/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>6545594
This again?

>>6545594
I found my shit, now I keep it in a designated draw so I won't lose it again.
I bet you are a nodraw, do you even know where your shit is?

>>6545600
I just flush it and never keep it
Will I not make it

>>6545603
it's over...

>>6545594
Only the good artist are use using it as a tool and integrating it into their artwork. The NGMI's are too busy seething to realize it can make their work better. It's that same playground moral argument people make for tracing, rotoscoping, photo bashing, digital, and using 3D, as if you're "cheating" and think you should only eyeball from references or draw from imagination.
The only thing that matters is the end result. And if the end result looks good, who cares how it's made.

based ai is a tool chads

>>6545610
>Only the good artist are use using it as a tool and integrating it into their artwork
for real? I haven't seen any... please share before the thread is nuked.

>>6545594
I don't even have a use for 3d models so it's completely useless for me. But at least for people who use 3d they can copyright their shit.

>>6545620
Now I don't agree with larping as a dead aritst but it's pretty obvious professionals are willing to jump into adding it to their framework/pipeline of work

>>6545634
>copyright

>>6545610
ai assistants calling themselves artists lol

>>6545645
You will be out-priced to people who are willing to use the most amount of shortcuts and cutting corners in time and money desu

>>6545610
>>6545646
pyw

>>6545647

>>6545651
You will be out-priced to people who are willing to use the most amount of shortcuts and cutting corners in time and money desu

>>6545636
Link to the vid? I want see what the robot arm looks like.

>>6545653
I kneel to my robot overlords indeed

>>6545636
Ok, AI itself... yeah sure... but when we talk of AI atm, not in 2020, we refer to the AI trained on work that the creators of the AI had no rights to.

>>6545680
What if the artist trains the ai with their own artwork?

>>6545680
>>6545642
It's the mp3 piracy craze of the 90s again
It's not about why is it moral or not, is who is going to stop them
doesn't help freedom loving fag/g/ots think they are in the right to because muh FOSS philosphy and shit

>>6545610
Funny how it's always non artists on twitter who preach about the importance of jumping on the AI train

>>6545695
You can go to any art discord and see healthy amount of artists talking, thinking and sharing their opinions about it
You are just wrong
Let's not ignore the fact that you are in an art board where people discussing these things probably posted in whatever thread you are lurking

>>6545690
sure, that would be fun, problem is that's not really possible right now. If you mean train on top of SD, you still have the unlicensed images as the foundation. Training it solely on your own work, will not be enough images for the AI to have much function, you've not drawn everything, at best you might have done a lot of portraits, like Rembrandt, and use a different AI to generate more portraits.

>>6545694
Oh, so we just need a spotify to find a legal way for generation of copyrightable AI art

>>6545703
There are still a few billion images under fair use

>"post your work"
>no work posted
Funny how it is with these threads

>>6545636
Ew, I hate that. It's as bad as that kim jung gi AI. Sure use their art in the AI - but don't use the AI to make a copy of their work as some sort of gross homage. It's like a robot wearing a humans skin.

>>6545703
Collages can be art as well. There is some massive coping that getting your own art out of SD and then modifying it in photoshop is not the same as real sovl human collages. Which is fucking idiotic desu
People making AI art are tuning it for an end result that it's probably their own image they had in their mind and those are the means they chose to make their art rather than actual copyright plagiarism. It's fucking insane how much you retards WISH this was the same as tracing, how much you WISH people didn't see the merit on learning how to use these new tools to make something YOU thought of

>>6545636
The people behind this should be beaten to death, this is like digging up the artists corpse and pissing on it while making a giggling tiktok video

>>6545718
>It's like a robot wearing a humans skin.
Sexy, watch this be a kink in 2080

>>6545694
I do want to use AI directly in my work at some point, I can imagine many images that are too big to attempt(without spending months on it).
Ethically based training sets are possible, just expensive. First company to do it is gonna make bank though, everyone against AI could justify using it, all those companies that vowed not to use AI due to legal uncertainties can use it then.

>>6545703
would an artist using sd trained on the artist own work to produce art in their style be any different than the same artist drawing from reference online?

>>6545733
Their argument is that humans made it and there is a byproduct of their own way of doing art in it, that there is actual merit
https://youtu.be/GOwxXj1EIXM

They are literally trying to use metaphysics and SOVL as an argument at this point, is so pathetic

There's no going back anon.
There's no "shaky legal ground."
This is how it is. Pinch yourself, you aren't dreaming.
Art has been democratized.
It's time for you to deal with it.

>>6545740
Oh no, a nobody is cancelling Corridor, again! How will they ever recover

>>6545730
Does openAI use a licensed dataset for dall-e 2? Microsoft is putting it in their designer software so I assume their army of lawyers wouldn't allow it otherwise.

>>6545744
watch the video. It's mental gymnastics mixed with absolute seething and trying to convince himself and others how THEY ARE STILL VALID THEY CAN'T REPLACE US THEY THEY UH UH PLAGIARISM YES THATS WHAT IT IS AND YOU CANT MAKE YOUR OWN MODEL BECAUSE YOU ARE NOT A BIG STUDIO or some bullshit

They are scared or deluded. maybe both

>>6545733
depends on the permission of the ref and purpose of the art.

>Oh no no no ahaha oh no no no xD art is le shit artists SEETHING OH NO NO NO laughingguy.jpg
>no work posted
I wish this board had mods

>>6545751
"DALL-E 2 was trained on approximately 650 million image-text pairs scraped from the Internet"
I don't think so. Microsoft was sued for GitHub Copilot cos they scrapped in the same way.

>>6545740
He cry babied so hard in that video. I got that they shouldn't call their film an animation, or consider it a replacement for animation (it's a cool film filter though), but everything else was such pathetic whinging.

>>6545743
>There's no "shaky legal ground."
We'll have to wait and see
>Art has been democratized.
It was always democratized, you never bothered to create anything then, and you will never create anything now. The ones who are going to benefit from this are creative people with some drive - people other than you.

>>6545760
>Microsoft was sued for GitHub Copilot
Good point, I guess they got enough fuck you money to not care.

>>6545760
It's cheaper for them to just eat all the lawsuits over losing the AI race too

>>6545740
I think like the idea of using diffusion to rotoscope into specific art styles. I could think of a few applications it could be used. Like the CGI in chainsaw man for example. Theoretically using diffusion to rotoscope the flaws that naturally come when blending CGI into 2D animation for a more immersive experience.

The only real issue I have with anything AI related in a professional scene is that it's simplicity will be used to make cheap shovel ware. Otherwise I like the ideas corridor present, and glad their shared so more professionals can find more applications for the technology Small ideas like these could be revolutionary if only moral judgment wasn't clouding the way.

>>6545771
this AI race is gonna make all the seething from us seem like barely a whisper. All intellectual labor is going to change, job losses will be much everywhere else(artists being a kind of small/niche field comparatively)

>>6545752
So many people mind broken by AI, oh well.

>>6545771
The US government also has no interest in China gaining an advantage in AI tech just because of muh copyrightz.

>>6545779
You just wait...

>>6545610
Have no problem with artists incorporating it into their workflow. Hell, I've experimented with it a few times in my own work.

What sours the pot are NGMIs that just use txt2img, and calls the result the finished product with no touchups(even to fix the blatant mistakes AI usually brings) whatsoever. That is a prime example of using a possible tool as a crutch because they can't be assed to learn the fundamentals.

At that point those people aren't much more than clients or even directors if I'm generous, as all they contribute is the idea.

>>6545663
fake news LOL
there's was a category for AI and he won

>>6545779
>>6545786
Yeah, the first guy to figure a cheap, mass produce-able, energy efficient and smart humanoid cyborg might be the first trillionaire before the real storm

>>6545761
>We'll have to wait and see
For what, the gofundme by the NFT grifter?
Going against not the commercial products, but the FOSS one?
Hahahaha.
The one that Disney of all people signed on to? (Gee I wonder why)

There's no waiting and seeing. Any lawsuit based upon whether it's ok to use the data is already settled. If human eyes can see it, bots can scrape it. That's settled, as much as tantrum about it, it's settled.
The other approach of being absolutely completely fucking wrong to the point of lying has to do with misrepresenting/misunderstanding how the technology works. I think they said something like "it can't create a good dog wearing a hat eating ice cream because there's no such image in the dataset" hahahahaha. Some shit like that.
As in, still insisting that it's just photobashing.

>you will never create anything now.
But I have been creating a lot of AI art

>>6545740
>watch until min 2
>mah anime
yep another who lives from drama/clickbait
kys

>>6545791
"digitally manipulated images"
was the category, and the judges didn't know the image was AI generated. The dude sent is as "software used:midjourney", so the judges would have assumed some random program, unaware of the emerging AI tech.

>50+ replies
cat thread?

>>6545808

cat

>>6545808
>>6545813

>>6545808
kino
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XFWgem4_LVo

>>6545799

>But I have been creating a lot of AI art

>"I typed a bunch of keywords into muh AI and saved what it popped out, recognize my work"

>>6545808
>>6545810
>>6545815
>>6545817
cats

>>6545824
>soiface
what a visionary