/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

They aren't smart enough for full blown comics yet, just concept pictures.

Is it not enough you fags get to larp as sakimichan on twitter? Comics and trad animation are the two fields where ai is absolute trash at. You may be able to skirt around time consuming assets like backgrounds as evidenced in the newest thing netflix shit out but even then you need to either live with the artifacts or work a lot of photoshop magic to make it look presentable, which is frankly more work than it's worth since pros can watercolor a full scene in half an hour.

>>6504580
Probably stable diffusion, it's free and if you are trying to make a comic you'll need img2img functionality. Don't expect it to be easy though, you'll still have to draw most of it and do all the paneling and writing.

Honestly, with all the time it takes learning how to generate comics with something like that, I'd rather just draw it myself.

>>6504580
Check out image to image and inpainting. I would iterate on the character until happy with one of the results, use image to image with the previous result to generate different poses / expressions on that character, and then try inpainting to drop the variations of the character into different backgrounds
- https://platform.stability.ai/docs/features/image-to-image
- https://platform.stability.ai/docs/features/inpainting

>>6504603
Eventually they're going to figure out a better user experience.

>>6504580
>>6504597
Just think about the absolute feats of mental gymnastics performed by people trying to shoehorn ai art for comics instead of just learning to draw.

>>6504615
>working harder for worse results
Do chuds really...?

>>6504601
>you'll need img2img functionality
Doesn’t SD also have img2img?

I really need to give hypernetwork a chance some time. Had a thought earlier bout what would happen if i make a model in DB then added a trained hypernetwork ontop of that er atleast train a DB-model, then perhaps use hypernetworks for postures.

I love how AI art "breaks" in places.

>>6504625
SD does yeah, MJ kinda does but you don't get nearly enough control for it to be useful in this scenario. With SD you can finetune the amount of noise added to the image to keep it closer to the original sketch, and for some comic panels you'll probably need to provide a pretty well detailed sketch because the AI won't be able to interpret more complex scenes or dynamic situations on it's own.

>>6504580
Personally I'd recommend gay sex AI. It's the perfect text-to-image program for modelling the hottest gayest sex scenes.

>>6504580
Tapas already banned it
ALL websites are going to ban AI due to spam reasons. Increases server cost

>>6504653
Oof, sorry ai bros

>>6504653

HAHA, didn't think of that, did you guys?

>>6504580
When it comes to comics, best you can do with it is basically brainstorm compositions. If you try to use it for the actual artwork you're going to find yourself with a whole lotta waist-up-character-looking-at-or-just-off-the-camera, which is so easy to do already that there isn't even any point in using AI for it.
t. comic artist who finds drawing a chore, if AI was any good for comics I'd give it a shot, but right now it's simply far, far too clunky and limited.

>>6504696
It could be good for backgrounds. I'd like to use it for generating images of monsters. I think I will use AI when the times comes and Tapas will never know anyway

>>6504580
On top of what everyone else has said, most comics feature line art done in pen and ink or digital equivalent. AI can’t do line art well, certainly not even close to a moderately skilled comic artist.

>>6504580
Ahh, for making a comic you might want to train a custom model to keep a consistent style and characters.

I trained a network on the hatbox ghost from haunted mansion @ Disney and then experimented with some different models. This is an example of comics diffusion (Charlie Bo artstyle) and into the spiderverse models, after training the ghost HN with the sd 1.5 pruned model. The spiderverse model is totally a unique interpretation that’s kinda fun.

I quite like the technique for “exploration”, which is necessary sometimes when the client doesn’t know specifically what they want and you can output 1000 different variations.

>>6504580
But that requires effort.
Pajeetshitskins aren't known for spending effort.
Really all these AI posting for clout is basically like reposting popular posts on reddit for updoots. Quick dopamine for minimal effort

good morning, sirs

>>6504701
>Tapas will never know anyway
Not very conved when the one and only example so far is so laughable it may as well be a shitpost.>>6504712

>>6504597
>>6504603
>>6504621
>>6504715
I won't get paid for this comic, I've written years ago but I don't the time nor the funds to find a artist. I can draw myself but I don't have the time.

>>6504712
Thanks do you have any other examples that looks neat.

>>6504653
Then they should ban all the low quality shit aswell

>>6504729
>muh whataboutism
Those low quality can grow to become amazing artists
If the site wanted AI art, they would generate it themselves

>>6504729
>Then they should ban all the low quality shit as well
I say keep /ic, who cares if they suck?

>>6504740
who cares if it's ai art ?

>>6504729
I mean, if suddenly there was a large influx of people spamming the site with shitty 5-second doodles then I'm 95.67% sure they would've been banned or at least have their shit deleted.

>>6504729
nope. most of those people learn how to draw, they should receive criticism and improve

>>6504743
becasue they will be overwhelmed with ai shit in the near future if they don't gate-keep now
it's just common sense

>>6504580
I would definitely recommend killing yourself.

>>6504580

None of the them. They suck at it. You'd be better off just drawing it for now.

Doubtless AI tech will improve with time, but there's nothing suitable for comics work at this moment.

MAYBE you can use it to generate some backgrounds. Maybe.

>>6504712

>I quite like the technique for “exploration”, which is necessary sometimes when the client doesn’t know specifically what they want and you can output 1000 different variations.

This is legitimately the best use for AI art at this stage of the technology.

>>6505016
>giving a no-draw 1000 choices
>a good idea
kek
t. never worked as an artist in their life

>>6505018

I literally pay my bills with art.

>>6505021
Pokemon vore isn't art

>>6504580
>i want to tell a story through images
>but i don't want full control over said images
literally why even say you want to make comics?

>>6505580
It is what it is. I don't have the time or the money to continue to be a draw fag.

>>6504580
People actually think art like this is good?

Its like Im living in a bizarre world where people give a monkey paint and a paintbrush and the monkey's shitty random paint smudges are treated like genius.

>>6504970
HAHAHAHA

>>6504580
Ai cant do comics because it cant do the same character in different poses across panels without fucking up, as well as make the background consistent and other characters in the scene consistent. We had Dreambooth that could in theory do the same character from 3-5 or something images of it, but it still sucks balls most of the time, if you want to see this in action, go on rule34 and look at AI coomers making "fanart" of some characters that are not supremely famous like 2B or Astolfo. And that is still easy mode since they are all naked, because thing AI fucks up most in consistency is clothing. And that is just the main character, now do it for backgrounds of the same room from different angles, then also make other nearby character and so on. It is a mess. The only cases of AI being used for comics have been the one comic that lost copyright once the copyright office that gave it to them found out what AI is, and then the other one was the children book that had story about a girl and a robot, but the robot was constantly changing design each page as well as the hair and dress of the girl. And those were not small design changes, it was changes like changing from one ponytail to 2 ponytails, then freeflow hair going on shoulders, then one just on the back. And the robot was changing from cube shaped to one shaped like sphere and then one that was flying, one that had limb and other one was just rolling ball. It was a mess, AI sucks at comics million times more then at hands

>>6504653
Ok, just say you made it and not the AI, how are they gonna be able to tell if you edit the pic or generate billion variations until you get one with no artefacts, it is not hard to fool people with AI pic.
>Muh progress evidence
Some autistic retard with gaming PC can then download million files of said progress, train the AI on those progress pictures, and then release it on HuggingFace. Emad making it open source made it literally impossible to regulate its progress, and besides its already too late. SD 2.0 was already cucked and nuked to point of uselessness, and yet everyone keeps using 1.5 and the progress in development is still improving thanks to lone autists making training models for free and releasing them to the public. You can delete all AI development companies from the face of Earth and it would still be over because it already ended for you.

>>6506098
Like this

P.s
All technological breakthroughs hit a ceiling and stagnates there

CGI is decades old
Phone jumped from brick to smart 15 years ago and has made 0 progress since
Google translate was made in 2006. Machine translation was born in 1950's

If google suffered the same fate, your AI is out.
Utopian is a fool's dream

>>6506102
Well, you are right and wrong. Everything hits a ceiling, but with tech it is usually because people then have no idea how to improve it further. AI improves itself and will not stop at human level just because the training data runs out. There are already impossible algos that train AI on AI made stuff labeled by AI. This is how ChatGPT competitor was trained, one that is slightly better but not released to the public. We already experienced one singularity with AI in one field that is very simple for AI, Chess. Chessbots first trained against humans, then trained against chess robots and then hit skill ceiling in the stratosphere. First they beat world champion grandmasters, then they battle against each other and now we have chess bots that are something like several billion times better then the best grandmasters. CGI is still made by humans and you can only get certain amount of realism from 3D models that have effects that humans can think of. And the phone being a brick is because it was already perfect for the average consumer.

>>6504729
One Punch Man started out as a shitty scribble on webcomic tho

>>6505018
This lol. Usually the best way is to give 2-3 choices and that's it. If you're giving them a lot of choices that's all are different and may be appealing they will become even more indecisive and the project would stall.

>>6506145
Ironically, ONE started getting better because he felt unworthy of the attention
He said that there are many other artists who are better but never recieves the fame. Thus, he stopped making doodles and pushed himself further

He is still shit by mangaka standards but he knows there's no cheating

>>6506127
How the fuck can you say that when Google translate is still fucking ass despite all the funding in the world

>>6505023
Its more art then making assets for mobile games (what most digital artists do for living)

>>6506157
AI art is nowhere near hitting its peak btw, recently it learned how to do object orientation and how to generate text on an image

>>6506162
If google can't get rid of translators, ai won't rid of artists.

>>6506167
A perfect translator is an ai "complete" problem. It would have to have a model of the real world to figure out context. With art it seem you can get away with mimicry.

>>6506686
That's billions after billions of dollars spent continuesly for an entire decade

There is 0 excuse.
AI has it's limits and it would always be below skilled laborers

>>6506688
Yes it's a hard problem. But never is a long time. And to be fair, machine translation has come a long way, where I can get by with Google translate/ DeepL on vacation in a country whose langue I do not know.

>>6506696
It's been implemented in 2006
Each year costing millions in research and it is still a last resort option

>>6506688
>AI has it's limits and it would always be below skilled laborers
you don't know that

>>6506700
Current architectures are completely different than the ones people used in 2006. DeepL is using a large language model, for example. You can look up different benchmarks to see their improvements. But I agree with you. Things don't evolve linearly and more breakthroughs are necessary. It's just speculaton on what tech is going to hit a wall. We will only know in retrospect.
And I also agree that we currently can't automate the whole process of making art and animation studios.

>>6506710
Do you think that the data came out magically?

>>6506154
Based. That's how everyone should behave. Not being a lazy fucks like pajeetniggers and actually push themselves to get better.

>>6504580
AI bros have been completely btfo. All the cope about it "not copying others work" has been debunked. Kneel AI losers.

https://www.vice.com/en/article/m7gznn/ai-spits-out-exact-copies-of-training-images-real-people-logos-researchers-find

>>6506712
Which data?

>>6504701
>Tapas will never know anyway
Man AIfags know that they’re hacks from the get-go don’t they?
If AI is truly a “tool” why do people give credit to it in the first place?
That’s like crediting any digital instrument like PS, CSP, your ream paper manufacturer and your pencil manufacturer, crediting your eraser.
Seems like calling yourself an AI artist only gets you ridicule and covers your ass from all the mistakes the AI makes.
Whenever I’m forced to use AI in my work I ain’t crediting these faggot companies and I’m keeping my methods to myself.

>>6506098
Mate, I'll give you this straight and clear:
They don't want it, so don't put it

Stop putting it on our faces and insist that no one can tell.
If you don't like the rules, then go make your own website.

>>6506722
(repost)
How does AI spit out exactly copies if it doesn't store exact copies? Checkmate.

>>6506731
Tell that to the courts when the lawsuits start hitting anon.

>>6504729
Artwork made by a human being is already higher quality than AI art by its very nature.
It’s the difference between a person messaging you on Instagram, and a porn bot messaging you an automated solicitation.
AI art is already worthless because there’s no reason or effort in it. That’s kind of the point of automation.

>>6504743
Consoomer mindset.
>who cares if she’s fucking another man while I pretend that that’s me?

>>6504580
Fuck off faggot, hope no one reads your shitty comic

>>6506087
When you are assembling a comic from prerendered bits,you'll be doing all sorts of Photoshopping, so why not swapping out bits of a character from a prepared stockpile of the character in various poses? I was doing this with my own drawings as the raw material for this 2D sculpture,and its literally the roll of the dice to get something that is close to what you want.

>>6504580
Wait 2 more months, by then they should have figured out how to maintain consistency.

>>6504580
You could train a Lora on your specific characters and then make the comic panel by panel. It's not going to frame your panels or speech bubbles though. That's the hard part you'll need to do on your own. You could write the story with ChatGPT though.

>>6504728
Honestly my dude, it'd probably just be better to write a web novel than to make a comic with AI. Every AI comic I've seen has been a janky and ugly mess that's unpleasant to read, it would be a disservice to your story if you really believe in it.

Though do feel free to use AI to illustrate your story. Alternatively, you could use AI to make a chapter of your comic, or a pitch, to see if an artist would want to collaborate with you rather than be hired.

>>6506157
>How the fuck can you say that when Google translate is still fucking ass
You are factually incorrect, I am ESL and started learning english in late 00s, early 10s, google translate had become orders of magnitude better since then.

>>6506771
>roll of the dice
keep rolling the dice until result==okay ?
This stuff is embarrassingly parallel, so farm/harvest pick winner.

Wow, I haven't read the whole thread but I am plugging away on this very thing without drawing at all and I can say it definitely possible. You have to make some compromises, and for every say 10 images generated, 1 is usable. I'm not going to make a perfect comic or graphic novel and snobs will tear it apart but I'm creating a story that I'd never have been abel to do before AI. This tech isn't just for nerds who want anime teens in bikinis, my love is experimental fiction and contemporary art and AI is amazing for realising ideas and inspiring other ideas.

Also we can all create our own photobooks online for FREE. Centuries of writers and artists would have killed for this technology and we have it for free.

The other thing is for someone who'd love to make a film, a graphic novel is quite a good substitute or even a start before it becomes a film. Its all about the story.

Anyway it's entirely possible and kind of amazing to me people here at /ic/ are slow or reluctant to embrace AI.

>>6508801
Fuck off, shill.

The galaxy brained move is to use AI to cheat at your day job so you can spend more time creating art the way you enjoy.

I messed around with the idea but like someone else said it’s ok for compositions generally, but it has a lot of problems, especially when it comes to characters and continuity.

>>6504580
I like stable diffusion because I can train it with my art and once you get a character chart setup with multiple angles, expressions and poses you can then just make a very rough sketch with a prompt and let AI figure it everything

>>6508864
It’s great for giving you a starting composition or idea though. I made a ton of “multiple panel comic about blah blah prompts and they’re like stories on the tip of the tongue visually speaking.

>>6504580
I am conviced it is totally useless for that sort of thing. I downloaded SD and I can’t get it to genderate anything even remotely useful.

>>6504580
And this thread question goes to show the problem with AI art. People looking for the lowest effort shortcut. Put two people in a room: one fully committed to improving and without looking for easy shortcuts and one constantly browsing the internet looking to do anything BUT improve.

I bet my left nut in 3 years time the former would have become popular, making money or be satisfied in some way while the latter would just be eternally stagnating. These are the AI ""artists"". Basically a more advanced version of the eternal /beg/

>>6508976
>NOOOOOOOOOO YOU CAN'T WORK MORE EFFICIENTLY UNNECESSARY LABOR IS GOOD BECAUSE.....UH.... BECAUSE IT JUST IS!

>>6508871
Inb4 you inadvertently steal another comic artists panel composition line for line and get railed online for it, losing your publishing deal, scarring your reputation forever as being a hack plagiarist

i don't think ai is good for comics lol.

>>6509003
Good response.
Now tell us what works you have done.

Surely, you are not a neet, no?

>>6504580
Create a story, generate each panel with SD and do some post-processing, boom done.

>>6509020
Everything looks so simple on the peak of Dunning Kruger

>>6509003
post your work

>>6509003
>Efficiently

Lmao. You don't even know what "efficient" is. That's the problem with people trying to look for these shortcuts. Otherwise, they would have already become successful with their art already. And since they are complaining/shitposting on /ic/ they most likely have jack shit.

THIS is the supposed AI revolution? Don't make me laugh. Try to AI yourself out of laziness first.

>>6509003
People who drone about working efficiently and taking shortcuts never work on their art. Curious.

>>6506736
>Artwork made by a human being is already higher quality than AI art by its very nature.
NGMI cope "I'm human so I'm better by default"

>>6509035
Is that the reason why you all refuses to tag it as AI?

>>6506688
>cancer research keeps eating billions of dollars for last few decades and we still don't have a definitive solution for it, guess we should stop the research

>>6509040
>comparing research to automation

>>6509003
Downloading a million brushes, 3d assets and tutorial books without using any of them isn't exactly "efficient"

>>6509040

You seriously think art is a "problem" like cancer and something that we need to solve? Tells a lot of how you look at it. It not being made by a human already lowers its value immensely.

Otherwise we wouldn't have sports despite machines being able to bring out several tons of force and 100% accuracy for many decades now.

>>6508976
>Ai artists
There's no such thing, the purpose of Ai is to provide consumers on demand content for those who will be satisfied with their conceptualized painting after whatever rendition the Ai provides. In other words, Ai cuts the middle man and instantly provides results without having to exchange services with anyone else that's the benefit behind Ai it is tailored for consumers and the Ai was created by consumers for the purpose of replacing you. As the Ai advances so will the demand for its content to be refined and built upon and before you know it you will start seeing an element of Ai used in media. I'm already seeing several Ai paintings being used on Jewtube as a filler for nightcore music, cuts the artist lose and allows the consumer to devise any image to their liking.

>>6509042
>literally research of automation
Automation is one of most important things in the world, hell, who knows, maybe one day it'll help us cure cancer
>>6509046
it's not art that needs solving, it's general "intelligent" automation that needs improvement, be it for art, research, coding, whatever
On a side note I'd love to see sports but it's huge machines competing ngl

>>6509053
AI started at research, dumbfuck
Animal testing has been greatly reduced because simulations has reached effective accuracy.

But there are still humans at the helm. Lots of them

>>6509051
Now tell us who is feeding the AI

>>6509056
>dude acting like automation of research is already perfect and doesn't need improving
That's why we are still researching and developing the automation cucktard
Even if the accuracy was 100%, there's still the matter of speed and so on faggot

>>6509061
You're acting in bad faith here, cocksuer
A simulation is a simulation
Automation is automation.

Both are nothing but tools for the human at the helm.

Your futuristic all-robot utopia can never happen because humans cannot create something better than themselves

>>6509057
Not who, what. It's visual images from the public domain.

>>6509069
>public domain images sprouts after the rain

>>6509067
Scientific simulation performed by humans, based on various calculations is a simulation, which is inefficient
Simulation performed by a computer in this context, is an automated simulation
Computers are already better than humans at various tasks, extremly simple one being math
Can a superior AGI be created? Only time will tell, but for specialized purposes, machines are superior to humans already

>>6509078
No it fucking ain't
Machine is just another tool to amplify human productivity

A bag can carry more
A cart can carry more
A pulley can carry more

What makes a tool a tool is the one single fact that they cannot work without a human at the helm.
And there would always be humans at the helm because what was made by humans would always have human errors.

Your scifi shit is bunk and would never happen

To further compound on this scifi bullshit:

Machines have no pewwwings
Machines have no rights

Don't drink the koolaid

>>6509038
Lmao it's because they know nobody wants to see that shit plus they want the glory of real artists while doing nothing.

>>6509038
Because AI art is real art, chud!

>>6509038
Even pajeets acknowledge deep down that AI image generators aren't really impressive

>>6509083
>glory of real artists
What the fuck does that even mean?

>>6509119
Glory of hardwork and determination

>>6509120
>Look at me, I got good at only copying anime
Glorious retard.

>>6509123
You know the drill
pyw

>>6509125
>>>/b/893947277

>>6509131
Hey, that's cool.
Shame you aren't really that far ahead from me

>>6509131
Why did you delete it?

>>6509143
Can't find the original artist. Probably not his work

>>6504580
In order to make a comic book in AI, AI would need to be capable of performing even the most basic continuity techniques.

The only thing AI is good at right now is making convincing still images. sequential art will not work.

>>6504580
There are porn videos of people getting replaced by animated girls using ai, look it up

>>6509233
Consistency will be solved in a couple of years at the absolute most. Most likely some time this year.

>>6509120
I understand this feeling
My highest rank btw

>>6509276
Why censor it? Come on, man. Be proud
Show us what #17 looks like

>>6509262
you are coping. the infamy of this shit is rising, and its popularity is decreasing

>>6509278
I won't dox myself

>>6509262
You're on a dangerous amount of copium, my guy.

>>6509364
Give it a smaller size and a black border. Flip it even.
Let us see it, mate

Don't be shy

>>6504728
if you have the time to draft, fully storyboard, write, design characters, and a lot more, you don't not have the time to draw, you just fucking suck at drawing

pick up a pencil and stop making excuses, basedlard

>>6506710

the more AI shit flood the internet the more trained peoples eyes will get. So much flaws that the average AI user is not capable of fixing even with inpainting.

I'm sorry AI won't get above being generic because it's made for mass image production. If you like art it's never too late to learn.

>>6509369
No
Forget it.
Think of it that I fake it or whatever. I will not show my identity. You may have good will but there are pajeets who can hack and fuck me up.
My achievements are my only emotional support. I don't want to lose it. I already earn zero from art if not sacrificed my saving for Nintendo Switch to buy art supplies

>>6509476
But what if it's better than any human, just like chess AI is superior to even the best grandmaster?

>>6509495
A human can never create something better than them
AI only wins due to the fact that the rules are simple, limited, and there's only a finite amount of possibilities that can be done.
Chess AI isn't even AI to begin with because it is just that simple. Just 200 lines of code and nothing more.

It does not say that machine is better.
It say that humans suffer at spatial analysis

Once you added more rules, or god forbid, it becomes an actual no rules, it can do nothing but just spit out the data that was fed to it.
It won't spit out 1+1=2. No, it would spit out what is most common pattern

And therefore, it can only give you the generic result and nothing more

ai wont draw a dead women covered in shit so screw it

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2v5sVfdr35w&t=37s

>>6509498
What about Go AI then?

>>6509276
Yor

Comics are not art anyway, so using AI is actually perfectly fine in this case.

>>6509495
>>6509498
A machine is only as smart as the person who programmed it.

>>6509517
Itll do 'A woman asleep covered in brown paint

It won't do a man pushing a woman over, but it'll do a man helping a woman up off the ground which looks identical

>>6504580
Kill yourself

>>6509498
What kind of weird Logic is that
>A human can never create something better than them
>Humans create chess engine that are far superior to humans
>Nonono that doesn't count
Also there are countless more different examples of machines created that are better at a task than humans...

>>6511182
It cannot be better than humans if it rely on human supervision in order to work, numbnuts

Tools are tools, no matter how complex

>>6511219
Are you saying that it can't have "consciousnes" and its own agency? Ever? I'm sympathetic to the idea but that's not obvious

>>6511280
It's a fucking TOOL

>>6509498
wtf does better mean then? maybe you should be more precise with your language if you want to make some profound statement

>>6511288
Yes I agree. Current systems are narrow tools. But like >>6511291 says, "better" as you use it makes little sense to me.
Is the
>we can't ever make anything better than us
Supposed to be some retarded take on Godels incompleteness theorem?

>>6511291
>>6511296
It cannot be better than humans if it rely on humans to start with

The tool is not better than the human
The human with a tool is better than the human without a tool

That's it.
Stop drinking the cool aid

>>6511306
Ok but potentially one artists could do the job of 5 artists due to these tools, reducing the need for as many artists

>>6511339
>small game dev teams that couldn't afford 5 artists now only have to hire 1
>cheaper to start a small dev team now
>more people form small teams that hire artists

>>6506098
lmao the seething, just draw you lazy faggot

>>6511339
If you think AI will actually save you money, you deserve to have your business collapse.

>>6511439
It's already near impossible to make a living off of indie game development. Machine learning will make it impossible (not just for artists either)

I'm a new AI artist and honestly I think there will still be work for brushmonkeys, like sometimes there is only barely something wrong with an art that I make but I don't really have the tools or skills to fix it, so instead of just making a new batch I could pay someone a little bit to touch up the mistake

been trying to create a consistent style for backgrounds for a few days now
unfortunately if you try to keep it in consistent style it's just not possible to be able to generate everything you want.
For example it's really hard for the AI to generate an underground city with this style

>>6511978
Resolution too high I can almost discern the details

>>6512001
what?
i didn't even upscale this, i'm just showing the style

>>6506127
>There are already impossible algos that train AI on AI made stuff labeled by AI
This is going to make a worse AI. The AI is going to train to reproduce AI-style botched hands.

AI art

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7NK_JOkuSVY

>>6506098
>>6506127
lmao
lazy fucks aren't gonna get anywhere.
pajeets banking on muh crutch AI to make up for hard work because he wants to play vidya games and seething on /ic/

>>6514000
>Producer: Shibuya
>A literal NFT scam marketplace
I could never see that coming

>>6509478
I'm curious what you think will happen.
The only thing we would know is "this guy posts on /ic/"... we wouldn't even know WHAT you post. The most inflammatory thing you've said is "pajeets" so at worst you'd be canceled for anti-Indian racism.

>>6509080
Humans are just a tool for the societal machine

Even a highschooler knows it's a scam

>>6504580
I've used it for concept ideas, but that's as far as it went.

>>6514028
I don't mind cancel faggots. My Twitter full off things that woke fags deem hate speeches and I will just tell them to fuck off.
However of they know I visit this place, they may accuse me of using pirated materials which is a thing my Japaneses friends hate the most.
Hacking is the worst
A lot of artists associate with this place but they are subtle and humble.

>>6506730
>If you don't like the rules, then go make your own website.
As others have pointed out, AIfags want to feel special and validated without any effort or quality control. This is why they flooded preexisting platforms, and why the few platforms they tried to make themselves are practically dead.

>>6509003
I've used AI. It's anything but efficient.

>>6506098
>use AI to get around learning to draw
>jump through a million hoops and take 3x as long to make anything because you need to teach the fucking computer how to draw instead and cover your tracks with elaborate fake workflows

>>6504580
Comics will be AI's true roadblock. At best it will produce uncanny valley novelty comics, in the same vein as 3D or photo comics (when was the last time you read one of those?).
Cartooning is the natural language of comics, there's an art to 'readable pictures.' I even find painted comics suck due to this.

>>6506102
>>6504653
>tapas
>skeb
Literally who sites. The big ones pixiv, deviantart and even artstation embrace the future ala AI art. Stay mad drawlets.

>>6514848
Click on pixiv AI tag
It leads you straight to a tutorial on how to block it

Make your own conclusion from that

Also, Skeb is not a literally who website

>>6514848
>artstation
>now owned by epic games
If that's the future, I don't want it.

>>6506087
It basically sucks at everything except titties and any other white female body part coombrains fap to. It's literally just virgin incel pajeets using tech to make 2D women of their dreams because they'll never fuck any real life one ever.

That's literally all AI has been used for. It will never do everything every artist in history would ever want their art piece to be without them doing it themselves.

>>6514990
There's a post about a music video with millions of views it's just been used for

>>6514992
And? MrBeast gets those just from breathing.
You do realize 1 million out of 8 billion is less than 1% of humanity, right retard? And so far, there's been zero video with 1% of the entire planet's population going "PRAISE AI GLORIOUS SIRS!"

What's the best ai anime art generator?

why doesnt this board have a SD general

>>6514996
Holy cope

>>6509003
>UNNECESSARY LABOR
It's not labor, you're never ever going to shit out a rocket to Pluto in a hour no matter how much you shill out the grey matter AI as a "solution" Things takes time, that's the law of the universe.

>>6506725

>>6515004
Have you tried a gun in your mouth.

>>6515010
Aishill, is that all you can say?

>>6514848
>The big ones pixiv, deviantart and even artstation embrace the future ala AI art.
Pixiv frontloads users with the option to block ai submissions. Deviantart and Artstation's traffic decreased big time once they embraced ai shit.

>>6508801
>Anyway it's entirely possible and kind of amazing to me people here at /ic/ are slow or reluctant to embrace AI.
I've experimented with it and probably most here have (whether they admit it or not).
>Its all about the story.
Yeah, that's the problem, it's not good at storytelling. Even if character consistency is achieved, it lacks the expressiveness of good cartooning (pic related). It's probably best used for environments and mood boards.
But hey, if it works for you have fun.

>>6504580

I took a week to learn about AI and try to find a way to work with it. guess what? I can't. The result is so fucked that I end up spending hours trying to fix it. It might not seem like it at first glance but AI shit is so flawed and as an artist you can see all those flaws It's a fucking nightmare.

for the average person it might be good enough. but not for an artist. we value our work and are most critical about our own art. I don't see how I can use AI art generation as part of my workflow. It's literally torture.

>>6515241
>muh hands
Basicly fixed with inpainting. And now it's
>muh expressionrinos
Keep moving the goalpost "artists".

>>6515362
>NOOOOOOO STOP NITPICKING THE FLAWS! ART IS NOT SUPPOSE TO BE GOOD!

>>6515273
Learning new tools is a pain, no doubt. Things are moving very fast anyway so what you learn today may be irrelevant in an year, still it seems worth at least dabbling into AI if you are an artist.

>>6515273
Not only that. Ai will never produce what you envision just a generation somewhat close to it. And on top of that you need to fix the mistakes it does. You are literally a cuck to a machine. All the fun decision making? Gone.

>>6515388
Call us when it can actually produce something that is useful
And by useful, I mean something that can be copyrighted.

I have absolutely ZERO interest in learning something that I cannot own.

>>6515388
And before you spout shit:
No. Every attempt by ai "artists" to copyright it have failed. All of them get thrown out the moment they realized that it was AI.

Why? Because copyright is reserved for works made with human hands

>>6515399
Photographs are copyrighted, seems like a pretty easy case. Also if you are an artist you'll probably do some post-processing which will meet the minimum requirement for copyright.

>>6515388
Did you really slap a noise filter and chromatic aberration on your pic to hide the artifacts?
That's kinda pathetic.

>>6515460
No? That's the result of the smudge stick in photoshop, picrel is the original generation for reference.

>>6515471
generation for reference
Nigga, I just created this (only used the Mona Lisa for reference)

>>6515485
I mean for reference to the smudge effect, retard.

What can we do to stop these pirate SD models? Crack down on tor? Put the government in control of the internet?

>>6515497
>chatgpt please generate a response to this AI bozo
>prompting..
>prompting..
>prompting complete!

Chatgpt: Did I ask?

Did I ask?

>>6514990
>It basically sucks at everything except titties and any other white female body part coombrains fap to
are you only seeing what /sdg/ makes or something?

>>6504580
Comics is one of the absolutely worst usecases for AI art. I would not recommend using it at all. Can't do consistent characters, can't do any sort of complex interactions and spatial relationships are fucked. If you want anything specific you're fucked.

>>6515511
yeah it can make fappable dudes too

>>6504580
Unless you can train your own model on midjourney I would stick with SD

>>6515526
Fappable in the same way a fat juicy cock is?
Cuz yeah that shit do be hella phallic lookin'

Quit whining to the jannies about AI. Just stop.

>>6514713
>>6515273
>>6515392
Every AI workflow that's supposed to be convenient is long and boring. When I tried to integrate AI into my workflow, the only thing it did was encourage me to photobash with actual stock photos in a more integrated way on top of drawing from scratch with correct perspectives. It's good for the most basic concepting and using it as a guide, but nothing else.
I generated a few to try and sell as prints, but while I was trying to figure out how to tweak them, I got disgusted and decided to do my own pieces based on the concepts they generated.
On the one hand, it's pushed me to do more with my art and give me ideas on to draw, like a writing prompt, and do more than just draw characters in a void. It also got me animating my work and not rushing to feed any algorithm just out of sheer spite.
On the other hand, trying to edit an AI picture feels like a stupid seek and find game. I don't feel satisfied. I don't want to post it anywhere. There is nothing fulfilling and fun about fixing basic shit like eyes or hands on something that would take me 60-120 mins to draw and render from scratch.

>>6515569
so AI art is both ineffective and an infringement that must be curtailed?

>>6515581
Is that supposed to be a contradiction?

>>6504580
kys

>>6515586
I doubt it. The infringement is already one thing; but the defense that it could improve workflow in its current state is up for grabs. As an artist who both enjoys the process and makes money from it, I've found the generators to be useless and doesn't solve any of my workflow issues outside of "I need an idea."
In its current state, it's better for people who chase social media relevancy and want to LARP being an artist. Maybe a print seller who needs new content to run through their machine, but is too cheap to licence anything after blowing $$$$-$$$$$ on a semi-industrial machine. Or for POD shop fillers.
I even did the DALL-E beta where they were moreso pushing it for creators to utilize.

>>6515454
>Photographs are copyrighted
Wrong, the story behind the photo is copyrighted, it's the setting behind the picture that's own to the photographic, not the camera you bought from the store. The owner of the camera is the creator of the camera, keeping you from stealing it and forging a fake copy to use for profit.

There's even been cases people have taken images of shit at the same time that made people think someone stole from the other, and they had to met up in person to realize they just were lucky enough to take the same moment in the time at the same time

AI art is never like this because it's stolen art from past examples, it's never something doing "in the moment" of the present. It literally takes past works to make remixed garbage.

>>6515667
Most of what you said doesn't make any sense, but my point was that photographs meet the minimum creative input required for copyright and that's a very low bar that AI could potentialy also meet.

>>6515682
>Most of what you said doesn't make any sense,
Of course it doesn't, to a 3rd world shitter like yourself

> but my point was that photographs meet the minimum creative input required for copyright
Yeah, by being taken by a human with the intention of the human getting everything they wanted in a photo. It's exactly why the monkey photo aka non human taken photo = no copyright.

> and that's a very low bar that AI could potential also meet.
Wrong, see above. Non human = no copyright. Cope and dilate.

>>6515682
How can you believe something that a computer ultimately generated with 0s and 1s and a few beep boops can meet the bar of copyright?

Am I an environment artist when I play a video game that has procedurally generated environments?
Straight silly proposition, fine sir

>>6515388
>Learning new tools is a pain, no doubt. Things are moving very fast anyway so what you learn today may be irrelevant in an year
Okay, well then I'll just stick with the old tools. If I can draw with a pencil it'll still be relevant in 50 years (hell, even with the advent of digital the best artists of the last 10 years, like KJG, still draw traditionally).

>>6515689
A human has to prompt and curate the ai images. A human has to code the model. A human has to train the model. The ai does not make images by itself for no reason and without a human instructing it to.
Relies on human input just like photos= art.

>>6515708
>curate images generated by pure chance = human input

So like if I bought a robit that makes garage band songs out of my proompting; 123 bpm, happy, banjo, retard theme song, 101 seconds long
Am I then a composer? are the songs that were generated based on my proompts but that I ultimately had no creative control over other than 'this version sux this other one good' at the end of the day my creation, or the robits?
It's not much different from 50 y/o mothers from Arkansas splashing acrylic paint over a stretched canvas they bought at Walmart and calling it avant-garde post modern art

>>6515689
>>6515690
Digital cameras also ultimately just generate 0s and 1s, they simply capture in a digital format what is already present in the world. Not unlike AI art which simply arranges 0s and 1s to capture something from it's latent space, in both cases guided by a human's creative input.

>>6515724
By your logic browsing 4chan and browsing the dark web for cheese pizza are one and the same since both are just 1s and 0s
What say you in your defense pdf?

>>6515708
>A human has to prompt and curate the ai images.
So does looking up shit on Google Search makes me an artist?
Does playing an order at MickyDs makes me a chef?
>A human has to code the model.
Coders are not artists.
>A human has to train the model.
Trainers are not artists.
> The ai does not make images by itself for no reason
Because it's not actual AI and thus, can't have human rights like copyright.
>and without a human instructing it to.
Instructors are not artists.

>Relies on human input just like photos
Wrong. It steals shit from a databank from servers to make shit close to the prompts provided. Real AI art would be your own art from scratch used to remix into generated garbage, but at least it's only using your actual work you didn't steal.

I use tools to make art. I am an artist.
One of those tools is AI. I am an AI artist.

Deal with it.

>>6515763
I deepfake myself onto Usain Bolt, I am now the fastest sprinter of all time.

Deal with it.

>>6515777
End product of Usain Bolt is him running, product of your deepfake is a video. AI art end product is image, same as other art. Next

>>6515782
I make a latex mask of your mother, I am now your mother?!

Go do the dishes and get a job you bag o' puke!

>>6515763
More realistically you write inputs in order to get a product. If you're an artist, a client asking for a specific product is also an artist.

>>6515782
An artist can easily move out of the computer and still produce images, you know

>>6515763
I push buttons in a factory I am a craftsman

Suck a cock, cunt
Government says fuck off

>>6515362
It's much more than just facial expressions, hands, or any singular element. By expressiveness I meant art that expresses intent.
I find it curious, despite AI's advancement, it can't do something as simple as pic attached. Something about intentional drawing by a skilled artist eludes the models, which is why the KJG model failed. AI tends to be a postmodern kitsch style randomizer, which is fine if that's the scope of your 'art.'

>>6515782
So if I throw a microwave meal into the microwave I'm a chef? Since both of us produce food?
Flawless cope /beg/let

>>6515724
> plebbit logic

>>6515763
That's fine anon, I don't mind if you call yourself an artist. Pic related can be art (that guy could actually draw too, btw), and I accept an expansive definition of art.
But I doubt most who use AI will call themselves "AI artists." I say own it, but I know most will not because they know the stigma attached. And there will always be envy of the artist who can draw well.

Ground hog day. Again.
Cope. Seethe. Mald.
Rinse Repeat.

>>6515763
You are a bugman.

>>6515809
I'm an ai artist

>>6515958
That's fine anon. Make sure to put it in all your socials so people know the wonders of your medium, lol.

What's the best platform to offer my services as a brushmonkey to clean up AI art?
I might as well accept that this is the reality moving forward, and why not get in and make a name for myself on the ground floor?
Lots of people can get something almost workable with AI, then I could charge a little to clean it up.

Thoughts and suggestions?

>>6516009
I do already

>>6516032
Forced meme is forced.

>>6504580
Two of the most paramount requirements for comics as a baseline is consistency and intent, both of which ai can't do.

>>6516032
>Thoughts and suggestions?
Learn AI. Master it and do your own post-processing.

>>6516032
bump for real advice

>>6504580
there is a lora for b/w manga, but you still need to do the initial sketches, or you'll spend hours and hours of useless proompting

>>6515009
this board is in suicide watch, people get meltdowns and start screeching over how AI will never replace them even though it's not even a debate anymore

>>6517463
Just get the brain implant. It makes things easier.

>>6517463
There's really nothing happening

>>6517477
what do you mean? I really don't see any way it's inherently limited, it needs to be fed better data and the dataset needs to be biased towards what you look to get out of it but with the introduction of LORAs it seems clear it's actually not as convoluted to do as I thought

>>6517482
Nothings happening and nothing would happen because it cannot be copyrighted

A spam at best and scam at worst

>>6517482
>introduction of LORAs
ELI5: what is LORA , what does it do?

>>6517485
>eli5
back to redd*t with you

>>6517485
basically you have a model that generates the images, on top of that model you can enable another model that's called a LORA, say for example the regular model you use generates a human figure, now you can also enable a LORA that consists of furfag shit and it then makes the human figure a furry figure

it's suprisingly effective at doing this

I know I didn't explain technical details because I'm not in a position to do so...

>>6517484
this copyright and art teft shit is a cope, ban it in the US and shit will happen in china etc.

>>6517493
Give it copyrights and suddenly, the office gets flooded with millions of spam. Fuck off

Photobash tech has existed since 90s and never had one.

>>6517497
copyright shit doesn't matter most artists and the way they make money

also who cares about your donutsteel artwork when it's drowned in a flood of generated artwork anyway?

>>6517501
Cope

>>6517502
I'm not the one coping, instead I recognize that there's no inherent limitation to what this new tech can do and how it will impact the world regardless of how you feel about it

>>6517506
>inherent limitation
>>6517482
>inherently limited
not that anon but
you can literally only output what is input. You can't do poses where the character is upside down because you haven't got enough handstands in the database and the AI can't handle facial features upside down. And now the house of cards comes down with the copyright lawsuit reducing the available database to nothing worth generating legally.
Learn to draw, then you aren't limited. AI is limited by its nature.

>>6517517
you can do different poses, I've used the anythingfurry model tons and it is capable of different poses and vantage points, it shits itself when it comes to crowds though

what I mean by it not being inherently limited is that the dataset can always be expanded to include what you want out of it, also with LORA you can do this on top of the existing general purpose model, if you just want to add some specific element that it's unable to do like a certain artstyle or pose etc.

>>6517517
the big company models at least are trained on literally billions of images so it probably covers whatever pose the human body is capable of being in lol

>>6517493
I can literally tell which pictures of Photonoko this sampled from.

Tell me, doesn't any of this fells really fucking pointless to you?

>>6517528
I thought that was using a kikurage LORA but go ahead and post whatever it stole from lol

anyway imagine you use some general purpose model to generate a pose that's not by any artists but just a photograph, then you apply a style transfer on top of it, meaning the end result will look like it's drawn by some specific artist yet the composition and pose is based on a photograph, this is what's happening now

>Tell me, doesn't any of this fells really fucking pointless to you?
I don't know what you mean

>>6516032
Maybe fiverr, but reconsider debasing yourself in this way anon

>>6517535
Yes and please refrain from spamming this shit around, specially on /v/.

Even autistis are self aware enough to understand that people don't want to see the endless shit they generated with AI.

>>6517545
I generally don't post any AI shit on 4chan. Look at what thread you are in you actual schizo.

>>6517535
would it not make you happier to see the actual works of that artist you mentioned instead of generating shitty knock-off images?

>>6517553
I would be happier if this AI shit didn't exist but now that it does I feel like it devaluates a lot of art

>>6517560
It only devaluates AI art.

>>6517569
how come? why do I care about some furfag coomer artist that shits out a drawing or two a week when the AI can steal the entire niche and artstyle and shit out an endless supply of artwork that replicates the artists work and on top of that can be further optimized to my tastes?

>>6517463
Proompts are ugly and you're a faggot.

>>6517573
Do whatever you wanr, just keep that garbage off my feed.

whats the point of of all this? For prompters I cant see any meaningful or fullfilment out of prompting other than the hit of dopameme from clout or coom, when the money dries up will people still be endlessly trying to generate AI?

>>6517577
the datasets have room for improvement but a year ago you got unrecognizable blobs and now it's better than most of /ic/ lol

is this art?

>>6517581
don't worry I don't pretend that having the computer shit out artwork is worth building some fucking twitter account around or whatever, but I do recognize that in general people won't give a shit about some random twitter artist if the computer is able to do the same

>>6517573
> Endless supply of artwork.

Infinite pictures and each one as empty and worthless as the next one, and that's exactly why you need so many, it's like being a millionaire in Zimbabwean dollars.

You don't value the craft of the artist, sure as hell you don't value whatever the fuck the bootleg is, that's why having a picture or three thousands makes no difference.

In the end AI vanishes as if none of the generations ever existed, one as trivial and ephemeral as the other.

Ai users can't code, can't draw, low level or completely zero creativity. And they waste time trying to create the perfect model or find ways to hide the fact that they use AI.

I find the early days of ai where it just shits out literally random blobs to be much more useful. It's fun to find shape within shapes. The feeling of creating something on your own is something you ai users will never taste. I actually feel sad for you people. You can pretend all you want but deep down you know you're nothing.

>>6517596
well yeah commercial art and coomer art isn't exactly special, most imitate nature after all

if you draw a figure then I guess it's empty and worthless too as any other figure because it's a copy of nature, it uses anatomy and principles of light and form or whatever the fuck you want to compare it to

It's fun, simple as

>You can pretend all you want but deep down you know you're nothing.
I don't mean to be an armchair psychologist, but this looks like textbook projection to me.
I'm sure you feel quite sad. But cheer up! I am an AI artist and I can also code, draw/paint to some degree, and pretty sure I have non-zero creativity.
Deep down I know I'm pretty okay! I hope you feel the same about yourself, friendo

>>6517603
Keep telling yourself that.

In the end, the art you make yourself is something you OWN, it's literally tangible, literally yours.

All AI generators can do is produce smoke, something so expendable that when it vanishes it's like it never existed to beguin with.

>>6517614
Sniiffaaaaa

>>6517615
also I like to imagine the little figure is the robot's papa, waving so-long to his creation taking its first steps into the unknown!

>>6517618
I don't understand why this ownership aspect or whatever you exactly mean by it matters

>>6517614
no, it's not fun at all ;__;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8I9pYCl9AQ

this video encapsulates art automation lol
feels terrible but reality is what we obey regardless of how we feel

Do people really not realize the importance of copyright and fucking ownership of the damn IP

Holy fucking shit!

It's entire reason why media empires exist in the first place and there's billions after billions spent every year just to protect their copyrights

How can people be this fucking stupid
Are you fags high on own farts every moment of the day?

>>6517630
how exactly is copyright shit relevant to some average twitter/patreon/fotm coomer artist?

>>6517632
It's not until they started their own IPs.

Artbooks, comics, and games. Then it becomes their lifeblood

>>6517615
>>6517621
>>6517585
>>6517405
>>6517019
rate my AI arts, or are they just images? I think they have soul but am interested in your honest feedback.

>>6517632
are you implying it should only apply to big corps? I hope not

>>6517632
Venom was originally an OC donut steel
Marvel paid the artist 3M for the IP

So I'd say very

>>6517644
I'm not implying it should or shouldn't apply but instead I'm wondering how does copyright even play a role in practice when you can't exactly ban this shit in practice

>>6517643
you're bad at using the software

I'M PROOOOOOOOOOOMPTING AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGF

>>6517632
It's something that should be relevant to every artist. Fan art of existing franchises is fun and all, but the big money is owning IP. And for those worried about AI, it could be a silver bullet.

>>6517652
I don't think I spent any time cleaning any of those up, if that's what you mean. I do that sometimes though to pretty good effect, and it is a nice process that feels good.
Besides cleaning up obvious things, do you have any suggestions at how I could be better at using the software?

>>6517663
If AI makes the supply of your IP essentially infinite then it wont be worth shit, basic economics.

>>6517665
dunno what you're looking for in your results but they look wonky, distorted, confusing, amateurish, lack consistence, symmetry, depth, form and so on

>>6517666
fanart has never killed anyone

>>6517666
If you don't own the IP, then they are called fan arts.
All it does it make the IP more popular

>>6517666
That's implying that the shit the AI outputs has any value at all.

How fucking much are the ai generated KimJungGi sketches worth?

>>6517670
think of it as the industrial revolution, automation is more efficient and you can't compete with the output

>>6517670
>>6517671
We're talking a completely different scale here. Not today or tomorrow but that's the kinda future we're heading towards.

>>6517675
I assume the average patreon fotm artist suffers though, why would their fotm art be worth anything when what they output is nothing special?

>>6517678
>>6517681
And so?
It's still a damn fanart.

You cannot steal an IP by spamming fanarts.

>>6517686
I guess I'm not thinking from some disney/marvel/pixar perspective but instead at the level of what's realistic for an /ic/ artist to aspire to be, which is not one who invents the next super mario but who instead just panders to demand

>>6517669
Those are all okay by me and to various degrees I agree. They aren't precious to me like my trad art is, but I think they are pretty nice.
However, I don't think you'd give nearly such criticism to something which was on a similar level that you didn't know was AI. But, a disagreement here will go nowhere as I'm accusing you of having a bias, which nobody really wants to admit to, even if it was true, and there's no way to "prove" it either way.
Have a great day anyhow!

>>6517687
You think that spamming your damn fanarts can kill off the official account?

Dumbfuck

If you want to know what /ic/ is capable off:

We personally got licensed for an event at Nevada for our webcomic and your kind can only wish you can have authority over your art
And we are not a top tier /ic/ artist

>>6517690
nah, I've always been technical oriented when it comes to valuing artwor, consistency, accuracy, perspective, form, rendering, composition, harmony etc. are what I'm impressed by

you know the draftsmanship aspect, creating art was always a display of skill to me and I generally thought that a lot of the hand waviness around soul was just hippie shit lol

>>6517691
>You think that spamming your damn fanarts can kill off the official account?

well yeah I don't see how the next big coomerbux collector on patreon will rise to popularity when their gig is automated and their style stolen

who's the ai now

>>6517686
you're not seeing the bigger picture, just wait a few years it'll dawn on you.

>>6517699
what's your style?

>>6517660
too bad i will never find out where this was sourced from orginally
also her belt doesnt even look the same

>>6517702
>this was sourced from orginally
what? it's lucy from cyberpunk

>>6517699
I'm not like those other AI artists.
>Category 4:
>Batmens

>>6517697
>>6517700
Do you guys seriously think that art is limited just on coomerbux at patreon?

This is hilarious

I already told you that our IP allowed us to have an event at Nevada.
They would be selling our characters as merchandise.

And you still don't get the value of Intellectual Rights

>>6517706
bro that looks nothing like lucy

>>6517708
yeah I do think that most of the art industry is not revolving around coming up with some brand that you own and instead is just about pandering to demand

>>6517709
she's in her rebellious reen phase

>>6517710
He does not even know how big the #original art tag is

>>6517712
why is the style different than before

>>6517716
not him but if you want a consistent style you use a LORA that focuses on some specific style or character

>>6517716
because i'm testing different styles

>>6517697
People like watching streams. Interacting with commissioners, doing raffles, trades, giveaways.

I've seen shitty artists technically wise with huge communities around their IPs.

Ai is literally dead, however most ai communities I participate they understand that people don't want to see their shit unsolicited.

>>6517721
>People like watching streams. Interacting with commissioners, doing raffles, trades, giveaways.

my argument is that this will fade more and more to obscurity as AI keeps improving, becomes more intuitive to use and gets more widespread

what you're talking about is from a world without AI being the norm, times change

>>6517718
no i want to find out where the style came from you trained it on

>300+ replies

>>6517724
Replicas sell less than originals and no one gives a crap about digital copies

Why?
Because Art is subjective, cunt

And since you can't have copyright, you cannot own anything over your own account

You own nothing and you won't be happy

>>6517731
yeah I'm sure there's five boomers following morse code operators too but the marketshare sure has shrunk with the advent of more advanced communication methods lmao

>>6517733
Security is not a subjective matter
Art is.

Some of the best trolling I've done in ages was soon after SD dropped. I would post human-made art as AI art and challenge /ic/ to explain why it's bad. Of course the inevitable criticisms piled on, mostly about it being obviously machine-created and soulless etc.
People will naturally judge things harsher the more they disapprove of them, but it's been pretty fascinating to see it displayed so plainly.

>>6517737
I don't what security has to do with anything, tapping some button to transmit messages was a useful skill before better technology came along making morse code operators useless, it has nothing to do with how secure the communication is

>>6517731
Why do you think you can't copyright output from machines? Do you have a Supreme Court decision or something? Can I post process output from these machines and claim copyright?

>>6517741
not only this but what if you just trace over the AI result, how will you prove if it was machine made?

>>6517740
Actually, morse code became encryption because it is more secured

Art is a completely subjective matter
Furry porn makes more money than any proper art. for no other reason than the fact that it's a subjective matter

>>6517724
I don't think AI has a technical issue.

It's a culture issue.

People don't want to see it posted as if it was art by illustrators, it pisses them off immensely.

I think maybe the acceptance of AI techniques might improve with time with the development of new tools and methods of incorporating it on the normal digital workflow.

But I don't expect image generation to go far when it comes to culture, I see it as something akin to 3D model comics, experimental, janky, sketchy, but still didn't find it's best use yet.

>>6517741
>>6517745
Matter of fact, yes.
It's a Court order that anything not made by human hands is not copyrightable

>>6517746
you don't know what morse code even is lol, it was just a method to transfer information over a distance where the frequency of the beeps corresponded to letters, for instance titanic had a morse code operator sending out mayday messages this way

>>6517754
Cool

>>6517750
but what if you trace over the result?
>>6517747
most people are content with mass produced factory made consumer goods and only a small minority cares enough to seek hand made stuff

>>6517700
gotta love how AIshills be nostradamus all the time, kek

>>6517760
Tracing over uncopyrighted AI is cool, actually

Tracing still takes effort
Buuuuut we all know that you won't do that

>>6517760
tracing something well does take some skill.
you won't put in the effort to do that lol.

>>6517747
I think this is more reasonable, if you compare it to what emerged from crypto, it basically became despised by the general populace due to all the rampent scams shilling etc. AI is already starting to follow the same path.
>>6517760
people dont care about factory made shit that because their they have a clean concious when they buy said they. Most of them arnt even told about what goes on about the lithium child labor or the suicide nets in the iphone factory as long as they can do it with a clear mind. AI shit is more infront and directly facing you

>>6517762
another question I thought of, what if you train the AI using only your own intellectual property, do you own what it spits out then or not?
>>6517765
everyone knows about sweatshop labour lol, people just care more about the product than how it was made, let's not kid ourselves

>>6517769
>another question I thought of, what if you train the AI using only your own intellectual property, do you own what it spits out then or not?
No.
There are already people who claim to use nothing but photographs that they took themselves

Still got rejected

>>6517769
yeah how often is that put out to you when said product shilled to you though. Companies will pay millions to keep that shit on the down low.

>>6517760
If you think that Tracing is magic, then I have some really really bad news for you

Go on, go out and trace your AI and witness how hard it is

>>6517761
hey I'm not claiming to have a crystal ball, that's just my intuition.

>>6517760
I don't think they will want all their art to be mass made, Not that I have any faith in normies not swallowing slop, it's just that it speaks to deeper human nature to value things like craft and skill, and I believe most people value things done with care and passion, they literally pay money for that.

It's an ego thing, to appreciate an artwork is to appreciate human achievement, it makes us feel good knowing that humans can do it , you can't have that with ai.

It's like making endless MI movies with a deep faked Tom Cruise instead of him acting on them, some normies will swallow the slop, but I believe a sizeable parcel with refuse to pay to watch something like that, missing a core ingredient of authenticity that is fundamental to art.

>>6517775
didnt normies swallow that shit when starwars reused some dead women or some shit

>>6517771
are you really suggesting people don't realize how unethical a lot chinese factory labour is lol? people just look the other way out of convinience
>>6517772
I actually like drawing and my question was more out of curiosity

>>6517775
I follow certain coomer artists because they have high technical skills and aesthetic stylization and pander to my fetishes

I have no reason to follow them if I can take what I like from them and have the computer replicate it

>>6517778
you will be surprised how braindead the average person is.

>>6517782
my point of view is that perhaps you assume people don't have blatant double standards to justify convinience while I do think this is the case

>>6517780
I can't relate to that sorry.

I literally follow and donate to several artists of lower skill than mine.

AI art does nothing to me, so it's irrelevant if it exists or not.

>>6517780
doesnt that mean you would have to invest time to have the computer generate stuff for you to look at? I wouldnt see where that would be worth it

>>6517785
yeah I understand, I'm just result oriented
I did like how impressive developing the skills to do high quality artwork is but the value of that is lost now, that's what automation does

>>6517786
the computer can pander even more specifically to my tastes and produce more results in a quicker succession

>>6517782
I think it's something akin to asking people to pay for synthetic dehydrated food when they can still buy normal food.

Ok, it may be cheaper, faster and more convenient, but nigga, I'd rather have normal food.

>>6517794
but it seems like sooner than later the two will be indistinguishable from each other unlike in your analogy

>>6517775
There's also a strong social (parasocial?) aspect to art. People enjoy biographies of their favorite artists, line up to get autographs from them, watch their youtubes, engage them online, etc.

>>6517797
still rather have a person I know make something even if it was indistiguishable from a fake. There were already clones of other artists to begin with that were hard to tell apart from the orginal, even before this whole AI thing.

>>6517800
yeah because they are able to do something most cannot

>>6517802
while I'm not like that, I do understand there's a group that appriciates handmade work for the sake of it, however you do have to admit that this AI shit will eat marketshare like crazy as it competes in the same general industry

>>6517797
Let's just say the synthetic food can have any taste you want but only the texture of dog food lol.

AI art is instantly recognizable.

Stop trying to devalue art as "just images that can be replicated"

Art is the single most subjective thing in the world.

No one cares about the photographs displayed on billboards but simple oil paintings on Etsy can fetch a massively high price.
People value the painting better because it was made by a human.

People don't want AI because it is not human. Simple as.
AI artists don't want to use AI tag because they know that, deep down

>>6517807
My bet is.

Prompt Image generation, the one where you train it from databases of artists and such, will die out in relevance due to a similar process to what happened with NFTs, public rejection and outcry.

AI technology will be incorporated into drawing tools in novel ways, it will be part of the workflow seamlessly, but while still preserving the general culture and work ethics of today's digital art.

Ai will take over but not in the way people pushing it think.

>>6517808
cmon on now, a year ago you got some distorted blurry blobs out of it and now it's shockingly close to beinig the real deal, I don't see how it can't further improve

I find it hard to get different surface textures out of it and multiple materials etc.

it likes to make things loo like plastic if you try to make it look 3D

>>6517813
I don't understand this comparison to NFT, what's the equivelancy ?

>>6517807
i am not going to deny that, your free to do as you please. I doubt theres going to be much in the way of stopping people from abusing AI. As I see it the best one can do is label it as AI or not AI despite the eventual frauds will be all over but frauds have existed for thousands of years so i dont think it will change much

>>6517814
It's not a technical issue, it could be perfect, it still has deeper problems than just the quality of the output.

>>6517816
scammers shills pajeets

>>6517820
general hand wavy statement


NFT pictures of monkeys was just some ponzi scheme shit

>>6517821
Ethics matter and people don't enjoy being scammed, tricked or stolen from.

Current image generation tech has huge issues on the technical and legal front that makes it impossible to integrate in any studio or company.

>>6517822
I don't think people are as ethical as you do

>>6517822
Didn't Netflix Japan and WIT Studio just do that?

>>6517825
No.
They claim that they used AI assistance but when you go look at the original image generation, it was competely unrecognizable to what WIT made in the end

The best way I can explain why AI feels off is by a weird skate video analogy.

Imagine a community of skateboarders that love sharing footage of their tricks and tapes, and everything you see is a trick done in real life by a real athlete, when you see something impressive like a guy jumping down an entire stair set, it was actually done, when you see a 900 down a halfpipe someone actually DID that.

people watch the videos to admire the skill and talent of the skaters, and to see that what they pulled off is possible, and to get inspired and do the same shit, to really value when a hard trick is pulled off.

now imagine someone somewhere developed a tool where you can make fake skate videos very easily, and suddenly the community is flooded with fake VFX skate videos of niggas doing tripple frontflips down stairsets, and doing 1080s everywhere Tony Hawks style, but every frame or other the skater blinks, or has two heads, or clips through a wall or something.

some people might watch these videos and think they are cool, but there is no skateboarding skill to admire, there are no tricks being done in real life, they might watch it for the special effects or the 3D skills, but not for the skateboarding.

What is there to admire is the fact that someone ACTUALLY DID the cool things you are seeing, that's what people admire, not only the fact that the video shows a dude doing five rotations on a half-pipe, but the fact that the trick ands skill is REAL.

>>6517852
art is more commercial rather than some sporting even like chess or whatever

>>6517844
Well but they integrated AI in their workflow, the thing you said is impossible?

if chatgpt can tell me what happens when a monkey gets sucked into a jet engine then AI sure as hell can do art

>>6517807
>you do have to admit that this AI shit will eat marketshare like crazy as it competes in the same general industry
It's already at the quality point where it should be competing, yet I'm not seeing the apocalyptic effect on commissions, patreons, jobs, etc.
I remember some AI 'artists' trying to sell NFTs when the hype started and whining on Twitter on how hard it was, lmao.
You would think someone would find a marketing angle to make bank with it, but something's missing. Like humans or something.

>>6517885
>>6517852
The major areas this will impact won't be selling pieces, obviously.
But animation studios, concept art, videogame assets, ... they will steadily become driven by an AI-touchup cycle.
tradchads are uneffected by this, in my estimation. But also more limited in commercial avenues.

>>6517893
How can it make any impact if it cannot be copyrighted?

>>6517893
this is why I say >>6517813

AI is here to stay, but not as a substitute of the human element in art.

if current AI can't preserve that, it will fail
>>6517885
> It's already at the quality point where it should be competing, yet I'm not seeing the apocalyptic effect on commissions, patreons, jobs, etc.
>>6517897
> How can it make any impact if it cannot be copyrighted?

current AI tech will give place to a new, better AI technology that maintains the human place, skill and craft in the workflow, and it's part of the current digital art work culture, when it comes to attribution and copyright, and not a badly thought attempt at disrupting it.

>>6517897
It can be, but even if it couldn't in the context of animation,concept art, video games it doesn't really matter since you wont see it in the final product.

>>6517862
>art is more commercial rather than some sporting even like chess or whatever
It's less performative (unless you're like KJG, performing was central to his brand).
Nearly everything is commercial in capitalism, it's not like companies pay athletes millions for nothing. They're brands in themselves.
Artists could benefit from learning more about marketing and IP, then they would be less paranoid about AI mogging 'muh skills.'
AI will commoditize the generic (anime waifus and purty pitchas) but the real power comes in branding yourself and/or creating their own IP.

>>6517912
I'm just saying that chess is sportsmanship, a competition, so seeing the best possible game in itself isn't the point

but art is less about sportsmanship and more result oriented

>>6517907
the problem is not the technology of image generation, but it's implementation.

it's shit.

it's like someone saying that they revolutionized research by using chat GPT to read papers and shit out a million of words making new papers without any sense of attribution or credits to the originals, so in the end you don't know where the fuck the bot is taking that shit from.

nigga, you can't use that shit to write papers or make science, you would be laughed out of academia, the same way you can't use that shit to make artwork, you will be laughed at by the artists.

it would be expected from CS majors to understand that shit, but I guess I am expecting too much out of autists.

>>6517912
the skills are not that relevant, otherwise thousands of mid skill artists with subpar techniques wouldn't have communities based on their content.

rendermonkeying like a god is like 15% of the formula, some can be successful just by doing it, but several are successful without doing it too.

>>6517918
damn you seem full of yourself

>>6517915
>more result oriented
It's a product.
But it's not a product like a cog or bag of oatmeal. Art's value is that it's a form of communication or expression, the content.
And sure, there are 'industrialized' roles in art, like those in video game production, etc, and AI will likely play a role there. Not sure why those roles or so coveted (besides money), their very nature devalues art, and the work is pretty miserable by most accounts.

>>6517750
>It's a Court order
Can you cite a real source?

>>6517780
>pander to my fetishes
The ultimate civil right these days. Fuck free speech.

>>6517939
Ai replaces stock imagery, if you need that.

for anything that is too meaningless or valueless that you would use stock imagery, AI is a good technology.

for character portraits, narrative, storytelling, grab a pencil and do it yourself, you don't want anything important, with an emotional connection to the viewer, or meaningful to be done by a software.

>>6517643
The robot one is the only one I like, and it feels like it was prompted by someone else idk how to explain, you probably nicked it.

>>6517918
If the papers it wrote were scientifically sound and the results could be replicated, it literally wouldn't matter how they are written/made. If it works it works.

>>6517968
the papers would have inaccuracies similar to seven fingers or missing limbs, so, no, they would not be that accurate.

>>6517974
Then they wouldn't have any value, not because of how they were made but because of their content.

>>6517976
I guess it would be similar to Chat-GPT they would answer factually wrong shit while citing sources, wrong, and making up shit as it goes.

I am pretty sure a horde of idiots might be using AIs to write their papers as we speak.

>>6517979
Damn right I would use an AI to write some paper for some college course I was jewed into

>>6517984
I probably use it too, but only as inspiration, read that shit and then use my own words and my own structure and mix it with real research.

someone too dumb will get caught by using the AI output verbatim.

>>6506734
>>6517517
Think the lawsuit gets shot down with fair use. Getty is a tiny company just 2B, they just want some gibs.
In any case supposing artfags get what they want and stifle AI to their content it will just move to China like how manufacturing (it's so dirty and polluting) did giving them a headstart before AI chads figure out a way to generate art without using stock images using language and visual modeling.

>>6517990
fair use is absolutely out of the table, the AI would have to output something different from imagery to even consider it.

>>6517991
You think banning stock images is enough but AI is not about just copying things. Using stock images is just a shortcut.
It will get better, the actual holy grail is to get the visual language model right and to generate entirely new works. The theoretical model of what a cat is exists in all of our heads and no one owns it.

>>6518003
What fucks them is the dataset.

if the output was actually transformative as in not the same media and market purprose as the input, then they could get away with not having the license to use the scrapped images to train the models, they are double fucked because not only they used copyrighted and watermarked images as the input, but also the output are literal copies in the same competing purprose, same media, same market, and in infinite scale.

>>6518016
wow you really think Getty is going to win lol
If the AI is copying one for one down to the smallest detail then it's shitty AI. AI is not copy paste. Nobody owns a style. It's just reeeeeing.

At the end of the day you can spend a fortune in legal fees and still end up like how the record industry did and the way I think it's going your side will run out of money before you can actually scratch out a win and even if you did win it would be meaningless anyways.

>>6517954
I did a bunch of robots. I have tried many different styles, probably why it seems that way.
Textures and patterns are really fun because it will always introduce some bits of inconsistency and variation.

you know how AI art sucks at hands right now? All I'm saying is that using stock images to train right now is a crutch, it's a shortcut. I think you would improve the AI space by removing that.
They'll get a better LLM that can attach visual models to certain words and then what visual models go next to other visual models like how they have it working for words.
it will figure out what hands are and how to draw them.

>>6518025
Doesn't matters IF it copies.

It matters THAT it used the copyrighted pictures as training data without the licenses to do so, and putting that in a commercial model for profit.

>>6517944
>“The U.S. Copyright Office will register an original work of authorship, provided that the work was created by a human being.“

>>6518050
ok. it's such a flimsy argument but if it makes you feel better about it then yeah whatever.
There is no good precedent for what to do with AI stuff and if it comes down to money tech will win.
And EVEN if you do win in the US and in the west people will just use shit from China like I said and China will be dominant player in the space like they are for like for solar and batteries.

let it go. its over.