Not a bait or trolling thread, just my opinions on AI art.

[Anonymous No.6223948]

Okay, I'm not trying to troll or bait here.
I just want to share my last 5 days experiences with AI art and the leak of stable difussion.

First, this shit doesn't even replace artists.
Not even possible.

This shit is closer to houdini for 2D pictures that can procedurally generate shit using some CSS tag system.
It's closer to CSS more than a magical pls make me art with a button.

And yes, It takes skill to produce good shit.
I had to buy the google collab pro montly subscription to even use the stable difussion leak.

And no, a random normie won't suddenly create masterpieces, more than a random normie will suddenly make a masterpiece website because he watched a CSS+html tutorial.

Also, It's just a tool.
It's just diferent.
And no, It's more like programming than doing art in the old way.

The only thing this shit does is that It saves me 20 hours of rendering I can now spend on trying to figure out a proper combination of tags to use.

The only irrelevant shit this makes is to need to spend 20 hours painting an anime illustration.
So, no, media is overreacting like the retards they are.

And no, your art fundamentals aren't useless, more than photography made drawing useless.

Pic related literally took like an hour of experimentation to make.
95% of your prompts will be garbage.
And most media shit is heavily cherrypicked.

[Anonymous No.6223958]

>just my opinion
opinion discarded, did not read after.

What a faggot, jeezus.

[Anonymous No.6223963]

>>6223958
I can produce better anime with AI than you by now.

so cope.

[Anonymous No.6223969]

>>6223963
>>Posted frankenstein abomination
>>Call it anime

Just because there are bad anime/anime art, does not mean they lowered the standard that low.

[Anonymous No.6223973]

>>6223963
>produce
describe production process without using vague terms like "its just learning bro"

[Anonymous No.6223978]

>>6223963
I give zero fucks, but a (you), sure, you can have one.
Still not going to read your blogpost, mein neger.

[Anonymous No.6223988]

>retarded trannime poster
>opinion thread
>about ai of all things
This board has collapsed

[Anonymous No.6223999]

>>6223988
Embrace the debauchery, let it feed your creativity. Destroy the old, plant the new.

you are here for shitpost what the fuck all this high virtue posturing?

[Anonymous No.6224001]

>>6223988
says the tourist nigger forcing the word >trannime

[Anonymous No.6224003]

>>6223963
cool, now show us few next frames of that "anime"

[Anonymous No.6224010]

>>6223948
Yeah, as someone who draws mostly trad and occasionally digital, my 2 cents is that AI seems kind of tedious to use. When I have an image in my head, I could spend hours trying to get the prompt right, and tweaking the results to be exactly how I want, or I could spend those hours simply drawing it my damn self.
Maybe to some people AI seems easier, but to me it seems harder haha. I’m a controlfreak with my art, I always want things a certain way, and if I outsource it to some program I doubt it could give me the results I want. I’m happy other people are having fun with it, but it’s just not for me..

[Anonymous No.6224018]

>>6224010
It is no different than those "A.I colorist". BEGs and normiefags sucked it up at release, but eventually got bored and gave up short time later.

[Anonymous No.6224072]

>>6223948
>saves me 20 hours of rendering
>Pic related literally took like an hour of experimentation to make.
are people that slow? an anime girl just standing there shouldnt take you more than 2-3 hours
20h rendering id imagine is for a huge illustration with many characters and complex details
reality is, an artist even just /int/ level can churn out better art with the ability to alter it at will at the same speed it takes for people to get a decent result from an ai, without the ability to even alter the image in any specific way

all this AI shit has taught me is people think all artists do is generic characters in standing poses lmao
its easier ad faster to just use 3D software to make models you can reuse over and over to paint over to be honest

[Anonymous No.6224083]

>>6224072
>its easier ad faster to just use 3D software to make models you can reuse over and over to paint over to be honest
forgot something, to add to this point a bit further
learning basic blender and google sketchup is a bigger crutch and speeds up your process way more than ai
especially if you draw similar things you can use reuse the same bg and character models over and over posing them in whatever way and perspective you want
hell, blender now has a feature that lets you draw directly on top of the 3D model then transfer that sketch to your drawing software

people dooming over AI are bots, shitposting retards who dont draw, and the occasional permabeg whos too dumb to research anything about making digital art and what tools are out there compared to ai

[Anonymous No.6224097]

>>6224072
>>6224083
okay, last shit im gonna add
just photobashing the old fashioned way like concept artists gets you the results faster and easier than ai with again, more flexibility on altering the image and creating wtv you want

basically, from 3D to photobashing, we already have better tools than ai
ai just gets attention because it doesnt need any drawing or painting skills and gives the illusion of being able to be used as a substitute when it snot even on the same level as 3D and photobash in the hands of even a /int/ level artist let alone a pro

[Anonymous No.6224238]

>>6224097
No A.I i saw can reach the level of quality like photobash. Industry Pros have been doing it all the time, like Johnson Ting. Why waste your time generating gross surreal grass field when you can take free stock photo of a grassfield and kitbash it in your work?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=19zCs2vIGMc&t=181s

[Anonymous No.6224246]

>>6223958
>useless
, Omg, you Faggot calls faggot a other people?

[Anonymous No.6224248]

that thing is the future of art, bros
you'd better not miss it like you missed bitcoin, like you really can make some serious money
i'm already looking for some college programs that teach this stuff

[Anonymous No.6224263]

>>6224246
>nigger has an opinion

[Anonymous No.6224304]

>>6223948
>First, this shit doesn't even replace artists.
Not even possible.
its already take book covers jobs in russian

[Anonymous No.6224310]

>>6224304
>>its already take book covers jobs in russian

It is their own exclusive A.I in training. Those "books" are made up.

https://gadgetonus.com/hot-news/32402.html

[Anonymous No.6225625]

>>6223988
kek

[Anonymous No.6225746]

pls help rate my aiart /ic/

[Anonymous No.6225748]

>>6225746
Generic animu face and pay attention to the right eye

[Anonymous No.6225776]

>>6225748
f-fine! Better?!

[Anonymous No.6225779]

>>6225776
wait no, I gave her a double chin! Back to the drawing board and... well I did like the animu style to be fair

[Anonymous No.6225784]

>>6225779
Ok ok... no animu! Goes!

[Anonymous No.6225792]

>>6225784
hmmm...

[Anonymous No.6225803]

>>6225792
ah fuck it I want a doll instead

[Anonymous No.6225826]

AI "art" looks like a fucking Kincade generator. It will never be a thing other than neoliberal corporate kitsch trash

[Anonymous No.6225832]

>>6225826
keep in mind this tech is like a week old with barely 3 or 4 days where the nerds have had leaked access. Regular people haven't even had time to experiment with the written prompts yet.

The progression in the next few days to weeks is what is going to be pretty scary/exciting.

[Anonymous No.6225835]

sounds like damage control from some know nothing coder hoping to prevent a schizo from shooting up your office.
in minecraft of course.

[Anonymous No.6225879]

>>6225835
I have been a staunch pacifist all my life
, but now for the first time I caught myself thinking that I would be incredibly glad if this happened

[Anonymous No.6225880]

>>6225879
Too late, this model has already leaked a few days ago so who knows how many people have it now, and commercial implementation is only waiting for the creators go ahead in a few days

[Anonymous No.6225885]

>>6225880
there's gonna be a whole lot of furry and porn artists with nothing to lose out on the loose soon : D b

[Anonymous No.6225886]

>>6225832
me and my hand drawn lolis will soon be homeless now

[Anonymous No.6225890]

>>6225885
can't kill them all when you can already run this on your own pc

[Anonymous No.6225891]

>>6225885
i recently thinking about it
what if there a new Hitler among them?
and i know that art community is full of slipping violent schizo when every 2 has a suicide attempt, give them a clear enemy and it will be a fucking kamikaze army

[Anonymous No.6225893]

I’m still trying to process everything that’s happening.
The biggest shock to me so far is how many people really enjoy playing with this thing, even when the results are bad. I don’t mean that in the sense of “it doesn’t have SOVL”. I mean very obvious problems with the drawings like melting faces and melting hands. And yet people don’t care, they’re having a blast anyway.
I don’t actually fear that this will reach complete human level anytime soon - I mean something that produces results as good as a human every single time, with the same level of specificity as a human every time, so no one ever needs to hire a human artist again. I think AI art is going to “smell like” AI for a long time to come. That’s how it is with AI translation - as good as the tech is, you still can’t just dump a whole novel into a translator and get human-quality results. The closer you get to perfection, the harder it is to eke out those last few percentage points.
What I am worried about in the short term though is the internet being flooded with low-effort AI crap, because as I mentioned, people have shown that they obviously don’t give a shit about quality. Over time this will lower the bar for what the average person expects, and true artistry will be less and less appreciated.
I’m also worried that professional artists will feel pressured to work with the AI, like how photobashing took over the concept art industry, in order to speed up production. Submitting themselves to just fixing whatever the AI forces upon them and further diminishing the role of genuine creativity.
The worst part of this is that techbros can always just smugly say “I see no problem here” as our collective culture continues to deteriorate. When a self driving car crashes into someone, everyone has to acknowledge that it’s a problem. When people make shitty art with AI, only people with a soul can tell the difference.

[Anonymous No.6225895]

>>6225890
hence "nothing to lose" dipshit

[Anonymous No.6225896]

>>6225891
>tfw youtube keeps recommending me ambiental music, and all thumbnails have midjourney garbage
>seeing this same-y horror shit all over the place will become the norm
one thing I know from sure, if we'll have anti AI factions in the future where we get to outlaw AI and hunt down any villain who will dabble in AI shit, I will vote for them. I don't give a shit they're hitler or stalin, I'll become a single issue voter if i'll have to

[Anonymous No.6225899]

>>6225893
it's literally going to make people retarded anon, think about how nobody can navigate or has a sense of direction anymore cause we all rely on google maps. what's going to happen when people collectively no longer have the ability to form sentences because we need predictive AI to write for us or form images instead of learning from life
humanity is going to get dementia lol, hope these silicon valley mother fuckers are happy opening pandora's box

[Anonymous No.6225900]

I want AI to keep all the southeast asian fags homeless. Far too long they've been bringing commission prices down. Fuck them, go AI.

[Anonymous No.6225903]

>>6225893
AI can't self-evaluate what it's making, so it will always be crap unless humanity invents true AI not algorhythm crap. but what you're saying is true. this garbage is flooding the internet, retards spam this shit in niche communities, people who used artwork before for thumbnails in videos or artwork for music compilations now use AI trash. and it wasn't even paid human artwork before they just used random artwork they saved from the internet, but they still choose AI trash for some reason. why? why the fuck lmao

[Anonymous No.6225908]

fokken hell, it's so annoying seeing this same-ish shit everywhere. you know from the thumbnail what it is

[Anonymous No.6225912]

I think the most annoying thing about it is how much of a "fad" this feels like.

[Anonymous No.6225915]

>>6223969
Just look at this shit. It can't even do hands.

[Anonymous No.6225918]

>>6225915
tfw breast cancer

[Anonymous No.6225924]

>>6225893
>t anon hates fun
what else is new

[Anonymous No.6225935]

>>6225924
>just deliver the fatal blow to art bro, who cares that a new way to make it even more soulless has been invented

[Anonymous No.6225937]

>>6225935
once you can train on your own art to speed up more tedious aspects and use it like the tool it is meant to be there will be much less crying

[Anonymous No.6225938]

>>6225900
>>Far too long they've been bringing commission prices down.

It is you tranny Westoid always try to lowball the artists.

[Anonymous No.6225940]

>>6223948
Good post anon
I suspected as much, just to fix those fucking hands you need an artist. I don't see how AI can replace artists, it's just not good enough, at least as it is now.

[Anonymous No.6225944]

>>6225937
>tedious aspects of art
>art
>tedious
if you find art tedious, you should not be doing it. the reason I stuck with playing guitar is because it gives me goosebumps as I do it. if you're not having a positive emotional feeling as you're doing it, maybe you should consider doing something else like playing with puppies

[Anonymous No.6225947]

>>6225944
get the fuck out of here. Doing art is exciting, yes, but if you pay the bills with it, at some point you're going to have a lot of work to do, deadlines, and you'll wish you could just get through it, because some aspects of it can definitely be tedious if you're working a lot.

[Anonymous No.6225950]

>>6225947
Art usually take 3 to 5 hours to complete if you are a rendermonkey. It is not meant to be fastfood, unless you draw only sketches and speedpainting.

[Anonymous No.6225951]

>>6225903
I think it gives people an extra dopamine hit of “I CREATED this” instead of just using google image search.
Which is unbelievable to me. You didn’t create shit.

[Anonymous No.6225956]

>>6225944
You are lying if you are telling me it is always 100% fun and never frustrating. Most of my pieces take 24 hours and up to complete and there are aspects where I am beyond excited to speed it up with AI magic.

[Anonymous No.6225957]

>>6225950
you have no clue what you are saying. Get work and you'll see.

[Anonymous No.6225958]

>>6225950
>3 to 5 hours
maybe for a half assed sketch lol

[Anonymous No.6225960]

>>6225937
>>6225947
>>6225956
>>6225957
you stupid niggers, people keep saying "waaah now i don't have to study my fundies, now i don't need bgs, i can just automate the boring parts and draw my anime gril over the top"
stupid stupid niggercattle, nobody is going to give a shit about your """work"" to commission you anyway from now on, the ai is gonna be able to do all the parts you add over the top anyway, there is no "workflow" from now on kek

[Anonymous No.6225964]

>6225960
You're stunningly ignorant about both these AIs and producing artwork, you fit right into contemporary /ic/.

[Anonymous No.6225965]

>>6225964
dumb dipshit, i literally draw for a living and i know this is gonna replace us and is designed with that in mind, 99% of clients just want generic algorithm crap anyway, they despise us and would cut us out of the equation in a heartbeat if they could
now they can :D good thing i love the painting process so ill do it anyway

[Anonymous No.6225969]

>>6225832
>keep in mind this tech is like a week old with barely 3 or 4 days where the nerds have had leaked access
You mean more like a couple of years of programmers work built on top of decades of research and polished with neuronet learning?

[Anonymous No.6225970]

>>6225908
>puscifer
man u sirius?

[Anonymous No.6225974]

>>6225958
>>6225957
>>maybe for a half assed sketch lol

https://youtu.be/iBjRyyWKS0A

[Anonymous No.6225976]

>>6225965
i see that a lot of furfags have parasocial relationships with artists, I'm just gonna head in that direction personally. but imo you're wrong, a lot of the commissions are very niche with customers that want to autistically change the smallest abstract detail.

[Anonymous No.6225977]

>>6225974
>"prompt engineers" will struggle for 3 hours to not make their generic static soulless anime trash look like they have breast cancer kek

[Anonymous No.6225984]

>>6225974
3 hours by one of the top .1% of digital painters. and it's only a head, a shoulder and a skull. so about 1 hour per item. Most clients ask for a lot more, and an average image takes more than one session. from deciding on poses, costume design, getting ref, shooting some ref if you need to. on and on.

[Anonymous No.6225987]

>>6225977
This is true right now. How true will it be 6 months from now?

[Anonymous No.6225989]

>>6225976
maybe, well i hope that artists can still eat. but this will absolutely destroy a lot of smaller commissions, for misc game assets and icons and generic concept work
well nobody thought we should have gotten paid in the first place for art, you can look in this thread for those exact sentiments :^)

[Anonymous No.6226000]

>>6225984
Oh once you actually know what you are doing, head or full body is no different since they require similar rendering amount and not as drastically different. If you draw head closeup, it would be a very detailed head. If you draw full body then you don't go to render too much on the head section and just go for the balanced details around instead.

Industrybros and Rendermonkey have amazing drawing speed. You will be very surprised by how fast they can draw.

https://youtu.be/ozWKfLGreHA

[Anonymous No.6226007]

>>6225987
By this logic we're going to have intelligent humanoid robots living among us by next year because "hurr look at how fast AI is growing".
Video game graphics took a big leap between 1990 and 2005 but we still don't have realtime photorealism in games and no one thinks we're going to have it any time soon. The technology has to plateau at some point.

[Anonymous No.6226013]

>>6225915
shit img
come back when you can fulfill commissions with AI
actually, go into any boards drawthread and fill requests that arent pure design but a scene
i know the DnD drawthread AI dude no use linking him, all he did was design shit
i mean actually create a full scene as per the request
do it ai faggots

[Anonymous No.6226015]

>>6225958
who the fuck needs 3-5 hours for a sketch you retard
the more i read these ai threads, the more i realise just how many retards here dont draw

[Anonymous No.6226031]

you all deserve to suffer

[Anonymous No.6226069]

>>6226000
It's basically still a scribble after 2 hours. What client would pay for that?

[Anonymous No.6226075]

>>6226069
>>Scribble

This is a scribble. That work is a WIP. If he can already draw that in 2 hours, 1 to 2 extra hours will give much more impressive rendering.

[Anonymous No.6226086]

>>6226069
Client usually pay 100 dollars for shits like these.

[Anonymous No.6226087]

>>6226069
Good luck with that "every drawings must need 1 month to complete" mindset. I hate it when fucking BEGs giving hot takes without bothering to look around.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNVoyRC718Y

[Anonymous No.6226095]

>>6226087
kys. he claimed 3-5 hours for finished pieces.

[Anonymous No.6226097]

>>6226095
8-12 is more common. and expected.

[Anonymous No.6226107]

>>6226095
depends o what this finished piece is, if its just a pinup the ye 3-5 hours should be enough
if its a bigger illustration and composition then 8h to 10h
this is just part 3 of 4 videos each around 2h so basically, he took 8 hours to finish this illustration
and its more complex than most shit i see peddled which is just a pinup or random character just standing there
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsn_NPg5ctg&t=8226s
and by some standards he could already have finished this at 5 hour mark if he wet less heavy on the painting and rendering

basically if you think 3-5 hours isnt enough to make a good image, you dont know shit
speed comes from skill and knowledge so i guess it would be normal for /ic/ to be filled with people who think you need a bunch of hours for anything

[Anonymous No.6226124]

>>6226107
I agree with you, a good painting can be done in 30 minutes(see Sparth), as for golden girl, Part 1, 3 and 4 are 3 hours each. add 2:20 for part 2. 11 hours 20 minutes. Talking/teaching at the same time slowed him down a bit.

[Anonymous No.6226126]

>>6226107
Not to mention these teacher guys sometimes stop abit to speak to their student as well. 3 hours is more than enough for standard medium detailed drawing. Usually BEGs don't know what they are doing at all, so their works usually ended up as very time consumming without looking good.

This dragongirl painting is from scratch to finish ( so semi finished ) and it is barely 3 hours. Yet, it looks good. >>6226087

[Anonymous No.6226134]

>>6226124
An industry guy on Facebook once said Industry pros have no time to slack off. They must draw very fast in order to meet the deadlines. What we have been seeing on Youtube is much slower than what they usually endure.

[Anonymous No.6226136]

>>6226126
Throwaway pinups take 3 hours, sure. I bet his work for clients take longer.

[Anonymous No.6226140]

>>6226134
Depends who they are and who is employing them. WOC gives you weeks. concept artists/key visuals, just pump them out quick.

[Anonymous No.6226146]

>>6226140
WOC still has a lot fo artists doing work traditioally so thats one reason why they are geerous with time given

and before people ask, magic the gathering doesnt only have enough of a collector value to have cards worth thousands
people also collect the original artwork by buying them from the artists directly, and WOC lets the artists do that, so they make money from both the WOC commission and later on a few thousand more from selling the painting

[Anonymous No.6226174]

>>6226136
Their "client" are big industry people, like videogame corpo, magazines and other bigdick business. Unlike the usuall commission customers, game companies usually force you to draw another concept instead of just "fix this spot, undo that spot".

[Anonymous No.6226176]

>>6225903
i will become the ultrachadmasterrace supplier of bases for AI and get rich of generating ideas for this shit and making it full of taste

[Anonymous No.6226179]

>>6226176
hey, that's actually looks like a good idea, let's make a good selected pack of dope cg art and throw this meat to this AI fuckers so if there will be some generated art it will be easily spotted and not as shitty

[Anonymous No.6226197]

>>6226174
This is getting muddled. OP was talking about saving 20 hours painting. Discussion was about illustration that tends take that long, like book covers, movie posters, splash art, card art.
concept art is another thing really...
I think AI could serve a purpose in both, especially in photobashing for concepts.

[Anonymous No.6226200]

>>6226146
>so they make money from both the WOC commission and later on a few thousand more from selling the painting
that's the best thing about working traditionally
you can make double the money from one image

[Anonymous No.6226206]

>>6226200
Burn the magic card painting and sell the NFT. tech bros are gonna love this...

[Anonymous No.6226216]

>>6226197
I really think that anyone who is considering adapting this tech into their "workflow" is deluded. Why would the client pay an artist to retouch or edit the art when the algorithm will be able to iterate itself infinitely anyway?
I don't disagree in theory it could be used for photobashing, but it's absolutely not being designed for that purpose. It's trying to circumvent artists entirely

[Anonymous No.6226258]

how did people react to content aware filling back then?

[Anonymous No.6226263]

>>6226258
Thought is was neat! End up only using it once in a blue moon.

[Anonymous No.6226273]

>>6226216
If the end result of a collaboration between the artist and the AI is completed in a shorter amount of time, why not go with that? compared to paying another artist(who you assume doesn't use AI, but will not know for sure) the same amount and it taking longer.

[Anonymous No.6226274]

>>6226258
Seemed useful.

It wasn't.

[Anonymous No.6226276]

>>6226273
Because I don't want random shit drawn by someone else and photobashed photos with random Google images sampling splattered all over my fucking canvas.

[Anonymous No.6226282]

>>6226273
The point is that neither artist will be hired ultimately

[Anonymous No.6226289]

>>6226276
Sure, you are in it for the art itself. We are talking about industry clients, not art connoisseurs.

[Anonymous No.6226318]

>>6225832
How did you make that?
Can you use stuff made with the software for commercial purposes?

[Anonymous No.6226322]

No one is stopping you guys from drawing or painting in the traditional way.
In a way it's kind of cool even, like model trains or using a loom to create your own fabric.

[Anonymous No.6226326]

>>6226322
I stretch my own canvases. Am I cool?

[Anonymous No.6226331]

>>6226326
Yeah exactly, do that kind of thing. Or mix your own paints or grind your own inks. It all works into the novelty of the hobby, which invites a kind of appreciation from someone who doesn't do those things.

[Anonymous No.6226336]

>>6226326
i am stretching my foreskin right now and i am cooler than you

[Anonymous No.6226360]

I'm going to bring a computer and printer to a tourist location, hopefully next to someone doing peoples' portraits/caricatures, and I am going to do AI caricatures and portraits of them.

It will make absolute bank, and I will deeply enjoy the banter between me and anyone out drawing/painting by hand.

[Anonymous No.6226362]

>>6226360
>just hang on, it says Load letter... that means.. oh umm. why isn't it printing... fuck. red ink low? uh, ok, new plan, I will email you the results! hey where are you going? give me your email!

[Anonymous No.6226388]

>>6223988
Yes. I am now longing for the days of the 6 month schizo posters. Those were fun times.

[Anonymous No.6226390]

>>6225890
The companies that made ai possible are staffed by a relatively small number of people who all have home addresses, frequent nearby locales, eat at nearby restaurants, and sometimes share an office.
A few months of research, both offline and online, some practice, and any schizo with access to a hardware store could make sure one or more of these small number of people get memorialized linkedin accounts. In minecraft.

[Anonymous No.6226399]

>>6224010
Chad, I like your nonchalant nature. I feel the same way about this stuff. I'll admit I went through the doomer stage with this about a week or two ago. I've kind of gotten over it and just don't care. Even if it gets better I just really don't care. If anything it made me draw more to cope with the sadness. Now the sadness is gone and I realized I really just like drawing for the process itself. Plus, I'm in IT and while it's not my first choice, I would've never had an issue with job stability with the advent of this anyways. I hate /g/ faggots though and always will no matter what they create.

[Anonymous No.6226461]

>>6223948
The real problem isn't art. The problem is more extreme than any of you even realize.

These programs are in essence the weapons of mass destruction of the digital age. Everything from text, to images, to comments in articles are open season for AI. Absolutely anything can be manipulated: politics, the stock market, national security, you name it. In the information age, disinformation is your greatest weapon.

This shit is a threat to humanity itself and everyone should be rallying to do something about it. Namely, the corporations funding it.

[Anonymous No.6226552]

>>6226461
This. And to be clear, I don't think it's possible to put this back in the box. But for one thing, consider how much we rely on the truth of video footage, and then speculate on where live rendering will be in a few short years.

At some point within 10 years, I'd likely be able to set up a live news broadcast from my room which you cannot discern is anything but an official live news broadcast from a source you have seen your whole life.

[Anonymous No.6226624]

>>6226552
It's like going forward to move backwards. Video footage may as well not exist at that point. Tech like this needs to be questioned if they would do humanity more good than bad.

But hey we're just serfs in this newly branded feudalism.

[Anonymous No.6226718]

>>6226390
Yeah sure I don't see most of those types of people leaving their home, bet they don't even have passports. Those people are from all over the world lol

[Anonymous No.6226768]

>>6226552
>I don't think it's possible to put this back in the box.
lawsuits

[Anonymous No.6226783]

>>6226768
over?

[Anonymous No.6226836]

>>6226768
The model is out there, running on anon's GPU

[Anonymous No.6226931]

>>6226836
anon everyone that uses the weights will be imprisoned by default, they add years to it if you ever downloaded a movie, song or program illegally as well

[Anonymous No.6226941]

>>6226461
No offense, but any kind of disinformation you were worried about is already rampant, being generated in droves by... us, humans. AI being able to fabricate lies is no wild improvement over people just lying and shitting up discussion as a job, photoshopping people into pictures they were not in and pushing narratives of events that did not happen. You think there hasn't been an almost comical amount of disinformation and from it, unnecessary unrest in the past few years? At least ranging back to mid 2010's?

>>6226931
kek

[Anonymous No.6226958]

>>6226941
Photoshopping still takes time. This tech generates MULTIPLE images of the same type in seconds. That's so much more dangerous.

[Anonymous No.6227064]

>>6226958
maybe if you are a boomer

[Anonymous No.6227075]

I started doing commission art using AI a month ago, I am finally able to keep up with the demand and I made around $1500 this month compared to the $500 I used to make from getting a bunch of work cancelled. This is how commercial art will move toward, it did with digital art and the early adopters made their bank in the 90s early 2000s, I don't care about "integrity" whatever that means in art, it's just another tool to get work done

[Anonymous No.6227079]

>>6227075
Why do you think clients will pay you to edit the prompt art when those edits will very easily be replicated soon too? Why would they pay someone to do something that a machine can do for free

[Anonymous No.6227087]

>>6225915
where are you doing it ?

[Anonymous No.6227094]

>>6227087
At SakimiAI.com

[Anonymous No.6227095]

>Technology goes from melted barely distinguishable abominations to kino landscapes and fair quality humans in the span of less than a year
>BuT tHE HaNdS LOoK bAd

Yes, I'm sure the progression of this brand new technology will halt right here. It definitely won't be drawing high quality detailed human anatomy in less than 6 months.

[Anonymous No.6227098]

>>6227079
I plan to retire in 2 years

[Anonymous No.6227100]

>>6227098
The point is, I strongly feel that people thinking this is going to be a "tool" are deluded. This is just a way to circumvent artists entirely. So I'll never tinker with AI even as a shortcut.

[Anonymous No.6227102]

>>6225915
Can the AI do the exact same character in a different pose though?

[Anonymous No.6227105]

>>6227102
if you scribble out the body and scribble in another pose / head angle prolly, give me two and I'll try it for you

[Anonymous No.6227107]

>>6227102
Not perfectly, but close, the tools for ai manipulation of existing images are coming along at an astounding rate.

[Anonymous No.6227114]

>>6227105
stop feeding these things you sick fucks

[Anonymous No.6227119]

>>6227114
Cope and sneed

[Anonymous No.6227122]

>>6227114
no i don't think i will

[Anonymous No.6227130]

>>6227079
a machine can only give you suggestions, not accurately provide what you asked for, or what you've envisioned in your mind. I am not sure why you keep repeating this retarded shit over and over and over

[Anonymous No.6227135]

>>6227130
that's true for your own art, but for a client it's not going to matter, if they can generate hundreds of images based off of their idea and pick one that looks good enough the role of the artist has already been superseded. I guess if you're a big name artist there will still be novelty in getting something that a popular human printer contributed to.

[Anonymous No.6227150]

>>6227135
>that's true for your own art, but for a client it's not going to matter
then why do I hear artists say that their customers behave the same way?

[Anonymous No.6227158]

>>6227150
a client is a consumer, not an author, which is also true of AI "promptgineers" or whatever they're calling themselves now; if any customer can describe their idea broadly and get something in return that matches their vision well enough, that's all that really matters. At the moment these algorithms are restricted by consistency and revisions etc but soon enough they'll be able to do that too and far faster than any human could. For the record I'm not in favour of AI art at all, but I believe that these technologies are being created with the intent of destroying the role of the artist, rather than a tool for us to utilise.

[Anonymous No.6227169]

>>6227158
>if any customer can describe their idea broadly and get something in return that matches their vision well enough
I don't think you're understanding what I'm saying. customers in general do not like "broadly". you can draw them something broadly and you'll spend hours with them telling you what to fine-tune. I'm saying this according to the experiences of other artists. I guess this doesn't apply if your quality is low, and you draw $5 shit to random plebs that are the exact type who are impressed by midjourney abominations
>>6227158
obviously, that's why they ripped off their art directly. well, the intention is mass production and money making.

[Anonymous No.6227173]

>>6227169
how about a service like skeb that doesn't allow revisions or anything at all, which is very close to an "analogue" prompt? This will completely decimate the value of their commissions
>find an artist you like
>feed their portfolio to the machine
>give it your idea
>yay saved 200,000 yen :D

[Anonymous No.6227196]

>>6227173
This is going to turn into a circus of carnage for the japs. I feel especially terrible about them, the people who contributed the most to spread better teachings, sense of beauty and joy to the many foreigners living in a decaying world, and now they're all getting fired and replaced by because they decided to share their cultural exports on the internet.

[Anonymous No.6227199]

>>6227196
I know, I can't take anyone who says that "it's learning the same way humans learn!!!!111" because obviously if it was the same thing we wouldn't be having the conversation. Consenting for your own to be seen by another human is a very different thing to having your work data scraped and then having the metadata used to feed an algorithm that can churn out work infinitely for you

[Anonymous No.6227208]

>>6226013
Might be able to create compositions with a rough block-in and textual prompt using img2img to complete commissions. I'm looking forward to what it can do with some of my garden basic sprite.

[Anonymous No.6227257]

step aside

[Anonymous No.6227259]

[Anonymous No.6227264]

>>6227199
How much of a sociopath one needs to be to use any of these image generators and then post the result for self-credit; Let alone write in the prompt "draw by", and sell it? They aren't ingenuous. These people can't possibly believe in their own stupid arguments, but they have to pretend they do out of sheer deceitfulness. They are desecrating the life and work of millions of buried and alive. They pay no mind to art. They have no discipline to learn or motivation to create. So they stab, drain and ditch the artist's essence aside then proceed to wear his bloodied skin over theirs.
"Joy of painting," the teachings of Bob Ross lie pillaged and murdered on an alleway.

May this be known as the greatest crime ever committed against Humanity

[Anonymous No.6227294]

As a non-artist. Dalle2 is amazing to use. Even if the pictures come out shitty its like having my own personal artist spitting out what i think of
It even makes 2d sprites and sprite sheets for me to play around with in unity

[Anonymous No.6227310]

>>6223948
I think it's an easy way to generate ideas with AI then paint over them in your style and correct the mistakes. A tool to help create art faster. In a decade it'll be similar to how 3d is used today. Anyone who says it'll make artist irrelevant is an idiot.

[Anonymous No.6227312]

>>6227310
AI is a tool but for producers and clients, not artists. The person who is needed to collect images from a generator is not an artist. Human labour is an expensive and unnecessary intervention when all steps can be streamlined by the algorithm.

[Anonymous No.6227313]

>>6227310
and how is 3d used today? i don't get your analogy, last time i checked 3ds max can't produce models on its own

[Anonymous No.6227315]

Don't care, I'm an AIArtist and I do AiArt, the future of art.
I started couple of days ago and can already do better stuff than 90% of /ic/, seethe and cope.

[Anonymous No.6227317]

>>6227310
You aren't needes anymore
The ai does good enough for 99% of people

[Anonymous No.6227321]

>>6227315
>I started couple of days ago and can already do better stuff than 90% of /ic/, seethe and cope.
Man imagine spending ages learning to draw only for ai to come along and destroy you
Funny shit
Its over artsissies

[Anonymous No.6227322]

>>6227315
You are not an artist, you are a consumer. The algorithm is the "artist" in this transaction. In the future, there will be no more authors, because all art will be infinite and meaningless. We will interact with the algorithm to get custom creations rather than the things that other humans make. So this is a fundamental shift where art is no longer owned by craftsmen, the art itself is meaningless, and the power will lie with whoever owns the algorithms and datasets.

[Anonymous No.6227328]

In a couple of years everyone in the world will be able to whip up their smartphone and do art like some dude who spent years of his life learning the craft, lmao.

[Anonymous No.6227330]

>>6227328
the difference is that you're not "doing art" anymore than someone is 3D modelling by utilising a character creator in ff14

[Anonymous No.6227333]

>>6227313
3d today is used for faster productivity so you're not wasting time sketching to get the same result. A tool. Ai will be used the same way, but for generating ideas. But just because you use a ruler, doesn't automatically mean you can draw the golden gate bridge. You still need talent to make it look appealing. Honestly a combination of the three (3D, AI, Personal Skill) is probably the best way in the future.

[Anonymous No.6227334]

>>6227322
>and the power will lie with whoever owns the algorithms and datasets.
the good ones will be opensource. the people will own this power
finally the people will be free from the shackles of whiny artists

[Anonymous No.6227337]

>>6227330
The difference is no one cares about that
The only thing that matters is the final product
>>6227333
You won't need to touch up the images in the future
And even if you do you can just ask rhe si to fix a certain part (they can do this already)

[Anonymous No.6227342]

>>6227337
I agree nobody cares. But it's still not making art, the person engaging in the app is not the artist. We're not all going to become artists, we'll all become art pickers instead.
>>6227334
open source for now kek, this tech is being funded by google and its just a matter of time before its monetised to all hell and they benefit from everyone working on the projects for free

[Anonymous No.6227343]

>>6227337
The ai*
Sorry my chatbot broke for a second

[Anonymous No.6227347]

>>6227342
>we'll all become art pickers instead.
and thats a good thing!
fuck artists. they brought this on themselves

[Anonymous No.6227348]

>>6227342
>this tech is being funded by google and its just a matter of time before its monetised to all hell a
Plenty of other groups are working on it too
A opensource version will always exist

[Anonymous No.6227351]

>>6227342
ill pay google 10 bucks a month to generate art instead of 100 bux for a commission from an "artist"

[Anonymous No.6227356]

>>6227347
>one of the lowest paid vocations in existence
>for exposure meme
>starving artist meme
>industry giants like craig mullins and simon stalenhag are all freelancing indies who don't have the ability to take legal action
>all artists posting their stuff online for free is what allowed these AIs to train patterns in the first place

[Anonymous No.6227357]

>>6227348
just because there are open source OS's doesn't change the fact that everyone uses windows and microsoft is a behemoth who has enormous power in the tech landscape

[Anonymous No.6227359]

>>6227356
Artists shouldn't have been little bitches
Now i am my own artist and you are starving harder

[Anonymous No.6227361]

>>6227357
It doesn't matter. Opensource will win eventually
The genie is out of the bottle. Nothing can put it back in

[Anonymous No.6227362]

>>6227359
suck my dick fag, at least ill be able to make art when WW3 breaks out and the power grid goes down

[Anonymous No.6227369]

>>6227351
for the former, unless you have the intelligence of a fish you will get bored and frustrated because it's too derivative and you won't get the exact result you want. for the latter, you'd never pay 100 bux to an ARTIST anyway (that your meme "AI" trained on through shitty bruteforcing) . you never did, and you never would.

[Anonymous No.6227370]

>>6227362
I have solar and a river generator

[Anonymous No.6227372]

>>6227369
I'll just feed the image which is closest to what i want into another ai that cleans it up

[Anonymous No.6227373]

>>6227359
>Now i am my own artist
what kind of cope does it take to become so deluded as to convince yourself of something like this? "AI artists" or "prompt engineers" are like the trannies of art. as other anons have put it before, YWNBAA

[Anonymous No.6227375]

>>6227370
ywnbaa

[Anonymous No.6227377]

>>6227375
>>6227373
Everyone is an artist now
You aren't special anymore
Sorry not sorry

[Anonymous No.6227378]

>>6227372
>I'll just feed the image which is closest to what i want into another ai that cleans it up
this is some insane cope. you don't even know what you're saying at this point. what exactly is the goal behind this action

[Anonymous No.6227379]

>>6227359
God did artists fuck your mom or something? you have some intense hate boner for artist there dude.

[Anonymous No.6227380]

>>6227377
>everyone is a woman now
>sorry but this is a fact because I say so

[Anonymous No.6227381]

>>6227377
strong vibes
https://youtu.be/fmSO2cz2ozQ

[Anonymous No.6227382]

>>6227379
i saw one of these aitrannies arguing on twitter that they hated artists for being elitist/ gatekeeping skills and wanted to destroy the entire value of art and it was too hard to gitgud with a pencil on twitter today
the proponents of this tech are misanthropists who have the mentality of a supervillain

[Anonymous No.6227383]

>>6227378
>>6227379
>>6227380
>the artist screams as you make art without him
Its over
You are finished
The people have spoken

[Anonymous No.6227386]

>>6227382
I prefer ubervillian
I am the bump in the night that makes artists shit themselves in terror
I am the anti-hero that brings art to the masses as the greedy artist tries to hoard it for himself

[Anonymous No.6227387]

>>6227379
anon, he's a failed artist (that's why he's here in the first place). basically he is envious of artists and wants to see them fail, since he does not have the mental fortitude to dedicate himself to a craft for years. he looks at the parasocial relationships they have with their followers and he wants some of that. he looks at their patreon money and he wants some of that. but his brain is fried, and cannot reach those goals. expect all the aphantasia, neuroplasticity faggots to end up like this retard who tries to convince himself that in a few days some shitty algorhythm that cannot even self evaluate itself to destroy all artists and take his revenge as the JRPG villain that he is

[Anonymous No.6227393]

>>6227386
you're a faggot who will get bored of generating malformed characters with pretty rendering in the style of inbred photobashed artstation pictures

[Anonymous No.6227394]

>>6227386
>I am the anti-hero that brings art to the masses as the greedy artist tries to hoard it for himself
you stupid bitch, no wonder you were ngmi
art is already one of the few things that have 0 barriers, from the day you were born to the present you've been able to pick up a pencil and make something of more worth than some noise generated by an algorithm

[Anonymous No.6227395]

>>6227382
It's kinda funny because people on one side are bitching to ban any use of AI generated content which I think is a little ridiculous and then on the other side people are begging for art to be an entirely dead job nobody can make a living from. And if you hold an insanely over-the-top extreme with zero nuance on this chances are you're underaged at least mentally

[Anonymous No.6227396]

>>6227387
>anon, he's a failed artist (that's why he's here in the first place).
The only art i have done is cropping or make things into transperant pngs
I am here becsuse half of 4chan is laughing at /ic/ and AI is cool

[Anonymous No.6227398]

>>6227396
ah, a tourist

[Anonymous No.6227399]

>>6227393
>who will get bored of generating malformed characters with pretty rend
Perhaps i will
But MILLIONS of others won't
Its over
The great tide of AI art is about to obliterate you

[Anonymous No.6227400]

>>6227396
cope, faggot. you're here because you're dipshit who tried his hand at art at ripped his paper apart since he knows he cannot do it.
>AI is cool
yeah, AI is cool not the shit it generates lmao. that pretty much sums it up

[Anonymous No.6227401]

>>6227399
the tranime pedo really got buck broken. you won't belong here, no one will consider you an artist other than deluded tech bros who are "in it for the tech", and who will live in their own bubble of delusion. deal with it

[Anonymous No.6227402]

>>6227395
i have literally seen no artists arguing it should be completely banned, everyone agrees its cool tech but there should be thought and conversation around the ethics/legality of training it on copyrighted datascraped content and barriers put into place to protect people's livelihoods

[Anonymous No.6227404]

>>6227402
I'm not an artist and I think it should be banned. I don't want art to devolve into generating a pile of shit and applying make up to it. it's degenerate and satanic, it diminishes humanity, it helps frauds, and it kills merit

[Anonymous No.6227406]

>>6227402
>thought and conversation around the ethics/legality of training it on copyrighted datascraped content and barriers put into place to protect people's livelihoods
The ethics are already settled. If humans can look at art and learn from it. So can AI

[Anonymous No.6227408]

>>6227404
there can be use for """AI"" aka algorithms and pattern based learning, but i think it's better relegated to the science and medical fields. don't really see the point of automating the arts this way since it's not like there's any shortage of crap being made, unless they really want the general public to have even worse adhd and get mental dementia

[Anonymous No.6227410]

>>6227401
>>6227400
Cope and seethe
I have literally never attempted to make art
And now I can make art better than most of /ic/
You are a horse and the car was just invented. Your owner will be taking you out behind the barn soon

[Anonymous No.6227412]

>>6227406
>The ethics are already settled.
settled by a tranime pedophile on /ic/ aka, worth jack shit
>If humans can look at art and learn from it. So can AI
omg this algorithm that explores trillions of possibilities and creates derivative shit with visible shutterstock watermarks and artist signatures, is just like le hecking humans bros.

[Anonymous No.6227413]

>>6227402
Any decently sized stablediffusion tweet has some whiner melting down about capitalism and shit

[Anonymous No.6227416]

>>6227406
nigger there is an obvious difference between the limitations of a human and an ai, if i want to match the genius of 100 people, i need to practise as hard as 100 geniuses put together. That will take more than a single life time. I cannot memorise and consume the metadata generated from an image in the way that an algorithm does, much less billions of images. If you don't know the difference between a human and a fucking algorithm you really are a dumb nigger

[Anonymous No.6227417]

>>6227410
cars are far better than horses anon. you are the retarded cripple and AI is the crutch you hold, morel ike

[Anonymous No.6227419]

>>6227417
the first cars were shit too
compare dalle mini to dalle2

[Anonymous No.6227421]

>>6227413
Talking about the obvious moral and ethical transgressions of this technology is very different banning it outright. There is obvious uses for this tech but it has definite potential to lead to some very dystopian outcomes. Given that the tech couldn't exist without artists drawing for thousands of years, it's immoral not to include artists in developing the tech.

[Anonymous No.6227423]

>>6227416
so its a matter of scale?
when does it become wrong?
should artists be limited to how many other artworks they can see?

[Anonymous No.6227424]

>>6227408
art is being automated because it can be automated, not because there's a secret plot against artists
these image generating neural networks are just smaller parts of the big thing called machine vision

[Anonymous No.6227426]

>>6227421
>it's immoral not to include artists in developing the tech.
How is this supposed to be done?

[Anonymous No.6227427]

>>6227421
>Given that the tech couldn't exist without artists drawing for thousands of years
The tech doesn't need you
They could train it on only photos if they wanted

[Anonymous No.6227429]

>>6227419
>I hecking love science bros. software growth is exponential. I'm sure the next iPhone will be better than the last 6 iPhones

[Anonymous No.6227434]

>>6227429
we accept your surrender

[Anonymous No.6227435]

Haha guys, how's my AI art looking? Surely it's not over, right?

[Anonymous No.6227436]

>>6227423
the issue is that you're anthropomorphising an algorithm. we create art to post on the internet with the understanding it will be viewed by other humans. the data being processed by an algorithm is unprecedented and majority artist would not consent to it. otherwise we wouldn't be having this convo.
>>6227424
they came after art first because we're scattered, non unionised and weak. if they tried to do what they did with our art to music, eg. feeding an algo millions of UMG and Sony hits to generate infinite music, they'd already be sued into their grave

[Anonymous No.6227438]

>>6227434
you should accept that you're a penis owner

[Anonymous No.6227440]

>>6227429
Yes?
Have you seen what the latest phones are capable of
AR still blows my mind

[Anonymous No.6227442]

>>6227438
unlike you i am

[Anonymous No.6227443]

>>6227435
wait this is ai?

[Anonymous No.6227446]

>>6227442
doubtful, as you keep claiming you're something that you're not

[Anonymous No.6227447]

>>6227443
Yes

[Anonymous No.6227448]

>>6227426
>>6227427
Why don't they only train it on information they have the rights to (or creative commons) and purchase copyright from the artists or get their consent?
You say it could only be trained on photos; but that's a misnomer; they'd have to purchase all those photos to be able generate something usable. Stable diffusion and midjourney both use raion which has analysed over 5 billion images. AI cannot create art styles without the information, so if it was only relegated to CC art (art created 50+ years ago) it'd be useless for imitating living artists.

[Anonymous No.6227449]

>>6227436
>the data being processed by an algorithm is unprecedented and majority artist would not consent to it.
Its precendented since humans do exactly the same thing
Don't want someone to learn from your art? Never ever show it anyone
Problem solved

[Anonymous No.6227450]

>>6227387
>if one hates artist it's because he's just jealous of them
This is also one of the reason why i despise artists; "The modern artist can do no wrong and cannot be criticized because anyone calling out their shitty behavior is a failure and can only be jealous of them pls like & subscribe & join discord & donate to patreon"
This is pure unfiltered cope.
Of course someone who is in the game and can shit all over your work is never going to out himself to tell you this shit, by nature of social media and how it gets weaponized against negativity i.e.
>"waaah this better artist told mean words to me he's bullying me by being better than me! cancel him! art is for everyone!!1!!11!! pls like & subscribe!"
Although, i'm personally biased since i really cannot suffer delusional narcissists anymore, which a lot of artists now shockingly are.
Being highly narcissistic and low iq is the anti-thesis to a creative mind, yet so many artists are like that.
Forget aliens in the hollow earth, reptilians and nazis in the arctic... artists being hypernarcissistic low iq retards is the biggest mystery in the universe.
Artists were always the odd ones out but how in the fuck do these modern subhumans even manage to stay alive when they should be forgetting how to breathe?
>Inb4 lol lmao i'm feigning ignorance or am actually retarded and ur a schizo
I would not expect anything else.

[Anonymous No.6227452]

>>6227449
they don't do the exact same thing, i'm not going to bother to replying to this argument again, if they did the exact same thing then artists would have no issue with it.

[Anonymous No.6227453]

>>6227447
guess its time to quit

[Anonymous No.6227454]

>>6227450
>waah
>complains about being called a schizo
opinion discarded tranime pedo

[Anonymous No.6227455]

>>6227453
feelsbad

[Anonymous No.6227456]

>>6227448
>You say it could only be trained on photos; but that's a misnomer; they'd have to purchase all those photos to be able generate something usable.
They could just take the photos themselves or get people to do it for free
The AI could create its own style too

[Anonymous No.6227458]

>>6227452
>if they did the exact same thing then artists would have no issue with it.
They literally do, they just do it better
Stable diffusion is a few gigabytes even though it was trained on terabytes of pictures

[Anonymous No.6227459]

>>6227454
You're gonna need to upgrade your literacy algorithm, robotto-kun.

[Anonymous No.6227460]

>>6227456
the ai cannot create it's own style; it is not sentient yet. also they could take photos or get people to take them but it would slow the tech down by years and years. I don't think you realise how much data these generators need to look at to get usable results.

[Anonymous No.6227462]

>>6227448
>Why don't they only train it on information they have the rights to (or creative commons) and purchase copyright from the artists or get their consent?
For the massive amount of data they need, there's pretty much no way they'd have enough for laion-5b with 50+ year old art. If we consider non-CC art to be copyright infringement when an AI learns on it, pretty much any image generating AI has been a copyright infringing machine and it is in essence impossible to make one that isn't.

[Anonymous No.6227464]

>>6227423
Again courts don't see it like this.

There is no my heckin thinking learning machinerino, there is simply a company feeding copyrighted data to a software when it didn't have the license to do so, this is one violation, a second additional one is when the software makes derivative replications of the data it reads without consent from the owners of the original works.

The legality of the dataset is what is being questioned, and then the possibility of making copies of it without infringement of copying rights.

I am not worried about ai because it's not even about making art, it's about laundering IP so it can generate infinite content for NFT grift for free.

[Anonymous No.6227465]

>>6227460
i don't think you realise how many people have phones and would be willing to take pictures
Make it a game where you have to take pictures of certain things the dataset wants and you'll have more pictures than you could dream of

[Anonymous No.6227466]

>>6227462
That's the point though. Using living artists work who still rely on their art for income is incredibly immoral and they should have gotten consent before including their art in the training data. But they know that doing it the moral way would put them in a disadvantage in this tech arms-race.

[Anonymous No.6227467]

>>6227450
>This is pure unfiltered cope.
this is you getting called out and seeting over it
>This is also one of the reason why i despise artists; "The modern artist can do no wrong and cannot be criticized because anyone calling out their shitty behavior is a failure and can only be jealous of them pls like & subscribe & join discord & donate to patreon"
what does this have to do with what your blatant envy? this has nothing to do with what I said
>Although, i'm personally biased since i really cannot suffer delusional narcissists anymore, which a lot of artists now shockingly are.
very, very ironic. and also delusional, thinking that anyone who disagrees with you is an artist. artists who put in a lot of effort, who do everything from scratch and don't trace, steal, etc deserve all the praise and merit they deserve. you do not deserve anything, because you're a lazy fuck who is trying to take shortcuts, and wants to see the world burn because of his insane envy
>Being highly narcissistic and low iq is the anti-thesis to a creative mind, yet so many artists are like that
the tragedy here is that you have neither
>Artists were always the odd ones out but how in the fuck do these modern subhumans even manage to stay alive when they should be forgetting how to breathe?
says the inept retard who cannot be half the human that they are. not even a quarter, you're a consumer who deludes himself that he's a creator. your ilk is the most wretched and abominable display to have graced the earth. religious fundamentalists in the middle east are worth more than your skin

[Anonymous No.6227468]

>>6227464
>, there is simply a company feeding copyrighted data to a software when it didn't have the license to do so, this is one violation,
This already went to court and the ai company won

[Anonymous No.6227472]

>>6227464
>a second additional one is when the software makes derivative replications of the data it reads without consent from the owners of the original works
This is transformative so its legal

[Anonymous No.6227473]

>>6227468
>This already went to court and the ai company won
interesting, I want to read about this. mind providing a source?

[Anonymous No.6227477]

>>6227472
>transformative
yeah, notice how the watermark is kind of weird like that ? very transformative, definitely doesn't use the images directly or anything like that. it's just like my heckin human brains dude

[Anonymous No.6227479]

>>6227473
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authors_Guild,_Inc._v._Google,_Inc.

[Anonymous No.6227480]

>>6227477
>yeah, notice how the watermark is kind of weird like that
Yes
Its been trained on so many inages with watermarks it thinks images of that type need to have a watermark
The same way you know that birds have feathers.

[Anonymous No.6227482]

>>6227477
Have you actually zoomed in on the watermark?

[Anonymous No.6227483]

>>6227468
that was in 2020 and the case in question was by a small book publisher; the landscape is entirely different now
also read https://www.taylorwessing.com/en/insights-and-events/insights/2022/06/flash-ip
we're really in unprecedented territory.

[Anonymous No.6227484]

>>6227467
>this is you getting called out and seeting over it
"no u"
>what does this have to do with what your blatant envy? this has nothing to do with what I said
"feigning ignorance or being actually retarded"
"ur just jelly"
>very, very ironic. and also delusiona
"proceeds to be delusional and narcissistic since artist are better because the other is inferior because a strawman is easier to burn"
>the tragedy here is that you have neither
"another strawman cope"
>says the inept retard who cannot be half the human that they are
"another strawman cope"

How can you not love these """people"""?
Guess if you don't ur just jealous
lol

[Anonymous No.6227485]

>>6227480
why do you use birds and feathers as examples? why not use the same example? if a human would look at shutterstock images as reference for drawing coffee cup or something, would he draw the watermarks as well?
>>6227482
>Have you actually zoomed in on the watermark?
dude it's smudges and incoherent...it's totally learning okay?

[Anonymous No.6227486]

some guy is trying to make a comic with the AI, lol
keep in mind this AI shit is only going to get better

[Anonymous No.6227487]

>>6227483
The same ruling applies

[Anonymous No.6227489]

>>6227484
>"no u"
that's not even a no u moment, you sperg. the rest of the message is you committing a strawman, and then complaining without a hint of irony that you were strawmanned by me. interesting how low IQ you are, wouldn't you say so?

[Anonymous No.6227491]

>>6227487
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/us-copyright-office-rules-ai-art-cant-be-copyrighted-180979808/#:~:text=The%20U.S.%20Copyright%20Office%20(USCO,ruling%2C%20which%20found%20his%20A.I.
as it is atm, AI generated works cannot be copyrighted in the US

[Anonymous No.6227493]

>>6227485
>why not use the same example? if a human would look at shutterstock images as reference for drawing coffee cup or something, would he draw the watermarks as well?
If he was only ever shown images with the watermark and no one told him not to draw the watermark or what a watermark even is. Then yes

[Anonymous No.6227494]

>>6223948
I FOR ONE ACCEPT OUR NEW AI OVERLORDS

[Anonymous No.6227495]

>>6225915
Thing is, this is an 800M model. We aren't even at the GPT-2 of image generation yet. A 175B model will probably be able to do it perfectly every time. Again, it's retarded to look at the errors of the first pass of the technology to ever be released and claim it'll never be fixed.

[Anonymous No.6227497]

>>6227493
>If he was only ever shown images with the watermark and no one told him not to draw the watermark or what a watermark even is. Then yes
"if"? but did it ever happen? what kind of human would make such an error?

[Anonymous No.6227498]

>>6227489
>throws around a bunch of personal accusations
>WHY ARENT U ARGUING MY AD HOMINEM?!?!? GUESS I WIN THE ARGUMENT!!! GOTTEM CHECKMATE!!!

[Anonymous No.6227500]

>>6227498
god I love when I break this tranime faggot where he devolves into complaints about being called a schizo or "muh ad hominem". it genuinely makes my day better. if there's one thing I really enjoy about this whole "ad hominem" stuff, is that whenever someone misuses this term and does not understand what it actually means, it is a clear sign that I'm arguing with a royal retard

[Anonymous No.6227503]

>>6227500
>>6227498
>>6227489
You two just pointing out strawman and adhom at each other is making me wish an AI would replace your little high school debate club going on here

[Anonymous No.6227505]

>>6227491
and?
That has nothing to do with any of this

[Anonymous No.6227506]

>>6227500
>throws insults
>thinks he's going to get debated when all he has are insults
>gets laughed at
>"G-G--G-GUES I BROKE HIM WAHOO I WIN! CHECKMATE! HMMM MY CUMMY IS SO YUMMY"
I'm going to post the comic, Anon-chan.

[Anonymous No.6227508]

>>6227505
how will this impact creative works moving forward if nobody owns anything they make? are we seeing the death of the author in real time?

[Anonymous No.6227509]

>>6227506
>your logical fallacy ..... IS.....

[Anonymous No.6227510]

>>6227503
>he doesn't know
I use gpt-3 to generate most of my posts for me

[Anonymous No.6227512]

>>6225893
It allows talentless hacks like myself to finally join in on producing visual content that isn't just shitty meme drawings and stick figures, of course we find it exciting. And you can be elitist as you like about how we're not real artists and have no skill, but that misses the point that we enjoy making things too and haven't been able to up till now. We're finally seeing a ray of hope there that we could produce viable art too.

[Anonymous No.6227514]

>>6227508
Nobody should be able to own pixels anyway

[Anonymous No.6227516]

>>6227512
you were always able to create art before. art has no barrier other than time and effort. nobody is going to care about the dumb shit you churn out when we're all drowning in a sea of noise.

[Anonymous No.6227519]

>>6227509
>wants to argue
>has nothing but logical fallacies
>"NOOOO WHY AREN'T U DEBATING ME THIS WOJAK IS LITERALLY U"
I am clearly genetically and socially superior than you.

[Anonymous No.6227520]

>>6227508
Good. Copyright was only meant to last a few years before everything gets dumped into the public domain. Now we're going to be forced to go back to the old way. Fuck copyright.

[Anonymous No.6227523]

>>6227516
Then what on earth are you all so worried about?

[Anonymous No.6227524]

>>6227516
>you were always able to create art before. art has no barrier other than time and effort.
Wrong
Its genetic
Cris is the prime example of this

[Anonymous No.6227527]

>>6227512
>we enjoy making things too and haven't been able to up till now
you have been able to since you were a kid, but you're a lazy fuck who can't be arsed to do it. I can't wait to hear your complaints in the future
>how to make my prompt unique?
>how do I generate a unique style
>no one wants to buy my AI art
people who seek crutches will find only disappointment, because you won't have the skills or knowledge to solve whatever it is that will bother you

[Anonymous No.6227528]

>>6227520
Copyright is a massive moneymaker, it's not going to just go softly into the night for that reason alone. An absolutely hilarious amount of money will go into some kind of copyright on AI generated pieces, and if that isn't enough, copyright holders will ban AI. Which, for artists, might be the one biggest favor completely shitty horrible people that are copyright corps have ever done for the average artist

[Anonymous No.6227533]

>>6227524
cwc's art will always have 1 million times more love and sovl than those algorithm generated goo.
don't you even dare compare it

[Anonymous No.6227534]

>>6227527
also, this mentality is degenerate in general. this instant gratification bullshit is a poison to society, a poison to the human mind, art aside. you just want to count yourself among artists by doing virtually nothing, you're simply insane. you do not know your place at all.

[Anonymous No.6227536]

>>6227533
Did you know you could train a CWC finetune of the stablediffusion on his art, since you only need 30 pictures to teach the AI?

[Anonymous No.6227537]

>>6227497
I'm not sure what your point is. That's a solvable problem, you simply need to train the bot on what a watermark is and then bias it against drawing it over the image. Expect it to be done soon, since it's so obvious.

[Anonymous No.6227538]

>>6227528
The genie is already out of the bottle

[Anonymous No.6227541]

>>6227524
>Cris is the prime example of this
chris chan didn't improve because he spent all his life drawing the same childish garbage. he didn't seek to improve. if you draw from your mind 100.000 stickmen you won't become like an old master

[Anonymous No.6227542]

>>6227534
it's literally the same as porn addicted mongoloids who get erectile dysfunction when they're actually with a woman. also fat amerimutts who have get diabetes from their tacobell and ubereats

[Anonymous No.6227543]

>>6227528
>generate AI image
>use liquify tool
>touch up some stuff
>add some stuff
>generated AI picture is now totally different
>can be counted as an original work and applied for copyright and be a protected IP

[Anonymous No.6227544]

>>6227541
>>6227533
Other cris. The gamedev one

[Anonymous No.6227546]

>>6227527
lmfao as if I'd be trying to sell it, or care about having a unique style or whatever. When I make images, they're shitty meme crap to post on imageboards for the sake of comedy, I have no desire to copyright or own any of it. You're projecting.

[Anonymous No.6227548]

>>6227537
>moving the goalposts
my point is clearly that it doesn't function like a human. with all this "training" you've mentioned, you'd think it's more like a dog

[Anonymous No.6227550]

>>6227548
Anon you might not want to think about it too deep or you might become insane

[Anonymous No.6227551]

>>6227534
>you just want to count yourself among artists
Again I couldn't care less. I'm an Anon first and foremost and have no interest in building a reputation or brand, or being known as an 'artist' or whatever. You've missed the point.

[Anonymous No.6227557]

>>6227551
at least have the decency to edit this shit into looking completely different. if we end up with generals full of midjourney looking shit from top to bottom, i'm quitting this website

[Anonymous No.6227558]

>>6227551
Artists only do it for fame you see
They don't understand people just want to convey an idea
I see ai art replacing emojis in the future

[Anonymous No.6227563]

>>6227557
better than fucking frogs and wojacks

[Anonymous No.6227564]

>>6227543
>generate AI image
>police execute the warrant on your house
Zamn, copyright

[Anonymous No.6227565]

>>6223948
>>6223963
>>6225746
>>6225776
>>6225779
>>6225784
>>6225792
>>6225803
>>6225832
>>6225915

how did you get access to the weights

[Anonymous No.6227567]

>>6227565
They are just lying

[Anonymous No.6227569]

>>6227565
An old shitty version of the weights leaked a week or so ago. The official release is expected to be a step up. It might even be able to do hands.

[Anonymous No.6227575]

>>6227558
what a fucking retard. artists do it first and foremost because they want to convey an idea. they also can accurately reflect it on a canvas, something you will never be able to do :)

[Anonymous No.6227577]

>>6227575
>something you will never be able to do :)
Wrong
Its accurate enough for me and is 10000x faster than you

[Anonymous No.6227578]

>>6227569
The official release was what was on the discord for stable diffusion for the past few weeks and it still can't do hands or anime. Also the setup is tedious as shit and most normies that have no idea how computers work won't be able to even set up the weights properly even using the retards guide.

[Anonymous No.6227580]

>>6227577
>good enough for me
mediocrity, lack of quality, impotence
>10000x faster than you
but hey, at least it's quick! I hope you don't imagine that I can actually care about this. it's not about the amount you shit out

[Anonymous No.6227581]

>>6227578
I'm hoping to see what some finetunes can do but yeah, the dataset is hideously tagged. A proper dataset could actually get shit done, laion-5b needs to be entirely redone tag-wise

[Anonymous No.6227582]

>>6227317
No, it really really doesn't if you actually used it for an hour, you would understand that you need incredibly complicated prompts to generate ok images, but even then, you usually don't even get what you want.

[Anonymous No.6227583]

>>6227581
>>6227578
>>6227569
>>6227565
>>>/g/

[Anonymous No.6227584]

>>6225832
You literally just want to reddit
https://www.reddit.com/r/NovelAi/comments/wt8g2s/image_generation_teaser_addicted_to_editing_with/

[Anonymous No.6227586]

>>6227580
It is about the amount
1 picture might not be good. 2 might not either. But 10,000?

[Anonymous No.6227587]

>>6227569
Hands wont be there at first release, Sounds like they have a whole suite of models trained on different things, that are able to be used independently. So take an image with bad hands and feed it to the good hand model?

[Anonymous No.6227588]

>>6227586
it's not just about it being good, it's about getting the exact result you've created with your mental image.
>But 10,000
imagine looking through 10.000 images to search for the diamond in the rough. holy shit

[Anonymous No.6227589]

>>6227587
You would have to do that manually, the weight they are going to release on Monday is the only weight that's going to be free from the Stable diffusion team. All the actual updates and work is going to their website

[Anonymous No.6227592]

>>6227588
Just have an ai search through them

[Anonymous No.6227606]

>>6227575
>artists do it first and foremost because they want to convey an idea
If that was true there wouldn't be so much artfag seething over AI.

[Anonymous No.6227614]

>>6227606
It's all begs and photobashfags

[Anonymous No.6227616]

>>6226461
100% this. This shit has to be stopped at absolutely all costs or humanity itself is doomed.

[Anonymous No.6227617]

>>6227578
So is it better to learn to blender at this point or not?

[Anonymous No.6227634]

>>6227616
To elaborate on this, the logical progression of continuing to utilize these kinds of technologies is a society/reality completely generated by copyrighted algorithms and AI tools owned by megacorporations that will shape everything single thing you see on the internet, every single movie you watch, every single book you read, every single image you view. Even now we're seeing the how rapidly the tell-tale signs of AI imagery are fading away. Dall-E mini was what, 6 months ago? We went from that clusterfuck to this in such a short period of time. As soon as the AI reaches parity with humans, it's fucking over, because that means its next iteration will be better than humans, and once it's better than humans at any particular field, humans will have effectively been replaced.

There will be no more meaning to any artistic works of any medium, and any meaning found will be completely imagined based on what the algorithm of some cold, uncaring, soulless AI generated. It's hard to articulate just how much of a threat this is to humanity's very fucking existence. I don't care if I'm sounding melodramatic or cringe or whatever the fuck buzzword retarded pseuds and normalfaggots want to throw around, we are on the verge of obsoleting ourselves. I wouldn't be surprised if many of the posts in this very thread were generated by AI as well. Again, once it can fool humans into thinking it's human, or into thinking it was made by a human, it's fucking over. This shit absolutely has to be stopped.

[Anonymous No.6227659]

>>6227402
>Thoughts and ethics
Na fuck that. I want people to use it till it breaks, that is how new mediums are created and new ones are revived.

[Anonymous No.6227660]

can someone link me to a collection of good prompts

[Anonymous No.6227663]

>>6227486
That's actually not bad.
Getting it to be consistent might be an issue tho

[Anonymous No.6227668]

>>6227617
Probably more useful

[Anonymous No.6227693]

>>6227659
I should be able to break into your house and steal your stuff. After all, ethics don't matter, as long as there's progress to be made.

[Anonymous No.6227699]

G

[Anonymous No.6227804]

>>6227479
After a settlement, and years of it, fair use was agreed upon on because google allowed the books to be sold by it's platform compensating the copyright owners, on their listed price, meaning no financial damage to the onwers

If it was giving the works for free instead of selling them fair use would have been denied over the fourth requeriment.

It's not doing IP laundery, where the authors are erased and no way to give credit or purchase the works is given, it's the complete opposite.

AI "art" does the opposite, take existing IP and "sell" it for free or use it for profit (you have to buy credits to generate derivative works or they use the stolen tech to gather funding)

I guess you can see the obvious difference google books and stabilityai can't you?

One sells the works and gives 100% shares on profit to the owner (or 70% for e-books), google also has a clear opt-out option for authors that dont want a work in their database, (something that was never in the first settlement) the other erases the owner and makes their work available for free distribution with no credit given or compensation and there is no way to opt-out of AI training.

Not the same in the slightest.

[Anonymous No.6227831]

Any leaked weights for Stable Diffusion? Got a world to burn.

[Anonymous No.6227833]

>>6227831
>>>/h/6804114

[Anonymous No.6227837]

>>6227833

Nice dubs and I thank you.

[Anonymous No.6227869]

>>6227196
Japs are the ones going to revolutionize this shit without crying faggot tears like you. Just like they and koreans already trace 3d models in clip studio paint to pimp up their work they have already shown interest in Midjourney and started using it in their workflows.
The west is a curse of no-skill no-improvement buttmad crybabies only worried about hurting feefees of the unwashed masses and poc.

[Anonymous No.6227882]

>>6227565
I'm part of one of the teams that is building an application with customized and improved upon SD.

>>6227634
We've had text and TTS/audio generation for years/months now and the world isn't any worse off. You learn to tell AI generated posts really quick with some exposure

[Anonymous No.6227887]

>>6227869
Gotta learn the efficiency of using it as the artist, I doubt photobashing entire faces and hair other people drew would fly with them.

Gotta wait for the pros to start incorporating ai on an ethical way, maybe only for backgrounds and details, ai is kinda shit at hierarchy of noise.

[Anonymous No.6227894]

>>6227333
I always sketch my own drawing even if I use 3D to pose.

3D sucks at proper proportion, shit gets distorted by cameras and poses don't read well on 2D, you have to make a sketch on the side to really translate what the 3D means to your 2D drawing.

Have you ever traced 3D hands? It always looks like shit.

[Anonymous No.6227950]

>>6225832
Go back faggot
>>6227584

[Anonymous No.6228630]

>>6227584
Woah! Who would've thought that these faggots were actively shilling here? What an unexpected revelation. I bet this nigger is also the one from /h/.

[Anonymous No.6229571]

>>6227894
That's why you don't trace 3D. You draw over it.

[Anonymous No.6229668]

>Don't worry guys there is NO WAY cars will replace horses!

[Anonymous No.6229738]

>>6227512
It's not you producing anything though, it's the AI, you're not joining anything.

>talentless
Talent = IQ * Effort. Unless you're abysmally retarded you can get there if you put more effort. Entering prompts in an algorithm will never be as satisfying as seeing a three dimensional illusion emerge in a 2D plane made by your own hands and wit, it's not the same so you'll never join or partake in anything remotely involved with man made art. Even if AI greatly reduces artist's jobs, who do you think will be hired, a "talentless" person or somebody who understands the visual language the AI is churning out?

[Anonymous No.6230145]

>>6223948

>AI WILL replace artists soon. That, and every other profession, In due time


You fail to see the forests for the trees, the issue isn't that AI is or isn't going to replace artists; the issue is whether or not a large enough data set can be made to serve a specific purpose, and improved incrementally over time, and that has already been proven to be possible.

If you can get a lot of data, and connect that data to a system that you can train, and each time it fails it can be shown where it failed, then even a dumb system can become smart.

You are replaceable. And what you also seem to misunderstand is that AI will start from lower level tasks and move up from there, first it will replace junior workers and people who do color (use your imagination), then line work and animation. It will make it harder to land a beginner's job. The talented, rich or famous people will benifit from this first. You won't be able to compete with people who can use AI to speed up their work, as they will have a large budget and will get priority access to the best tech. The replaced are gonna be no-name-losers who are just starting out. I'm sorry for being a downer, but I truly believe that AI will be a negative for people who aren't particularly skilled from the start.

>lastly you forget that it takes time to build an art career, if you do art for fun AI should not worry you, but if you are doing art as a career AI is just as threatening to you as the first locomotives and factories were to workers in 1804

I think I failed to explain myself well, but it's late and I'm drunk, but I think in a few years it will all be a lot more clear. AI is just not that advanced right now, but if you consider how fast we got here you will understand why I feel so pessimistic. Ultimately this tool will provide positive things too, just how trains did, but the people who are going to be displaced aren't going to be happy.

[Anonymous No.6230545]

>>6227550
i agree, i've thought about it deeply and now im ostrasised from my friends and family. Mainly because i tell them they'll be obsolete too within the next 10-20 years

[Anonymous No.6230932]

>>6229738
Notice that I never said anything about getting a job doing art. Not everything's about the money here. Stop projecting. As I said, it's about making things for fun. I'm not sure if you can even comprehend the concept at this point. If I get a chuckle out of anon with one of my shitpost images then I am happy, simple as.