/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>tfw most popular platforms aren't even good for hosting an art gallery
deviantart I guess?

>>6437290
DA is also infested with AI shit, they even have their own inhouse AI generator lol

>>6437275
Why is it dead?

AI is the equivalent of a massive horde of retards bringing their pre-packaged frozen food to culinary workshops and competitions.

If you are not baking it fuck you, nobody gives a shit about your microwave button mashing technique.

>>6437292
Didnt ban AI shit when everyone was demanding it, resulting in mass exodus

Frontpage is filled people deleting their galleries, bye messages and anti-AI protest images

Do these retards really think they can "escape" AI? Eventually it'll be so good that you won't be able to tell it isn't human made.

How will sites that ban AI art be even able to tell the difference? Sure right now you can still tell by a few obvious signs but what about in a year or two?

>>6437299
They better find a way, because people aren't going to go to their website to see AI art

>>6437275
i'm just gonna make a pdf i can email to clients or a private website. there's no point in hosting your shit anywhere until we have actual data protections in place
>>6437293
it's some fat tard on a rascal scooter sperging out that no one cares how fast he '''ran''' the boston marathon. the funniest thing about aishit is that these weirdos literally cannot conceive that someone would draw because they like drawing
>>6437299
require a process timelapse be submitted privately for review. most art packages already record your action history so implementing that is fairly trivial. procreate and heavypaint already do it.

>>6437305
>They better find a way, because people aren't going to go to their website to see AI art
Truth is most normalfags won't care or start prompting themselves.

>>6437306
>require a process timelapse be submitted privately for review.
AI can already kinda fake that right now and it will sure as shit be able to fake it in a couple years.
Also would you allow /beg/s or would it be intermediates and pros only?

> there's no point in hosting your shit anywhere until we have actual data protections in place
Actually true. If you post your shit publicly anywhere right now it WILL.

>>6437311
>Actually true. If you post your shit publicly anywhere right now it WILL.
get scraped and used for AI training lmao

If you post it on the internet it's not yours anymore : ) sorry
Just the way it is
Artfags are shitting and pissing themselves because they failed to understand this simple fact.

>>6437311
You have to be 18 to post on this board.

>>6437299
Unironically request for a pdf file or a progress video if suspect a piece made by AI.

>>6437315
just post it, it'll never stop and the people who scrape your shit will forever be a fraud

>>6437311
I don't believe for one second that AI can fake a believable process video, that's way more than a couple years away. It starts from random noise which it then coalesces into the desired image attributes, so it would have to fake every frame of the video along the way.

>>6437335
I'm not saying it's happening anytime soon but in theory it should be possible to take a complete painting and reverse engineer a fake painting process with AI. Bascialy it wont be how the image was actually made, it'll just look like it.

>>6437311
>Truth is most normalfags won't care or start prompting themselves.
Normalfags can't even cook without going to McDonald's, and people throughout history, to this day, value hand made crafts more than anything mass produced.
Art is inherently human, the fact AI made it, alone, devalues whatever output it turns out

>>6437339
Yeah, untill the majority of all art is AI generated. Then it will just be "normal".

Why are you wasting time replying to low quality bait threads, ignore this shit and go draw.

>>6437338
why hide that it's AI if it's a legitimate tool?

>>6437342
Personally I wouldn't, matter of fact I don't think it'll ever come to it because people will probably just start accepting AI as the new normal. Just saying it wouldn't be outside the real of possiblity to fake it.

>21 replies
>not a single new website mentioned
You fucks are really bad at this arent u

>>6437347
>people will probably just start accepting AI as the new normal
people are already sick of it

We don't need process videos. Just live oekaki drawing fields, with mods that watch you draw for a bit.

>>6437351
This is the expected trajectory, things get worse before they get better.

>>6437349
Because there isn't one.

>>6437353
russia starting a nuclear war is more likely by th its point

>>6437351
>people are already sick of it
then you have nothing to fear
just wait out the fad
try drawing in the mean time ;)

>>6437340
Nah, people see AI art as a gag. The tech fethishits that'd sell their mother for tech progress are too blinded in their arrogance to see that.

>>6437359
Ai have become death?

>>6437360
certainly seems to be the end
of something

>>6437358
not gonna pretend to know the future, only time will tell but that's my intuition

I heard about Artfol. Anyone there? I created an account but haven't looked around much yet. Truth is that I don't go to art websites to look at AI shit, I care more about looking at other's art than posting my own

>>6437364
Devs seem sincerely but they also bow down to faggots with no "problematic". Still better than Artstation at this point

are all you nigz gonna move to newgrounds now, lol

>>6437366
Oh didn't know that, all I heard was that they were an alternative with clear guidelines against AI. Sucks. But still better than what DA and Aistation are becoming, I just want a place to look at actual art holy shit, I miss he days of freaky fetish on DA because even this has more artistic value and is mildly entertaining to go on rabbit holes of those accounts

Introducing ArtHub! Human only art gallery and forums! Get verified by our ever growing panel of judges, enter the thunderdome and draw to prove your humanity! This site is closed to public viewing, and when you view art, it is watermarked with your info, invisibly, so don't go sharing it, we will know it was you.

>>6437367
I don't draw zany cartoons.

>>6437293
Sounds like you need to git gud.

It's funny how drawslaves both say that AI art is of poor quality and that it needs to be contained.
If AI art is so bad then naturally artists have nothing to fear.

>>6437342
Tranny mindset
Hide that they're a man
Hide that they can't draw
Hide that they're a fraud
In each case they fail upon closer scrutiny, no matter how much smoke and mirrors they put in your way
You will never pass

>>6437275
https://cara.app/
you never know, might become a thing

So begins the game of cat and mouse.
I must be extremely careful with my presentation, as I gain notoriety as a human artist. If I am discovered, it would be over for me.
As commissions come in, the stakes grow higher.
I cannot be discovered. I will not be discovered.

>>6437398
be very vocal about your anti-AI sentiments publicly, that will throw them off a bit

>Go to DeviantArt
>Mainly favorite landscapes and fractals
>My front page is now full of porn
>Turning mature content off merely makes the page full of softcore porn
I HATE TRACKERS

>>6437420
Seriously, how do you get furry/anime porn from this?
Is DevArt just giving up?

>>6437398
10 minutes in a discord screen share call and you're done.

>>6437340
it mostly affects digital. people still want to hang hand-made paintings on their walls, even if they are bad.

>>6437403
Yes this

>>6437430
By passionately calling out others as AI I will shield myself from scrutiny

>>6437299

AI detection tech is also developing. You think only artist are concern about AI image gen? You're so wrong dumbfuck.

I can easily. EASILY. train any face and do some damage to a person reputation. And I can't even code.

This shit is a weapon made public. The fuckers behind it should be put in jail.

>>6437459
>The fuckers behind it
It's relatively simple mathematics that's been around since mid-1900s.
The rise of GPUs is what led us here, but it was inevitable that someone would, and if they were in jail, someone else would in their stead.

What is the website that let's porn artists stream their drawings?

>>6437275

there's inkblot

https://twitter.com/inkblot_art/status/1606362113961623553/photo/1

>>6437466

If they were in jail means there is law is already law against it. Which would make anyone who do the same after that... a fucking criminal.

>>6437482
Picarto allows nsfw streams.

>>6437493
Based. I believe a new wave of art site is coming.

>>6437459
I still say people should just flood huggingface with models trained on random people's faces, to force the start of drawing of ethical lines. To date the argument seems to be that as long as it is done with a picture generator, there's no such thing as ethics, probably because the people releasing models have never drawn and don't really grasp how shitty it is to release a model meant to try to rip off particular artists (or wait, they do understand, because they explicitly use them to irritate the artist in question).

>i'm totally leaving guys
>look at my profile thats still up, it has a picture that says i'm leaving
>i'm going to do it, for realsies!
hahahahahahahaha

>>6437311
>Truth is most normalfags won't care or start prompting themselves.
Artstation is basically facebook for pros and pros wannabes. Normies don't go there. It's very understandable that artists want to be among other actual artists rather than prompt engineers

>>6437527
Are you retarded? Deleting all their pieces with dozens of thousands of combined likes is essentially deleting their accounts. Their profile is still there only so people know what happened to them and also for dms.

>>6437493
I checked it out and it seems kind of jank, I wanted to see what a portfolio on there looks like so I clicked a random upload and tried to look at their profile but clicking on their name or profile image doesn't do anything and there doesn't seem to be anything else to click on. Seems like these people do not have their shit together.

>>6437299
It's not about AI as a tech. It's about the people pushing it. AI is inevitable. It's inevitable in the same way that digital art was. Artists know this. It's not even a debate.
It's about getting the legal minutiae organized, and also preventing retarded fucking techbros from thinking that they're worth a damn, even though I've already seen tons of professionals come out and say they won't hire prompt-kiddies. There was precedent set recently that AI-generated images can't receive copyright--or at least works produced using them cannot--so all we really need are opt-in rules and mandatory labeling.

>>6437557

>Artists supernova levels of assblasted by now having to compete with AI art.
>Remove themselves from Art hosting pages in what alreadly is an extremely oversaturate market for digital art.
>Now instead of Humans to compete with AI only has to comepete with itself.
You guys really showed em'. Self extinction seems to suit you.

>>6437364
Seems like it might be a good place considering one of the bulletpoints they advertised their website with is "AI is banned"

>>6437387
Looks fishy af

>>6437493
>inkblot
Jesus christ who designed this website

>why do I see a feed of new profiles created as first thing in the center of the screen, why does that even exist and why does it take up screen space??
>what are those icons in top right, is that a wifi symbol? Is this website a wifi site or something? What in the fuck. None of them are clear as to what they are without clicking on them, and also they dont even tell u what they are on mouse hover
>Why do I see some tweets or something on my screen, right below the fucking new profile feed? Who in the fuck cares? Wheres the art???

Finally, scroll down, heres some art, and
>Why in the FUCK are all the thumbnails different sizes and not standardized at all? If some dude uploads longcat.jpg then youre gonna have to scroll all the way down because Inkblot apparently doesnt crop the image into a thumbnail
Also thumbnails are way too big, one row fits only like 4 images lol

Artstation might be retarded but holy shit they got the obvious basics correct
>wall of art
>wall of art
>another wall of art
>done with that? Okay, heres another tab ("trending" or something) with even more cleanly cropped wall of thumbnails of artworks
Like how do u design an art website and cram it with the most irrelevant shit imaginable and make VIEWING ART actually difficult?

>>6437569
Industry is moving away from sites that are unfit for their purpose (finding an artist to hire) because theyre polluted with irrelevant shit thats not getting filtered out (AI "art") and just clog up the space, making finding an actual artist difficult

How can it be hard to comprehend why professionals dont want to deal with that?

>>6437569
ehh, no reason to stay on an art website filling up with ai.
personally, i want to stick with those who draw.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯

>>6437557
It's whatever the market demands and what they will pay for. If AI art is what's in demand then that's what illustration and graphic design will use. In reality who hires who has no relevance. It's sad, and I do belive commercial artist are pretty much going to be squeezed out of a living in the next few years but it is what it is. The bigger question should be asked what are we going to do with these people and other labor issues regarding many careers going to automation.

>>6437493
Kek, this website is what happens when you're a cheap bastard and don't pay a dev.

>>6437563

>>6437585
It will never be higher in demand than professional artists. By itself, it takes too much trial and error to get consistent results. Will AI tools be used in the industry? If proceedings don't declare it unethical and illegal, yes, of course. But it will be used by professional artists as a tool, not by fucking techbros who don't know their crypto from their NFTs.

>>6437580
So. Hire an AI artist. If an AI artist can meet the demands and outline of the client then so be it. This is nothing new, and it's just a bitter wakeup call to the cold reality of what marketing is. If you are a great artist then surely in theory your art will outshine any AI work crested.

>BUT WAIT YOU CAN'T DO THAT YOU HAVE TO HIRE A HUMAN ARTIST BECUASE...! WELL YOU JUST CANT!

>>6437596
Why would AD willingly hire someone who can only press a button and cant actually follow a brief, draw or make changes, not to mention using tools trained on stolen art?

Seems like you have zero understanding what illustration industry is actually like and you only see the outcome ("pretty images") and you thought you can just fake that and get hired

>>6437596
>AI artist
No such thing. There are artists who utilize AI, and useless techbros, the latter of which will never have a place in any worthwhile industry.

>People that still consider this "AI" and as a result chalk it up as inevitable with no further thought

>>6437603
I use tools to create art. I am an artist.
One of those tools is AI. I am an AI artist.

Deal with it.

>>6437612
You just proved my point though.
If you make art, digitally or traditionally, using those tools available to us, then you're an artist. If you use AI to assist in that, you're still an artist (even though using AI is still currently unethical).
If you just use AI to generate images, you're not an artist. You're a talentless thief. Cope.

>>6437594
>It will never be higher in demand than professional artists. By itself, it takes too much trial and error to get consistent results.
Only time will tell that being said artists aren't helping themselves by anheroing themselves becuase of AI. It also doesn't take much in the way of effort to get consistent work flow especially if you are using embeddins/img2img. keep in mind AI Art assdeveststed paintings only 6months ago, it is still very much in development and not quite a consumer or professional tool as of yet.
>proceedings don't declare it unethical and illegal
Not going happen since there is no case, scraping will never stop, and training AI is more than fair use since it doesn't even use a part of the original IP. But feel free to support a campaign that will inevitably go no where
>techbros who don't know their crypto from their NFTs.
You can always sense the seethe whenever someone mentions techbro. It always ironically by the same people who use IT technology everyday and or missed out on the crypto bubble.

who cares? does half of the people on here seething about AI even have artstation accounts?

>>6437618
Really sorry your pyramid scheme crashed. Hope you didn't lose too much money in the fallout.

>>6437609
We've been completely raided by reddit and discord troons. Every time you bring up the fact it quite literally is just copy pasting real art with extra steps they start seething profusely.

>>6437612
Right on sister!
And I am a real woman.

Deal with it.

>>6437619
I use artstation for studying professional artists. I don’t have an account because I’m not good enough.

do not fall for the demoralization campaigns, we will win in the end

oh no now where will i go to see artbro #4013001's traces of dbz characters? the horror!

>>6437378
I want to see human art. Not interpolations of it flooding a site since they can be made in 5 seconds. You understand that don't you? Do you watch Olympics to see a 100 retards on bikes flood the stadium try(and fail depending on the event) to beat runners?(actually I would watch that once lol but it would not be cool if it happened every event)

>>6437447
He doth protest too much. You would be caught. But not for that reason. As ai detection improves year to year, so does ai image gen, BUT! Someone runs the latest ai detection on your early work and discovers it is ai.

>>6437658
you can just study ai art now. pretty much the same.

>>6437367
>>6437373
You don't need to draw "zany cartoons" to be a Newgrounder. All sorts of people post their work there. Just take a look through the galleries and you'll see an insanely diverse range of styles and subject matter.
Honestly, it's probably the best art website made by artists and for artists, and most likely our best bet moving forward.

>>6437569
If artstation has nothing but AI artists left then it will essentially die. Professionals don't want to hire proompters, they can't do design or concept work or anything of substance that a company needs a professional artist for.
Proompters are grifting, useless wastes of space that can't do anything except generate random pretty pictures. They're just the 2.0 version of tracers and photobashers that steal other people's work, change it a little, and try to pass it off as their own.

>>6437378
>drawslaves
lmao what?
AIdiots are even more retarded than NFTards

>>6437870
I mean you can go with,
Paintpig
Drawcuck
Artcell
PthaloAI
Drawcell
Artlet
Fleshartist

Or the good ol tried and true before AI drawfag.

>>6437855
>They're just the 2.0 version of tracers and photobashers that steal other people's work, change it a little, and try to pass it off as their own.

Okay now it's time to let the adults talk, before you say something full retarded like ML/AI is just. A highly lossy compression algorithm right after you claim it "steals".

>>6437848
even better. if you can't find ref for what you are looking for from your fave artist/style you can just use AI

>>6437887
None of these sound funny, you AIggers can't even come up with good derogatory terms

>>6437855
>They're just the 2.0 version of tracers and photobashers that steal other people's work, change it a little, and try to pass it off as their own.
This is accurate. Been in online art circles since 2000, The more things change the more things stay the same. It's less about the process, it's the attitude. They will never be artists.

>>6437887
>lossy compression algorithm
Oh, you mean a variational autoencoder, right?
https://www.compthree.com/blog/autoencoder/
You know, you guys keep denying that this is the truth of how these things work but the more I research the subject the more I keep seeing that, no, this really is how they work and you're full of shit. It's almost like you either don't understand yourself or you do know but don't want that information getting out. Curious!

>>6437926
I mean, gee willikers, when you see multiple machine learning experts saying the exact same thing, you kinda wonder if you should be listening to some anonymous asshole who's been shitting up our board for months and doesn't want any honest discourse, or whether you should be getting the info straight from the horse's mouth.
I mean, do you have any actual rebuttal besides DUUUH THAT'S NOT HOW THE TECHNOGOLY WORKS SWEATY, UHHHH HOW COULD YOU POSSIBLY STORE A BIG NUMBER IN A LITTLER NUMBER THAT'S IMPOOOOOOSSIBLE HA HA HA PLEASE STOP RESEARCHING JUST LET IT GO ALREADY AAAAAAAH
If you aren't going to post any real information to back yourself up then don't say anything at all.

>>6437931
ae you stupid? read what it says on the image you posted

>>6437931
Were you that guy arguing with that AI shill in this thread >>6435921 while giving sources and backing up claims only for him to basically reply with "nuh uh! thats not how it works!" over and over again?
Anon im pretty sure youre arguing with a bot

>>6437926
>>6437931
SHUT IT DOWN

STOP THE COUNT

>>6437275
If you want to do hobbyest stuff, there's Doodle Addicts
https://www.doodleaddicts.com

It only allows most users to post on piece per day, which is an anti-AI method in itself. The general skill level is not high, but it is nice to be around people who aren't really part of the rat race.

>>6437596
Who the fuck would hire an skillet prompters
>I have a GPU and I can write
So does everybody else. Nobody cares, retard

Here's a simple visualization of a VAE at work- again, everything that I see points towards machine learning image generators encoding data to the latent space as points of data, and then everything between those points is an interpolation. The term "animorphs" comes up a lot as a comparison which I think is pretty apt.
>>6437951
Yes. I'm wondering if that's not the case myself, someone used ChatGPT to try to solve a math problem in that very thread.

>>6437931
ohnonono it's fucking over

>>6437931
>>6437926
I mean the weights for the model are 7gb max. If it was able to compress the amount of data of LAION that would break physical limitations on the actual hardware itself.

>>6437967
If you actually understood what that means you would also understand it doesn't support your position.

>>6437967
>Yes. I'm wondering if that's not the case myself, someone used ChatGPT to try to solve a math problem in that very thread.
Thanks for posting all that info anyways. I'm gonna guess many more anons that were just reading the thread (me included) have a better idea at how this shit works now.

>>6437340
why do I find this pic so funny?

>>6437931
>we have not yet seen how we can sample points from this latent space to seemingly generate "new" data
>these generated images are not technically independent of the original data sample
AI sisters...not like this

>>6437275
There are currently no good gallery sites for human artists. And the new ones are either mobile only shit or furry only. Seriously what is it with furries actually developing proper websites? Anyways I don't think we'll have to wait very long for new ones to come out seeing how there's an ever growing black hole for artists.

>>6437967
Not the AI shill you were arguing against, but what would you say to those who claim humans are doing the same thing, "interpolating" between learned samples?

>>6437981

>>6437967
chatgpt seems to get a bit weird with math, which is odd for a computer, aren't they supposed to be good at this shit?

>>6437981
This thread.

>>6437974
You can either explain how it doesn't, or you can shut the fuck up. All I get is mealymouthed "uhm uhm that's ackshually not how it werks mmkay" without any actual information given to the contrary. Well you know what, I'm sick of dealing with you people. I'm going to post my findings in each and every one of your bait threads and let the anons of /ic/ come to their own conclusions, so you're either going to step up or get shut the fuck down. Congratulations, motherfucker. The information warfare just escalated.

>>6437993
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x1wlW4t9o1U

>>6438000
But it is how it works, it just doens't support your position. If you can't see it on your own it's beyond me to explain it to you.

>>6438002
>um it works that way but it doesn't support your position because it just doesn't okay
Like I said, put up or shut up.

>>6437539
It's actually a good chance for some entrepreneur to make another art hub for artists using this opportunity that was caused by the scandalous approach of Artstation to AI prompts.

>>6437321
AI retards really believe this? We’re not living in the early internet days anymore. Every website has a terms of service. If those websites are not protecting their users data when they say they will, they can be sued

>>6438017
This has been a thing since day onen of the early web days. Webcrawlers scraping content are only non compulsory robots.txt.

>>6437358
It’s definitely marketing. Telling people they can be “artists” is just marketing and “artificially intelligent art” is to buzz tech bros. It’s just that someone with an image scraper got a big database and learned how to graft images. By astroturfing 4chan, they got random people to train it. Now they got the coomer crowd and normies hooked, paying their fees to generate images. I’d applaud their grift if it wasn’t off the backs of real artists and destroying art communities they don’t even understand.

>>6438028
I like how to refuse to acknowledge it’s illegal. These new scrapers are not scraping for email addresses like old scrapers. These new scrapers are looking for art and faces.

>>6438029
>I’d applaud their grift if it wasn’t off the backs of real artists and destroying art communities they don’t even understand.
lmao

>>6437887
>enjoying drawing and getting paid for it makes you a cuck
those reflections doesn’t even make sense lol but how could you possible know that

>>6438001
LMFAOOOOOO
AISISTERS? WHATS THE NEW SHILL LINE

>>6437275
>Where do you guys plan on posting your work?
The fridge! C:

>averagecompetion.jpg

>>6438032
How the fuck is that illegal? The scraper by definition litterally do what you do manual when ever you visit a web page.
Are you going to have a copyright cause in your work where only human eyes are allow to "view" your work?

>>6437299
>Eventually it'll be so good that you won't be able to tell it isn't human made.
Over rendered anime girls with huge tits are the be all end all of what "good" is to you people. There is no other virtue on your radar than this superficial form of beauty. There will no value in this whatsoever, as everything will be completely flooded with it. The same thing, over and over and over again.

>>6438061
Every time I share this video the AI shills either just don't respond or choose to break their logic consistency like so:

>the AI is learning like you do, it has neurons just like you do!!! This justifies the usage of copywritten data!!!

I counter the claim, show them this video series

>okokokok EVEN THOUGH it's DIFFERENT, it dOeSn'T MaTteR bEcAuSe tHe EnD rEsULt iS tHe SaMe!!!!!!!

Motherfucker if someone does a painting study, and you come along and just copy paste the source image, claiming you also did the painting study, you don't get to say "well the end result is the same, so it doesn't really matter!"

>>6437291
>>6437290
DA at least by owning their own art generator and making statement that they won’t allow other third party companies to scrape are the best bet. They allow the anti-training tag automatically and being in the business of AI image generation means they will try to protect it from their competitors. Yes, the AI shit can flood the home page sometimes, but once you favourite non-AI stuff, it will stop reccomending it. Also before you call me retard, that tag I know is useless against anons scrapping pictures manually for their personal models, nothing in the world can really stop them just like saving NFTs, but it is still a powerful legal tool against big commercial models once lawyers finally start to enforce this shit.

>>6438001
>>6438144
>>6438061
Artists are NPCs. Humans might have neurons unlike AI neural network nodes, but not artists. Artists are not humans with human brains, they are soulless automatons lacking in critical thinking or consciousness, so it is justified to say Diffusion models work the same way.

AI-worshipping subhumans need a "W" bad. I mean, I'm something of a betting man, and I'd put money that they're the same losers who lost money on NFTs, who lost money on crypto grifts, who tried to suckle the toes of the richest african american because he had a boring company. It's just a bunch of losers who are too dumb to know better and too proud to learn. Doomed to never be anything but the thing they accuse others of being. A waste of perfectly good pork.

Artist Jigna Zhang is creating Cara HQ. You can check @cara_hq on twitter or go to cara.app

>>6438066
SOVL

>Throwing a tantrum like a baby
kinda cringe

>>6438239
>Scraping copyright artwork to use in for profit ventures
Extremely cringe

>>6438246
>copyright artwork
lol

merry Christmas!

>>6438247
Why? most of my work it trained on it got from work I produced for companies.

>>6437668
>the demoralization campaigns
The "No AI" protest?

Just stay on artstation,
you're not really that active.
You won't make a difference.

>>6437493
>click on random post on the front page https://inkblot.art/post/7xNCtqnqLsEoWkdO80bW
>goes to a new, mostly blank page with just the post on it
>click on their username
>nothing
>click on their avatar
>nothing
This website needs basic work done.

>human artists want to be on websites with only other human artists
>prompters do not want to stuck with other prompters

how odd

>>6438246
>Scraping copyright artwork to use in for profit ventures
this is me

>>6437341
this desu, except it's time for me to go to bed and recharge for drawing tomorrow.

>>6438558
Mee too anon
Good night and Merry Christmas

>>6438560
Thank you and you too, anon. I was wondering if I'd go another year without a 'merry christmas'. once again, the hacker 4chan comes through

>>6438558
you can lie to me, but you can't lie to yourself.
You won't draw

>>6437459
Copyright laws are anti creative and only corporate stooge cunts support them.

If your a real artists this shit won't bother you, but my guess if most people here are wanabee hacks who can't compete in an actual market.

>>6437378
You are just a wannabe tracer who can't even trace himself.

>>6437338
well currently we have art tools that can show start to finish historys, ai would either need to do that for every image it generates, which would be retardedly heavy even if there was a good model for it, but it would also have to essentially make the art like a human, which it does not do.

we are probably a good 10~ years out from believable video unless a data set is in place for it, not sure how fast it could happen if it had the data set though.

>>6437353
Ai would need to stop looking like ai for people to really like ai

ai as a tool to speed shit up, that's what people want, not ai as a tool to say 'woman spreading ass cheeks but her anus looks like a horses with a dogs vagina with her looking at the camera with an I just came face' and you pose the exact image.

people want to take 5 or 6 photos of someone and have a 3d model, or at least something they can work with, they want something like nvidias shit for background art.

ai as it currently is, needs and artists touch to make it not look like its ai.

>>6438587
t.never made original content
Put the poo in the loo, rhajeet

>>6438587
Rajeets final words he tells the judge before being sentenced to 5 years

fucking kek

>>6437305
>They better find a way, because people aren't going to go to their website to see AI art

What is this self delusion youre practicing lol, do you even use your brain before you type?

>>6438712
Are you high? None but /g/ cucks and coomers are after AI sewage. Its still in actual movie/animation/vidya productions. No fucking shit the people hiring there dont want to look at a website flooded with AI, they can get better results doing a Pinterest moodboard.

>>6438712
Did you ever take a look at AI platforms?
Nobody cares about those generated shit not matter how beautiful they are.
Just look at this biggest AI platform on Japan, the current #1 daily ranking is the one with only 15 views and 2 likes.
Nobody wants to look at AI art, even the prompter itself, the only time they'll look at AI art is only when they want to ask for prompt. Not the appreciation of art

>>6437290
>got a notification a couple of months ago
>"welcome this uprising artist in our community"
>check the profile
>is an AI fag
haven't posted on DA ever since.
pixiv might be shit now with the paypal thing, but anything is better than DA

>>6437378
>drawslaves
So these people can't even see art as a hobby, who'd knew!?

>>6437596
the only way an AI "artist" would make money is through deception and scam

>hiring an ai shitter
>ever

lmao

>>6437596
you couldn’t be more wrong and retarded
Most of my experience is from working with ad agencies and clients briefs can’t be solved by just a fucking promt, they make A LOT of changes, even if for some miracle the images you generated somehow meets the unending requirements

>>6437926
Is there a way I can just use this interpolation feature without the text prompting bullshit? Let me feed it two images and just tell it interpolate into X point between them.
It sounds fascinating, like the old "morphing" tech from the 90s but on steroids.

>>6437887
lmao what the fuck is that composition??
>AI "artists" on their way to write the most boring shit imaginable, but being unable to make it good even when served on a silver platter
HAHAHAH oh wow that is sad. I guess you like it because of the pretty colors. Can't say I blame you, seeing how every normie and their mom know all about art because they can type their half-baked "ideas" on a prompt now.

https://twitter.com/dekubrush/status/1608172980881981440
lmao

>>6437887
>mountains aren't even accurately reflected in the water
sugoi

all aifags need to get their heads violently caved in in real life
normalize raping and murdering aifags

>>6437378
>>6437887
>>6438150
Learn to draw you smelly poo Indian incels

>>6443602
Just like my Bob Ross paintings.

>>6438016
Not gonna work in today's investor's mindset. No recurrent and perpetual income? Idea gets flat out rejected. That's why Tesla and Intel came up with that shitty subscription to use hardware that's already pre-installed. AI goyslop is the same and that's why the techbros kept pushing for it because new territory equals new grifting opportunity. See how crypto and NFT panned out. Also see how the owners of DA and Artstation arent even art inclined, or tech inclined. They're just bean counters at the end of the day

>>6437275
>aware of Mastodon and Inkblot,
what wrong with mastodon

Does anyone use Buzzly?

I'm going back to cghub.com

>>6443673
>>6443668
I've looked at a bunch of "art gallery" sites, present and past, and they have all sorts of problems.
>buzzly
>mods going through mental breakdowns, pedo allegations, discord drama, baiting and banning people who vote on polls
>inkblot
>terrible, terrible ui. Site is slow as molasses
>sheezy.art
>died due to discord drama and over influx of users exceeding what the site can afford
>mastodon
>too difficult to set up for normies
>itaku
>good ui, seems promising but furry only and may having funding issues in the future

There really are no good art gallery sites at present time. >>6443664
highlights another problem with funding. My fear is another site takes the mantle with shittier subscription practices than any site before.

>>6443239
Omg would love to see sweeny reply. He won't though.

>>6437574
That Cara app is by artist Jingna Zhang https://twitter.com/zemotion/status/1606378798819463168

>>6437275
If you dont want your artwork scraped, dont post it online.

>>6437275
Host your own website and put a public password on it

>>6443748
Unironically this, you'll probably have to have your customers sign an NDA for this stuff

>>6437378
>If AI art is so bad then naturally artists have nothing to fear.
I fear poop will be everywhere, jeet.

>>6443748
Tell it to the judge

I post my stuff on hive, free money

>>6443801
Wtf is hive

>>6443838
honeypot site

>>6437612
Your "tool" is stealing from people's works online
If I used a camera to take a picture of a drawing and photobashed it in Photoshop, that's not my work, you're a thief.

A tool isn't a get out of jail free card.

>>6437981
Computers are taking one to one examples and photobashing them
Artists take their perception of the world, which is an imperfect interpretation of reality itself, and makes something in their vision, based on their own DNA that crafted their personality, interests, tastes, and biases. Literally all of these things are missing from the "AI" and no, your prompts don't magically fill these in for the "AI" to shit out your stolen art because you have no input into the actual final image, you're just guessing and being wow'd by the "magical" "AI" doing the work for you.

It's the exact reason AI lerped shit slapped on animations to force "le 60FPS animation" on something that clearly wasn't designed to be 60FPS. Nothing about "AI" gets the nuance of human touch and minds, and never will. It's like thinking some ayy lmao from space will understand human culture even though they have a higher IQ level than us combined. You don't see humans understanding why a ant colony does what it does, they just do. So how is AI going to understand how to do human art? It won't, that's how.

>>6443852
>it's ok when artists do it

>>6443876
yup, AI is bad because it steals

>>6443877
Remember kids; when artist steal, it's called referencing or meme'ing, when AI does the same thing, it's called stealing because it just is OK?

>>6443876
>Making fan art is stealing.
I'm sorry, is AI art actually creating something different from the source without the need to photobash many other artists styles to do so? No? No.

Artists with their own look doing their own thing is not what AI is doing, since for it to work it needs other sources just to get a rather uncanny mashup.

man this thread really filled with garbage, huh, well to be expected. Ignore the retards.
>>6443720
he did
ArtStation is becoming worthless every single day.
I wonder will he make surprised pikachu face when faced with truth of platform going under.

>>6443876
>>6443877
>>6443879
>Pajeets think poses are copyrighted.
What images did the artist steal from to photobash them to look like these examples? Because that's how AI does it, I highly doubt humans do. And when humans do, they get called out for it, like with AI.

>>6443880
>is AI art actually creating something different from the source without the need to photobash many other artists styles to do so?
Explain to me in technical terms how image generation works, then you'll convince me.
Long story short; it doesn't do what you think it does.
>"it's ok when artist do it i-i-i-its just fanart!!!"
>"Artists copying others artist style is ok!!! AI using existing styles is NOT because-- its just NOT, ok?"
Thanks for proving my point.
>>6443883
What did they do except copypaste the original and slapping a different filter or character on it?
Mind proving me wrong by showing me all the incredibly unique creations spawned from the memes that also would objectively stand on their own without the context of the meme?

>>6443876
>>6443877
>>6443879
>UM SO IT'S OKAY WHEN HUMANS DO IT????
Yes.
Now fuck off.

>>6443891
>Explain to me in technical terms how image generation works, then you'll convince me.
See >>6437967
>Take sources
>Mash them together
>"AI Pajeet": I made ALL OF THIS MYSELF

A artists doesn't take 4 other artists works and mash pixels together, they take a pencil, conscruct an image from their perception of what they think "looks right to them" based on their knowledge of human anatomy, shapes, etc, and creats something that for all intends and purposes, completely from the mind of the idivisual, not a line for line copy of the source, and, in the case of "AI" some lerp between 4 or more examples of existing media to get something retarded inbetween that has no thought process put into it. It's not even like "randomness" that comes from the physical connections of matter in real life with hands to paper/tablet, the randomness that has zero reason other than whatever the system clock says is random for the AI to "decide on" out of your control.

>Long story short; it doesn't do what you think it does.
It does, to me, which is the correct thought process of how "AI" works.

>>"Artists copying others artist style is ok!!!
A post isn't a style, something you're really displaying and thinking is what these images have in common with, when they don't. Where, again, are these meme images getting their sources from? Because until you can site them, there is none, because there IS none. These people made up their own style they CONSISTANTLY work with due to biases, preferences, etc, something AI DOES NOT HAVE. Whatever the artist made, looks nothing like the source it comes from, not even parts of it. AI however, clearly has lerp'd sources as people pointed out already.

>What did they do except copypaste the original and slapping a different filter or character on it?
What you posted is not stealing, nor is what they even did besides the character argument. The character isn't some lerping of other artists works, it's original characters. Something AI can't do

>>6437596
This is the true reason why pajeets shill this shit. They just want art money, it's that simple. But they have no skill to actually create something so they want to convince everyone that they are in fact actually doing something important.

>>6443876
"like someone walking through an art gallery" is how I perceive how models use datasets.
And so for me it seems absurd to put limit on what can be scrapped.
I see no difference ethically or philosophically between a human learning about the world around him or an artificial intelligence doing it.

>>6437299
Ban AI. Have tech fags stop making it and contributing to the decline of humanity

>>6443908
man they are in for rude awakening if they think this shit brings out money lmao
I wonder where is that image of super wealthy artists coming from, oh well

>>6443905
>a computer uses pixel to generate images
How the fuck is a computer supposed to generate images, pen and paper? How fucking retarded are you?
>It does, to me
Based on a oversimplified example? Are you actually retarded?
Take those 4 images, multiply it by a fuckton, add more technical mumbo jumbo about values and shit the computer is supposed to tag to gain an understanding and create a path on how to operate and then you'll get how image generation works.
>b-b-b-but muh randomness
The shit doesn't all come out at random.
You give it commands and what it is supposed to do, and the computer will try to do it as best it can with all the information it has accumulated; much like a real person would do it.
>Where, again, are these meme images getting their sources from? Because until you can site them, there is none, because there IS none.
So, again, if an artist steals but you can't cite the sources, it's ok.
But everything AI does is stealing because YOU CAN ASSUME the AI has been trained on other images.
Yet again proving my point.
>it's original characters. Something AI can't do
What constitutes and "OC"?
Is it some retarded furry weeb shit you like or by the true definition;
>a fictional character that hasn't been invented yet
?
Anything can be an original character
I can draw an apple with the body of a monkey with a sword coming out of its dick and it would be original.
Does it have to have any pretentious meaning? No, it doesn't.
>What you posted is not stealing
But if AI did it it would be stealing, right?
Again, proving my point.

do not engage with this retard holy shit.
let him live in his techbro fantasy land

And btw kiddos
You all just parrot shit you have read your worthless e-celebrities spam and only fear that AI will take away all the potential attention you're so desperate to get

Quit art, it's not for you and get yourself a regular ass job
You would never have been rich and famous
And if you're so scared of AI, it means you would have never been able to surpass it

>>6443912
A human has the right to have memories.
AI is just a soup of ones and zeroes. It doesn't have rights. If you feed data in it that you don't own, you're breaking copyright and possibly privacy laws too.

>>6443943
okay, I'll give you attention you crave so much since seems your generated shit ain't getting it lol
so all you can do is resort to arguing on taiwanese boards.
no one is scared of AI. People just dislike it cluttering normal spaces, and hate idiots like you who can't shut up about it being best next thing, like NFTs and such.
And also there is general dislike of fuckos techbros who put millions of images without second thought in algorithm, cause they seem to do that perfectly knowing what a huge little shits they are and gloat in it.
So now everyone trying to do AI anything is just a little bitch who ain't capable of thought and effort, or a techbro who "goes technology fuck yea" while selling his humanity to shitty corpo suits.
I guess sucking ceo dicks is very lucrative.

>>6443953
>WOW LIKE I BET UR THE ENEMY TECHBRO CEO COCK SUCKER!!! GOTTEM!!
You're a stupid nigger, that's what.
Go draw.

>>6443957
you sure got me with that greentext
don't worry, I will
you however will be spending years arguing on internet cause you believe in being right without stopping to think about it.
Enjoy your existence I guess. That's all there is to it.

>>6443936
>How the fuck is a computer supposed to generate images, pen and paper?
Exactly, it can't because it's not a sentiant being. It can't do anything without human input.

>Based on a oversimplified example?
It's not oversimplified, it's just that simple to see how "AI" works.

>Take those 4 images, multiply it by a fuckton, add more technical mumbo jumbo
So exactly what I said with >>6437967
Lerp'd shit isn't how artists do art.

>>b-b-b-but muh randomness
The shit doesn't all come out at random.
Literally have reading comprehension
Meds. Can't even grasp what "randomness" means here, how it factors into the difference between the human touch to lerp'd AI noise.

>You give it commands and what it is supposed to do, and the computer will try to do it as best it can
A: That's not what artists do, you're admitting AI "Aritsts" are commissioners.
B: The computer isn't a person, it's not sentient. A calculator isn't a math genius, it's a mechanical device preprogrammed by human knowledge of how components come together to produce calculations based on own rules of math. A computer is exactly the same, AI is exactly the same. It's just following instructions using predetermined examples aka stolen art from other artists posted online.

>So, again, if an artist steals but you can't cite the sources, it's ok.
It's not, just because the truth about you stealing shit isn't discovered yet doesn't make that legal. Robbing a bank and not getting arrested yet doesn't make it legal you fucking retard. Pelent of people that even worked at Disney got canceled eventually when found out for being a hack fraud.

>But everything AI does is stealing because YOU CAN ASSUME
We have proof it steals from google images, you fucking idiot poopskin.

>What constitutes and "OC"?
Not having a source. Nothing AI can't do without, because it's literally how it must work to do anything.

>Anything can be an original character
Not being a recolor of existing work, retard.

This is the biggest trolling ever and you are all falling for it roflolmao

Isn't most people from Artstation concept artists? Won't a lot of them lose their jobs? Why would they want to retire their portfolio accounts now when they really need it to try and keep their jobs for as long as possible? Am I missing something?

>>6437378
>if your toilets are so good why do you even care about us shitting in your streets
Indians truly are wise

>>6443962
>WOW GREENTEXT BAD
>B-B-B-BUT ARGUING ON THE INTERNET BAD U SUCK
>WAAAAH
Rules for thee, but not for me.

Thanks for proving me right by posting the exact same shit everyone without any actual arguments posts.
No wonder you fear AI, you're not even a real person.
>>6443967
>It can't do anything without human input.
And that makes it a tool.
Is using a program like PS, CSP, Krita, Sai also AI then?
>It's not oversimplified
It is though. You just can't grasp your tiny low IQ head around it because you're too busy trying to suck your own cum out of your ass.
>the difference between the human touch to lerp'd AI noise.
Same shit.
Your hand is just a tool that receives commands from your brain.
Your brain is in a constant state of "noise" when processing information.
Your human actions are as random as AI actions, but your body is more fine tuned due to repetition that's why most of your movement come out more "precise". That could be classified as intent.
>That's not what artists do, you're admitting AI "Aritsts" are commissioners.
I'm not admitting shit, nigger. Stop trying to make a strawman.
>The computer isn't a person, it's not sentient.
Again, it's a tool.
>people that even worked at Disney got canceled eventually when found out for being a hack fraud.
They still did that even though it was illegal?
We still have a plethora of artists stealing shit that no one bothers to check the sources and they suffer no consequences and get even rich from it.
If it's not ok, why do artists do it but only accuse the AI of doing wrong?
>We have proof it steals from google images
Can you cite me the laws that would make the AI guilty of having stolen from public resources?
>Not having a source
You made your OC a human? Guess you're a hack fraud then.
Your OC has the same color as that other OC? Guess you're a hack fraud then.
Your OC is a clown? Guess what, off to art jail you go.
>Not being a recolor
You actually don't know shit.
Doesn't surprise me.

>>6443996
>And that makes it a tool.
A gun is a tool, if used wrong you go to fucking jail

>Is using a program like PS, CSP, Krita, Sai also AI then?
No, idiot, it's paper. A canvas. AI is not paper, nor canvas. It's like saying a camera is a canvas, it's the film inside that's the "canvas". Way to reveal your retardation.

>It is though.
It isn't though, shill. I explained exactly what it is.
>Same shit.
No, it isn't. Learn what LERP means.

>Your hand is just a tool that receives commands from your brain.
Your hand is the input, the brain is the commander. The diference is the commandar and imputer are one in the same, linked together, you have zero idea how the AI will shit out its stolen images back at your prompts.

>Your brain is in a constant state of "noise" when processing information.
Noice in AI is not "cloudy memery" it's the lack of information that hasn't been processed. I've seen how light rendering works in CGI idiot, it's not remotely anything alike.

>Your human actions are as random as AI actions
Litearlly factually false, as no computer on Earth is real random. It's psdorandom, literally bound to the physical limitations of 0s and 1s of CPUs. There's a reason AI is nothing like a real quantum computer, it's like comparing a rock to a planet.

>I'm not admitting shit, nigger.
Yet you're the one seething when being called out.

Again, it's a tool.
Again, you can do illegal shit with tools.

>They still did that even though it was illegal?
Yes, because they hid the truth until found out and fired/canceled for it, that's how the law works. Do wrong, get evidence, find evidence, get arrested. I don't care what shithole you jeets come from, but don't come to my land and commit crimes k thanks.

>You made your OC a human?
Humans are not copywritten Jesus Christ on a stick.
>Your OC has the same color as that other OC?
Skin color is not copyrightable Jesus Christ on the moon.
>Blah blah retarded shitposting
Never reply to me ever again, fuck off.

>>6437275
Not posting my art until there's better laws to protect artists. AI fags did this. My portfolio isn't for your subscription service picture generator.

>>6443705
Oh shit I wasnt aware there was so much drama

>>6443996
>Thanks for proving me right by posting the exact same shit everyone without any actual arguments posts.
Don't worry, you prove yourself right is your entire meaning of existence, I can't rob that of you lol. Taking candy from kids is illegal.
it's your modus operandi. You go on internet to fulfill the need to be "right", as well to grab attention
Also really funny you caring about rules, as ff you'd ever worried about them or following them being morally bankrupt like you are

>>6437275
>parasites crying they destroyed the source of their art generators
>destroy ArtStation when there's literally no replacement for that type or quality of art
>faggot "ai artists" make thinly veiled AI shill thread/artists demoralization
>h-h-h-hey artisans. where ya'll post these days? sure is rough for a fellow artist
Fuck off. I would never tell you. You never belonged here to begin with and you managed to destroy at least 3 art communities with your shitty artslop images. Pixiv, dA and ArtStation. I think being an "AI artist" correlates to being more ape-like. AI chimps can seethe.

>>6444046
ultimately this is the solution.
retards and shills will try to obfuscate with psuedposts when what it comes down to is image ownership and data protection. currently there is no platform who are providing an adequate service for working artists in 2022/3. tbqh these problems have existed for a long time and aifags just poured rocket fuel on the fire.
just email clients lmao

>>6444058
Zased

>>6437299
If we were given time and better moderation, we could easily guard art websites against AI. AI homosexuals like yourself spam these website. 9 out of 10 "art" pieces belong to tech goyim, drowning out real human progress. If you genuinely think AI art is indistinguishable, you have too much monkey DNA in your blood, hence artistic incapability's and desire for instant gratification, chimping out, disregard for others, etc.

>>6437557
>AI is inevitable
No, it's not. If it's being pushed rapidly by tech chimps, the laws just need to keep up. Also, the class action lawsuits have not even started. At this point, every single art generator tool is 100% illegal and storing images of real people, medical photos, little kids, and a database of pixiv/dA/artstation. It's going to be a riot when they're forced to show what they're really storing.

>>6444071
Tech golem are mad. Don't you have a chip to implant in your brain because Elon told you to? Go do it, Luddite! For the NFTs.

>>6437275
What's up with that arrrt.io? The name is retarded, but it's basically AS clone and they're anti-AI. It's not super populated yet, but I saw some names there that were popular on AS.

>>6444090
>>6437275
Don't use Artfol. It's mysteriously new as well.

>>6444090
Just saw it today too. Not 100% convinced. Looks like its made by a non-artist (dev) who was a part of YC 2021. Basically another tech bro, his art didn't look very impressive

>AI has the potential to learn
>Pajeet Shadmen shilling it absolutely do not
That's all these threads have convinced me of
Just months of the same shit, over and over

>>6444076
it is inevitable, its the same with 3d models and tracing. People will use them because its a huge shortcut to getting good then pretend they don't because of the stigma until the day they blow up and "make it".

Then they will put out their process video in exchange for money and it will show the use of AI to "speed up the process" and "work smart not hard". People ("crabs") will post it here and others will look at how that dude has "made it" using ai, call the guy crying a crab, then spam "no rules just tools". I mean fuck man look at the Olympics, all those dudes are juicing. The majority of people will always choose the path of least resistance and people not involved in the process only care about the end result.

Same story, told 100 times before. The only hope is that the tech doesn't actually get much better then it is now for a long time. New Tec usually has fast growth when its fresh but then slows down drastically as further innovation becomes harder. If the day comes where you can put a machine on your head that 1:1 your imagination + fixes it then its over.

>>6444111
Why should it matter? Do you expect someone to be a legit pro in the industry AND be a great web dev/coder/etc?

>>6444069
>just email clients lmao
This is how we did it before, and how it always should be. Social media is space aids.

>>6444180
I emailed WotC a while back via their artdrop page and got ignored. Then a couple of my pictures went somewhat popular on AS and WotC contacted me to do MtG cards. And I'm working with them ever since. I'm pretty sure a lot of emails just get lost along the way, it's really not reliable. And you're also targeting just one client at the time. And you can't really spam them.

>>6437275
What's even the point of posting art online? I used to only post my drawings on 4chan for years but lately I've stopped doing that too. The last few times I posted art someone would complain about something autistic or crack a joke or something annoying. Then someone posted some shitty porn doodle and he'd get 20 (you)s from coomers sucking his dick.
1 time I posted art out of 10 someone would be genuinely interested in what I was doing or gave me a compliment about skills or whatever but I'm so used to drawing for myself and only for myself that I feel nothing and I don't feel any incentive to post more. It's funny because if you complain about this shit people tell you to stop being an "attention whore" and draw "for yourself" but then they routinely reward the people who act the most obnoxious and whorish. I don't get people sometimes.

>>6437378
Ai art is quick, and for a lot of people "good enough". It's like fastfood, Ai art is Goyslop for the mind.

>>6444239
how much bullshit do you have to deal with working for wizards these days? i remember hearing at least one of the art directors was a crazy bluehair who constantly asks for retarded revisions

>>6444291
>okay so this character is a heavyset badass
>you mean a fat cunt?
>YOU ARE FIRED!!!!!!

>>6444291
To be honest it's pretty great, they rarely ask me for revisions at all. But I worked only with 3-4 art directors, some of which are popular artists. They are nice and reasonable. Not sure if there are some complete cuckoos among the art directors, I didn't experience them yet.
They seem to trust your expertise way more than a lot of other clients that I had. And it's a bit weird, because they pay really good - 1-3k per piece. I had much cheaper clients who were just insufferable with the revisions and urgency.
But WotC are corporate and woke and all that for sure - there are pronouns and all that. The general direction of a set might also be questionable, you might heard about black Aragorn in their LotR Universes Beyond set and all that. In the artist's guide, they also have a note not to paint cheesy armored underwear sexy slave fantasy girls in distress. But in general, they ask you to do what you're already doing - you're not going to be forced to paint Bearscape if you're Piotr Jablonski.
Btw, WotC forbade any use of AI for making their cards.

>>6444363
stop lying like a retard, Wizard has been paying like shit for decades

>>6444366
Ok. But if you want to know who really pays like shit among the big card companies it's FFG with their laughable 100-300$ per card illustration.

>>6437299
>Can be solved in a year or two
Hands, maybe shit like lace, ribbons, intricate jewelry.
>Will take longer, if ever
Non-garbled text, recognizable logos, keeping a character's design consistent throughout multiple generations in very different situations (same goes for creating images of existing characters accurately)
>Lmao, AIjeets will never get this working
Actual proper composition, visual flow, and lighting. Machine learning can never learn this shit, the most it can infer is crap like "oh, the character should be centered in the frame", but the lighting often makes no sense, and every inch of the image is detailed as fuck, it doesn't prioritize areas of interest or tries to create a guiding flow for the viewer, it just spams the eyes with detail and information, and this is shit an artist will subtly code into the image, not something a machine can learn to do.

Basically, I doubt ML will ever be perfect or as accurate as a real artist. Best case scenario it'll generate images that are 80% there and need a 20% of human tweaking, and guess who's gonna get the job? The actual drawfag with the skills to fix said AI garbage, not the proompter begging through tears that he needs to pay off the $10.000 debt on his now $0.15 worth NFT he fell for a few years prior.

You know guys this shit feels like nft part two but with emphasis on hating art. I'm reading your posts and it seems like every fucking company wants to use this AI shit because it's way cheaper than actual artists even if it sucks as long as normalfags don't riot(they won't, their consumer brain just wants some pretty pictures to look at).
I'm glad that artists actually show some balls for once tho. Seeing your works being practically stolen and recycled does feel awful I believe.

>>6444374
I did a couple tiny illustrations for Talisman years ago. They were paying $100 each at the time, and that was around 2010.

>>6444415
if artists play their cards right and successfully migrate to artist only spaces.
It will kill these Ai art supporting companies and turn out financially better for them

>>6444415
>it seems like every fucking company wants to use this AI shit because it's way cheaper
they don't
just another headache to any art director cause now instead of only fake portfolios, he'll get techbros in his emails.

I do not post art online (hardly draw at all) but this seems to be all cope to me. anything artists will do will hold AI back by like, 1 year at best
it's true that AI will not substitute human artists completely but this is a situation like industrialized craftsmanship where 90% of the work is done by machines and although you will still need to hire humans you will hire 1/20th of the people you needed before.
I've been to a mcdonald's yesterday after a shitton of years and it was like 90% automated. all the people working at the cash registers were gone. I've eaten and left without ever saying a word to anyone. this is the world normalfaggots want

>>6444449
You do not get it.
Images already been scraped, it doesn't matter if they post online or not.
Problem is that biggest website which provided place for people to post stuff and for studios to search for talent - getting filled with garbage.
That's what fuss was about.
That's why people left loudly - cause it was that good of a place which started to turn into garbage overnight. Hell I had few hundreds followers and pretty whatever folio there, I still got work, real ones for decent paycheck from reputable studios.
No one is happy in this situation, nor the companies who seek for artists, nor artists. Just techbros craving for attention and suits being retards cause someone convinced them about "great new things which will save them money".

>>6444449
lol you are an idiot. AI isnt even real its pure snake oil.
This shit is going to fail and real artists are going to come out the winner.

The way I see it, it will take a couple instances of AI-generated loli shit hitting the general public before they start calling for gov to at least lobotomize it the same way OpenAI did with AI Dungeon when it got too popular.

>>6444464
>>6444463
>AI isnt even real its pure snake oil.
It's having quite a bit of an impact to be snake oil. All I've seen so far is that you can say "draw me this thing" and the AI generates a bunch of rendered shit. Then you can pick what you like best and paint over it or in 95% of cases jerk off to it because people are using it for porn, just like they've been mostly paying artists for porn. It doesn't matter that it can't do hands right or whatever. It's yet another thing that saves a lot of time and sort of lowers the skill floor. This means more competition, etc. it's not going to "fail" because it's going to keep getting used.
I say this from a completely neutral position, like, I don't give a shit about both AI and artists. I said I don't post art online to make a point that I'm outside of this whole market. But basically every technology is doing the same shit now, just pushing more and more people out in an already hyper-competitive situation. It's extremely demoralizing to think about this on a large scale but in the end it's happening everywhere. 90% of articles online are written by AI that just scrape shit and cobble it together. Surely there's one retard who edits the output before publishing but it's one retard instead of 10. I'm not even sure if these jobs getting replaced were worth having in the first place. Now Canada is euthanizing homeless/jobless people. I'm jobless right now. Things are getting fucking depressing. I can only think that Ted Kaczynski was right about everything.

>>6444395
>Hands, maybe shit like lace, ribbons, intricate jewelry.
>Non-garbled text, recognizable logos

This shit has already been solved by just training a larger model.
Stable Diffusion and midjourney aren't even 1B models.

>>6444483
porn places blocked that shit the moment it shown up.
that's the hilarity of situation. No porn addict wants this shit. Porn people have more integrity than majority of popular art platforms.
>I don't give a shit about both AI and artists.
why the fuck you are in thread then.
again, jobs not been lost, people who gleefully act about whole thing never would've hired anyone. nor they ever get a job.
at worst you'll have some manager type faggot in big studio trying to "art direct" shit and someone will have to clean that up, but that's another pile of issues companies already had, just blown up

>>6444447
Lmao

>>6444494
>Porn people have more integrity
they probably just don't want AI generated CP and other shit that would get their sites in trouble
LMAO
imagine thinking that porn people have integrity
wasn't there a thing now where coomers are calling artists drawslaves and shit?
>again, jobs not been lost
aren't people complaining a lot about exactly this? I see people panicking that they're not getting as many commissions after this drama
>why the fuck you are in thread then.
I want to understand the situation better. I think things have been looking like shit for a long time but thanks to this thing they're getting even worse.
like the way I feel is that the only people who will get hired will be the 0.0000001% of top artists for that one AAA studio or whatever. all the lower end of artists will get fucked. I know that everyone here is convinced he'll work at Blizzard and while I appreciate the motivation, the truth is that a healthy industry offers work to a range of skill levels. it seems like fewer and fewer people are going to make it
like I'm pretty sure that even porn isn't as profitable as it used to be anymore although it's still ultra easy mode and people still have shit standards

>>6444483
Its all in the name guy Artificial Intelligence isn't actually what it says it is. It's a con, snake oil.
And what effect? its getting banned everywhere and the people creating it getting nowhere but annoying people.

>>6438066
If he really wants to hurt AI they should put as much of their out as possible and hope the AI copies it to degrade it's quality

>>6444512
>its getting banned everywhere
the thing is, yeah right now you can recognize it, but in 6 months or something the algorithm or whatever the fuck that is will be trained well enough that it will create seamless images. look at this shit >>6444491 when AI will no longer generate mangled hands and wonky blurry images but things that look solid, how will you be able to separate it from legit artwork, especially if it's painted over? I'm not saying that artists will make masterpieces, but you will have a ton of shit you legit won't be able to separate from the "legit" art, and here's the next thing: art has already become for a long time about WHO the artist is rather than WHAT he makes. It's going to be even more about your personality/how you "sell yourself" as a "brand" and all that cancer. Everything is shifting even further toward this weird prostitution thing which is why I didn't bother with social media to begin with

>>6444506
>they probably just don't want AI generated CP and other shit that would get their sites in trouble
even if it's that - still more precaution than some faggot selling pack of "disney" girls on artstation.
>aren't people complaining a lot about exactly this? I see people panicking that they're not getting as many commissions after this drama
people will always doompost on shortest notice.
Unless your commission work was "I gotta use yourface to make you an avatar" you prolly have nothing to worry about.
Sure, some decided to generate shit instead of ordering new avatar for their facebook, but I bet percentage is negligible and hardly affected much actual livehoods. People who had stable income - have stuff lined up months ahead. With or without techbros screaming bloody murder
>they're getting even worse.
they are indeed getting worse. But you got it wrong. It got worse for any half decent studio who employs artists on general basis cause they will now need to dig thru more dirt than they had to for past decade of fake portfolios.
porn is profitable enough, internet could give people porn for decades at moment notice of any type, it still somehow survived, sells dvd and stuff.

Basically, anon, do not read too much doomposting. Reality of situation is sad, but not that terrible as led to believe. Fucks who generate and stroke themselves as "artists" are worthless and keep being worthless - not a replacement.
They will be just annoying fucks no one decent, or even indecent, would want to deal with.

>>6444483
It's still snake oil. I'm laughing at these Facebook retards and pajeets that are buying these expensive subscriptions and getting into the whole "anyone can be an artist" thing. Calling an image scraper and grafter "artificial intelligence" and people who type a paragraph an "artist" is brilliant marketing. Doesn't work on real artists they exploit.

>>6444494
>>6444512
>>6444526
AI art is just the sprite comics of Artwork and AI porn is the sprite comics of porn. You'll see thousands and thousands of people use it and abuse it because it makes doing the work easy and you'll find that most of them, even with AI holding their hands, will lack the patience and the quality control to put out anything good.

Eventually the lack of constant attention will cause it to decline once it stops being the new thing. Oh and the flood of shittly done works will cause people to turn off to it because even if they can have an AI do the work most won't have the creativity to do it right.

>>6444524
people been using fake portfolios for ages, now it's just another type of fake portfolio. People going to adjust. But yea, recording themselves is prolly will become a must, but not to the point of trying to be eceleb shit.
Just show off some workflow, your psd files, etc.

>>6444500
they honestly think they will be swarmed by job offers, it's really hilarious

>>6444530
>AI art is just the sprite comics of Artwork
I dunno, if you look at the coomshit AI it looks identical to the actual output of the coomshitters. I am sure that AI will not be able to create artistically meaningful things but it's not like you went on artstation and you'd find human, interesting art. You'd find generic rendered fanshit. AI will be able to do that in a way that is indistinguishable very soon, and that's the stuff that gets a market.
As I said I'm not in the market but I've never seen "real" art that was actually creative actually get paid. That art was the art that people assumed artists would make out of the goodness of their hearts, just like that, out of love for muh art. What people paid for has always been generic shit and porn, both of which AI seems to be getting pretty good at.
The argument here would be
>oh well who cares if porn and shitty overwatch fanart are getting pwned, true artists making true art, with their own voice and all that shit will not become obsolete!
which is retarded because that kind of art doesn't pay. it's just going to get drowned even further into an even bigger pile of shit

>>6444524
people already have ways of spotting ai art. Like simply requesting the PSD file

I genuinely do not see the the issue with having separate rules for people and non-people.

A person copying me is fine, an ""AI"" doing the same isn't.
Should TVs be allowed to fight back when a drunk retard hits one?
Hell, animals don't have human rights so what's wrong with doing the same with machines?

>>6444541
>what's wrong with doing the same with machines?
there's an Indian man behind that AI you racist chud

>>6444537
True coomshitters already had a problem in that most of their coomsoomers were cheapskates who were never going to pay anyway.

Really for awhile the addition of Patreon, Fanbox, and other things actually did much to help those people get a steady income, but those people are now also bought into the artist, AI shit might suit their needs but will it be enough to make them drop their favored artists?

There is the question.

As for the techbros fucking around. There will be a few grifters and they'll be tacky, but there will be just enough freebasers who won't ask for money. Really it's too soon to see the profit potential or lack there of with AI art, but if everything AI made becomes automatically free use because of all the copyright issues, that could put a damper on people paying for it.

But who knows.

>>6444524
Use AI to detect it. Images exist in time(something people seem to forget when discussing detection). You might not detect the latest day one, but the latest becomes older, and is detectable. Ban AI users often enough and it becomes too hard to make much impact as a fake artist.

Given how fast things will be developing, the detection AI could be developed the day a new image gen update comes out. there would be such a short window to getting your AI art onto a site, and then the next morning you are banned, so what is the point?.

>>6444556
theres no profit in something that is infinitely replicate-able with no effort. Basic econ.

>>6444124
It's a shortcut to becoming a garbage artist that forms bad habits. And that's only if you're retarded enough to even use them as references, let alone becoming a straight out AI handler

>>6444535
its a larp tool

>>6444574
Exactly so the idea that this is the death rattle of the artist is too soon to predict..

>>6444535
And this pig is having the nerve to tag itself as NoAi.

>>6444535
It's hilarious to me how they have to fallback to these messy unreadable designs to try and hide the fact they are working with AI.

>>6437398
AIparasites really are interlopers into the artist's world. Artists always scour pieces they have the slightest suspicion of foulplay in. We've been hounding tracers and copycats for years, and you think you can come in get away with it?

>>6444535
with that tech u'd think they could make some interesting stuff but nop it's just ur average bust shot of a manly mcman with highlights.

>>6444598
it's almost as if that's all the tech can do without glaring fundamental flaws.

>>6444559
>Use AI to detect it. Images exist in time(something people seem to forget when discussing detection). You might not detect the latest day one, but the latest becomes older, and is detectable.
You seem to give for granted that people will hate AI and try to get it banned. The fact that artstation welcomed AI and didn't take it down is already a sign that people like it and there's profit to be made with it. artstation wasn't even that much of a freelancing platform anymore, it seemed to focus on shilling tools and courses
>>6444576
>It's a shortcut to becoming a garbage artist
people said this about tracing, tracing 3d models, etc. and now if you say that tracing 3d models is a shortcut to developing bad habits people call you retarded
>>6444595
>AIparasites
people who draw fanart and porn are already parasites
>>6444598
but anime girls are original lol
not to shit on anyone specifically but the whole market has been a shitfest since the 2010s

>>6444603
its a sign tim sweeney is a retard

>>6444608
I don't want to offend you but he's a millionaire and will probably stay a millionaire, while you and me will stay loser faggots on an Armenian freestyle water polo IRC. The reason for this is that these people who pilot the market know what they're doing and only look retarded because nobody has the same insight/info they have.

>>6444613
You really are a dumb faggot just like sweeney. i suppose you think kanye west is smart too, moron.

>>6444613
Hi Tim, how's the lawsuit against Apple going?
Is someone finally using your game store?

>. >6444603
>and now if you say that tracing 3d models is a shortcut to developing bad habits people call you retarded
I've literally never seen someone say that outside of maybe some retarded crab in /beg/ you have no idea what you're talking about, kindly fuck off with your pajeet gaslighting

>>6444613
SURELY rich people can't make bad decisions, SURELY there's no precedent for rich faggots losing their money because they're out of touch

>>6444603
>people said this about tracing, tracing 3d models, etc. and now if you say that tracing 3d models is a shortcut to developing bad habits people call you retarded
When I was a teenager I learned very bad habits by being lazy and tracing MMD models for most of my drawings. After years I literally had to go back to basics, forget everything I knew and start learning everything from scratch again because despite how honed my other skills became (coloring, background work, composition, etc) my fundamentals for anatomy were complete dogshit and I didn't actually properly know how to draw despite the results I was getting (which anatomically were pretty stiff and boring in hindsight and were only masked by my ability to do everything else). This kind of scenario is what people are referring to when they say this.
Literally no one would call you stupid for talking about this because many artists like myself were dumbasses looking to "skip the boring parts" and made these mistakes already ourselves. 3D models can obviously be fine to speed up and help your workflow when you know how to already draw, but that's the big caveat.

>>6444603
>You seem to give for granted that people will hate AI and try to get it banned. The fact that artstation welcomed AI and didn't take it down is already a sign that people like it and there's profit to be made with it
It's the same retarded shit as NFTs and shitcoins. Companies and rich retards have learned that all these FOTM technologies are very profitable if you get in early, but worthless once they fade, so they'll hop into any up and coming bandwagon without even thinking if it's a good idea (then have spent thousands on a monkey .jpeg now worth cents).
Companies and artist recruiters have already said they are going to pass on hiring proompters and touching this shit for now, even all the techfags behind them are backpedaling and banning prompts that name artists because they know it'll likely become a legal nightmare.

No one is embracing this shit except out of touch rich kids born rich who think they can make a quick buck out of the novelty. The second they figure out they might make more money taking a stance against AI instead of in support, they'll flip 180. No one but proompters and easily impressed zoomers think it's good.

>>6444620
>>6444637
I do not endorse AI I don't know why you're so pissed. I hope I'm wrong FWIW
>>6444665
After a decade of go woke go broke and companies surely going to bankrupt soon I'm not really sure anymore. They keep getting richer. Surely part of it is semitic sorcery but I am going to assume that since these companies have people specifically hired to look at data analytics. I'm not sure anymore. Lots of things make no sense to me.
>>6444679
I wouldn't say it's the same shit as bitcoins and NFTs because those were just an abstract money thing. AI is an actual tool that creates results, even if shitty. You can shit out 100 images and paint over the best. The comparison doesn't stand. Normalfags are very happy about using AI tools to create the images they need, and it's a very concrete fact that many people will use AI. They are already using AI to generate things like D&D character portraits. I'm not sure how much of a market that is, but there are definitely people who are not commissioning someone and instead prefer to use AI. Considering that AI is still at a stage where it lacks training. I think you guys are underestimating how appealing it is for normies to use this shit and you also assume that people "hate" AI because it's muh soulless machine.
Anyway we'll see.
>>6437339
>people throughout history, to this day, value hand made crafts more than anything mass produced
this is bullshit. excl. money laundering, people will buy a oil painting for a thousand bucks or more not because they value the painting but because 1) it's an investment 2) there's a "brand" behind it. people will pay $1000 for a sweatshop made Gucci bag or whatever the fuck because of the brand. They won't pay as much for a better made but no-name thing. What you are missing is that people do not give a shit about how something is made, they care about "hand-crafted" when it's part of a marketing package.
What will happen is that art will be secondary to how woke/slut/meme you are

>>6444603
>people like it
Ai-fags are not people.

>>6444726
I think the same about porn peddlers and trendhopping fanwhores. Opinions won't change the fact that people will use this shit and love not having to pay someone to get their fap fodder or whatever.

>>6444735
they never paid to begin with

I am an AI artist and there's nothing you can do about it.
Say whatever you want, it makes no difference.
The proof is in the pudding.

>>6444740
>they never paid to begin with
you are either retarded or a pornfaggot yourself, because being a whore is the most surefire way to get paid in this shit "art" environment

>>6444037
>AI is a tool, b-b-b-but ur using it wrong and should go to jail
>But ban AI because AI itself steals
>But ban AI because its not real artiste
Make up your mind, faggot.
>No AI is not paper
So, it's not a tool anymore.
Flawless mental gymnastics.
>Learn what LERP means.
Tell me how alternatively a computer can generate images.
Pointing out how it works to make a statement against it, is not an argument that can stand on its own
>The diference is the commandar and imputer are one in the same
That's irrelevant. A tool is a tool. It's the result that counts.
> will shit out its stolen images back at your prompts.
Again: when artist steal and plagiarize work it's ok, but if one image some AI generates even comes closes to an existing image, then it should be accused of every crime.
Again, flawless mental gymnastics.
>Litearlly factually false
Are you unable to apply context to what anyone else says? Go reread that line again.
>u r seething
Try to convince judges and lawyers they're seething when they don't decide to ban AI.
>Again, its a tool and you can do illegal shit with tool
What illegal shit is the AI doing that clearly goes against copyright and intellectual property laws?
Saving images that roam freely on the internet and training a tool isn't illegal no matter how much you want to play the human card.
>Do wrong, get evidence, find evidence, get arrested.
>I don't care what shithole you jeets come from, but don't come to my land and commit crimes k thanks.
Hypocrisy in this two statements alone:
>U HAVE TO HAVE EVIDENCE
>OK AI STEALS BECAUSE I SAY SO AND IF YOU DISAGREE U MUST BE PAJEETS LOL LMAO I AM SUCH GOOD ARGUER AND UR SEETHING
That's all it comes from the "Human" side.
>Humans are not copywritten Jesus Christ on a stick.
>Skin color is not copyrightable Jesus Christ on the moon.
Unless AI does it, right? Because AI bad because..?
>waaaah shitpost
No arguments but only trying to discredit any opposition much like this nigger right here 6444054

>>6437275
> Never heard of inkblot, sounds interesting
> Looks ok
> Founders all list their pronouns and other woke lefty shit
Aaand disregarded.

>>6444768
Strawman schizo. You offer nothing of value to this discussion. Kindly get the fuck outta here.

>>6444768
Whats RA

6444783
No arguments but only petty provocations and hollow insults to try to discredit any opposition

You won't be able to cry and temper tantrum your way out of this, "Real" Artist.

>>6444768
Unironically the smartest post I've read on this entire board. Also the very idea of copyright in the arts is so absurd but if artists want copyrights to be honored, I guess they better stop using reference images without paying the rightful copyright owner first.

>>6444819
Using reference falls under creating a derivative work. Where it starts to become muddy with AI is where bits of artwork are being directly lifted. Even though the work is derivative it may not be sufficiently unique according to copyright law, as many lawsuits regarding music sampling from the 90s demonstrate.

Copyright absolutely makes sense for the arts as a way of protecting the author's right to profit from his labor. Without the ability to profit from it no one will pursue art to a high level and art suffers as a result, becoming literally something only for amateurs and hobbyists. People who are against intellectual property will appeal to high-minded ideals but their position usually stems from wanting something for free.

Also it's dishonest to say that image compositing, which is what AI is, is the same thing as using reference. Reference does not mean precisely replicating what's being referenced. For instance here's a picture of an artist looking at diagrams of ships to accurately paint one, presumably from a different angle.

>>6443996
>comic telling the screaming man to make a case against programs using copyrighted visual material and data without consent
The case was already made a bunch of times the past half century. Just look at what happened to Music Mixer and Time Warp Productions. Why do you AIfags confidently tell people to look up legalities when of this issue when it's not in your favor?

>>6444819
>if artists want copyrights to be honored, I guess they better stop using reference images without paying the rightful copyright owner first
Finally someone who gets it.

That's the point i'm trying to make them understand.
Artist want AI to fully submit to the rules, but they themselves should not, because they're "human".
And they do not even understand how the laws work and the "when" those are applied.

What artists are advocating for is even stricter laws that will fuck them over and give companies complete artistic control over the public with the pretense that a
>tool
is the root of all evil, when in art is always the end result that counts, not the
>how it was made
Because if we go the "conception" route, no one would be legally allowed to draw anything anymore.

>>6438001
Interesting video

>>6444874
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnnYCJNhw7w

>>6444878
You can't put music and visual arts on the same scale, they're different beasts and are treated differently regarding plagiarism, copyright and whatnot.
I can't really make any educated statements around and about it because i don't deal with or have any interest in the music.

You don't need written consent to use visual images in however way you want as long as you're not directly selling them and passing them as your own work and of course as long as the work isn't a 1:1 replica of another work.

Accusing someone or something of a crime without actually knowing shit, doesn't make an argument nor does it make whoever and whatever you are accusing, guilty of the crimes you're accusing them of, that's why;
>make an actual case
following and understanding ALL the laws, not just conveniently cherry picking the ones for your own advantage, instead of throwing random accusations that any judge or lawyer would scoff at or ignore.

>>6437293
people give no fucks about the process they care about the results, the stuff i made with AI is usually marginally better than whatever you make with pen and paper, you can keep whining and whining about how AI Art doesnt have that magic essence you splurge all over your “”art”” but in reality none of it matters when my shit wins art competitions

>>6444917
Can you outline an argument, or am I expected to watch some community college normieweeb theater kid's video essay. I notice that the webcomic he made that's supposed to prove that his model is tenable made it to around 15 pages before being abandoned 6 months ago.

>>6437299
>eventually it will be so good you won’t be able to tell it isn’t human made
>he doesnt know its already that good

>>6444958
Art takes time and money. Or are you implying I should use AI?

>>6444961
I'm implying this comic seems to work against the point he was trying to make given that he quickly abandoned it due to lack of incentive to work on it.

>>6443876
well of course it is. if you, with your own hands make a fanart, it's fine. If you don't have artistic inclinations or abilities, is fine too. There are a lot of talentless people posting online, and most of them get the attention they deserve, nothing. AI doesn't make you an artist, you are just a prompter. A scribble made in 5 seconds of a stick figure has more weight than AI generated """"art""""

>>6444973
And Anon, what even matters to you if someone calls themselves an artist or how they make something?

Everyone that says the exact same thing you say:
>b-b-b-but they r not REAL ARTISTS
just come off as children who are shitting themselves over the realization that being an artist is nothing special since anyone with paint on their dick or smearing their own feces on a canvas can call themselves one, and you're feeling your speshul identity card revoked.
>a stick figure has more weight
The overall great majority of art are meaningless scribbles, kitsch or straight up porn. And the famous works of art are mostly only financial assets.

If AItrannies call themselves artists, i do not give a shit.
If Artists call themselves artists, i do not give a shit.
Call yourself however you want, you're all retarded niggers trying to find something to build an identity around to me.

>>6444983
if you download a 3d render of a gun and 3d print said gun, does that make you a gunmaker? not at all
prompters are the same. at least the 3d printer invested some money

>>6444991
Apples and oranges, Anon.
You can't compare drawing to making guns.
It even fails since most gun factories actually use 3D printing to make gun parts.
Does that make them gunmakers unless they manually make and work each piece individually?

If you use a ruler to draw a straight line, can you even say you drew the straight line yourself?
If you use a pen to draw, can you even call you an artist?
Why aren't you using your own blood and your own skin to make art? You're not a real artist if you use anything else.

>>6444883
Where do i pay money to use a tree as a reference that is outside my house? Can ai even see outside to gain reference or only use images that is made by someone else that the person hold the copyrights to, how does your rant apply when its a reference from real life? Also how the fuck can you equate human to ai thinking they deserve the same rules as humans? ai and human are fundamentaly different

>>6444999
pen and rulers are tools, much like pen tablets. they don't turn you instantly in a good artist, because in order to get good, you need to practice, put thought in every stroke and line, even if you use a ruler to make said line. everything in your piece has to be made with conscience.

that's what separates real artist from prompters. prompters literally put a lot of words in a blender and hope for the best. the only that changes is that the blenders are getting better spewing out coherent pieces.

you will never win this argument, cause there is no argument, is a factual thing that art, despite its subjective nature, can only be done directly by living beings with some sort of conscience involved.

>>6444999
>>6444983
Fuck off. Putting a frozen pizza in the microwave doesn't make you a chef, and typing 3 words and clicking a button doesn't make you an artist.

>>6444983
bro you are also retarded child arguing here while saying you dont give a shit, if you truly didnt give a shit you wouldnt even responded.

>>6444983
this is the kind of person that advocates for the ai art scam
you are this dude

>>6445007
>Where do i pay money to use a tree as a reference that is outside my house?
Well, if you keep up your faggotry, you will pay your government or your local landlord to even be allowed to draw anything.

I'm not saying that AI deserves the same rights as human, never was the case, but the rules that govern the making of art, shouldn't be suddenly be voided for someone using the tool that is image generation, because if you want to apply rules to those using the AI, then real artists have to follow those as well, meaning that you won't be allowed to even make derivative work or any work that might remotely resembles another existing work.
>>6445013
>you will never win this argument
Because yours is an emotional argument, based on whatever makes your ego feel good, which makes you already lose any discussion you approach.
>>6445015
What does it matter to you?
Selling shit in a can makes you an artist.
Taping a banana to a wall makes you an artist.
Painting a canvas in monochrome makes you an artist.
The only reason why anyone would give a shit about this is because they are controlled by their emotion;
>WAAAAAAH HE'S DEVAULING MY IDENTITY PLS GOVERNMENT HELP ME
Why don't you try dying and then tell me how it feels to be alive?
Well, i don't think you will get it, since you'll only understand that i said to kill yourself, which i didn't, but if you're actually human and not some chatbot, you would understand what i meant by that or do you need to e-celebrity to make a video explaining it to you?
>>6445023
>like lol lmao bro ur arguing y u do this like lmao y respond
I never said i don't give a shit about the whole situation. I am making conversation.

If you want meaningless circlejerking echochambers where no one is allowed to disagree with the majority, go back to plebbit.
>>6445027
>no arguments
>baseless accusations in an attempt to discredit the opposition
Shills are going full force today, eh?

>>6445032
>emotional
yes, and ai doesn't have emotions
thus ai "art" isn't real art

>>6445033
Of course, it doesn't, because it's a tool.

>>6445032
>PLS GOVERNMENT HELP ME
what a clever way to put your ideas anon. that alone gave me all I needed to know about the kind of person I'm dealing with
i don't care about goverment regulations, i only care that prompters feel ostracised and outside the artistic sphere
ai "art" is a trend, and will die as such. i'm just doing my part to accelerate that death

>>6445038
It's not, though. It's a soulless generator.

>>6445040
>i only care that prompters feel ostracised and outside the artistic sphere
Thanks for proving my point;
Everyone that says the exact same thing you say:
>>b-b-b-but they r not REAL ARTISTS
>>just come off as children who are shitting themselves over the realization that being an artist is nothing special since anyone with paint on their dick or smearing their own feces on a canvas can call themselves one, and you're feeling your speshul identity card revoked.
You're just giving AIfags more ammo to make fun of you.
Which in all honesty, i can't even blame them for doing so.
>>6445045
So are the majority of artists. Whats your point?

>>6445032
>>baseless accusations in an attempt to discredit the opposition
i mean, that guy is proudly doing what prompters do, though
if you take it as something negative as well, i guess that settles it

>>6445053
>>>b-b-b-but they r not REAL ARTISTS
they aren't
real artists have inherent potential of create and innovate, ai doesn't, much less a prompter

>>6445058
Yeah, there are a lot of niggers trying to take advantage of any given situation for monetary gain, especially e-celebrities and youtubers.
That's not part of the discussion and is irrelevant as well.
What were you trying to achieve with this except trying to discredit anything i posted?
>>6445061
Because it's a tool.
Anon, i'm right. Stop going around in circles by pretending to be retarded.

>>6445066
Bro, don't even sweat it. A tool stops being a tool when you only need to press a button once. As I said, you'll never have a strong enough argument to legitimize ai "art". It all can be boiled down to

>hey, looks, this is my art
>okay, did you make it?
>no
>then it isn't yours. who made it?
>an application
>then it's not art

there

>>6445072
Art doesn't need to be legitimized to be art.
Art just is.

The same thing can be applied to any piece of art as well:
>Hey, look, i made this person with claws and big titties
>did you invent persons, big titties and claws?
>no
>then it isn't yours, who first invented person, big titties and claws?
>god idk
>then its not art
If we go the route that art done through image generation isn't art because it somehow isn't original, then this standard has to be applied to regular artists as well.
You can't have a double standard based on how a piece of art is made, it's always the final result that counts.

>>6444483
>It's yet another thing that saves a lot of time and sort of lowers the skill floor.
Can't be since faggot jeets keep posting the ugly raw output because they aren't artists that can fix it for themselves.

>>6445081
that greentext is flawed, though.
the person, even though he didn't invented claws and titties, he did interacted with the medium without using an intermediary that fabricates 99.9% of the piece
that interactions has a degree of innovation.
the closest that AI has with trad art is collage, and even then, the collage artist physically interacted with the scraps, the scissors and the canvas, he made artistic decisions as well.

>it's always the final result that counts.
for big corpos and people that want to cut corners, sure
i love that we can differ in this, anon. but it's not something that needs me as its whiteknight, ai art is a fad, just like nft was.

Art it's not just about the end result. When you see the michelangelo or the gioconda, people with artitic sensibility don't just look past them and say "yeah, that's really cool, anyway...", they start to think how it was made, which were the difficulties that the artist had making them, how much time did they take. When you see AI art, evocates nothing.

>>6444524
This is never going to fucking happen faggot.
Real people can tell faked imagery. You're just showing how stupid you are by thinking how stupid you think everyone else is.

>>6444543
Like I give a fuck. If they think like this they should actually make something people actually want.

>>6445099
nta, but I can't really tell sometimes. When the AI thing exploded, the amount of artists in different sites exploded as well. This guy, for example, has made a lot of good pieces, but the style is something I've seen in the past. The account is just 2 months old and it has pretty good pieces. I was almost sure that this was another AI bro after the quick buck, but the guy also offers PSDs via patreon
https://www.deviantart.com/tezy8/art/Rendering-WIP-938158239

I don't depend on art as livelihood, it's a hobby that sometimes gives me money. That doesn't mean that I'm not against the bullshit that AI is.

>>6444819
Nigger fucking take the hint
AI STEALS FROM OTHERS WORKS. Looking at a fucking image is not stealing, AI literally photomashes images in a algorithm to shit out merged shit.

You're literally saying if I took a tree and molded it into my own door that looks like another door, it's the same as a 3D copy of a door done by a AI program, right down to the cellular level. One made a new thing in the likeness of another, the other literally made a soulless copy.

>>6444999
>You can't compare drawing to making guns.
Why not? It's fucking materials. It's information. It's matter. All of it is the same. X may not be Y, but Y can be X.

Buying apples from the store some machine in a factory harvested does not make you a fucking farmer.

>>6445110
>I
(You) are a subhuman, higher IQ people can easily tell.

>>6445119
what's your verdict on Tezy8 then? You have to fundament it as well.

>>6445096
>But how it was made
Anon, it doesn't matter.
>When you see the michelangelo or the gioconda, people with artitic sensibility don't just look past them and say "yeah, that's really cool, anyway...", they start to think how it was made, which were the difficulties that the artist had making them, how much time did they take.
And again, this is an emotional argument which might be true to you, but that's about it.
It doesn't make an art piece "more valuable" because it makes you think to suck your own dick.
The art you talk about has been long gone and will never come back, because times and technology and abundance has progressed.
Maybe old paintings hold some value because they were made in times where art wasn't as widespread and easily achievable as today.
>Art is not about the end result
If the end result of any of the old artists sucked balls, would you think how they made it or is a pretty picture all it takes to make one think about the art?
>>6445115
So, if guns can be compared to drawings, in your logic how is AI bad?
>but it doesn't make you a farmer
Anon, spraypainting penises on a wall makes you an artist.
Being an artist is nothing special. It's the most loose term ever used in the history of this godforsaken planet to call anyone who creates anything through any means.
What is it that you don't get?
If they call themselves artists, what is your problem besides feeling insecure about yourself? There is really no other explanation for it.

If you actually call and consider yourself an artist, you're a fucking retard.

>>6445132
>If the end result of any of the old artists sucked balls, would you think how they made it or is a pretty picture all it takes to make one think about the art?
Ok, end result does matter, so does the process. AI generated pieces don't have a discernible process, devaluing them to the point that they don't even qualify as art, cause as you mentioned it, art derives from emotions, and AI has none, nor the person pressing the "generate" button.
Art on itself shouldn't have a commercial purpouse, but where there's interest, there's a market. If you can earn money by doing art, you've made it.
That link breaks with AI, because you are putting the commercial gain, end result and mass production before the creation.
It's no mystery that AI is profitable, but it won't stay that way. The generated pieces will worth nothing in the near future and the technology will be abandoned, putting in perpective the usefullness of the application, and exposing that the only reason it existed is for monetary gain. And that's not art.

>>6445132
I'll add unto my argument:
Any modern piece of art or illustration, will never come close to pic related.
No matter if it's made by real artist or Ai.
Why? Because this piece has actual historical context and was made in a time before mass information media, journalism or cameras.

This isn't a piece of art that hold value because of HOW it was made or how it looks, but because it has actual context and a story to tell.
If you can't give context to an image, it isn't the fault of any of the tools you use, the fault lies with you, and that's what makes the "artist"; the ability to actually do something beyond anime titties, furry shit, porn, retarded concept art or shitty tumblr comics about fat mentally ill people that want to kill themselves.

If people managed to use AI and generate images with actual context and use, that would make them "real artists" as much as the ones still drawing manually.
If a "real artist" draws something that hold no real value besides look pretty, that's kitsch, thus has no real artistic value either.

How a piece of art is made or how photorealistic it looks, is fucking irrelevant.
>>6445140
Anon, the process is irrelevant.
If a drawing of big anime titties makes me feel all fuzzy inside, makes me think about how i would ravage them and makes my pp hard, is it art then?
Fuck no. It's kitsch, like 99% of modern art.

>>6445153
sure, but if those big bazongas were human made, they have more value that AI bazongas.
art is subjective, we can all agree on that. and how people percieve art is also subjective. My personal ethics as a shitty artist will never allow me to resort to AI. Using 3d models as a reference feels dirty enough.

>>6445160
>sure, but if those big bazongas were human made, they have more value that AI bazongas.
Explain to me objectively, how one type of kitsch would be more valuable from another type of kitsch.
Pic related, both make my pp hard, so how is one better than the other?

>>6445032
Why are people still responding to your shitposts lmao

>>6445169
Well, I love baiken, so I'd pick right. Left is based on a character that I don't know, thus I have zero attachment to it
Also, left has a botched vagina, makes it look weird. The left breast is squished for no reason and the chin sweat makes her look like she's melting. The right eyebrow was left unpainted.
Right has a lot of proportion issues, but that flaw makes it look more human made. I could be wrong.

>>6445132
Nta but I wouldnt buy any ai art
Whats the point? Lol

>>6445175
because it's fun, and the guy is being respectful despite being wrong
that's the beauty of this site, it's not an echo chamber.
I most likely have irl friends that think like that, that AI art is then next step in human evolution, but I don't really talk with those friends, cause they have their own lives and interests far away from art, and even if I talk with them, they'd probably honeyd their words because we are friends.

tl;dr: don't get upset for people discussing shit in a discussion forum

>>6445132
>So, if guns can be compared to drawings, in your logic how is AI bad?
>Use guns to protect and self defense
>Good
>Use guns to kill innocent people for racial/sexual reasons
>Bad
Use tool wrong, go to jail, simple as.

>>6445132
>Anon, spraypainting penises on a wall makes you an artist.
Yes? How is AI doing the same thing here?
>Being an artist is nothing special.
Then why the fuck are you here you black stained faggot?

>>6445169
The irony here is both are drawn by human artists, the left is just a stolen collage of thousands of images mashed together to get the end result.

>>6445205
>DRAWN

>>6437378
>drawslaves
It existed this month and it already the forced meme of the year.

>>6445208
>Pajeets can't read and understand words
What else is new. Yes idiot, the AI image is a collage of drawn images, but the final image isn't a drawing. It's like saying mixing all food on the planet into liquid diarrhea means its still food. it's not.

>>6445175
Yes, how dare someone actually argue about something and not just spam snarky tranny buzzwords as arguments so they showed dominance over an anonymous forum and don't have to cry themselves to sleep for not having farmed enough followers and likes for the day?

You dont even know what shitposting is. Shut the fuck up.
>>6445177
>i love baiken
Already biased.
>nitpicking
Wrong again. In this context, anatomical perfection or minor mistakes don't matter to a viewer/consumer, all it matters is appeal aka the end result.
>right has issues but its ok because it looks like made by human
Again, bias.
How are flaws ok when made by humans, but not ok when made by ai?
That's a double think/standard.
It's either not ok for both, or ok for both.
Who made it or how it was made is irrelevant.
>>6445200
Can you actually prove your accusations as so as to actually make a legal case and legally prosecute the tool or the creators of it?
>guns don't kill people, people do
Yes.
Now, how does AI kill artist by itself?
You keep contradicting yourself.
>>6445203
>incoherent illiterate retard is unable to comprehend contextual information
No wonder you fear your updated version, you fucking bot.
>>6445205
You actually make a good point.
>the left is just a collage of thousands of images mashed together to get the end result.
If it's a collage that doesn't resemble or replicate the original, it is protected and counts as original artwork.
Read the laws.
>>6445192
How am i wrong?
Holding a moral highground based on the fact that somehow human made art is automatically regarded as "more valuable" (by artists themselves) than any other type of art, isn't the deus-ex-machina of argumentation.
This shit ain't black and white, Anon.

>>6445226
Nigga thinks ima read all that shit lmao

>>6445226
>Can you actually prove your accusations as so as to actually make a legal case and legally prosecute the tool or the creators of it?
Is this a bot post? No way a real human wrote this trash. I'm not even kidding.
AI steals work. It's literally stated by terms agreements of them they do so.

>Now, how does AI kill artist by itself?
X may not be Y, but Y is X
Do pajeets not understand what this means? It means while AI isn't gun, using tools illegally is still illegal.

>incoherent illiterate retard is unable to comprehend contextual information
>No wonder you fear your updated version, you fucking bot.
Literal bot post. No questions.
>If it's a collage that doesn't resemble or replicate the original
It does because it's literally within the bounds of the algorithm, it cannot go outside the source provided to make a real original piece.

>>6445237
How the fuck are you so illiterate that a genuine question comes off as a bot? Are you that fucking retarded?
You imply and accuse of crimes, yet you do not deign yourself to make an actual legal case and only parrot whatever everyone else is saying;
>OMG ILLEGAL ILLEGAL AI BAD ILLEGAL WOW LIKE LITCHERALLY WOW PLS PRAISE ME FOR PARROTING THE GOOD VIRTUES
Again, make a fucking case. Present it and go to court with it.
If AI is actually "stealing" artwork as in;
>replicating them 1:1 and passing it off/selling as its own original work
you would have a point.
Saving pictures is not stealing.
Same as an artist being influenced by other artists in their actual original work is not stealing.
Read up on the fucking laws and what you're actually allowed to do in the realm of artistic expression.
>It does because it's literally within the bounds of the algorithm, it cannot go outside the source provided to make a real original piece.
Can you, as a human, do something you don't even know how to do? How do you get the knowledge to be able to know how to do something? You just extract it from the ether?

If the algorithm has no directive and no "goal", how the fuck is it supposed to pursue the function it has been programmed to do?
>inb4 but AI is not human and humans can think
Still not making that fucking argument that AI is the same as humans.

Again, can you prove with actual laws and shit that ai is committing a crime?
Or hire a fucking lawyers, you clown.

>>6445112
There are no images in the models since they're usually around 4GB in size, down from 100's of TBs in the training data. But if that wasn't the case, the AI would need to understand how to "merge" millions of pictures into a new image as it would have to rotate pixels, stretch and move them around to match whatever picture it is imagining, etc, all in a single GPU (which is impossible). So in the end it would be much, much easier if it just drew all the pixels itself.

Artists also steal ideas and inspiration all the time, it's practically impossible to avoid doing it because your senses are always active, unless you live in a cave away from civilization.

Besides, nobody has yet proven a case of AI stealing images except for all the overfitting cases which are entirely undesirable. Everything is original at least to some extent.

>>6445226
>Who made it or how it was made is irrelevant.
not a single artist would say that. that's reason enough to ignore you when talking about art

>>6445270
Pyw

>>6445308
Ok, let's go burn every piece of art made pre 2010 because they were probably made by some racist and let's delete any and all concept illustrations because they're all 90% photobashed.

Did you read what the conversation was about or did you just get triggered like the retarded nigger you are?

>artist seethe
Tasty

>>6445317
no, probably the only two anons that give a fuck about anything you have to say already left
keep eternally seething cause your doodles can't break the double digits likes
no wonder why you embraced AI

>>6445343
>says retarded shit
>gets an answer
>"wow like ur seething and u have no likes wow like you have embraced ai ur the enemy wow like and subscribe lol and lmao gottem checkmate"
Do you think this works on me because it works on half-people like you?

I can best you artistically and intellectually. Never forget, niggeru-kun.

>imagine being so right that they have to employ the jannies

>>6444957
This is literally a bot post I've seen multiple times typed out the same way.

>>6445279
>There are no images in the models
Prove it
>He thinks 4GB is too small to hold a 1 KG Jpeg image
Literal pajeet IQ.

>>6445270
>implying AIfags aren't using AI as reddit upboat farming machine

>>6445395
seethe

>>6445435
It is too small.

Every pair would have to be 0.8 Bytes to fit in the 5-billion image-text dataset which is almost nothing.

With 5TB you could fit 1KB pairs, and with 250TB (LAION 5-B) you can fit 50KB pairs.

>>6445699
>It is too small.
Nice non argument
>Every pair would have to be 0.8 Bytes to fit in the 5-billion image-text dataset which is almost nothing.
Or, the 4Bil shit is a exaggeration and can easily be storing whatever 1K images needed to merge side images together into pure abominations.

for me i can't get over how dumb AI bros sound and they can't seem to comprehend other people know they are dumb. They seem to think just adopting this software and cheerleading it makes them intelligent. They view art as a commodity as if they can just corner the supply it will equal big bucks. Their brains cannot register that people enjoy art for an intangible human quality. I don't care if its a learner using crayons, anime or a masterpiece painting, i value and love art people have made that poor their passion into and spend years perfecting. I love seeing real peoples ideas and concepts they make with their own two hands.
They aren't considering what I and other people WANT and thats the real thing. So they are forcing this on the art world.
I will always seek the real thing, buy the real thing and reject these charlatans attempts to see me a synthetic mimic.

Anyway back to laughing at the ai bros, they really think typing some prompts and farting out mindless aesthetically revolting AI barf is going to "replace" artists. Its just ridiculous how they have no self awareness. No one is going to pay for something that is infinitely replicable by anyone for free. Theres no money in it, They have just created a sea if digital pollution and created an urgent need to protect real artists in artist only communities.

Good luck to all the retarded ai shilling companies when all the real artists abandon you then the consumers and you are left with nothing but poojeet telephone scammer prompters. Good luck making anything anyone would actually buy when its worthless.
Hope you enjoy watching the real authentic artists earning more thanks to your royal fuck up.
You will go down in history as the biggest fools ever to walk the earth.

>>6445699
>>6445717
They actually "only" used 2 billion, 3 billion other images were excluded for "low quality"

The scam is pretty obviously now they are charging 30 bucks a month to talentless normie mongs so they get to "feel" like a pro artist playing generator gacha.
It really is the new crypto nft.
But is it worth burning the bridges of real artists when people get bored of it.
I don't think so, its suicide.

>>6445727
Yeah, just read that now

>>6445717
They did that with LAION 2B-en which is 2 billion but that still uses 1.6 Bytes which is still nothing.

>>6445723
and i can go on... the other thing thats pissing me off about these AI bros is all they pretend to be enlightened ultra rational science people.
and just brief conversation with them reveals they are super IRRATIONAL and not informed on science at all.
These fucking tards start talking about the AI AS IF IT WAS REALLY INTELLIGENT or in religious terminology or superstitious terminology or that they have the ability to prophetically see the future.
its a god damn irrational cult, centred around this snake oil naming "AI"

Bunch of tards

it really just feels like some clueless tech scammers looked at all the art and the money it creates and thought what it exploited that. With zero understanding of art.

>>6445755
what if we exploited*

>>6445755
It's their next "golden goose" after NFTs failed. Seen too many "startup companies" with these two in common. Truth nobody cares about looking at AI art and these sites will fail just like nft starter sites.

>>6445735
it's basically scientology type of fanatism. they have indeed became religious fanatics

>>6445728
i feel like ainiggers are going to do irreparable damage to the tech profession by essentially destroying all shared online spaces with what are essentially highly sophisticated spambots with little actual usefulness. it really is the eptome of pajeettech where the whole vision is to the internet into an endless feed of those creepy elsa videos

i've been laughing so hard at Sweeney i didn't buy any games off epic this holidays

I wonder what they had going on behind the scenes regarding AI shit.

Artstation probably was going to introduce some inhouse prompt shit similar to DeviantArt, and make it part of their subscription model, and thats why they decided to side with AI techbros against their own userbase

Doesnt seem like it worked out well

>>6437275
I plan on continuing on not caring and posting as usual.
AI art looks like shit and continues to learn from shit "artists" who are hilariously the primary doom-sayers throughout the AI "conversation".
Generic illustrations by AI; stolen from souless hacks. And you know their hacks because they continue to use "steal" in the arguments, despite the prevailing paradigm in the arts being that the best artists steal from the greatest.
>but muh job oppurtunity
Was already taken by some no-neck 3rd worlder 20 years ago who can produce the "high-quality" dirt and swill faster than you ever will and uncultured normies as well as souless executives will eat up.
>but the economic value of my art
Never mattered to begin with. Outside of art snobs and responsible connoisseurs, everyone will measure the worth of a piece from the personality behind it.
>but muh copyright/trademark/IP
okay, lets say you do sacrifice your artistic integrity and successfully categorize your creative endeavor into a product. Go here for advice: /biz/
>but how am I supposed to compete
how were competing against the mountain of superior artists already working?

>>6446066
Also
I draw because it's fun and I enjoy doing it
keep crying AI users/whiners you're all the same

Jeet-tech
Noun
Useless technology that makes the world worse.
A scam.

>>6445755
>With zero understanding of art.
lmao art is 99% HERE'S [TRENDING BITCH OF THE WEEK] WITH HER CUNT OPEN what the fuck is there to understand
fucking retards

>>6446374
Very telling, yes. In truth I can't even tell if you're a genuine AItard, because by God some of them are really that dumb, or just a falseflagger. Either way it's sad. Stop