/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>6858948
>(except hands, eyes, clothes, hair, interactions, scale, composition...)
but it can do those. just not always.
the fact that it can TRY enough to fail should already be a clear sign that what i'm saying is correct and that it has learned and is applying concepts.
not to mention every example i ever brought up: reflections, lighting, night, day, all things that are context dependant and cannot just be copied.

>pls bro look at my controlnet and inpainting it fixed those issues
>those issues it totally learned
that's not how it works. it learns from the training images. not from controlnet or my own input, even when they're sketches.

but you're too dishonest with literally everything you say and how you act. it borders on mental illness. you're just tiresome at this point.

it sounds silly but you're just plain dumb. too dumb to know you've been defeated many threads ago. too dumb to not just understand, but even intake anything that doesn't confrom to your headcanon.
your posts are so flawed that you're literally begging me to call you a retard every other sentence.

and now you'll predictably make a post saying a lot of hot air while claiming i used ad hominems.
even though i cleanly rebuked your idiotic post once again.

it's pointless but i'll repeat:
>it gets concepts bro
yes. failing sometimes doesn't mean that it doesn't.