/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

Fire Emblembro, why do you keep making these threads?

>Made a vow to draw everyday starting this year
>0 drawings at all and it's already February

Why am I like this?

>>6416940
Neuroscientists are literally finding out correlations to his work, proving him right.
The exact methods are flawed, and his work is mostly dealing with subjective experience (something naturally really hard to quantify or measure) but to say he's a total fraud is ironically a self perpetuating myth told by people that never read a single word from him and just blindly trust his detractors (that they also didn't read)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNzWSMjRU0E
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cGAbZgIpPpc

>>6413621
It truly is horrible how badly this aspect has been pulled under the rug, on total bad faith.
A.I is not a person like entity when it comes down to property of created content (I, the person am the creator, AI just the tool) but it is a person when it comes down to the relationship with real artists (AI learns the same way a human does, so there's nothing wrong with giving nothing to the humans that created the learning data).
You can't have it both ways.

>>6403230
>Caravaggio
Psychopath, gangster and murderer
>Miura
Shut in that destroyed his body in pursuit of greatness
>Jung gi
Sexual deviant that destroyed his body in pursuit of greatness
>Claire Wending
Didn't know what children were when she entered school, grew up non socialized among farm animals

If you want to be an artist, you have to be a weird fuck, that's a requirement, how good you are at hiding it is your prerogative, but the actual schizo autistic lunatic part is absolutely a requirement.

>>6393970
>>6393990
>Who wouldn't want that?
It's a monkey paw thing, you don't want that.
>If I could just copy it out of my mind and paste it into the computer, that would be perfect.
That's the thing, that's why you learn to draw and do things by yourself, because the moment you try to materialize it you'll learn that it's all smoke and that your idea was actually kind of just a pile of vague trash, so you try again and actually come up with something decent.
Letting an A.I fill in the blanks makes your monkey brain go "aha, of course, this is what I wanted", but in reality it is nothing of the sort, because there was nothing inside your mind to begin with, it's all a lie you tell yourself.
That's why I keep telling A.I shills that even if A.I gets good and it comes down to pure curation they will still get mogged by artists, because if you can't draw it you can't perceive it, and that's going to drag down the quality of anything you try to do. There's no cure for shit taste.

>>6388836
Art is probably one of those things were IQ won't be a good predictor for success.
I've met great artists who are incredibly dumb and high IQ mathematicians that were terrible artists.
Of course going to the extremes an incredibly low IQ person will do worse art than an incredibly high IQ person, but I don't think the correlation is as strong in the averages as it is for STEM.
High introspection is the one thing I've consistently seen in good artists, and that's independent of IQ. You can interpret the world around you all you want, if you can't interpret yourself it will show in your art.

>>6385955
I was banned for a couple days because a jannie is an AI shill, and my life got exponentially better.
I'm considering taking the jump and stop using 4chan all together, which I probably won't, but it feels nice to consider.

>>6370357
>he problem is that it can be used by any retard with a graphics card and doesn't require any skill. It is basically going to be accesable to anyone who knows how to use MS Paint.
Theres nothing A.I can do against shit taste tho, and anyone thinking random non artists can do something like a good comic without actually consciously engaging with art fundamentals is just wrong.
Even in the worst case scenario on which there truly is no place for human input other than curation in art the person that can do real art will have better taste and eye than the fa/g/ that can't even perceive form.
The narrative seems to be that the only reason people needed artists is for their physical work, but art directors barely if ever actually draw however they understand aesthetics and visuals in a way no random fa/g/got ever will.
I don't even care if they believe me or not, time will prove that being an artist is much deeper and complicated than simply their manual output, and anyone trying to engage with visual arts, even when given a magic button will have to engage with the same rules any artist does, and if they're to have any success in creating anything worth looking at, they're going to have to learn them and inevitably, draw, because if you can't draw it, it is because you can't perceive it, and thus whatever you do will always be held back by your ignorance.

>>6355572
I just skimmed through your posts but they read as someone that tried hard to become an artist, didn't make it and is just having a meltdown trying to tell to himself that your failure is ok because those that succeded are going to be automated anyway.
People like you do nothing but encourage me to keep doing art, if I ever end up in autist rage like you are, I'll know for sure I've been buck broken with no return.

>>6346229
>>6346271
>thinks he's making more than a few cents out of something available to absolutely everyone
>thinks the art industry is purely about illustration
I know you think you have discovered something no one here has before, but you're just throwing jabs at nothing, predicting the future in the most simple minded ways and again trying to act as if artists own nothing and deserve nothing.
Bad faith or seething failed artist that got roasted out of his dreams, who knows, opinion discarded, it doesn't matter if you're proven wrong you'll just regurgitate another defeatist narrative because you've got nothing to gain from artistry being protected.