF A JOB? I'll blacklist you!
>meanwhile other artists who are commissioned deliver by the due date
He's talking about Patreon and literal porn artists who were never exactly career people until recently when internet clout started to matter.
SIMPSONS DID IT!
%3D%3D
If I make my own pepe, does that make it rare or do rare pepes need to come from somewhere special?
if you make your own pepe it will be rare until people start right clicking it and downloading it without your permission so be sure to ask people not to download it unless they trade you another pepe
I love the porn and how much it makes people seethe.
It might be cool if AI art is legally found not to be subject to copyright.
AI can't be legally copyrighted
but tha doesn't stop people from comercializing it
yes, I pirated photoshop and I pirated my games!
why do people use AI art? it's stolen!
Videogames with AI will be the shit
imagine playing CS with actual precise players or playing multiplayer games without internet
with funny interactions and player oriented improvised storytelling
a lonely creep such as myself would be so happy
I'm not super pro AI but as a kid I did like sandboxes and pet sims like Creatures of Albia and I would have loved to have NPCs that talked back to me with dynamic improvised speech instead of limited preset lines. If they made a god simulator game where the NPCs spoke with character.AI levels of dialogue I'd never stop playing.
This is all fun and games until you end up breaking the AI by saying the wrong thing to it. ChatGPT is impressive at first but it is extraordinarily stupid and very easy to manipulate. It has next to no utility in video games even in its best form now because jailbreaking it is as easy as just telling it to act like something else that would do the thing it's told not to do. People were jailbreaking Discord's sanitized version of the AI into doing and saying all sorts of wild off-script shit by telling it to act in "Baphomet Mode" in which in would act like an evil demon with no human morality, something it accepted without question.
All I want is a cute anime buddy that can see what I'm doing on my computer and bant.
Apparently that's asking for the fucking moon and stars while they somehow think they can replace an entire workforce with a single pc.
Bots with adjustible difficulty/behavior have existed since at least Perfect Dark. I don't get what you want unless it's a bot to run the most broken weapon/build and call you a nagger-homosexual on VC.
a bot that feels like a human.
who can make inteligent decisions, who can actually make fun of the game itself like a person would
like .....a friend
Humans are too complicated to AI duplicate and experience of a real world environment is what made circumstances and reactions unique.
Go on incognito mode and open up the front page of Youtube
imagine a game with improvised storytelling that changes accordingly with your mood!!
it could start as adventure zelda style game and morph into a horror game!
or a game that starts as a horror game like visage and changes to a action game like Doom so you can get revenge in the monsters!
Exclamation marks, the internet's universal symbol of baitposting
I don't really care about the AI art debate, I am just happy that I can do something basic like generate D&D character art without having to pay someone a hundred bucks.
AI art is a godsend.
Been trying to learn how to draw for 20 years with barely any improvement but ever since AI came around and I can use it to make reference pieces that "kind of" show something similar to what I want the final piece to be, I have improved greatly in the span of the last year or so just because I have used it to overcome hurdles like perspective that I just couldn't understand without some vague approximation of the final piece to look at and analyze. I don't think it should replace artists but for shit like or as a reference tool, it is very useful IMO.
Post your AI art anon
He's gonna take you back to the past
Jackie Chan just wants to fap to his waifu.
To play the shitty games that suck ass
Today I will remind them
the "i fucking love science" still gets me
Strawman
IF you stick a banana on a wall that is your expression.
If two fags shit in their mouths that can be a form of expression.
You just ordering a program to fetch you items from library and stick it together.....that is the programer effort in programing, but the prompter? He has no form of expression more then commissioning work from an ai.
>You just ordering a program to fetch you items from library and stick it together.....that is the programer effort in programing, but the prompter? He has no form of expression more then commissioning work from an ai.
Yes, akin to how many artists commission their hands and brushes to make a work of their liking.
I'd argue that the art is in training your own model to express concepts that you couldn't before.
>the art is in training your own model
>on other people's works
That's their own art, not yours.
God can sue me if he doesn't like it. For now, I'm making monkey people.
reminded me of this
That's more or less the idea, yeah. But in this case, my alternative is making big titty anime girls. But, I just don't want to. I want to make photos of animal human hybrids.
>my alternative is making big titty anime girls
>I want to make photos of animal human hybrids
I can't understand, but mad respect to you.
>>the art is in training your own model
>>on other people's works
>That's their own art, not yours.
Virtually all artists trained on the work of other artists pejorative word
Human training is not machine training. A human can draw their own original stuff without having someone else's work around. Your machine returns an empty query if you remove stuff from its dataset.
>Human training is not machine training. A human can draw their own original stuff without having someone else's work around. Your machine returns an empty query if you remove stuff from its dataset.
Yeah and if you were to remove the concept of "hand" from a human's mind they'd have a hard time drawing one too unless you literally showed them a hand and had them try to draw it (like how diffusion ai works).
but anon that's not how diffusion ai works
your ai can't draw a hand for shit if you just tell it to draw a hand and it doesn't have a specific dataset for hands, it doesn't work on abstract concepts like humans, it works on specific traceable bytes of data that's protected
while the human mind has no such thing
>never seen a man with a degenerate brain condition losing his grip on reality
All you know you were just trained to know
>man with a degenerate brain condition can still draw cats without needing to see a cat
You never seen the draw a clock test, have you?
dude I literally referenced this artist and his schizophrenia
I'd love to see this animated
Even just one of those 'morphs into' animations of it would be cool as fuck
>All you know you were just trained to know
Are you a lobotomite? If I tell you that people are 20 feet tall, bananas are blue and round, and Lizzo is the peak of female beauty, will you "learn" these things or use your own reasoning, other information you know and sense of beauty to decide whether to believe me? Because an AI can't: it doesn't have a sense of beauty and it treats all input as "fact".
You're an idiot if you think a human learns and creates in a similar way to an AI. There are some very basic similarities, but that's it. Please educate yourself on the matter instead of sounding retarded. Especially if you're so enthusiastic about it.
aI IS NOT tool because you are not part of the process of creation. You are in process of commissioning.
You can commission a master of the craft to to work on your commission, but that does not make you the creator of the commission.
You can commision an ai to do that job, but that is still not creation because at the creation level the programer did most of the programing.
Yeah. If you aren't harvesting your own horse hair to make your own brushes then you're a fucking poser and not a real artist
Do you have control over the ai in its action on a coding level?
Do you select the wood to make your brushes?
Nah. You're just a grumpy of boomer scared of being replaced by newer and better
No, but i have control over my tools. The ai has control over your commissions.
You have control over your ai by selecting the seed to use. The model to use. The prompt to use and the weights to use.
It's like your don't even know how to aiart
No you have no control because you don't know its coding. You are at the mercy of the coder.
You at the mercy of your color mixer because you didn't mix them yourself
But i get to pick the color to the exact point of my liking from the first time. I don't need to play the loto to get the color i need.
>I don't need to play the loto to get the color i need.
Same with the AI. Have you ever used it?
I have, that's how I know. You never know what exactly you're going to get. Or if it's going to be even close to what you asked. Sometimes it works, sometimes it's impossible to get it to do something because it's data pool is limited.
>You never know what exactly you're going to get
This is only true if you don't know how to.
>Sometimes it works, sometimes it's impossible to get it to do something because it's data pool is limited.
That's why training exists. As I said, you don't know how to use it.
Negro, I haven't seen a Gwen with a correct cat logo o her blouse to date. Don't tell me that "just train it" shit.
>Negro, I haven't seen a Gwen with a correct cat logo o her blouse to date. Don't tell me that "just train it" shit.
???
more ai gwen
Look closely, it still can't get it right.
So you are not using the visual medium.
You are not an artist because you are making your own vision, but what you assume is good by other people. You are a voiceless chump who can't express him self through art.
It's all open source and training a LoRA is easy
How would it be art if txt2img just spit out perfect images every time?
>training a LoRA is easy
do it on works on you actually own
You can't own an idea, man
You'll find every law in every country recognizes that people do own their artwork.
>training a LoRA is easy
Then do it on your work, not someone else's works.
>How would it be art if txt2img just spit out perfect images every time?
Because that is YOUR CHOICE which with the ai you don't have.
>It's all open source and training a LoRA is easy
LoRA is open library of images. Not the AI program.
>Because that is YOUR CHOICE which with the ai you don't have.
I don't understand what you're trying to say.
>LoRA is open library of images. Not the AI program.
LoRA stands for Low Rank Adaptation. It's basically a small patch to the weights of a larger model. You can train it on whatever you want.
You have no control.
You beg the ai to fetch fancy items.
You have not created anything because the ai presents you with items from which you select.
I have more control than any photographer could possibly dream of
You have none, because you are at the mercy of the ai and the coder's ethics.
It's all running locally on my hardware. I can modify the software or train the models whenever and however I want to.
I'm only good at genning furshit since that's all I ever do. Do you want some of that?
Frontend user detected.
Please sir don't forget your walker.
Not in front of the normies.
Corpos haven't figured out how to effectively ban lewd.
Photoshop has generative fill now.
I choose not use that tool and guess what, ITS A SINGLE TOOL OUT THE BOX which i get to pick and choose at my leasure.
You? You can't go outside of the code. You are in a box of your own making.
Sure pick a Cinemaphile anthro. There are thousands. Post one eating a slice of pizza.
Still waiting (lol not really because we both knew you weren't gonna do shit.)
I'm trying. Pizza is hard and my GPU is awful.
I'm actually curious now
why the fuck is pizza so hard?
A whole pizza is round, a slice of pizza is triangular or sometimes square. On top of that, the model is trained on sexy animals, not food.
>A whole pizza is round, a slice of pizza is triangular or sometimes square.
Or vaguely vagina shaped apparently
H-hot
I sense a frozen pizza brand in the making!
Dude, you could at least try to match the style or at lease try to make her look somewhat like Loona.
That's the neat thing. He can't. He can only do what the loras allow.
Nope, that's not how LoRA works.
Then do the same thing, with the actual style.
Sharp lines, Vibrant colours. Style.
Still want dat pizza boyo.
I'm not that anon.
>Then do the same thing, with the actual style.
>Prove it.
Sure. bw is 20$, flat color is 30$ and shaded is 50$
Quick and dirty before the thread dies
>not adding signatures to your negative prompt
shiggy diggy
Makes it more authentic
The time factor is a bitch
https://rentry.org/trashfaq
And artist could at least make sure the basics are followed.
Nope, not with the time constraint.
Artist at convetions can.
We never mentioned about coloring.
And they make mistakes. Wonky perspective, parallel lines, shapes that resemble hands, merging, etc.
And that's ok. You're just splitting hair
Terrible.
Those eyes.
God Terrible.
The color just vanishes
Fingers go in and out.
The eyelashes and ears merge.
There is not single coherent line style.
Also this is not the style, Close but no cigar buddy,
please teach me masters
So close but you got a calzone instead
Prove it.
Like I said, I only do furshit.
Artist mix can make a ton of difference.
Dude you are so bad.
Look at that mouth.
What are those armbands my dude.
Why is her fur human skin color.
Also is that how people eat pizza?
My God such loser.
That was just a funny one, silly
That's nice. Shame I'm not into furry.
Am I a tasteless slopfag if this pic could actually fool me if I didn't know it was AI? Except the pizza which is a dead giveaway. Is it the chalkiness hiding the fucky AI bits?
Stable diffusion is shit at small fiddly details.
A character eating pizza involves the small details of hands, food in a specific orientation, an open mouth, and interaction with said mouth. It can't handle it, which is why I asked for a character eating pizza specifically.
Hamburgers are a similar problem. AI is trained to know that there's a bun and cheese lettuce and a patty but it doesn't actually know what order those go in, which is why you have to inpaint the fuck out of it or it'll put the patties on the outside.
An artist does not need GPU to make an image.
>An artist does not need GPU to make an image.
3d artists?
That is a different medium boyo, which the AI coders don't dare touch because they will need nasa computers.
I asked some dude to draw me a picture
that for you literally makes me the artist
you are a retard
Are collages or photobashing not art? When you deliberately pick and choose elements to combine because you think they might form a harmonious whole, is that not art?
IF you collect the images, chose which items are best for your expression from the items you have collected and combine them using various methods that is art. Just making an order to an ai is not art.
Going to place, picking a spot for your shot. Waiting for the best time and using the picking a lense to take a photo which best expresses your vision is art. Just ordering an snap shot of a place you have never seen is not.
>IF you collect the images, chose which items are best for your expression from the items you have collected and combine them using various methods that is art.
Yes, that is how I make these, with the method to combine my handpicked images being the AI.
Absolutely nothing different from finding the right spot and lenses to finding the right model, using the right prompt and weights.
Just your hurt feelings making you biased
>You can commision an ai to do that job
Without a human using it, you can't.
Yes you can. You literally give it a prompt and it gives you output.
>Yes you can. You literally give it a prompt and it gives you output.
Without a human, you can't. The person giving the prompt is a human. This is like saying you're going to commission a sculpture from a piece of clay.
You yourself are the human who gives it a prompt. WTF are you talking about? Why do I need an extra person to write down what I can write down myself? Are we talking about a fringe situation where the commissioner can't write or doesn't own a computer?
Yes. "You can commision an ai to do that job" is wrong because of this. The AI is just a tool, the human is the one responsible for what's being made.
I don't know what you're trying to tell me, but what I'm hearing is "You can't just put your popcorn and pop it in the microwave, you need a chef to operate it!". Literally anyone can write a prompt into the AI, literally anyone can read a short guide on how to use it and how the prompt works to get good results, same as using a washing machine or microwave.
I can make a code to enter prompts in the ai.
Yes, the human made a code to enter prompts. If the human doesn't exist, neither does the code.
But then its not art because its not communicating anything. It just removes the human element from the image and making it worthless because there is no expression in it.
>But then its not art because its not communicating anything
It is. It's communicating whatever your intentions were when you created the code.
AI is a tool. A tool can't function without a user. You don't commission the tool, you commission the tool's user.
Then you commission yourself, you semantic-loving fuck. More known as just "doing something".
Hey, you're the one who said something stupid. I just helped you realize how stupid that was.
Actually you commissioning the ai to do the work.
So both of you are wrong.
Without a human using it, you can't.
If i code an auto prompter yes i can.
And what are you? A real boy.
Red line it.
I won facker.
I can replace you with a monkey beating its dong on keyboard and probably the monkey will make more original things its not so predictable.
Translation: I can't
And that's ok, not everyone can. But if you practice enough, you'll be able to. I recommend some Loomis or if you want something more modern, Proko (I forgot the other guy's name).
>commissioning a human artist is the same as commissioning the ai to do the work
But you have not made the code. You entered an item in the code. YOU ARE FRONTEND USER.
Just like photoshop, csp, sai, etc. See, you agree with me. This is just a tool. You don't commission the tool, you commission the person using the tool.
img2img, controlnet, inpaint
But in photo shop its emulating the tools which you would use in real life. Photoshop is a compilation of tools. I have exact control over all of Photoshops tools. I can control the lenght of each line from the first time. I can pick a brush to the texture of my strikes. I can design the brushes used to emulate brushes of any paint brush.
AI mostly is a memory fetcher. You don't have even the emulation of control.
You have the same control using AI.
>You have the same control using AI.
lol
lmao
But you don't have because you can't make exact measurements. You can't make exact strokes to empaphise a place where you want the eye to focus. Fucker, you can't even pick the composition whithout reaching out for a third party software.
>You can't make exact strokes to empaphise a place where you want the eye to focus.
>Fucker, you can't even pick the composition whithout reaching out for a third party software.
Both of these are trivial with img2img
I do requests sometimes. Not here though.
>Not here though.
Every single time it's this same steamed hams bit.
>AI CAN DO A THING
>Can we see it?
>...No.
I bet you guys all have canadian girlfriends too
Prove it.
>But you don't have because you can't make exact measurements
You can.
>You can't make exact strokes to empaphise a place where you want the eye to focus
You can.
>Fucker, you can't even pick the composition...
You can.
>...whithout reaching out for a third party software.
Why wouldn't I? Anon, you sound stupid.
Prove it.
Just with prompts.
Get me a dick dragon riding vagina knight, With rose red skies.
He could probably do this if he wanted to spend the time training up new concepts merged from others. But I don't know who would want to spend the time necessary to curate a dickdragon/vagina knight model.
I don't want you to train me an ai.
I want you right now to prove it by drawing what i asked. If you ask an artist he will agree to the work as long as it is ethically ok with him.
I'm not that guy, so I don't really care about the "prompting as art" idea one way or another. To me, using someone else's model feels like browsing through someone else's portfolio.
My friend there is inspiration.
But when you feed somebodies work in a machine that copies the style is plagiarism on the level of China.
I consider it more like a form of photobashing, at least the way I use it.
>photobashing
You are not even doing that.
You are ordering a photobash.
Believe me, there's enough manual input here that I'm not "just ordering" anything. I am rather carefully picking out what I think will mix well, adjusting it so it'll mix better, and so on.
You can't adjust, because you are prompter.
Even the word means to force somebody to do something.
>You can't adjust
You can. Just because you can't doesn't mean others can't.
You can't. Because the AI does it for you out of the order you gave, The problem is that all of your input is regurgitated through the ai.
I pick out images with the right features, train a model, check to see how the features combine, go back to training, until I get some results I like. It's like gardening, with a particular shape in mind for how you want it to grow.
>I pick out images with the right features
An artist makes images, he does not pick them.
For what it's worth, I get what you mean monkeybro
Thanks. I consider it a pretty fun process. I might not get the highest quality results, but it helps satisfy my curiosity and test out caveman ideas I have to see how it'd actually look.
...if I see an increase in gay monkey human porn. I'll know who's fault it is.
Oh, I actually had that problem at one point. The gorillas were fusing to make naked muscular men with excessive bodyhair. Only a few were actually usable for future training.
Sure. bw is 20$, flat color is 30$ and shaded is 50$
The funny thing is that AI shills will seethe about these rates when they're so far below minimum wage it's not even accurate to call them poverty tier.
Oh but the 400 dollar GPU with 16 gigs of vram? That's not expensive at all!
>$400 gets an unlimited supply of pictures
>$50 gets one shitty drawing from a crappy redit artist
Bitch surrenderd.
Go home bitch.
You can only order what the ai allows you to.
>You can only order what the ai allows you to.
Only if you don't know how to use it.
Ha.
Bitch please.
You are a frontend user.
>You are a frontend user.
Yes. Just like with any software.
HAHAHAH.
Are you really that retarted.
Just tell me.
Do you get entertained by the bugs doing loops through your ears.
>knowing what to prompt isn't expression because
>why
>just isn't chud!
Why don't you take the banana off the wall and stick it up your ass, homosexual.
>my artistic expression
Because you are commissioning an order from the program.
You have no control over that order, besides the most simplest descriptions of that order.
You can change the prompt to whatever you want. No different from using assortment of brushes to get the right textures
I don't need to have the entire library of artgerm's artworks to create my own brushes and draw whatever I want
can you create whatever you want if you can't prompt some actual artist's name anymore?
Yes. You don't have to put in a artists name and you can select any model and prompt with weights.
Do you even know what your are raging against?
>You don't have to put in a artists name and you can select any model
Any model that uses specifically an artist's works?
>oh I don't need to prompt artgerm
>I just use this lora that uses specifically artgerm's works
you are still depending completely on someone else's work for your shit to exist at all
No. You don't have to specify anyone. You can just type in blahjahdiknds and get something.
Yes you can with your prompt
Go for a walk anon. Maybe have the ai paint you a soothing picture. You're clearly losing it
See, then you are not an artist, but a commissioner. You have 0 control, you have 0 no idea the process of the ai to get you that image.
That makes your image hollow and mute to any artistic value because it has no voice to express anything.
>You don't have to specify anyone
then why are ai naggers are so mad about artists not wanting ai being trained on their works? because you can't generate anything worth shit without literally stealing other people's works
But do you get what you want exactly as you want it or do you pick from the AI's work.
When I work on my art i can control perfectly what i get to the capacity of my skills.
Img2img and photoshop
Or are you going to tell me you have never done postwork editing and no real artist does that
In photoshop you have control.
You don't pick an item from SOMETHING THE AI MADE.
Technically no because when actual digital artists do it it's not postwork.
It's just work.
Yes. If I don't like a gen, I can pull it into GIMP, fix it to the best of my ability, and feed that into img2img to make my toddler scribbles match the rest of the image.
But why not get what you want from the first time if you have created it.
But do you have control over what the |AI fetches from where it fetches, and to what extent. No.
You have no control.
Only the hope it will fetch you something you like.
See
What makes you so sure what you are creating is actually what you want and not just copying what you liked from others you saw?
what to prompt isn't expression because
>>why
Because prompting only "knows" what keywords are coded into it and it's not even real knowledge, just vague association. It can't intuit or extrapolate or interpret. This "AI" doesn't really know what it's drawing, Which is why when you ask it for something like "a red triangle" it gets the red part but will give you a random ass polygon. A human thinks
>a triangle has 3 sides.
AI "thinks"
>triangles are an amalgamation of straight lines in a random orientation
Expression requires people to actually know what they're doing and interpret, or represent, or subvert, or otherwise play with that knowledge.
Shapes are something you learn when you're like 3 years old. And Stable Diffusion still needs multiple tries to get them. Now extrapolate that (because you're a human and capable of extrapolation) to things that *do not exist in reality*.
>imagine a hypothetical character design
>have to beg in a draw thread or commission it
>or just plug it into an AI and get instant output
I'm seeing why artcucks are so upset
>Plug it
Plug what? Your brain waves?
You could write as detailed a description as you want but it's never ever going to come out as you have it pictured in your head, and you can't tell an AI to alter minute details precisely to better match your vision.
You are just going to get some generic-ass shit and cope that it's "totally what you wanted"
>edit your text2img prompt with Photoshop
>chuck the edited picture in img2img
>edits are now seamless with the rest of the image
Granted, you still need a modicum of artistic skill to do this well, but it's not impossible.
>start with original sketches
I think you're just baiting the hardcore anti-AI spergs. The image literally depicts an artist using AI to aid their workflow, not someone who can't draw for shit "having their vision realized"
You're right, pic related is a better example of what I'm talking about.
I said I'd stop, but I figured I'd give the AI a shot at more landscape-y art.
It does pretty well with space/stars/accretion disks.
I'm not a Cinemaphile regular but I think AI art is fine and I make money selling art. It's not that big of a deal and makes my life easier since normies don't know the difference between a sketch and a rough, lazy sketch I ran through an AI and then cleaned up in 1/4th of the time.
>lazy sketch I ran through an AI and then cleaned up in 1/4th of the time.
Imagine scamming people like this
>Imagine scamming people like this
Where do I sign up? Furfags are so easy to manipulate
the thread have become much more optimistic without those spammers
I think there's a loud minority of autists
Idk, I look at ai media generation as something we can learn to use to make shit more tailored to our unique tastes. Or just dumb shit that sounded mildly amusing in your head
I don't get how anyone can hate the thought of that
>I don't get how anyone can hate the thought of that
me neither
why do we need women when there are transwomen, bro?
they're looking less like dudes every year!
The people that want to create art, go and do it.
The people that want to create AI art, go and do it.
Meanwhile, there's subhumans like this homosexual OP that want to keep making pointless discussions that contribute nothing so they can feel like they're part of something, when in reality they're just shouting into the void.
because AI art just doesn't feel fun. there's nothing to it. art made by a human usually takes talent and skill. like, what's the point of playing a video game if all the cheats are turned on? sure it's cool at first, but then it loses its charm.
>what's the point of playing a video game if all the cheats are turned on?
So you want to grind art? The fuck are you on about?
Practicing anything is real life grinding.
He was referring to consuming not creating
>what's the point of playing a video game if all the cheats are turned on?
This loser never played any Sims game lol.
I think professional artists (not Twitter) should decide the fate of art, or at least you need to have a lot of experience in that field to decide it. Who cares and know more about art than artists?
AI is a nifty tool for scientists and the industry when used correctly. It's just the bitcoin bubble all over again with inflating opinions on it by people that have no idea about the fundamental mechanisms and how to use it correctly. Once in a while I get fooled by really good AI art but most of the time it's dull or just plain trash. It's already as annoying as disney's trainwreck of CGI slop.
Question, who here knows how to make AI models that are good?
I tried learning something from Cinemaphile but that stuff is too complicated for me
Models I am completely clueless about and they probably require more powerful hardware than I have at my disposal but you can finetune existing models with lora pretty easily.
If you give me good screenshots of Penny with those black borders removed, I'll make your Penny model.
In the end it’ll be corpos and governments that will decide whether AI art stays or goes, not us faceless web surfers on a tibetan acupuncture website.
If it becomes a bigger asset to them than it is a liability, it will stick. If it’s the opposite, it will get outlawed to oblivion.
I think in terms of AI, context is important.
Corpos using it is bad, people using it for fun/personal projects is not.
And before someone goes "muh twaining :(", the genie is already out of the bottle, you can't put it back in, this is the best way to work with it to keep everyone happy.
The Springtrapped threads hurt me on a spiritual level
>irrationally
1) It disincentivizes new artists from entering the field, because they will be inferior to AI garbage initially.
2) AI can't make new art, it only reshuffles. Like a box of Lego that you can only make a finite combination of things from.
3) So by both reducing the amount of new artists and being stagnant by definition, AI art can only hurt the overall art landscape. We will be left with billions of shitty AI pictures clogging up the space, most of them awful and the best merely kinda remind you of how that one good artists sometimes drew on a bad day.
>they will be inferior to AI garbage initially
They will also be inferior to talented artists initially.
>AI can't make new art, it only reshuffles.
This is not true unless you are going full philosophical and arguing that 'with only X colors in existence and only Y pixels (or other smallest unit of an image) there are technically only Z possible configurations of any given canvas but that also holds true for regular art.
>can only hurt the overall art landscape
What a fallacious and illogical attempt at reasoning.
If what you said was true (it isn't) you would also need to demonstrate that there is no way for AI art to contribute the overall art landscape. Off the top of my head:
"AI art might inspire someone to get into traditional art methods to try and see the difference in styles"
"AI art can be used as a learning tool regarding lighting, posing, etc..."
"traditional artists might be motivated to work extra hard to 'stick it to the AI fags'"
"AI art will filter out all the shitty porn-artists so the field of 'actual art' will be of a higher average quality".
>They will also be inferior to talented artists initially
Devil's advocate, it takes no effort to make an AI image.
>talented artists
Yes, but they can believe that those people put in a lot of work into being good and that they will be as good if they put in a lot of work.
>not true
Maybe you're misunderstanding me. An AI cannot create something good because it has no idea what "good is", it only knows what pictures that people think are good look like. It can only take elements from those pictures and use them to try and make something it thinks a person might find "good". The AI, at best, is like some dolt wit no personality or imagination, who can only try to copy other people's works and styles. It cannot grow and develop like a human can, because it cannot grasp what "growth" and "development" is.
>AI can make a person interested in styles
So can seeing normal art, so it contributes nothing new.
>AI art can be used as a learning tool regarding lighting, posing, etc.
No, it can't. This is one of the things it's garbage at. The programs that can be used for this are completely different from AI that produces pictures.
>traditional artists might be motivated
That's moronic. It's like saying that people will start knitting to stick it to those soulless machine-knitted sweater distributors — no, knitting is almost extinct in comparison to what it once was.
>AI art will filter out all the shitty porn-artists
Exactly, before they ever get the chance to become good.
A whole bunch of things very much like the pic you posted exist. That's why the AI could produce it in the first place: it has lots of very similar references.
imagine hating on this?
>it only reshuffles
I never seen something so witty, clever and well done like pic related because it never existed before
again, imagine hating on THIS
Has it fixed eating and drinking yet?
commissioning artists is a scam just use a prompt
post more gwen ai
Sure I can make you all the Gwens you'd ever want. In the style of any artist you like. And in seconds, no waiting. Isn't that lovely?
Maybe you recognize the artist. Maybe they're even your friend. Doesn't matter to me. They're all just toys for me to play with.
>In the style of any artist you like
>admits to stealing from artists while hating on the people he stole from
That's why AI is hated
BRUH THIS COPIUM NEVER ENDS
I suppose the game scorn "STOLE" too from Hr giger because it has his style?
why you say things you don't even believe in?
>stealing from artists
Like how we steal cartoons by watching them online?
"Stealing"? But all the images I used were available online to view and download for free! It only took five minutes to make my little Bigdad puppet, do you like his "drawing" of Gwen Tennyson?
I unironically like this drawing
>all the images I used were available online to view and download for free
that doesn't mean you are allowed to use them for AI
A lot of artists are injecting data into their work that specificies the terms and conditions for using their work and AI is a breach of contract which you accept when you view the image.
>3 fingers
>wrong hair
>wrong clothes
>melting face and eyes
>3 fingers
>wrong hair
>wrong clothes
>melting face and eyes
Look at it. If an actual artist drew this shit, people would question whether he has some crippling form of autism, catastrophic lack of talent, or really bad eyesight. It's full of flaws and really stiff.
>Look at it. If an actual artist drew this shit, people would question whether he has some crippling form of autism, catastrophic lack of talent, or really bad eyesight. It's full of flaws and really stiff.
Remember two years ago when AI could barely draw a shape that sort of vaguely looked like an object?
Now chart that progress rate forward to the year 2025.
Oh, so you concede that this looks like shit and you just hope it won't some day in the future? Good! Then fuck off with this shit until it looks absolutely indistinguishable from real art.
>VERY new technology isn't perfect yet guys! you will need me forever!
I bet the artist looks exactly like that blob. Shame they never found out what beauty is like
>AI will never be able to correctly render hands!
>meanwhile, the hand problem was fixed months ago
Got anything else? Maybe a law demanding that buggy whip manufacturers be compensated for lost wages due to the development of the horseless carriage?
oh good this again
which of the same three discussions are we all having today
>aifags in charge of not being professional victims
Alright fags, since you're so adamant on telling people AI art isn't real art. What are some tells that something is made by AI? How would corpos know that someone they're hiring isn't just AI models?
I like AI but sometimes I can tell they are AI generated because the skin looks like wax and texts always have a specific AI look to them
but not always
>because the skin looks like wax
Prompting issue.
>and texts always have a specific AI look to them
I genned some anime images last week that replicated English characters perfectly.
>I genned some anime images last week that replicated English characters perfectly.
I'd ask for you to prove it except odds are you could've just fixed it in post.
>he wants us to be impressed he prompted the word "BLACKED"
Instead of getting mad that people enjoy something, shouldn't you be working on your art?
It's ironically something you have to train your vision to see.
AI stuff tends to suffer from the big meme problems like hands and the fact that it's all dead eyed pin up girls with fairly neutral expressions but there's also more nuanced stuff like if you pay attention to backgrounds with buildings the windows tend to get merged together because they're a small fiddly detail that the computer isn't parsing well. Or how sometimes folds on a body on the ears or armpits or other muscle groups get doubled up because again, small detail.
>flowchart bait posting
Fucking mindless AI drones at it again I see. Did a new lawsuit happen? Is user growth stagnating again and making that $700k per day bill more ominous?
>Cinemaphile: has been pirating cartoons, storytiming new comics and creating fan art of intellectual properties for over a decade
>AI art comes into the picture
>Cinemaphile: what the fuck you're literally stealing from the poor artists!!!
Aren't those made by corporations.
Doesn't matter, you're not paying for the content, therefore you're stealing
>"Stealing is wrong!" yelled the little marine while chewing his favourite colour crayon
>The Somalian pirates stared at him before continuing their storytimes and checking .party for kindly shared Patreon porn
>One of the pirates chuckled. "Dumb homosexual."
>And then a nerd with a robotics degree the marine called a homosexual and some "overpaid" SEALs saved his ass.
So how's that whole thing in Ukraine going, crayon munching homosexual?
See
I’m not claiming to be an animator because I watch cartoons online for free
So all you care about is the status? I'm not invested in other people's status climbing, neither are most others
How is completely new text Greg's
If it "has to be" because his work is in the AI's library, then Disney owns people's work for being inspired by Star wars, marvel, and other super popular franchises
>this disingenuous shit again
the human brain is not a computer
a human can still draw even if you take all franchises away
a machine literally cannot generate anything anymore if you remove the data
when Greg Rutkowski was removed from the prompt list and naggers couldn't use his brand anymore they threw a hissy fit because they weren't getting the shit they wanted anymore. the machine was literally broken and not working
that doesn't happen with humans, so fuck off
The training dataset literally contains copyrighted works, provably and recognizably so. Can you prove the same for the human brain?
I mean you are the one refusing to recognize that you are using Greg Rutkowski's property when he said he doesn't want his property used like that
it's not even "I used Greg's work for my shit post, it's his work not mine"
it's "I made this shit post it's totally my work but don't take my Greg Rutkowski prompt from me or I can't do it anymore reeeeeeeeee"
>it's not even "I used Greg's work for my shit post, it's his work not mine
If this was the argument, can you really argue against it without coming across like you're singling this instance out but letting other copyright infringements slide?
other copyright infringements at least acknowledge there was a copyright infrigement
this is plain old plagiarism, appropriating someone else's work and pretending it's your own
Yeah, but what if they acknowledged another person's work was used to make it? What argument can you make against it that doesn't also shit on youtube poops or shitpost edits or something?
>what if they acknowledged another person's work was used to make it?
that would open them up to a nice fat copyright lawsuit since they do not have permission to use another person's work.
wow that's retarded
training datasets can be searched and you literally find copyrighted works there, in their entirety
when you have searched someone's brain and how did that person's brain categorize influences anon, can you explain in detail?
>that would open them up to a nice fat copyright lawsuit since they do not have permission to use another person's work.
You're right. Those damn youtube poopers have been copyright infringing for far too long, we need to take those fuckers down.
yes, that's why youtube has a copyright infringement report process
I like AI art because it pisses artists off and artists are the most entitled, whiney, insufferable people on this planet.
based.
All nuance about this is for fags. Fuck artists
Chad tier ignorance.
AIfags are already professional victims in their own mind. The fuck do you think they'll be like if they 'dethrone' artists like they claim they'll do? Somehow be LESS entitled, whiny, and insufferable than the artists? They're already on par with them and they don't even have any real dominance yet.
You're just replacing one set of whiners with another set of whiners.
Don't care.
Whether AI kills human drive to learn art or not doesn't matter(it won't)
I don't even care if it looks good or not.
Simply put: fuck artists. I love watching them eat shit and cry. For the briefest moment the past year, I've got to watch some of the most annoying people in society have a pissing hissy fit over something, and that makes me so happy.
If that's your stance then I can't really argue with it, since you seem pretty dead set on it, but I also think you're missing the point. Sure, you get to see the artfags eat shit now. But is it really worth promoting a whole fucking new faction of incredibly annoying people? It really just sounds like shooting yourself in the foot. But if that brief high is all you're looking for then go for it.
I'll answer for that anon.
Yes.
Some people will gladly kill everyone and themselves because at least then the "woke" will suffer.
anon, he is one of those incredibly annoying people
Lmao you fags and "wokeness"
I don't have shit to say about gay ass politics, but media has been garbage for what feels like decades now, regardless of hamfisted attempts at political statements seeping into it.
If AI fags become as unbearably whiney and self aggrandizing as artists, so be it.
But I now get to watch some of the worst humans I've ever known suffer AND I'M GONNA FUCKING ENJOY IT
ok
Reminds me of this editorial I saw where the writer was smugly proclaiming that artists should be put in their place because he wasn't popular at dinner parties with his boring non-creative job title. Turned out he couldn't hack it in art school. It's been funny watching these types of people project their own insecurities and then speedrun their way to becoming the kind of insufferable elitist they imagine they're taking down.
I think it's pretty telling that none of these AI shills ever tell you how to get in on it. Just constant braying about how everyone else is seething while they make a thread a day begging for validation.
see:
I meant the ai shills here dummy.
Hell they've only JUST started mixing things up by actually posting Cinemaphile related gens and even then it's like one guy in these threads that does it.
they don’t want other people to get in on it. they want to be part of the secret artist club without putting in the work. they’re only against gatekeeping when it keeps them out.
Your post implies they were kept out by anything but their own laziness.
well that’s the cosmic punchline of the whole thing. they could’ve been an artist if they got off their ass and worked for it. but they couldn’t even do that.
>I think it's pretty telling that none of these AI shills ever tell you how to get in on it.
The last time I made an AI thread with instructions on how to get it running, some autist decided to flood the thread with pictures of pajeets.
Link it in the archive.
Also tell me how the ai voice acting stuff works that's what I'm interested in.
https://arch.b4k.co/v/thread/630662842/#q630662842
though the /sdg/ general on Cinemaphile is your best bet like another anon said.
>ai voice acting
Have you looked at RVC? You can use it to train a voice model and apply it to pre-existing audio. If you want text-to-speech then your options are either Elevenlabs(locked down and web-only but quality is decent) or TortoiseTTS(open-source and can be run on PCs but quality is shit).
Pretty sure Cinemaphile has an stable diffusion general going most of the time with instructions on installing the program (and open-source-image trained ai models to run)
>but Cinemaphile
This isn't Cinemaphile.
I get that AI can't generate text but you fuckers need to read and realize you're on a different board.
Go fuck off to Cinemaphile.
Now that''s some entitled bullshit.
>I shouldn't have to go to the tech board for tech info. You guys should bring it to me.
I mean, that's some high-level spoon-feeding your whining for.
You know, or you homosexuals can keep your tech threads to the fucking tech board. Just a thought.
Gatekeeper.
There's a difference between gatekeeping and pointing someone to the open portal instead of bringing the portal over.
Bait started again, just ignore it. They are typing with their dicks on their hands.
It's not bait, I think all artists need to suffer.
>I'M A PROOMTER! I'M GONNA PROOOOOMT!!!
Answer the baits with pepes.
I love how this doesn't even address the problem of AI voices or deepfakes.
AI voices genuinely make me nervous. AI voice bots aren't even that hard to program, you just feed them in enough clips of a person's voice and they're pretty hard to discern from reality. People will fall for that shit just as badly as they fall for fake tweets, and we'll just have MORE unneeded he said she said bullshit.
this I agree with
they are working on a way to identify AI generated , aka deepfakes of voices and faces
there was a big fake news about it already and damn, they are convincing
>catch AI generated material
What does it do if it's a false positive?
it doesn't exist yet, we will have to wait to see it
>there was a big fake news about it already and damn, they are convincing
I mean shit, if people believe tabloids and TMZ already, it's not going to be too hard to get them to believe deepfakes either. Just last week fake news outlets spread a story from a parody website saying WB lost every copy of the Aquaman sequel. If we believe that without question and spread it to a point that WB has to make statements about it, then deepfakes is just the shit frosting on the cake.
Just download an app lol, it's not magic.
>Take dogshit-tier fetish art from deviantart
>See if the AI can do anything with it
>If not, it just shows that the art's so shit an AI mistakes it for the wrong thing
>If it works, you just made their shit art bearable by uguu-fying it into a generic anime waifu
AI art is the devil, and some of us already realized we're going to hell any way so why the fuck not. If your art's good enough, experts will be able to recognize the original from an AI fake. If not? Congratulations, your digital art's worth exactly 14 Cryptobucks and 3 NFTs.
>wants his art made by robots
>wants his women fucked by black men
Why do these two interests go hand in hand?
Already happened, can't happen more. The good part is that it allows me to generate tons of useful information for my work from AI using the information of my plagiarists
Winning big
Still baits hateboners homosexuals
I think you need to learn the difference between b8 and people expressing an opinion different from your own about the people they h8, m8.
greg rutkowski is still alive and he has spoken frequently how does not want his work used for ai
https://www.artstation.com/artwork/g8E2xZ
that's him telling you he is against ai
Didn't actually answer the question, you're just hoping that you can dodge it but I don't let go of any of my questions
your question is disingenuous
dead people can't defend themselves
but here you are ignoring even people who are well alive
>This ai-generated monkey makes artists slit their wrists (or draw a red gash there anyway).
Damn, that's a lot of power for a few pixels.
There was another anon who explained this better in a previous thread but there's basically three types of AIfags:
>The ones who prompt for instant gratification or to get close approximations of what's in their heads without needing to draw. They typically stay quiet, don't act like dicks and support human artists whenever they can. They rarely post their prompts outside their echo chambers(examples include the Midjourney discord, the AI subreddits, and the Stable Diffusion generals here)
>The proompters who think of AI as a way to make a quick buck. They actively mock artists for caring about their craft while insisting that AI is on track to replace them, and they unironically believe that their "promp engineering" skills will eventually make them rich
>The singularityfags who hate humanity and want some form of fucked up AI utopia where they'll be free to live with their AI waifu bots until the end of time
>want some form of fucked up AI utopia
As long as our AI overlords aren't TOO distopic, it won't be much different from today.
Tolerably distopc AI world.
I just enjoy the tears of artfags who thought they were invincible because they could make shitty commission porn as they cheered on the outsourcing and destruction of blue collar jobs
Lol and you homosexuals can't even burn your overpriced Wacom tablet for warmth
I'm pretty sure people are still commissioning artfags despite AI existing
Fucking why
to spite you specifically, obviously
There's no reason to waste money when you can do it yourself for free.
because AI isn’t gonna replace human artists.
I hope one day you’ll realize that.
Marvel already uses AI for their opening sequences. The time is coming quick and there's no stopping AI from replacing artists.
And did people like those openings?
lolno
have you SEEN how bad it looks? the fucking director pretty much said "it looks like shit on purpose" as damage control
What show? Loki?
secret invasion, but that's a bad example honestly because literally everything about that show was minimum effort garbage
>have you SEEN how bad it looks? the fucking director pretty much said "it looks like shit on purpose" as damage control
Anon. All of the comments on this video are super positive.
>Marvel already uses AI for their opening sequences.
and it looks like shit and everybody hates it
Because AI isn't actually intelligent and it can't parse niche fetish stuff or autist's OCs for shit. It hinges on stuff that already exists and you're asking it to make something that doesn't.
It only satisfies people with low standards and suspiciously wealthy furries are *very* exacting.
And people pay for porn when pornhub exists. There will always be paypigs but this has cut down majorly on it.
The weirdo who would commission pictures of women causing deforestation isn't paying out for his pictures anymore.
>trying to pretend the past decade of cheering on the destruction of the rust belt and coal miners didn't happen.
Why are all you homosexuals constantly lying all the time?
I thought that fucker disappeared entirely
Last I saw was him gloating on Twitter how art ai made all his commissions obsolete
World War 2? No, no. World War art
>The weirdo who would commission pictures of women causing deforestation isn't paying out for his pictures anymore.
Yeah he is. AI can't get the wonderbread labels right.
Kek.
I wonder how much he has paid out on his lifetime
fucking lmao
he's really that latched onto wonderbread that he gets everything else but the logo being wrong makes his dick limp? That's some funny shit.
Someone calculated it once and it was in the hundred of thousands.
>he's really that latched onto wonderbread that he gets everything else but the logo being wrong makes his dick limp? That's some funny shit.
It's not really that uncommon. People that get commissions get them because they want those little custom details. Otherwise they'd just partake in mass produced stuff.
That's how you know all the trolls and shills going on about commissions ITT are outsiders looking in that don't actually know anything about the process. They're pushing a technology that's the exact opposite; great at mass production but terrible at tiny details and utterly incapable of custom never before seen stuff.
>who thought they were invincible because they could make shitty commission porn as they cheered on the outsourcing and destruction of blue collar jobs
this thread is mad at a person we made on our heads, arent we?
gotta be mad at someone!
I guarantee I have a more blue collar job than you that keeps the lights on in Appalachia. I think artists are the most insufferable homosexuals of all time, but I'm not gonna pretend most of them hate me.
You know you can hate people without such a faggy victim complex, right?
>You know you can hate people without such a faggy victim complex, right?
Then how do you explain your post taking it all on a personal level? You really need to toughen up, homosexual.
Ps calling doubt about blue collar experience because they would have chased a pussy like you out
You sound like you get you idealized version of big burly tradsmen from jacking off. Have you considered you might be gay anon?
>sex not mentioned
>first things leftists think of is sex
>not any aex but homo homosexual gay sex
Something you want to tell the class anon?
Yes. I've fucked more men and women than you.
What's this faggy sex hating gay shit you're all about now? What, you think because your political opponents fuck, you should be some kind of no-fap gay little bitch because you can't get pussy and hate yourself? Goddamn dude.
Lol being this much of a slave to sex.
What are you? 16? Grow up virginboy
>WAAAH I CAN'T GET WOMEN TO FUCK ME
>EVERYONE THAT DOES FUCK IS A SLAVE TO SEX WAAAA
cry some more little bitch boy 🙂
I'm married. Not a loser on the internet trying to pretend to be a fuck machine.
To be 16 again. Cherish these times anon. Eventually you will grow up and become an adult. Maybe you will even work that blue collar job with all the gay men you fantasized about.
I've worked some blue collar jobs. The only gay dude I ever met was prison gay.
Don't tell the other anon. I'll she he will be running in their backwards with his pants down.
I was wondering when we'd get to this talking point. A bit slow this time. Go ahead and post the screencap of headlines too while you're at it.
Made a recording for the very simple question I asked about Tolkien https://voca.ro/1l3ttnZ1TmqF Nope sorry, not going to be able to evade the religious dimension of this discussion
You can acknowledge that it is said but you can't make any meaningful response
"I acknowledged it so I win" is perverted psychology
His post is more pointing out how tiresome you people are and any anon with sense hates you and your stupid bullshit. Yeah, artists are annoying fags, but guess what homo-so are you. Learn to hate stupid obnoxious shitty people without making yourself such a godamn victim
>cat avatarfag is retarded
Checks out
they hated this anon because he told the truth
It's cringy when you reply to your own post anon.
that right, kiddo, everyone who disagrees with you is the same person.
So it happened and you are upset people remembered and are now turning back on you?
This shit's been repeated and proven wrong so many times that dwelling on it and pretending it's valid argument is a sign of having brain damage or being a disingenuous troll. Why don't you read those articles that get posted and point to where the "artists" are gloating? You can't because those are fucking journalists covering government sponsored "learn to code" programs. You couldn't even dig up a screencap of some twitter nobody and that's a fucking low bar. You colossal contrarian dumbfucks.
>is been proven wrong
>posts nothing but his tears
>it just has, ok!
We all saw it at the time. No need for your fake revisionist news. Just as bad as the "No one made you get the vaccine"
A bunch of disingenuous homosexuals that have to constantly lie.
Quit babbling, make your response or concede that you have no response, don't talk about how often something is brought up
"Tiresome"
Don't give a shit about your baby ass emotions, my big video game project is about AI development. I care about the future of technology, I don't care about stressing you out because you are wrong
It's lame
There's an amazing sense of accomplishment that creating something solely yourself brings. Proompters are deluding themselves in saying they also feel that and will never truly experience it.
Again, false dichotomy. Nothing about using AI prevents you from being a creative
Being like many people in the art Industries prevents you from being a creative
Didn't say anything about computers. There's no meaningful difference between AI libraries and the abstract library of people's influences. In fact there are many artists who are extremely similar to popular work, more so than typical AI images
I mostly care about chatbot AI at this point. If I can get a local GPT-5 quality model running on my PC for free I'd probably never leave my house.
Influence is not storing copyright works as data
that's what you don't get
the human brain does NOT work like your machine generators
the machine generator literally cannot work without the data, you want Greg Rutkowski? you can't have him without literally always including his work in the dataset
while a human can still draw a superhero even without having pictures of Superman around
the human brain just works differently from your machine, sorry you are too retarded to understand that
>while a human can still draw a superhero even without having pictures of Superman around
Oh for god's sake. Here comes the reference debate, ft. anons who've never drawn professionally in their lives. I'm a 2D and 3D artist (actual from-scratch art, not AI proompting) and it is common practice to have a moodboard of references when making something. Sure some highly talented people are able to draw Superman from purely their minds, but that's usually due to muscle memory, for example an animator who drew Superman frame by frame so many times they can do it without the reference. But the majority of the time we do need pictures around to take inspiration from and solidly guide us, human minds being so abstract is a blessing and a curse.
For the record, I'm not saying AI and human brains are the same. AI is stealing (although I'd be a hypocrite if I cared about it) but come on. Artists who are inspired by other artists will usually have the other artist's work on hand to take reference from, that's extremely common. You would struggle trying to construct it just from the abstractions of pure memory otherwise.
>You would struggle trying to construct it just from the abstractions of pure memory otherwise
>mfw even 3 year olds can draw some flying stick figure and call it a superhero
Are you even capable of creating anything original at all? Most people are.
What if I want my art to look slightly better than a 3 year old's doodle?
start sketching people from life
Anon, you're stupid. I don't need pictures of Superman to draw my superhero OC. You're so dumb you couldn't even think of that.
>AI art is already improving so all of the old arguments cease to exist as time goes on.
It depends. All the generated porn literally looks the same. Use it for worlds, designs, backgrounds, stock images and its perfect.
Or if you're totally burnt out, type in character ideas and get inspired by the results for your design.
I don't care about AI. Not gonna use it anyhoe. People hating on it like it's ANADDASHOAH like a cult are fucking obnoxious though.
Funny how the same people in here who complain about how AI can't create art are probably the same kind of people who gripe about how they don't have the skill to make their own art or webcomics. Guess they know more about art than anyone else by experience .
it's not art
Are you all just baiting me?
You will never be real art like just like you will never be a woman, AI Troons
I hate that stupid blobfish strip more than ai art by a long shot.
Artists already use Ai to help them, but not to fucking creating the artwork itself if you do that and then think "look how cool I Am I can barely think and press buttons I am a great Artist" you are the worst homosexual in the world
This said without the whole copyright shit
>artist with the world's most generic artstyle rages about robots
yawn
>407 replies already
>only 119 posters
/mlp/ got its threads banned for less.
There should just be an /ai/ board already
Not enough users. Go look at all the /ai/ threads on there respective boards, they all hover in the 70-40 posters per thread range, they aren't a big enough demographic to justify giving them a whole board. Maybe in the future when they can burn through threads in less then an hour on all boards and the posters per thread are consistently +120 but that's not gonna happen anytime soon.
To be fair, most of the AI hype(and therefore most demands for a new board) happened around September-November last year when Stable Diffusion just came out.
Back then the AI generals really were reaching image limit within half an hour, but things have died down since.
It was so obvious that shit was being forced by outsiders with little to no understanding of board etiquette with things like how they'd burn through image limits by spamming every single shitty thing they generated. You could also tell from the way they would post. I stand by my suspicion that marketers were trying to get a separate board so they could have a permanent advertising base without needing to do any upkeep like moderating or paying server costs.
The board already exist it's called
That's perfectly normal, you're grasping for straws of how to shut down a productive discussion
would you have preferred anons to just make one post and then leave...?
it's called a discussion, man
>407÷119=~3 posts per person
Wow! That's alot of posts per person there.
you would know, wouldn't you, homosexual?
>steal
That's a straw man. AI art isn't theft. Cope and seethe, commissionfag.
>AI thread
>400+ posts
>3 Cinemaphile related images, 4 generic superhero
As is tradition
As an artist, I'd be willing to give my two cents. I've been doing commission stuff for like a decade (mostly furry because that's where the money is) and I've made a lot of connections with other artists who talk about this shit constantly. And no, I'm not giving a name because I don't feel like being strung up by my contemporaries. Generally, hatred for AI art on a consumer level stem from it being incomplete and has some issues or stem from artists hating it openly and art consumers wanting to hate shit artists they like hate. Truthfully, it's still a budding science so I feel like it's impressive it's come this far in such a short time, it's incomplete but that's not something to hate it for. I get not liking it for how it sometimes melts shit, but it's really not that big a deal in the grand scheme of things. ARTISTS on the other hand, hate it because they either don't understand it (due to other artists spreading narratives about it) or they hate it because it's going to take their jobs. The latter is usually the more likely. There are a lot of arguments made about it too that are factually untrue and disingenuous. But they don't care about that because they feel endangered by it.
Like, this is all pretty obvious shit people probably already know, but let me put this into perspective. There are people who're afraid they're going to lose their jobs to AI, so they spread narratives like "AI steals art to make its own". This narrative is intentionally wrong, no theft occurs. It's fearmongering by people who are scared to try and whip up those who aren't. It borrows lines and concepts and leaves the original intact, obviously. The shit it borrows from any one person is like 1/1millionth of a percent of the whole piece. But the thing is: we do that too. Learning to make art takes fucking forever and it's largely a process of learning the basics then seeing other peoples art and aping concepts you like until you blend everything together into a homogeneous aesthetic. What AI does is identical to what people do, the only difference is that it's a machine doing it so it does it faster. It's a machine that learns to draw the same way we do. That isn't theft, it's art. The only issue is that it's faster and better and that means humans will be losing jobs.
This weird kind of argument was on full display near the start of the Sag-Aftra strike. The head of the novel writers union came up and tried to make an argument about AI art that made zero sense. I actually lost respect for her guild because of what she said. Her comment was something like: "AI is like going to a dozen 5 star restaurants, eating all the food on the menu, then going to your own restaurant where you throw it up and sell it as your own." And that's so wrong it's deceptive. AI is like going to those restaurants, eating the food, then sneaking into the back to find the recipes for all the best stuff. Then you go back to your own restaurant and try to reproduce those recipes with your own spin and flavor on them based on all the recipes you saw. Which is exactly what a fucking chef is. That's how WE learn to make stuff. The only difference is that it's a machine. In truth, AI will probably take jobs, and that's scary and people should be free to be scared. But it's not actually that bad and most artists would know it if they stop and think about it if they don't already know.
AI created work SHOULD be uncopyrightable, though. Anything made by AI should be unable to have copyright if only because the AIs making it aren't allowed to hold copyright on their own work.
Between what you said and what she said, she's closer to reality. 99% of AI "art" is puke, and only 1% looks like OK plagiarism. And it will never be something more than OK plagiarism. Because using the cook analogy, an AI can replicate a recipe if given perfect directions, but the second it tries to change something, it's that episode of Futurama where Bender tried to become a cook: it will be shit because it has no idea about what "delicious" is.
Also FYI, what you described is a literal crime called industrial espionage, not something "all cooks do".
This has to be one of the stupider posts I've read
>Technology has peaked here, and will never improve!
What a historically ignorant post.
>technology can improve endlessly!
There are lots of imperfect things around us that are no longer being worked on, because either they are impossible or unfeasible to improve.
No, AI-s do not work "the exact same way". They cannot experience things, they cannot judge or make logical conclusions. They can only be told something and then accept what they were told as "how it is". The second they will transcend those borders, they will become self-aware and our discussion will be irrelevant.
Yeah, sure, use it as an assistance tool. That's what it actually is good for. Or you can train it to make your backgrounds for example.
>all this
It's specifically the hatred of AI "art" because it's an inferior, but also super-simple and super-cheap solution. As in, it will 100% something that unscrupulous people will use. Because they don't care about quality, if they can shit out things quick and cheap. Real art will become for the rich, and us plebs will have AI shit. Just like how rich people have hand-maid furniture and we use Ikea.
Learning to cook is the same as learning art. You learn the recipes and the basics until you move onto bigger things. Eventually, you make it your own after you've experienced everything other people have to offer. An artists "style" is a culmination of all the art they like made their own. It's an "homage" paid to, sometimes, dozens if not hundreds of other people. AIs work the exact same way, they're just more efficient and faster at it. An AI is an Artificial Intelligence, it mimics and learns to make things the same way all intelligence does. To say it should be illegal or that it shouldn't exist is the same as saying that 10 year old kid drawing Minecraft Steve in his notebook, trying desperately to make him look like Steven Universe, shouldn't exist or should be illegal. It's the same fucking thing. Again, the most we should do is just say that AI work can't hold copyright. Anything more would be too far.
Personally, I think most people use AI art wrong. To call it a collage tool isn't quite right, but it's close to the ideal use, and the one I've aimed for since the start.
With AI art, I've been able to merge apes and humans into cavemen rather than copying anyone's styles or concepts, just training on photos of people and chimpanzees. And it looks way better than any other collage tool that existed prior. In this way, I'm plainly not plagiarizing shit, unless God wants to sue me.
I use it occasionally, as an artist, to create more dynamic poses for stuff or inspiration. I basically do a prompt for the general thing I'm looking for with a general pose and then let the AI go nuts until I see some stuff I like. I think I basically use it more like someone who would ask a friend for ideas for a piece than to generate a piece on its own. Except I don't have to feel bad about asking it the way I would about asking a friend for dynamic pose suggestions. I'm almost certain that's the intended use for artists, but I guess "intended use" is pretty vague.
>but I guess "intended use" is pretty vague.
I don't really care about intended use myself. I suppose in theory that it could fill in the parts of an image the artist doesn't care about, if they really just aren't interested in backgrounds or such, or it could help blend elements when photobashing.
But, personally, I use it as a concept blender in the hopes of making something new.
Style isn't copyrightable and AI can copy style very easily.
If you create a new style in a few minutes an AI can replicate it near perfectly.
People and businesses are unironically doing "special interest" meeting with US congress and other governments about AI art in order to make "style" copyrightable which could have large ramifications like music remixes and covers being made illegal or even music genres like Country or Western being copyrightable, which would ironically make over 99% of the "AI art protestors" committing a crime by making art without paying a style license from the copyright holder.
Ironically by protesting AI art they are leading the world to where not only things like "content" of an image are copyrighted but (IN ADDITION to the "content" of a work) parts of it like (specific OR general) "line width", "luminosity", "hue", "opacity", "scalability" of a piece of digital art can be grounds for copyright, say for instance because "so and so" created a piece of art that mathematically scales relative to "zoom level", THAT ARTIST now owns the copyright IF THEY WERE THE FIRST TO DO SO meaning even if SVG is a format of images that scale infinitely then you still wouldn't be allowed to create an SVG image without first getting permission of "so and so" (same with creating a PNG that has transparency as part of a larger image to be easier to store and draw on a computer, and so on).
Most people don't realize it but things like "real world colors" outside of a digital space ARE COPYRIGHTED and if you make a certain hue or saturation irl (even printing a paper with the color on it!) YOU EITHER PAYED A FEE TO THE COPYRIGHT HOLDER OR YOU ARE IN VIOLATION OF THEIR COPYRIGHT AND COULD FACE CRIMINAL CHARGES! For the most part digital space has been exempt, BUT THE MEANS TO STOP "AI ART" THAT THESE GROUPS ARE SUPPORTING ARE ACTUALLY CREATING A COPYRIGHT DYSTOPIA THAT MAKES IT NEAR IMPOSSIBLE TO BE AN INDIE ARTIST!
I like using my gaming PC to prompt, though I haven't touched much of my vidya in nearly a year because of it...
What model are you using?
MeinaHentai, it's on Civitai.
>>>/a/
Is all this AI hatred literally just because people are scared they'll lose their jobs to it?
That's exactly what it is. They thought they were safe when it was blue collar jobs being lost and cheered it on but now it's their "job" they are freaking out
no, that's just aitard cope
It's an interesting tool but under the current business model it will only be used to make shit for cheap, not to produce anything remotely good
>the old arguments cease to exist as time goes on
So we have to whine as long as we can
Although we won't stop later anyway.
There is absolutely 0 point of having AI threads on Cinemaphile when there is no nuance and nobody keeps an open mind. 99% of the time, including here, the OP is just blatant bad faith bait/trolling being inflammatory to artists to provoke people. Jannies should just delete this shit on sight so we don't keep getting sucked into the same rehashed arguments and shitty takes over and over again. Both sides are retarded, ignorant and should shut the fuck up.
>Cinemaphile
>jannies
They are trolls or Aitarrded, it's useless try to convince them of anything. They will never learn the pleasure of creating (or holding copyright)
Can we report this shit for being off topic?
That'd require jannies that care
Can AI draw fat cartoon old women raping a cartoonized version of myself? I have the hots for Granny Goodness and the villain from the first Tom & Jerry movie.
Yes. But the author, as a human, can look at it and be inspired by the elements that look good, discard the ugly parts and draw a good caveman that he (and so probably other people) will find aesthetically pleasing. Something an AI cannot do.
Well done, Cinemaphile. Another bump limit hitting AI shitfest thread. See you tomorrow in the next one!
I know it does. The AI didn't start knowing how to make hybrids, even the best images it spits out are defective, but it's getting better at mixing them as I retrain it on its own output. This isn't really the intended use for it, just something I realized I could do.
Well, there were already pictures of anime girls made by people who are way more dedicated to that than I. No one else was going to combine microcephalics and apes but me, though.
>STILL arguing
I'm collecting so many yous its great.
Artfags on suicide watch
I get it. AI shills think digital art works like
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/bo78A4mWazo
so of course they think it's the same as what they're doing
it's what I said here:
if we just post AI art we like, it will derail in to artfags complaining. it's impossible to have a serious thread about AI
>if we just post AI art we like, it will derail in to artfags complaining.
Bullshit. You've never actually done that you homosexuals just post the same 87.png screeching HIRE. FANS. NOW.
You guys NEVER attempted to do this in good faith or you'd have copied the same thread format you see on /aco/, Cinemaphile, /h/ and /d/ and there wouldn't have been a problem. You poisoned the well from the fucking start and are whining about it because playing the victim is all you're capable of.
>You've never actually done that you homosexuals
literally the link I posted
the image above your post came from that thread
Yeah and look at the replies to your post in that thread.
5 pictures to start a thread. Those are the rules. You're not special or exempt from the rules, and you can't hide behind OP being a spambot and then expect to be treated as posting in good faith.
there's more than 5 pictures there
all the post are angry AI haters
>literally the link I provided
>all posts are bashing AI
>You are the problem
>there's more than 5 pictures there
to START a thread ESL.
fucking hell no wonder you fags simp for these programs you can't understand basic concepts either.
I can't control what other people post anon
Yeah but you can whine and cry that they're being mean to someone other than you? Fuck off white knight. Either try and make your own AI thread following the rules for once or shut the fuck up.
Oh wait. I forgot. Making things is antithetical to your ideology.
you seem upset
>If AI where at all capable of any of the shit it's shills claim
you mean this:
?
1. Those aren't requests.
2.
It still sucks
>has to cut out the rest of the sentence out of cowardice of the point.
shameful.
You autist, you know Cinemaphile is hostile to AI so if you want to make a thread about it, you need to be gentle and self-aware. Saying "spot on" made it sound like you were fishing for good AI images to shit on le artfags.
homosexual, the OP is literally discussion bait. Don't assume other people are as retarded as yourself.
I actually do want to discuss AI's use in art but homosexuals like you and OP keep making these smug anti-artist bait threads that just polarizes people
I can explain how I use it as a concept blender. I don't really aim for good quality or anything. What I do is I try to find pictures with some shared quality. People with especially large brow ridges, tall faces, short foreheads, as well as hairless apes. The more I can find points of overlap, the more I can train the AI to associate the human and ape faces as part of the same category. When I notice it fucking up on a particular feature, I try hunting down an image that can help bridge the category gap in some way, and I save the better hybrid results I get to help with the same.
And now I can make weird troll things. There's an actual process there, where I'm very much molding the concept as I go along. Now I have to make the females work right.
do want
Why did you make Storm an Tanned Asian?
Isn't she supposed to have non-african facial features or something dumb like that?
what makes me bitter and angry about AI is this:
lewd AI image generators are A-OK according to corpos but I can't have a lewd AI chatbot? what the fuck bro?
I think that has something to do with AI art generators being open source but whoever's in charge of the AI text generators are stingy and won't let the public modify it to their liking
>Be artist
>Try to get Stable Diffusion to color line art for me
>lol CUDA error
>Fuck it reduce the image size
>lol can't tell where clothing ends and skin begins
yeah. brave new world. all this has done was waste my time.
queen raven
Her right thumb's fusing with her leg.
If AI where at all capable of any of the shit it's shills claim, they'd take requests.
As it is they can't even compete with this peruvian pedobait message board when it comes to deliveries. We've chased out the vast majority of our drawfags and the few that remain STILL pump out more deliveries than I have EVER seen an AI shill do.
I want her to suck me dry if you know what I'm saying
I wanna go rouge in that bitch
Are her gloves fused to her hands or did she dip her fingers in yellow paint? Also, it's Rogue, no the bat lady from Sonic.
that's a real picture
Can't even get a matching jacket.
The badge looks so out of place.
The belt is so off that is makes this shit look humouros.
Without the feathered hair this lacks.
But also her ribcage is weird and her torso is short and it makes it kinda uncanny. I've noticed that AI does the thing a lot of the worst do where it makes the torso too long because of how it puts in the boobs. Which makes sense because that's what happens when techbros that don't know good technique from bad just throw everything into a big pile without curating when training their models.
like you could draw something better
the point is that the image looks great, but anti-AI fag searched up and down for something to critique and only found a single line missing
Alright I guess we're seeing this shitty thread through to the end.
What are your thoughts on schizAIphrenia? It sounds like a loaded term but you can be against AI and notice it too. It's when people are so against AI, they mistake real art for AI shit and will point out imaginary gives, or actual flaws that are just human error like bad anatomy.
Isn't there an AI being developed to detect AI generated work?
>Alright I guess we're seeing this shitty thread through to the end.
Dunno why you're surprised, every single one of these shit threads go to bump limit.
So if I understand right, the general argument style in these threads are
>nuh uh
>yuh huh
>nuh uh
>yuh HUH
repeated, ad infinitum?
Sometimes there's a
>prove it
which the shills meet with the dead silence of a coward called to put up or shut up
Only idiots do stuff for free.
And cowards & liars don't defend their grounds.
Nope, just idiots.
How are you guys still oblivious to the fact he's trolling you
I have as much time to waste as he does, I am just winning my arguement. MY MAN THIS IS Cinemaphile.
>I'M WINNING!
You lost the second you clicked Post
For somebody who has time to waste, nope.
bump limit somehow brings in the stupidest of us, I noticed.
Who won?
MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
Who's next? YOU DECIDE