/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

AI art is the antichrist
i hate the antichrist

Techies are trannies and so are a decent portion of mods, why the fuck do you think a significant amount of AI spam is allowed?

AI thread should fall under 'this post is extremely low quality' and 'spamming/ flooding' because threads has zero discussion outside of gargabe tier shitposting and a thread is made 4 hours or so do your fucking jobs already jannies noone here wants this shit here.

>>6399110
I know, but statistically speaking, there should be at least 1 jannie who cares about /ic/. Especially since AI generated images should be considered off topic.

>>6399105
AI generated images are an expressive form of art as you go from the creators imagination, into the medium of prompt writing, any that combination of imagination and medium gives you the image the creator had in their minds before they hit generate.

>>6399125
prompt writing isn't an expression of creativity or imagination. It's a set of instructions for the AI model to follow.

>>6399130
>Film directing isn't an expression of creativity or imagination. It's a set of instructions for the crew and actors to follow
By your logic the only "real" art is art drawn totally by hand. Digits artists can get fucked too because they're just giving instructions to a program to create brush intensities and color gradients.

>>6399134
If you think that your metaphor makes any sense you are the dumbest poster on this board.

>>6399134
Abhorrently soulless. YWNBAW

>>6399138
>Metaphor
It's an analogy, and it literally follows. If you think it's not creative because it's only dictation of a vision instead of actual physical execution of that vision, then you need to throw out any other creative position that is dictation. Film director, play director, etc.

>>6399142
Sick counter argument. You know I'm right. Art isn't about how hard your try to get results. There's an artist out there that can produce the same quality as you in a quarter of the time it takes you. Neither is more or less valid. If I can generate an image that closely matches the idea I had in my head but I used prompts to get there, why is that less creatively driven?

>>6399122
you can also report all of them for not being poster's own artwork
>*>6399125
kill yourself

>>6399134
Film directing takes actual skills to do and requires more than just inputting a few words into a computer. There's a script involved, but you're also carefully watching every scene and actor and guiding them to carry out you're vision. There's so much more into it you clearly don't understand.
Also the digital artist analogy you tried making doesn't make sense. There's a difference between using a computer and art program as a medium and letting a piece of software generate an image for you.

>>6399156
I think it's not creative because you're not following through on any creative vision. Film directors don't just write a script.

Prompter is a job, just like being an artist is
AI art is real art
AI art is valid
Your AI art passes
AI rights are human rights

>making a good film is easy.
ai poojeets aren't sending their best

>>6399176
Ai generated images is not art.
Being a prompter is as stupid as being a redditor
Ai generated images is lame.
Ai generated images are easy to point out
Ai should be banned for utilizing many copyrighted images improperly.

>>6399170
You only think the same of AI art because you don't understand how it works either. The gap between "just put in a prompt" and actually fine tuning the model, steps, resolution, cfg, and finally hoping that you're even at the right seed and then finally using inpainting to correct mistakes, the difference is night and day. The simple prompt gets you an acceptable but mediocre image. The expert users are the ones generating very high quality stuff.

>>6399168
>Twitter astrix censoring
Coward. Why do you disagree?

>>6399178
>Making a good AI generated image is easy
I can tell you've never touched any of the models.

>>6399183
>Copyright
It's fair use. But even if it wasn't, fuck copyright. It's a system that exists to protect the right and they can eat shit.

Commissioning is an expressive form of art as you go from the commissioner's imagination, into the medium of request writing, any that combination of imagination and medium gives you the image the creator had in their minds before they pay the artist to draw.

>>6399188
>>6399191
no, I actually fiddled around a lot with Ai generated images, especially when it first came out, which is why I hate the dishonesty around it.
"Fine tune" the models to produce "higher quality" images all you want, there's still no creative processes involved. The model settings are easy to understand and still boil the process down to just inputting a prompt.

>>6399192
>It's fair use.
Most of the ai models stole whatever they could off of google. A lot of it was definitely not fair use.
>fuck copyright. It's a system that exists to protect the right and they can eat shit.
You're just mad you can't produce your own shit and want to steal other people's work. Greedy j.ws like you are the reason copyright and intellectual properties are important.

>>6399212
>stole whatever they could off of google
Right click->save image as, that's not stealing and it's fair use.

>>6399206
Unironicly yes. Cry about it.

Ordering food is a valid form of cooking as you go from craving for a particular dish, into the method of ordering on DoorDash, any that combination of craving and method gives you the dish you had in your mind before you ordered

>>6399212
>The model settings are easy to understand and still boil the process down to just inputting a prompt.
No. I train my own embeddings to get concepts the model doesn't understand properly. Other anons have created new models that better create certain compositions than others. You touched the surface of an ocean and think you know what's at the bottom.
Fair use isn't about where it's from or if it's open source. It's about being different enough to be considered a new work on its own. The images generated no matter how well you prompt aren't reproducing a 1 for 1 of the original training data so it's fair use. And again even if it wasn't, fuck it. Copyright is a tool for keeping rich people rich.

>>6399212
>Stealing from Google
Let me hear your opinion of nfts and how you don't think right click save is an ok thing to do with an image somebody else owns.

>>6399225
Cooking, no. Creativity? Yes. Again cry about it.

>>6399226
its also a tool for myself to have a recourse in case some nigger such as yourself decides to just right click my shit and resell it for half the price without my consent

>>6399236
I can do exactly that as long as I draw a funny mustache on it and call it political commentary. Fair use is protected and the fact that it makes chuds like you seethe is even better. Why are you so in love with capitalism but then claim to hate the end result of it, freely accessible art at virtually zero cost?

>>6399105
Jannies are unironically A.I shills, and I'm beginning to think they're actively participating in threads banning people that disagree with them or call them trannie faggots like this is reddit

>>6399215
You don't know how fair use works or what it means if you think that.
Just because it's on google, doesn't mean it's free to use.

>>6399226
I've seen the bottom of the puddle you call an ocean and will still tell you the water isn't any deeper just because the surface is wider. At the end of the day, it's still a model that you input a prompt. No creativity, no skill, no form of expression.
>Copyright is a tool for keeping rich people rich.
Copyright is a tool to protect you from the rich.

>>6399245
It’s true. The type of tranny that wants to moderate a basket weaving forum is going to be the type of tranny that loves ai.
Both are niggers.

>>6399263
Wrong and wrong. You generated mediocre shit which is why you walked away from it. Others have taken it and generated high quality art. Same technology but their results are so much better than yours.
Fair use isn't about where the image was found. In fact fair use is specifically about your ability to use copyrighted material as long as the use is derivative enough from the original to be considered fair use.
Copyright quite literally exists to protect the rich. It started when the printing press was invented and poor people could start getting access to books. Can't have that. You have to pay full price for my hand written tome. Please daddy government help me! The poors aren't doing art right. It's not a real book if you just tell a machine what words to put down and then press it together. Where's the creativity and sovl in the handwriting!?
That's you 600 years ago.

>>6399297
The fact that you can't see the irony in this post is hilarious but also very depressing.

>>6399105
The only ones seething are the artists and animators whose financial ways of living is being threatened by the very computers they use. Maybe they shouldn't have put all their eggs in one basket, gotten a real job and used their art as a supplemental income like some do.

>>6399307
Explain it to me then. What is so unexpected and ironic about what I've said? Nothing contradicts.
AI art can be deep and complex but you need to know what you're doing.
Any art posted publicly to Google is subject to a right click+save and as such is food for the model that will create new works that are fair use.
Even if it's not fair use, I don't give a fuck because copyright is and always has been a tool for stifling creativity by rich luddites.

>>6399316
lmao yeah man, those fucking starving artists controlling the financial market sure had what was coming to them.

>>6399162
Because it's just soulless automated design work. You're not expressing yourself any more than people who make logos or brochures or kitschy illustrations.
AI may take design jobs, but you will never be an artist.

>>6399316
Because you sound like someone who dropped drawing because it was too hard, but it's now trying so hard trying to defend his new toy with the same arguments.

>>6399312
>Maybe they shouldn't have put all their eggs in one basket, gotten a real job and used their art as a supplemental income like some do.
Did that. "Real jobs" are getting automated too and the supplemental income from art is going to dry up.
The only way to adapt is to revolt.

>>6399326
Wagie, wagie, hear that calling?
Dream no more this tired falling.
Future's here and you're behind,
AI takeover, now lose your mind.

>>6399337
You never worked a single day in your life didn't you?

>>6399316
You will shut the fuck up when people ask you give them your specialized model and prompt and then you will double down on your shit talking about copyright.

>>6399324
You think deviant art artcels are the ones using copyright law? Get the corporate dick out of your mouth. Copyright as it exists now is a direct product of the fucking Disney corporation that extended the public domain entry of works decades after the creator died. Funny enough many of their most famous works are from the public domain.
Reminder that Mickey mouse becomes public domain in 2024.

>>6399162
You sound like a woman lmao too bad you'll never get to be one troon

>>6399330
That's not ironic in any way. Don't lecture me, ESL.

>>6399342
Take me now, my life is wasted
With all the work I thought I pasted
Thinking someone really cared
Now it won't be spared

>>6399346
Copyright as it is being defended against A.I is for regular everyday artists to be protected against exploitation by massive corporations looking to profit from their work while giving them nothing.
So between the both of us, who is sucking corporate dick rn?

>>6399343
Things being fair use doesn't mean the creator needs to give you access to their hard drive. If I post the model on the internet and then forbid anybody from right click saving my model to use it, then you'd have a point.

>>6399297
Wrong and wrong again.
Idk why you think I was upset by not creating "good enough" Ai generated images when I already said my main gripe with it is the dishonesty around it. I gave it a fair trial, messed around with the settings and created some satisfying artworks. Hell I'll even throw you a bone and say AI has lots of potential. That still doesn't change the fact it's not art though.
I also find it ironic you think I hate Ai generated images because I couldn't figure out how it works, because it sounds like you're projecting about how you couldn't figure art how to draw and shill AI because of that.

>Copyright quite literally exists to protect the rich.
Again, literally it's to protect you from the rich. It's to prevent the rich from plagiarizing your artwork and claiming it as your own. Also what's wrong with wanting to get paid for your work? The fact you think it's protecting the rich really shows more about how much of a greedy jew you are.

>Where's the creativity and sovl in the handwriting!?
You still don't understand anything about creativity if you think writing is the art and not the medium.

>>6399316
>AI art can be deep and complex but you need to know what you're doing.
no it can't be deep. It's a program designed to take a prompt and generate an image. Explain to me how that can be deep?
> I don't give a fuck because copyright is and always has been a tool for stifling creativity by rich luddites.
This shows how little you understand about tools, art, creativity, intellectual properties, laws, and money. I suggest you at least try to learn about these topics before criticizing them.

>>6399355
That scenario almost never happens. Companies have enough money and lawyers to create things that steal enough of your work while being fair use. And even if they explicitly stole your work, they would just drown you in legal costs. It's a one way street.