/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

Art used to have value for it's scarcity and originality, the fact that now can be quickly produced makes each piece to be worth very little.

Focusing the value of art as the Japanese do (technical measurable parameters) was a mistake, it was scarcity and originality what made art worth.

By over-saturating the internet with art you are causing something similar to inflation, art is now worthless, like those African banknotes, it can be produced by thousands and it will always have correct perspective, lighting, anatomy etc.

It is doing the opposite of what crypto and NFTs were supposed to do.

>>>/g/
back to your containment board

>>6453811
ok schizo

>>6453768
generate me a worker destroying a loom

>go to random art post
>some pro-AI comment
>it's a street shitter
Why are they so obsessed with shilling this?

Today's word of the day is "Astroturfing"

anyone got a link to the original thread? can't find it for shid

>>6453768
thats pretty funny lol

>>6453908
its on /v/
https://arch.b4k.co/v/thread/620908196/#620913184

>>6453811
not my problem
>>6453819
seethe
>>6453831
seethe
>>6453893
>>6453902
seethe

>>6453893
You can cope all you want but its actually chinks and nips the ones who are going to use it
Pixiv has a category for AI
KnY mugen train used AI to animate in-betweens of fire movements
iirc Mappa's SnK had entire in-betweens done by AI

sir do not redeem the superpower in the loo by 2020

>>6453811
Art has moved on from being about who has technical skill and ideas, and now what matters is the idea since everyone can emulate technical skill.

Technically skilled people had a monopoly on expressing their ideas, and now that their foundation has been shaken, they feel oppressed.

It's unironically the crabs in the bucket analogy.
Everyone who has made it out doesn't care

>>6453811
I dont think that the Japanese were wrong, since they tend to be quite creative, they just care very much about excelent.

However, I agree with everything else.

They aren't even attempting to be subtle about baiting anymore huh

do you think that the hands is just some minor fix that coding can fix till this becomes a reliable tool?

>>6454024
No. it will always be bad at hands forever and ever and never get any better. This is it. We've peaked. There's no more improvement to be had.

>>6453768
>weeks old meme picture
>Discuss [meta level shit]
Even when all you have to do is TYPE A COUPLE WORDS you faggots STILL refuse to create new pictures and post them.
One of the benefits of AI is that it's shown just how empty and soulless the nodraws really are.

You will never be an artist. That voice in the back of your head that says that the image you generated isn't really yours? It's correct. The voice that says that you're a fraud? It's also correct. You're a parasite. A leech.

>>6454038
Kind of true. This isn't "AI" as most people seem to think it("it learns like a human!"), and using diffusion will never lead to intelligible hands(on purpose, you might get lucky with a common/stock pose, good luck having the hand manipulating anything.). Even googles Parti with 20B parameters sucks shit. This appears to be a dead end technique.

>>6454058
Do you ever get tired of moving the "AI art will never" goalposts?

Surely you must be exhausted.

>>6454058
It's also permanently stuck not understanding lighting and composition. Look at that girl by the pool image above, that water is so fucking bright it steals all the attention and almost looks as if it's in the foreground.

>>6454009
There’s no need to be, most replies are /g/ niggers themselves. This board doesn’t move this fast lmao.

You AI poojeets can sing the praises all you want, but at the end of the day there is no human triumph against adversity, no bettering of one’s skills, no improvement of the self with AI.
You are just typing a bunch of words and throwing it into a literal black box and hoping what comes out the other end matches the image in your head.

>>6454071
Show me where I said "AI art will never".
Once AGI is developed, it will learn to draw hands.

>>6454095
We'll get there before AGI. Hands and holding things are getting better daily.

>>6454103
>Hands and holding things are getting better daily
Really? I saw this back in march. is it more that inpainting is getting better?

>>6454107
>March
>Almost a year ago
?????????

>>6453984
The category was created because the Japs already anted them to fuck off.

>>6454103
lying? I just perused the latest /sdg/ and all the hands were busted.

>>6454109
Yes? That image is from march 2022, from the Dalle-2 preview, hands have not improved since then.

>>6454071
Are you exhausted from shilling AI on 4chan 24/7? Even I eventually go to sleep.

>>6454115
bots don't sleep!

Okay I'll bite.
>AI art gets so good it replaces artists and their normal workflow
>prompters have their day of victory
>real artists start using AI
>replace prompters immediately due to years of art/color/composition/light/construction theory
>artists can add to and improve AI art in every conceivable way - even without prompting :o
>B-B-BUT I'VE BEEN PROOOOMPTING SINCE THE START!!! YOU C-CAN'T DO THIS TO ME!!

Thank you for creating my new workflow sirs.

>>6454112
>>6454114
>People using the same old models are still getting bad results
You don't say?

>>6454129
It's literally AI Bros saying this is what's going to happen. AI Bros say "It's a tool". It's the art fags that say "No it's a replacement", so you're owning the ai bros by proving them right?

>>6454140
Surely those /g/entlemen are using the latest stuff?
also your pic is not helping your case lmao!

>>6454142
This model only came out a few days ago so probably not.

It's still not perfect, but it is clearly a massive improvement.

>AIfags think they've won
>meanwhile, I wait for the tech to get better so I can draw my waifu by hand and have her come to life

>>6454038
Cope, I've already started seeing more generations with better hands and feet

>>6454143
Those look better than the indiana joe hands. but not in the images where tool manipulation is happening. How do I know the good hands aren't a case of over-fitting for common hand poses? tool manipulation in novel scenarios is still not possible.

>>6454143
I'm detecting a lot of Tarakanovich in your dataset.

i>>6454024
What program was this made in? I want to create anime fight scene, but I guess that would be hard to do?

>>6454148
The Indiana Jones holding the torch looks way better than anything previously, and the girl in the 5th picture in the top row is also holding something just fine. The hand on her hip, when she's holding the case.

You can't overfit on a hand pose and have it be in the same style as the rest of the picture. That's not how that works at all.

>>6454147
I was being sarcastic you fucking monkey.

>>6454154
>looks way better than anything previously,
April dalle-2 looks about the same
>You can't overfit on a hand pose and have it be in the same style as the rest of the picture. That's not how that works at all.
Sad Keanu

>>6454141
Just to clarify, I don't think this will happen.
AI art is an illegal nightmare. It's advanced quickly due to using billions of stolen images. No company in their right mind would touch it.
You'll see terrible results from AI in other artistic mediums, such as music and animation, because those works are protected by big money, not freelance internet artists.

>>6454160
>A stagnant private model looks the same
Bwuuuuuuuuuuuuuuh?

>>6454160

>>6454163
>We'll get there before AGI. Hands and holding things are getting better daily.
Nigger we are not talking about SD only. So SD is catching up to Dalle-2s first release? and?

>>6454160
holy shit that's bad

>>6454153
>I want to create anime fight scene, but I guess that would be hard to do?
Ever wondered why all the AI images you see are static poses?

>>6454166
SD is better than Dall-e. Midjourney is better than Dall-E.

What do you want to do? Judge the progress of hands and holding things by looking at fucking Craiyon?

We're -going- to reach perfect hands before AGI. You're literally doing the "AI will never" goal post moving.

AI will never create good art.
AI will never create good faces.
AI will never create coherent character design.
AI will never create gay scat furry porn.
AI will never create good hands.
>AI will never create good hands before AGI
You are here.

>>6454167
They needed to do more gatcha, that is just the first roll. (dalle-2 used to give 10 images at a time)

>>6454169
>AI will never create coherent character design.
>AI will never create gay scat furry porn.
post em.

So uh
What are techbros going to do about AI deepfakes and stuff

There's talk about improving this tech but little about the impact that doing so will have on stuff other than art

>>6454174
you will get framed for crimes you did not commit because you did the wrongthink and you will like it.

>>6454174
The onus is on the user not the tech.

>>6454174
imagine when AI will be able to fake an election

>>6454169
>AI will never create good art.
>AI will never create good faces.
>AI will never create coherent character design.
>AI will never create gay scat furry porn.
>AI will never create good hands.
>>AI will never create good hands before AGI
>You are here.

I am not in your silly list. AI will do anything and everything.
I will judge the progress by the latest and greatest. If it is no better at something than an older model, I'll say it.
I said diffusion will not get it there, compositionality is not happening with that technique.

>>6454177
Alright, and what are you doing to prevent users from misusing this tech?

>>6454184
It's already illegal to do illegal things.

>>6454186
I thought techbros were above tautology.

Like some people have said before I think AI art will only make creative and talented people more relevant than ever before, way before AI people in general (as long as they're not kids or absolute braindead coomers) were already starting to get more and more annoyed by being shoved with soulless generic media like the shit Pixar and Marvel has been making ever since Endgame. 80% of the shit Pixar and Marvel have made these last 3 years have flopped miserably and have been so fucking forgettable garbage that even kids themselves stop caring about buying toys in less than a week, and don't even get me started with the kind of shit Netflix produces, even the absolute gods of braindead consooming like animefags and gamers are so fucking tired of weekly anime/videogames adaptations they end up getting cancelled in less than a month.

You can create all AI content you want, but the faster you do it the faster you get people to get fucking bored about it and the faster you make people go back to consums more original and genuine media, just like people have been doing it recently with videogames, TV shows, movies and anime.

>>6454190
You don't penalize Smith & Wesson whenever there's an active shooter. You penalize the person doing the shooting.

SD/MJ/Whatever else does not produce their tech with the intention of people doing deepfakes or starting world wars. It's not their responsibility.

>>6454197
The spies who stole the nuclear bomb research for the USSR were executed though

>>6454200
Espionage is a crime.

>>6454201
Leaking anything highly harmful to public use is a crime. Be it a bomb or a virus or Stable Diffusion.

People are still understating the rapid development of AI to prosecute Emad for essentially releasing personalized deepfake machines. Dunno if anti-AI detectors become a thing before or after we get serious damage from his toy

>>6454206
I ripped all the data from facebook I could using bots, even private stuff through a vulnerability they don't know about. I built a facial recognition tool for phones with the data, just point it at someones face and it will tell you everything.

I am releasing ti to the public to democratize the information. if you use it for evil, that's on you, not me.

Make American Free Again. Legalize A.I.

>>6454000

>>6454230
It's already legal though

>>6454206
It's only a crime if that thing would, by design, allow people to do illegal things. There's no legal justification for releasing the blueprint a bomb or virus out into the public.

Nothing SD does in the way it functions is illegal in any way. "Legal loophole" or "Legal gray area" is just cope-speak for "It's legal but we wish it wasn't."

>>6454038
This but unironically

>>6454169
>You are here
>AI will never create good art.

>>6453984
This is horrifically bad

>>6454262
Artists have nothing to worry about then and all of this outrage is over nothing and a huge waste of time and money.

>>6454266
We worry about the same thing as ever, people profiting of our work, claiming it as their own etc.
It's just like seeing my work on iphone cases on aliexpress.

>>6454262
looks good to me

>>6454275
If you can't tell your work was used, how do you claim harm?

Who was this copied from? How do you prove it? How do you know?

If this artwork already exists, why would someone need to use a program to create it? Couldn't they just save the original?

>>6454281
>If you can't tell your work was used, how do you claim harm?
My style is distinct, I would be able to tell. I can even tell when someone used my name in the thumbnails.
if multiple artists were included in the prompt, AI might help determine the percentages in the future.

I don't look at furry art. no idea. someone more qualified would have to answer that.

>>6454283
>My style is
Not copyrightable. You can't claim harm for someone using something you don't own.

Not only do you not know how copyright works, but you don't know how image gen works, and it's embarrassing that you're proud of that.

>>6454284
YOU don't understand retard.
It's not just copying style, it picks up on patterns beyond that. It's identity theft. My art fingerprint. Human artists can't do it,in fanart/studies of my work, I see the artist behind it, nobody can mimic perfectly. AI is not quite there yet, but it will be one day. Laws have to update. btw I know how they work, better than you I am sure.

>>6454291
You can't copyright technique either. It's only identity theft if someone claims they're you.

A n y o n e can legally copyright Greg Rutkowski's style and techniques. It's not a fingerprint. It's a skillset that anyone can learn, or anyone can teach a machine to learn. SOVL isn't real.

The laws are fine as-is.

You DON'T know how image-gen works because you didn't answer any of my questions because you don't know the answer. You don't know that when someone says "trending on artsation", it's not literally googling what's trending on artstation. You don't know that "In the style of greg rutkowski" doesn't make the machine look at greg rutkowski's artwork. Greg's name isn't required. It's just a shortcut for words like "Painted, digital art, epic, atmospheric", etc.

The image I posted doesn't exist anywhere else. It's not a copy. It's not an amalgamation of other works. If you can't wrap your head around that, you're retarded.

Why do y'all have to reply?

I really hope we get open source AI detection tech soon so we can have an AI-free website for artists. A way to separate the dopamine monkey AI parasites from the real human beings

>>6454299
>SOVL isn't real
If I create something, no human can replicate me, They can make a near perfect copy of an image I made, but not a new one. AI could feasibly create a digital clone of me in the future. Not cool. Should not be legal.

>you didn't answer any of my questions
You asked retarded questions, strawmanning me. I have been in following GAN shit for many years.

>>6454305
Just do what the Artist dopamine monkeys are doing and witch hunt your fellow artists, because while you artists can ALWAYS tell if something is AI or not, it's still a threat to your livelihood, because your enemy must simultaneously be pitifully weak as well as overwhelmingly strong.

ok let us discuss this then

you are mad because retards who don't know anything about art are making images you can only dream of, but no that is not YOUR issue with AI art since you are aware that it's a machine and not another human you are competing against. And even if it was another human that was that good you probably wouldn't be bothered by it because you are not 12 to get jealous about other people's work.
YOUR issue is that idiots who type in some retarded words into a software are starting to exploit this and make money off of it while your ass that has been practising for ages isn't making any money at all.

both you and the AI "artist" are worthless pieces of trash. both of you are fueled by money and greed.
you honestly couldn't care less about the software using other peoples work to feed the machine no matter how long of a youtube rant video you upload, you are not the saint you want to appear to the people that you want to reach out to.

art was never supposed to be about money and here you are doing it just for that
your reasons for hating AI art is wrong you disgusting greedy jew, you should hate it because it's another man made horror that will just make us more into soulless pieces of flesh than we already are
a fucking machine is about to replace something that had no functional purpose and only had emotional value to it BUT NO here are you who loves art so much that he can't bother with it unless it fills his pockets with coin and pays for his diamond faggot earrings

you are not better than the machine you are fighting against
kill yourself

tl;dr
kill yourself

>>6454300
someone is wrong on the internet, I have to correct them.

>>6454308
>Instead of addressing any of your points, I'll just say they're strawmen
Actual retard with no arguments who knows he's wrong but doesn't want to acknowledge the reality that you have no legal or ethical ground to stand on. The only way you're gonna get any new laws passed is by lying to less-informed law makers like you lie to yourself.

>>6454311
>art was never supposed to be about money and here you are doing it just for that
literally all the most culturally revered art was made by craftsmen and artisans who were paid you stupid nigger.

>>6454311
How are they making money? Commissions?
If i make living of art i can spend 8 hours a day for art instead of 2. More time more art. Creativity in help

>>6454311
Using a machine to create artwork of my OC's fills me with joy. Who is anyone to tell me I'm wrong?

>>6454313
jeez. ok here are the answers.

Who was this copied from?
It is an interpolation of many data points.
How do you prove it?
prove that is is an interpolation? just look up how it works
How do you know?
I looked up how it works.

If this artwork already exists, why would someone need to use a program to create it?
It didn't already exist, it's an interpolation
Couldn't they just save the original?
The original?

>>6454319
Having an AI draw your OCs is like having a nigger fuck your wife. You're getting artcucked by an AI

>>6454321
So it's a novel original piece produced from a text document and not copyright infringement, glad we agree. I'm glad you learned something today.

>>6454278
Try zooming in lol

>>6454326
>copyright infringement
it can be beyond that, and requires new laws. Sometimes it is simple infringement, however.

Would you say you have the right to your own voice? it's just soundwaves man!

>>6454325
I agree AI is cucked but goddamn Mutt's Law is real.

>>6454337
And now the goalposts move to copespeak. "W-well it might not be illegal now but it should be!"

Go draw something and pray that your side loses ever court battle because if your side wins, you're gonna have to pay Disney a royalty every time you pick up a pencil.

>>6454317
keep on practising, maybe you'll earn a coin or 2 before AI replaces you completely you absolute waste of my cooldown timer faggot
not even worth a serious reply

>>6454328
Ehh, there are issues but it still looks good to me

>>6454341
>And now the goalposts move to copespeak. "W-well it might not be illegal now but it should be!"
Your reading comprehension skills fail you if you think the goal posts shifted in this conversation.

>you're gonna have to pay Disney
I want laws against training AI on copyright work without consent.

>>6454343
>get called out for being retarded and making a retarded ahistorical anti-art and anti-artist statement
>make another retarded statement right afterwards
sugoi

>>6454348
ok the let me waste time on you
those artist that made those pretty figures or pictures you like so much are everything but the majority of art
more art was made for non-profit reason, and just because you favorite furry artist draws for money doesn't mean that they have some form of license to decide that art should be produced for reasons of gaining money
if you think that art should be a job that pays the bills then i hope that you have no issues with AI art since you and the AI are both on the same intellectual level
that's right anon, you are as smart as a an AI in that case. tho judging by your first reply you don't even need to answer to this question for me to know that

>>6454326
Ditto. AI art training ought to be regulated not for copyright but identity theft.

>>6454375
It's not identity theft to copy a style.

>>6454341
>we're allowed to break website tos against scraping because.... well... we're non profit!
AI shills really believe this

I can see it now, Joe Biden's art cops installing monitoring software on your computer to check for A.I. What could go wrong?

>>6454378
Yes it is, especially with mechanical "in the style of" generations.

Holy shit why did I not hear anything about computers being able to make art until fucking now!!!!!!?!?!??!?!?!?!?!?!??! WTF is this black magic how is this even possible like WHAT IN THE ACTUAL FUCK

>>6454383
That would be the best thing Joe Biden's done.

>>6454385
That's not identity theft you mongoloid. It would be if someone said "This was drawn by Greg Rutkowski" but just using his style isn't.

>>6454386
where have you been? did you miss thispersondoesnotexist.com? thiswaifudoesnotexist.com? artbreeder? all shit from like 5 years ago.

>>6454390
Joe needs to raise your taxes.

>>6454211
this you anon
https://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/everalbum-inc-in-first-facial-recognition-misuse-settlement-ftc-requires-destruction-of-algorithms-trained-on-deceptively-obtained-photos

>>6454392
I've been pretty busy trying not to die

>>6454371
>those artist that made those pretty figures or pictures you like so much are everything but the majority of art
Sure, but they are the majority of art that we actually value in society and hold in the highest esteem of what 'art' is, culturally and socially. The Mona Lisa was made for money, as were countless other examples of renaissance art.
>more art was made for non-profit reason,
And that art is usually low-effort dogshit that overemphasizes 'ideas' like the One and Three Chairs by Kosuth. But AI is revolutionary precisely because it DOESNT give a fuck about the postmodern fine art. It's popular because it tries to emulate the technically skilled, and the technically skilled artists are the ones who are usually the most passionate about and the most likely to create good art. It's actually ironic that AIfags hate postmodern art so much given that they're basically Dadaists, except their Ready-Mades are pretty looking instead of a urinal so it's okay.
>if you think that art should be a job that pays the bills then i hope that you have no issues with AI art since you and the AI are both on the same intellectual level
I don't necessarily want art to be a job, but I do want to be able to spend all my time drawing and painting and art as a job is the only way I can do that.
tl;dr: unless people can make a living off of their art, then we're going to be seeing a massive collapse in good, original and unique art

>>6454391
>That's not identity theft you mongoloid
nta but yes it couild be? but more literally this time, not just taking credit card/ID and buying shit.
This could potentially make a digital clone of you, that does exactly what you would do, right down to the jitter of your lines from your heartbeat.

It's like stealing an actors voice to use in your product.

>>6454404
>Every kid that ever drew The Lion King growing up is committing identity theft

>>6454391
You're taking an artist's style and making a mechanized counterfeit out of it. Styles aren't copyrightable so we're left with identity. And hey, it's right there in the prompt, too.

>>6454407
Not every kid draws the Lion King the same way, retard.

>>6454408
Style isn't identity. IDENTITY is identity.

>>6454407
How can you take what I said and spit that out? not related at all.

>>6454337
you do relize you can get sued for using others voices. Why pajeet's retarded to alot of laws that have been made

>>6454401
NTA, I'm with you anon

I already gave up on a career in art, I make good money as a wageslave and I have a reasonable amount of time for art.
At this point I do art just to try to better myself, to become a better person and a more creative and skilled guy, to keep discipline in my life and learn to do challenging things.
I want to take pride in my work and enjoy the process as well as the results.

>>6454435
GMI

>>6454401
>tl;dr: unless people can make a living off of their art, then we're going to be seeing a massive collapse in good, original and unique art
I mean, it'd happen with or without AI. Have you seen the state of American animation over the past decade?

>>6454401
>they're basically Dadaists, except their Ready-Mades are pretty looking instead of a urinal so it's okay.
Ahahaha, exactly this. Turns out that, essentially, every image that an imagegen algorithm craps out ALREADY EXISTS within the dataset's latent space, and all that proompters are doing is the equivalent of a Google image search. They have the notion that they're "creating" something but it's merely an illusion granted by their ignorance and limited perspective. Their "art" doesn't belong to them in any sense of the word.
Maybe the mods should move all of the /sdg/ posters to /h/ or /e/, since that's technically what they are in reality. That one retard that posts generated celeb pics could go to /s/, I guess.

Humans use tools. Get over it.

>>6454519
(You) are a tool

>>6454519
If you met a man who abandoned all sex with his wife because "a vibrator is a tool that's quicker and more effective at getting the desired result [that she cum]" what would you think of him?

>>6453768
What do we do now that AI has acquired SOVL?
I thought we were going to be safe because you can tell a human artists and a AI artists art apart by its soul energy but that isnt the case anymore.
Im scared...

>>6454519
Well, golly gosh and I'll be hornswoggled, anon, you're right! I do suppose that Google image search *is* a tool after all. You really made me see things in a new light today.

I don't give a shit about people using ai for whatever but I am genuinely annoyed when people keep posting bad AI work and claiming it's good/better than manually made stuff lol.
Like even basic stuff like classic head swap photoshops will see people posting something that looks worse than what someone could make with 5 minutes of editing and they'll claim it's so much better.

>>6454265
It looks like he's singing and dancing like something out of HS musical

Did the retard I was talking to delete all his posts or did some mod go ham on him? The fuck.

>>6454548
AI demands zero artistic knowledge since all the artistic process and most decisions are made by the AI alone, so they are are unable to distinguish from what it's good or bad, as long as it's over rendered and "realistic" looking.

>>6454531
>tries to imply google isn't a tool

this isn't the got'cha you think it is.

>>6454598
>misunderstands the point

this isn't the gotcha you think it is

>>6454605
You didn't make any points, if anything you just agreed with the other anon. Which, if that was your goal, then never mind; I'm sorry, you did great.

>>6453811
The internet was already over saturated with art. Millions of artists ranging from great to mediocre, you just saw the same popular ones each time because most random artists were hidden by the algorithms, but they were there working for pennies, doing what the Ai is doing now

Ai is a good thing, it will weed out and discourage mediocre ngmi losers and make art more exclusive for real skilled artists, which will be forced to get even better. I don't see why that's bad.

>>6454644
>implying
Postmodern art arose because of photography. We're going to get even uglier fine art now.

>>6454644
good luck finding diamonds in an ocean of shit.

>>6454606
it's not a "tool" you fucking retard. you don't use it to draw. name a single use it has. if you're gonna say "inspiration" you're a fucking retard and you know why. not a single AI image that has been used as "inspiration" brings something to the table. you could've used the other millions of shitty pinups that already exist, you don't need an "AI" to achieve that purpose

>AIfags shit on artists
>thei program is 100% dependent on artists to produce anything