/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>6809197
You call it a disruption while others like me see it as an innovation.

>>6809197
>>6809201 This
The only thing I FUCKING HATE THE MOST about it is the fucking retards making these subscription services [Leonardo.AI] that forced me to try Stable Diffusions.
I don't even know how to "make models" and struggled on finding guides on "How to train to draw like Dobson" for examples.
I read it's called "capturing concept" but I couldn't find tutorial like that anywhere.

No artist jobs were lost with stable diffusion, and now there are lawsuits which just might prevent more powerful AI systems from being developed.

Y’all done goofed with all y’all’s arrogance!

>How did it went?
Good morning sir!

remember hide and use the options at your disposal. the more anons that hide the less effective their threads become. It will require a joint effort to get them off the board. we must all come together and resist the bait.

So far there are 3 use cases for SD
>1. to impress people who don't understand technology
>2. to make easy money doing commissions
>3. to piss off anti-AI people

>>6809197
Eh, nothing seems to really have changed. All's good on the artist's end... So long as you're in the west, China, Korea, and yes even your beloved Japan seems to be doing some dickish things with AI.

I can understand some people being worried and filled with trepidation though, but I don't see the worst case happening. I think we're just going to integrate it into the creative pipeline in most professional settings and that's it.

Though it looks like hollywood writers might be fucking themselves.

>>6809213
I've given up on figuring out how to do that shit. Does ANYONE here know how to do that? I will pay out the nose for your services.

>>6809260
Leonardo.AI allows you to make models, but it's only 1 per user, and limited to 150 "tokens" [or 150 regular images] per day

>>6809197
5/10, it's a big deal when it comes to digital images but digital images are not a big deal in general. I think LLMs have been much more impactful.

>>6809263
I don't wanna learn all the semantics I just wanna pay someone and get a good result. C'mon there's GOTTA be someone willing to make LORAs for like $60 each.

>>6809272
I been asking that on /trash/ and /g/ and holy fuck they're fucking elitist faggots calling me retards.

I just want to learn to draw like other artist like Garfield, Marios, and any fun drawings, and they assume I want to monetize these shit.

made this with SD as a proof of concept.
next experiment: scharacter designs

>>6809275
https://rentry.org/sdg-link#lora
There is a bunch of guides already, did you read any?

>learning how to draw instead of genning AI art
Not. Gonna. Make it.

>>6809238
So its entire existence revolves around scamming people, I'm sure the FTC loves that.

>>6809238
>1. to impress people who don't understand technology
>implying there is a single person on /ic/ that understands technology, much less how SD works
funniest post itt so far

>>6809335
You probably don't understand how a car actually works, but you'd probably still say you understand how a car works. It's layman's terms dingus.

You proompt and an image comes out, who here doesn't understand that?

>>6809346
nobody here understands that. they think it's computer magic and that it's stealing your shitty images.

>>6809349
Would it or would it not work without feeding it heaps of high level artwork from pros without their consent? That's what I thought, parasite.

>>6809354
Would you be able to draw without feeding yourself heaps of high level artwork from your favourite artists without their consent?

>>6809197
it made me realize how much I hate social media """artists"""

what a bunch of fragile and emotion driven reality detatched looney trannies, you're not special anymore, boohoo

>>6809197
I just don't understand why anons here can't admit how awful of a hobby drawing really is and that's why AI is attractive.
Imagine pumping in tens of thousands of hours (and a lot of money) into grinding boxes and loomis heads in hopes that you might "make it" (it's incredibly unlikely you will). Nobody sane is going to do this. Hell, most anons here don't even enjoy the process anyways.
It's worse when you're an adult with dwindling time and extra responsibilities and expectations. Why is it so hard for anons to realize this?

>>6809359
Fucking. Braindead. Response. Every god damn time. I hope you choke.

>>6809354
nobody could draw if they didn't see any images.
if you never saw a cat, you would never ever be able to draw a cat. if you never saw high level artwork, your own level would be lower. every artist is building on top of what came before them.

it's incredible how arrogant you fucks are.
do you think all the researches call it "training" and machine "learning" because
>oh no, we have to make sure the artists don't figure out we're stealing their images!
do you?

>>6809365
attention starved coomers who live on the internet and have sunk cost fallacy when it comes to how much of their time they've wasted, pair this with narcissism and a dream of becoming a rockstar (who draws titty girls xitter)

yes I'm projecting myself from half a decade ago, thank fuck I grew out of it before it was too late but the pattern is something I see time and time again

>>6809197
>the single most disruptive piece of program in all of art history
lmao
are all aijeets this delusional?

>>6809197
It still cannot make an old man punching a horse.

>>6809365
ding ding ding, exactly.
art is enjoyable, but not every aspect of art is enjoyable. far from it.

>>6809373
it can.
you just have to fucking draw it. ever consider that?

>>6809369
And its incredible how again and again you people prove yourselves to completely fundamentally misunderstand what art even is. Its a machine, it doesn't get human rights. It feels good to have an artist look up to you and learn from your work. What we're talking about with SD is essentially a data laundering device. It isn't the fucking same and every time I encounter one of you idiots, I get a bit more disappointed in humanity at large. You're a genuinely anti-human cancer cell and I'm ready to have you excised, friendo.

>>6809369
>>6809359
The problem is that AI does not understand them, and now that everyone finally tried them along with LLMs, they finally understood that too. You cant simulate a human mind with just patter seeking. Yes, it could "understand" that cats have two sharp ears, are furry and have flat faces compared to dogs, but it will not go beyond that. Its the same shit with LLMs "being able to code" or "being able to write". ChatGPT, even the 4.0 one not just the 3.5 one will write you either some boilerplate shit it scrapped from GitHub or StackOverflow, or it will write some incorrect trash because it cant fucking code, it still to this day not fully understand most things it shows, it just looks like it understands while then proceeding to do obvious errors, so it should not be treated as being able to understand something the same way humans would

>>6809365
Making it is supposed to be exclusive to people who love art and want to spend their entire life on it. People wanting to "make it" despite not being like that are just purely capitalistic retards who have a passing interest in exploiting art for their self interests.

There is also another group that doesn't want to make it but loves drawing and this are the pure hobby people who accepted art to be nothing but a hobby, they are totally fine as well. /ic/, china and india are the only three places in the worlds not understanding this simple concept.

>>6809383
literally no reason to give a fuck about its cognition lmao

anyway more parameters more coherent results, demonstrably can improve the output, no need to anthrofy it

>>6809365
The problem with the AI is that it does most of the annoying part, but also almost all of the fun part. It does the "creative decisions" as it is easier to make something that looks good instead of something you had on mind, while at the same time still leaving you with shitfest of artefacts, or composition/lighting that gives it away from miles away that it was AI made, both of which are almost as hard to fix as drawing it yourself

>>6809386
no one is obligated to consume your work, this is a fact not a feeling

>>6809197
I fucked around with it (and MJ) for a couple months, just out of curiosity. Got bored and then double-downed on drawing.
To be fair, some of what it can do is visually impressive. But it made me appreciate art on more than just an aesthetic level. Art is about a human's ideas, beliefs, life. And even on an aesthetic level I've never seen AI art with the dynamic energy and charm of a soulful sketch.
It might disrupt some industries but it'll never replace true art.

>>6809395
write dynamic sports photography in the prompt field and bam you get dynamic poses from interesting camera angles, wow real hard...

>>6809359
>Would you be able to draw without feeding yourself heaps of high level artwork from your favourite artists without their consent?
yeah, that's how drawings came into existence in the first place you moron. you need a brain, a limb and a mark making tool. you absolute retard. if there were no drawings/paintings we'd inspire from something else. it's actually insane how subhuman you are

>>6809394
Yeah, so?

>>6809365
you are coping. you know deep down that you're not making anything. it's gnawing at your mind, yet you stubbornly refuse to accept it. but deep down, you know it's all in vain to lie to yourself like this

>>6809365
Sunk cost fallacy. At least that's what it is for me

>>6809399
it's not in your control if people consume AI content instead

>>6809389
Yeah, after seeing Bard and the music AI from Google I no longer believe this schizo shit about Google having all the giga super ML models that dwarf the rest of the world and they just refuse to release it. "Welcome friends" is such a generic piece of text that you could search trough many pictures and find correct one, the same way you could search trough lot of "exist sign" generated images with less parameters that generate the text as well, all because this type of generic texts might be remembered as almost a face pattern, while some made up text it never saw like "Welcome to Lucacio, the city of Policana" would be almost impossible to do.

Which reminds me, isnt there some new SD product that has LLM imbedded in it? It can write text on images, put red cube on blue cube and so on, seemingly understanding logic better, yet nobody talks about it, whats up with that?

>>6809278
character design proof of concept

>>6809383
no, i'd say their understanding is limited. due to various reasons. but it clear that they will improve with more data.
same with LLMs. they have limitations since all of their data comes in text form. they have a hard time understanding the world as a whole due to this, but outside of that they work shockingly well.

>>6809382
you're the kind of "art and creativity is magic and it makes me special" kind of guy.
i am someone who likes thinking analytically, i always saw art like that too. there is no magic, there is only craft.
and now with AI, i can clearly see that they can do some of the tasks that used to be human only. that's all there is to it.

no "human right", no "looking up to artists", none of that is relevant here.
if they get good enough, we'll have to end up studying these fuckers, just like how magnus carlesn studies chess engines, and that would be a sad state of affairs. but what happens, happens.

>>6809402
not him but peak projection

>>6809373
It's gotten better though

>>6809408
lol

>>6809405
I don't care about your gut feeling

>>6809404
Ok? This has nothing to do with what I wrote. Your response just confirms that people on /ic/ see art as nothing but a product. The fact is that a lot of people here are introvert losers that think art is their saving grace to eventually making some money. That's why you rarely see this kind of unhealthy relationship to art outside of /ic/ where people with normal jobs frequent.

>>6809408
I like it

>>6809412
ai does have the ability to take over commercial artwork

and yes I'm not into muh deep and sophisticated art either, so what?

>>6809406
Could you give me concept for monster? Its Amphibian troll, a toad humanoid that takes on the characteristics of a DnD troll, because amphibians are one of the best vertebrates at regenerating and DnD trolls main gimmick is their insane regenerative powers. Try making it in a way that makes people think its actual troll btw, not just a frog man.

>>6809412
Nah, /ic/ sees art as nothing but products not because they are loser introverts that want to make money from it one day. They think its nothing but product because they are edgy 4channers that cannot say anything positive without being called a faggot and cannot say anything spiritual without trying to sound like funny tripping schizo from /x/

>>6809414
Even when AI replaces all artists it's not going to be the talentless losers that do the commercial art but people that have the technical know how to perfectly manipulate the AI which is also going to be a very elaborate skill people will go to school for.

People that see AI as their saving grace despite so far having achieved nothing just live in delusion. Their spring will never arrive, it's just that the upper range of producers will get replaced by other equally talented people.

Accidentally generated an anime I'd watch.
See, this is why AI is so fun.
"Happy accidents" - Bob Ross

>>6809238
>2. to make easy money doing commissions
I fucking wish that was possible anon, god how i wish i could earn some coomission scraps

>>6809407
you cannot surpass the human nature. you can try to delude yourself as much as you'd like but you know you can't do it. of course I'm projecting, but i also know that this is human nature at its base level. when I'm telling you that you value money I'm projecting, but that's because I know how you feel about it as well. it's human nature to derive value from things, to feel proud of your own work and sweat. i'm projecting when I'm saying that working out and and being proud of your accomplished body is better than losing weight through liposuction and then roiding yourself, but you know this to be true as well. you know that being at the top of the scoreboard in a shooter game consistently gives you a little bit of satisfaction, and you know that using cheats to do it makes you a worthless cunt. you know that you're merely using AI as a proxy to pretend that you're doing something, but you're nothing without the work of artists' work that you're using. and you're nothing even with it. all of these are projections, but it's merely human nature at its base level. you can try to suppress it, you can try to pretend, but you cannot succeed in doing so, just like you cannot make a communist utopia work.

Why is /g/ raiding /ic/ again

>>6809396
it's more than dynamic poses and camera angles, it's the entire energy of a piece, something holistic.
I've never seen AI with the energy of KJG, or the personality & soulfulness of Robert Crumb, or the storytelling ability of Will Eisner or a number of manga artists.
And even if AI were able to emulate them aesthetically (and empty simulacra) there's the matter of content, the fact that artists are more than just lines on paper/screen.

>>6809425
you generated a generic garbage that you'd watch? what about this contorted nonsensical yet also extremely generic image makes you want to see a movie version of it?

>>6809428
Feel bad for pointing this out, but to you people I think I will have to do that. That Twitter account is falseflag meant to make AI look bad, they have no follows and everyone knows that for every nazi chud artist there is 1000 liberals, leftists and trannies with politics that oppose their nature.

>>6809433
your coping is palpable, code monkey. they're called "programmer socks" for a reason
> That Twitter account is falseflag meant to make AI look bad
by who? the leftists, trannies and liberals are false flagging to make AI look bad with their own aesthetics? lol. you fa/g/gots are out of your mind, if you ever had one in the first place

>>6809365
>Like sculpting? Just 3D print loser
>Like Knitting? Just buy the jumper loser
>Like playing the guitar? Just make AI music loser
Sometimes it isn't about the end product, sometimes it's the journey.

>>6809432
>He doesn't want to watch an anime of ripped old men boxing eachother to death
NGMI.
no creativity, no inspiration

>>6809437
By trolls you fucking nigger, how dumb you have to be to fall for bait that obvious?

>>6809415
like this?

>>6809443
whose side are these trolls on and what are their political beliefs?

but can it use a g-nib yet?
If it can't take a g-nib and dip it in ink, it's impotent.

>>6809446
working on it
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L32BRcvnWRU

ni/g/gers really cannot cope with the idea that they'll never be able to infiltrate the artist community? why do they want to do it so much though? are they really this painfully unaware that this is an impossible task?

>>6809445
The one that makes you seethe most

>>6809439
3D printing is incredibly popular though.
Also as stated, no one here actually enjoys the journey.

>>6809451
gaslight harder, Pa/g/eet

>>6809449
retard

>>6809447
we good.

>>6809447
pathetic
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=foahTqz7On4

>>6809458
>>6809447
>Better than most of /ic/ already
It's so fucking over, bros.

>>6809197
>discovery period starting in the lawsuit
Emad cant run anymore!

>>6809447
hey that's not a g-nib.

>>6809446
it can emulate pen&ink to some degree.

>>6809201
Someone said that about the robocaller. Guess how much people love robocallers.

>>6809197
>1 year plus 1 or two days since the official release of Stable Diffusion, the single most disruptive piece of program in all of art history.
This sounds like an exaggeration but it's actually true. Not even photography caused this much artist rage. It reminds me of automobiles devastating the horse industry.

sorry I just dont like tech people, I think they're dull, soulless money oriented drones, no offense.

If SD in its first year can cause this much mayhem in the art world, imagine what the 2nd year will look like.

>>6809451
>3D printing is incredibly popular though.
Somehow you missed the point completely.
>Also as stated, no one here actually enjoys the journey.
Firstly, wrong. Secondly, even if there are aspects of the journey you dislike, it can make reaching the destination that much more satisfying.

>It's about the journey
No it isn't.
It has never been about the journey. The end goal is all that matters.
Stop being brainwashed by the elite telling you that it's okay to be miserable because it might sometimes make you feel better when your life isn't shit in the future.

>>6809521
>It has never been about the journey. The end goal is all that matters.
So when people scribble in the corner of the page, is that also about the end goal faggot?

>>6809521
It's about both. Obviously when you have drawn something good after years of study you will feel different than generating a picture even if it looks perfect. Us hobby chads will never give a single fuck about AI.

What do you guys think about using AI just for background stuff?

>>6809530
that's what i did. see >>6809278

>>6809529

>>6809527
>>6809521
>>6809524
There is a journey in AI as well. This is basically the main point every spiritual luddite ignores. It isn't just press button get what you wanted. You have to do a lot of stuff to get what you want. Yes you can prompt "1girl, boobs" but that probably won't be your perfect waifu with an art style you like.

I've personally generated way over 100k images and gone through THOUSANDS of wildly different styles, almost each prompt has some adjustments made on my part too. This has been a crazy journey of art for me and the people who follow me. Saying AI isn't yet another artistic movement that's subject to change, growth, progress, etc is just being intentionally ignorant and fucking stupid.

>>6809529
It's funny that the majority of an "AI Artist's" identity comes from acting persecuted by the rest of the art community. What a bunch of pussies. You're somehow bullied by us!? You're somehow bigger faggots than we are! It's unfathomably pathetic.

>>6809365
>Imagine pumping in tens of thousands of hours (and a lot of money) into grinding boxes and loomis heads in hopes that you might "make it" (it's incredibly unlikely you will). Nobody sane is going to do this.
I just like being able to put down what's in my head onto paper. It's really a hobby. imagine having this mindset towards exercise or playing a video game.

>>6809545
Stop making strawman arguments, most AI artists don't even consider themselves artists. I find that really stupid because I feel like everyone is overrating what it means to be an artist and acting like it's some huge hurdle in life. But that's besides the point.

>>6809544
Maybe at a point when people will have far more control over the outcome I will agree. But you're basically playing gacha now.

>>6809516
Ngl. I actually do hate the entire art journey. I only draw at this point because it's all I have

>>6809544
>You have to do a lot of stuff to get what you want.
So what are you personally doing? I haven't seen one prompter here who actually bothers to even slightly edit their image. Oh you proompt more, until you get just the right proompt? No one cares, those discarded proompts are worth less than my discarded cum tissues. Seconds of extra effort aren't comparable to the effort put in of an actual drawn image.

>>6809556
Sounds like a you problem. How would proompting fill the void in your life? Your issues have nothing to do with art or even this discourse, go out side a meet up with your friends, or call your parents, I'm sure they'd love to hear from you.

>>6809529
>questioning their work's purpose.
i wonder about that.
art is not a game, there isn't necessarily an optimal path, so while the AI can outskill you, i don't think the AI can make your decisionmaking obsolete like it can in Go or Chess.

The art "journey" is basically just realising that learning art boils down to copying artists you like and making slight changes to not be considered a thief.
I'm pretty sure I had tougher journeys on the toilet than that.

>>6809555
And that's okay. It's still art and there is an artistic process. It's not the same as drawing but it doesn't have to be. There's random aspects in all art as well.

>>6809557
I just make stuff and share what I like. Your ideas have no bearing on reality because art was never supposed to be edited or photo realistic or perfect or whatever. It's just art -- self expression. If you make something you like and share it, guess what you are.
Also effort means fuck all, implying otherwise is diluting what artistic expression really means. Pretending someone who is a shitty painter who spends a lot of effort is as good as someone who does it quickly and better, or using tools you don't like, is mindless.

>>6809563
Never said anything about prompting. I'm not that original anon

>>6809555
not nearly as much as you'd think. you can do quite a lot with controlnet already.
but yes, control is what we want.

>>6809480
Pic not related? That just looks like a desaturated sd

>>6809564
Depends what your work's purpose was. I've seen a lot of artists coping because AI can do exactly what they just but better. And if they're just trying to sell that or just garner attention they could very well have a mental breakdown when they realize how pointless all their effort was.

>>6809575
It's hard to explain how much control a person has over it. There are like countless illions of parameters that get you to what you vaguely like lol. Like people say it's just gacha but no, most seriously AI artists have made tons of stuff that no one else has and they know exactly how to get to that outcome and no one else does. If that isn't a lot of control what is?

>>6809572
>And that's okay. It's still a woman and there is a medical process. It's not the same as a real woman but it doesn't have to be. There's random aspects in all women as well.

>>6809544
Who cares that you think there's a process, for every one of you that says there's a "method" there's 10 more of you that just hit the gacha and roll and post the same type of dogshit image.

Also, if you're gonna try to bring up how you need to perfect the process by making adjustments with negatives to start, and inpainting the few spots that look bad that's not a process. That's barely any work and still a gacharoll. The reason you go through these 100k images is because as you said, you won't get that level of perfect control over it because it's a slot machine you fucking dunce. That's why people call you stupid and even I can admit that when I use SD. Stop fucking trying to think you're all that when this pales in comparison to the actual work put in by real artists. I swear, promptfags are some of the most spoiled ridiculous fucking retards out there and I hate that I;m associated with them for using it

>>6809581
if you create art you're an artist
if you were born a man you stay a man

>>6809566
This means nothing when you can't even draw in the first place pal

Give me a good argument against ai that isn't about theft/job loss or "muh process". You can still go on your little journey regardless of ai

>>6809572
>art was never supposed to be edited or photo realistic or perfect or whatever.
Never claimed it was
>It's just art -- self expression.
And there's the piss in the soup. What self expression? You didn't decide what colours were used, the brush strokes, the composition, the character designs, or anything. What little influence you do actually have on these images is so insignificant compared to what the computer algorithm pumped out for you - and that's what you call your "self-expression"? What a corporate machine decides for you? Fucking bleak expression there, buddy.

>Also effort means fuck all, implying otherwise is diluting what artistic expression really means.
How? Explain this. Is a blind man's painting not worth more because it was painted by blind man's effort?

>Pretending someone who is a shitty painter who spends a lot of effort is as good as someone who does it quickly and better, or using tools you don't like, is mindless.
Are you forgetting just the effort of making a painting? The effort not just for getting the skills, but of making a single piece? How can a quality painting just be zapped up by a talented person? Oh right, he puts effort and time into making it.

>>6809583
That is a process too though, whether it's big or small is completely irrelevant. A shitty painter that takes weeks to do what a speed painter does in minutes is not better than the other. They're both just painters. What I'm saying here is that work is not relevant in art. It might be relevant in what you consider GOOD art but that is a completely different topic.

The reason I've made 100k+ images is simply because I like art. There's no ideal image style to me either. It's just fun as hell swimming through the infinite expanse of art, finding stuff I like and sharing it. We're living through an amazing period in art too and it's so fun seeing millions of new and old artists doing exactly what I'm doing too, creating images almost freely. In traditional art one artist basically has one style but that isn't how it is with AI and I love that. And I don't think I'm all that, I'm just an anon. What are you on?

>>6809406
>no "human right", no "looking up to artists", none of that is relevant here.

But it is relevant. There's a reason this whole thing is going through the legal system. There's even been results that say it can't be copyrighted which was the whole reason why the learning argument came up in the first place. Are you retarded? No piece of machinery/code has authorship capabilities and it remains that way to this day. There's a huge difference between companies mass training on unlicensed copyrighted data to make a profit, and a single human using reference you absolute bad faith tard

>>6809578
>I've seen a lot of artists coping because AI can do exactly what they just but better.
but that's not exactly true imo. because again, art isn't linear. even if the AI does it better, it would also do it differently.

take my example here: >>6809564
>>6809278
i decided on the position and pose of the cat and dog. even if an AI can find an even "better" position, it would end up being something different. make a different impression maybe. so i do feel like your choices are still unique to you.
or just think of this for example: in the future, do you think there can be a "best AI" just like there can be a "best chess engine"? i don't think so, because it's more likely that it will come down to taste.
it will come down to what and how they create, not how good they are at creating. the same goes for us humans.

>AI can't do ink drawi-ACK!
(ps this is literally with the base version of SDXL, not even a custom model lmaootflaosoftl)

>>6809591
Oh please, you and I both know the majority of people shilling this stuff and arguing for it want it to be a legitimate process which is why there's so many sperg arguments like this saying it requires work. If this is work to you my god, you actually will never make it in anything. I don't even say that to demean you it's just honestly pathetic that people are handed this kind of amazing tool and try and justify some asinine pride they have for it when it's so simple to use

>>6809574
No I got that, but you're saying that in the middle of such a discussion, so of course I'm going to think you're advocating for AI art. Regardless, art shouldn't be all you have, work on your self buddy (and I don't mean that in some dismissive dick way, I mean that in a legit "I want you to be happy" gay kinda way).

>>6809590
>You didn't decide what colours were used, the brush strokes, the composition, the character designs, or anything.
You decided other things and got something you liked. You're stuck in a really shallow and retarded mindset.
>What little influence you do actually have on these images is so insignificant
It isn't at all. Not even remotely. You make one AI image and I make another and they will be completely and utterly different because we have immense amounts of control over the tool. Self-expression is sharing an idea you want to share. You talk about corporate machines yet you're soulless as fuck for not understanding what it means to express yourself, when you unironically think drawing is the only way to create visual arts. You are very small brained.

>>6809596
Sometimes it does it the same though. Also I'm literally parroting artists here, from youtube and blogs. I think we're having different conversations here though.

>>6809598
Grow up man.

>>6809597
>a black and white filter
>woah its just like ink!
This tells you how clueless these aidrones are about art

>>6809597
Nice Instagram filter

>>6809597
Exactly year ago we got this. What you posted isnt all that impressive (relatively speaking, if you posted this year and a half ago, people would be blown away)

>>6809602
>Grow up man.

Man even with gen AI, there's so many dogshit losers in this space that can't even use the tool efficiently. Even worse than the /beg here desu. Keep whining about how people don't look at you as a real artist, you're doing a great job defending yourself mr. 100K hours kek

>>6809604
>>6809605
Just give in to the AI, anon.
Let's all become one.

>>6809591
100k images? Show me your favorite work you generated.

>>6809602
>You decided other things and got something you liked. You're stuck in a really shallow and retarded mindset.

>models are only good because they have training data scraped from millions of actual artists' work
>I know what good art is!
>I created it even though I didn't decide any of the actual strokes, composition, or the character design!
Actual retard

>>6809602
>You decided other things and got something you liked. You're stuck in a really shallow and retarded mindset.
Why respond to half a sentence? And then past the other half of the sentence straight after? So fucking redundant.
>when you unironically think drawing is the only way to create visual arts.
That's right, I hate sculpture, collage, painting, 3D modeling, photography, etc, they aren't considered art by me... in your fanciful retarded world.

You think yourself a creative because you commission a machine to draw your ideas, while still having the loosest amount of input into them. Well everybody has ideas, you're not special. You're just upset because no one is willing to acknowledge you as a creative person because of your lack of drive to ever actually commit making any of your ideas into a reality.

But continue making your disposable effortless trash.

>AI shilling a year ago
>AIfags posting boring portraits with deformed hands, eyes, feet, and clothes
>AIfags repeatedly say shit like, "It's constantly improving and will be perfect in just a few weeks or months!"
>look at AIfag threads now
>they're still posting boring portraits with deformed hands, eyes, feet, and clothes

>>6809621
>Well everybody has ideas, you're not special. You're just upset because no one is willing to acknowledge you as a creative person because of your lack of drive to ever actually commit making any of your ideas into a reality.


This is what gets me about these retards. They say they put in all this work, but they can't even go just a tiny bit further to actually draw over or edit the image in a way that the obvious AI style is still present. It's like how are you gonna lecture others about art when you put the bare minimum of work into it, and then not even have the fucking skill to see why the image is Ai garbage in the first place. Truly if i've ever seen a new era of autism it's these guys

Why are AI backgrounds so filled with soul?

>>6809609
As an AI artist I can confirm that his is more impressive though. Prompt wise and visually.

>>6809612
Thanks for proving you're even more immature than I thought you were haha.

>>6809614
It would derail the thread too much.

>>6809629
J-j-just two more weeks, I swear!

>>6809635
You're the actual promptfag that everyone hates. People against AI don't like you because you're not doing anything special by prompting and trying to say it's just as valid as drawing/painting. AIfag artists don't like you because you do the bare minimum and can't even edit the image or use it as a tool or stepping stone to create an actualized full image without the AI style that people recognize. Good job retard haha

adapt or die

>>6809621
>That's right, I hate sculpture, collage, painting, 3D modeling, photography, etc, they aren't considered art by me... in your fanciful retarded world.
AI is just another genre exactly like the rest. It's more complicated an art form than photography and sculpting is too.
>You think yourself a creative
Because I'm a human, you're creative too. We all are. Being an artist isn't about how much effort you put into something. It's about expressing your ideas. I'm not saying I'm better than you, that's you doing that to me lol. I don't care about that though I'm just here to help you cope with reality as much as I can because it's fun and it's a good thing to do!

>>6809544
this part is very true. and it forcing people to create more diverse things is a good thing.

>Art is all about creativity!
>No rules, just tools!
>Ideas are more important than skill!
*AI art starts getting good*
>IT'S ALL ABOUT THE SKILL, NO ABOUT IDEAS YOU CAN PROOMPT
>FOLLOW THE RULES, YOU HAVE TO DRAW 100000000 BOXES BEFORE YOU CAN MAKE ART
>AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

>>6809644
> It's more complicated an art form than photography and sculpting is too.

Bold coming from a guy that can't even understand the fundamentals of a good piece of illustration

>Because I'm a human, you're creative too.
You're being really bad faith, you know what he meant by creative, a person that actually practices said art form

There's a shit ton of retarded takes in here especially the idea of art. We're mainly talking illustrations of drawing or painting not the nebulous aspect of anything can be "art" art. If you're going to defend AI stop using this takeaway of "art" and be specific about it.

>>6809646
>Art is all about creativity!
>No rules, just tools!
>Ideas are more important than skill!
Then why was everyone preaching the 'book of Loomis' retard?

>>6809645
The main good thing is that AI is already letting people do that. I know it hurts but AI is here to stay and it'll only get more wide spread. It has let people who aren't artists create zillions of art pieces that are diverse and creative as fuck.
Like I personally don't really care if traditionally made anime still stays overwhelmingly derivative art wise, because eventually AI made anime will go the same route as illustration has thanks to AI. I'm really looking forward to that.

>>6809647
>Bold coming from a guy that can't even understand the fundamentals of a good piece of illustration
Why are you implying those fundamentals don't apply to AI illustrations? What a stupid thing to say.

I'm not arguing in bad faith, the dude was just chucking out insults for no reason, you are too. You don't know anything about me. That isn't what being creative is, you're conflating the craft with the product. The craft isn't what creativity is. The idea is creativity. The craft is your effort.

>>6809646
kek nailed it

>>6809653
>book of Loomis
/beg/ trap.
If you've been on /ic/ for more than 1 month you know loomis is just a meme.
The real way to get good is to copy artists you like.
Making loomis heads is just a very weird way of procrastinating. Same as drawing boxes.

I just like looking at the funny pictures

>>6809664
nigger

>>6809259
>Eh, nothing seems to really have changed.
There are literally millions of people making and enjoying AI art and a significant amount of professionals, especially marketers, are using AI to create art.

it's crazy how good the furry model has gotten at recognizing characters

using stable diffusion is not fulfilling however, but I don't let that cloud my judgement when it comes to the output

i do kinda see now why /ic/ doesn't want to talk about AI.
talking with non-artists about can be quite painful. and both sides are too antagonistic towards each other. one side out of jealousy, the other out of fear.
but it's silly. as artists, you need to stop bothering with uppity trolls and start looking into how to use these tools for something good.

>>6809662
I still don't understand how and why drawabox made it in the sticky.

>>6809666
retards aren't people

>>6809655
>Why are you implying those fundamentals don't apply to AI illustrations? What a stupid thing to say.

Because learning those fundamentals don't come from generating AI images? Are you actually arguing you learn the same fundamentals into what makes a good piece from using ai..?

>'m not arguing in bad faith, the dude was just chucking out insults for no reason, you are too.

No you really just took the wrong definition. He literally meant creative as in a person that engages in the arts... You're acting ridiculous because you misread the situation

>>6809671
>if they don't share my views they're dumb!
You are literally retarded.

furry , loli+shota , bad /ic style anime.

What genre will fall next to the scourge of AI?

>>6809671
emotional bitching like this has no impact on reality and just exposes that you are frustrated, there's no greater point

>>6809677
Humanity is next

>>6809668
The problem lies when the non-artists are somehow preaching the same quality and standards and even trying to deny regular artists but lack the entire fundamental base behind what makes a good illustration good. That's essentially all thats being generated here and everywhere as well.

AI is a tool in the right hands, but the problem is the way ai proponents preach it like this retard who generated 100k images is that it's not a tool. It's quite literally the whole gimmick because their work stops at what the model produces, instead of actually using it as a tool or stepping stone for a completed piece.

>>6809665
hey alright

>>6809673
You can and either way you are making an invalid point. Do you realize that? They apply to AI art just like they apply to photography. You have no argument here.
>No you really just took the wrong definition.
There's only one definition. In my posts here I'm trying to explain what art is since you don't seem to know what artists are. You are grasping at straws trying to defend the craftsman's honor now that people can make pictures by pressing a couple of buttons. AI is one of those arts to engage in. Saying everyone who uses AI isn't creative is beyond retarded but that's where your argument is at.

>>6809666
>There are literally millions of people making and enjoying AI art
Making? Maybe. Enjoying? No.
> a significant amount of professionals, especially marketers, are using AI to create art.
Sure, but that anon even said it's going into the pipeline. That's different from the claim that all artists were going to be fired and blah blah blah.

>>6809443
Anything i dont like are made by trolls too, anon

>>6809662
>The real way to get good is to copy artists you like.
Still means that artists always cared about skill, which was the point being made.

>>6809679
No, it already does realistic humans.

>>6809683
Why are you so emotional? what did artists ever do to you? none of these statements make sense.

>>6809680
Quality has nothing to do with the core discussions surrounding AI and thousands of my 100k+ images are pretty cool. You aren't an artist because you worked hard, you're an artist because you create art. Just like people using AI which is an artistic tool.

>>6809685
If they make it they enjoy it so automatically that's correct. But there is an audience besides that.
>That's different from the claim that all artists were going to be fired and blah blah blah.
Literally no one has ever said this.

>>6809683
>You can and either way you are making an invalid point. Do you realize that? They apply to AI art just like they apply to photography. You have no argument here.

? Are you genuinely retarded. If you took a regular person that learned how to use SD and asked them to be able to recreate an image of just bare fundamentals like a 3 point perspective scene or recreate the anatomy of a human being on paper they wouldn't be able to do it. What in the world are you actually talking about. Watching videos on a subject mean nothing if you don't actually apply it. You don't learn the fundamentals with generating an image you absolute fucking retard. I actually can not believe how stupid you are and I regret engaging in good faith with you lmao wtf

>>6809693
>Quality has nothing to do with the core discussions surrounding AI and thousands of my 100k+ images are pretty cool. You aren't an artist because you worked hard, you're an artist because you create art. Just like people using AI which is an artistic tool.

By that metric, someone taking a shit is considered an artist. That's not how most people would take it pal. I'm sorry your equivalent of a search engine is valued less in regards to actual drawings/paintings but that's just how it is. You can larp as an artist, but if you take away SD you're not that kind of artist are you now. But it's not a tool, it's quite literally the only way you can make your "art" as it is because you actually lack the creativity to produce your craft without it. You're not an artist to the rest of the world even if you claim to be unless you can do more with it beyond the program

>>6809691
They called him retarded for not taking his $5 furry coom com

>>6809673
>Are you actually arguing you learn the same fundamentals into what makes a good piece from using ai..?
eh, not that anon, but that might happen.
at least for the fundamentals that aren't directly related to drawing. composition being the easiest and most obvious example.
a non artist that takes it seriously will sooner or later look into these topics and maybe even start learning how to paint. that is, if they want more control and want to get closer to their specific vision.

or they won't and they'll just PROOOOOMPT as they have done. it depends on the person.

>>6809680
i honestly just don't bother with thinking about it.
even if it is created by the machine, this is still the legacy of humanity. when i see a cool AI image in /g/sdg/, i can still appreciate it for what it is. and i also can appreciate the things the prompter did to make it happen. because why not. sure, the effort they put in is less, but you still need some effort to tardwrangle the AI.

and if that level of effort gets you this level of art, then that's just the new baseline. accept it or deny it. that's all you can do.

>>6809695
If you can paint human anatomy that doesn't mean you can scult human anatomy out of marble...

>He can't recreate his cyborg wife in a different artstyle just by changing 1 word in the prompt
NGMI

>>6809697
not him but you're projecting your own insecurity, literally none of my normie friends give a fuck about who makes art

Do not expend any mental energy on these threads. Hide and move on.

>>6809695
>they wouldn't be able to do it.
Uhh is that so? Can you prove it? Why are you destroying your argument talking about a nebulous "regular person"? Why are you saying no one who knows the fundamentals can use AI? I think I'm talking with someone who has brain damage.

>>6809697
Poop isn't art and neither is hanging a banana on a wall but using a tool to create pictures is inarguably art whether you like the tool or not. Most of the anti-AI arguments applied to photography and digital art too. Artists said they were artists for decades and look where we are now. They're artists and always were. This is the same for people using AI. It's literally a program just like photoshop. Photoshop literally has it built in.

Your problem is that you literally cannot think critically because you're an emotional wreck or you don't understand what a tool is. It's really embarrassing.

>>6809701
Oh im sorry, are we saying SD can sculpt models now and produce that kind of marble figure? If you're gonna argue in bad faith at least tie the knots to your shitty arguments. But then again, it's pretty obvious you cant answer it cause you're a dumbass

>>6809702
I love SD

>>6809635
>It would derail the thread too much.
When the fuck has that mattered? Its ai thread number 563.

>>6809707
No, what I mean is a person can learn to create good human anatomy using AI, or they can learn to paint it, or sculpt it. All of those are different I don't see why you would expect the skills to transfer 1:1. The person using AI is learning how to make things using AI and that's all they need to know. Well unless you're a genious like Michelangelo but that's pretty rare.

I love stable diffusion because it serves a humbling lesson to so many narcissist who expect the world to exist only to serve them, I hate it because it undermines my work

>>6809703
I think that's pretty obvious, but there is an inherent bias towards if it's visible and the information is out there, the handmade/hand drawn aspect is more appealing. Especially when we're talking about art because it is a luxury at the end of the day.

>>6809711
I want to have mature conversations.

>>6809712
This. It's just another genre.

>>6809712
Knowing the fundamentals, means you can to an extent transfer that knowledge to other mediums, even sculpting. With a little bit of basics, you know what the anatomy is supposed to look like if you've drawn it, so you can recreate it to an extent in other mediums.

The problem is he's trying to say anyone using AI can learn those fundamentals but you don't learn how things work just by generating and looking at what you've done I think that's pretty obvious

>>6809646
Ai is a tool? Or a collaborator? What happens in 5 years when the best ai art "tool" is fully multimodal? And makes work unprompted by existing in the world taking in everything? Are you using a tool when you ask it to draw you a wife?

>>6809714
it's not a luxury anymore

well hanmade is as much of a luxury when it comes to pottery

>>6809720
Well you definitely learn something, I don't know exactly what. Also there's always going to be discrepencies in skill transfer like painting to sculpting vs sculpting to 3d modeling, etc, etc.

>>6809693
>Literally no one has ever said this.
You shitting me? Half these discussions are about how artists are things of the past, or are becoming redundant, or how their skills have become useless, how artists are scared, insecure, or how artists have wasted their lives and so forth.

You see these kinds of claims in every AI thread.

Ok. Do "an old amphibian ogre punching a zebra".

>>6809714
>but there is an inherent bias towards if it's visible and the information is out there, the handmade/hand drawn aspect is more appealing.
This bias plays a role regardless of how the art was actually made though. Name 2 AI images as human and AI made and the person will like the "human" made one more regardless of quality. This isn't logical, reasonable, or sane. It's what you call retarded. And this topic of art goes beyond paintings, it's not really a luxury and people prefer easier made stuff as long as it's good. Look at CG in general. Video games and their animation. A good example is that Naruto game vs the anime, the game looks way better but was "easier" to craft. I doubt many people prefer the crappy animation made by bleeding and starving animators.

>>6809662
>/beg/ trap.
>If you've been on /ic/ for more than 1 month you know loomis is just a meme.
Fdfaiw is legit.

>>6809712
>The person using AI is learning how to make things using AI
Learning? Pfft. Give a man 20 minutes and he's become a master.

>>6809720
>he's trying to say anyone using AI can learn those fundamentals
I didn't say this and I don't even think they're mildly important either, I don't care about objective qualities of art I just like what I like and respect that others like what they like. AI also has its own understanding of these mechanics too so it's barely relevant in the first place.

>MFW anon keeps making random commissions without paying me
>MFW he thinks it's a "gotcha!" moment when he does this
>MFW he has never actually posted any of his own drawings of the things he claims AI can't make
>MFW he is worse than AI at the one thing that is supposed to make him special

>>6809706
>Uhh is that so? Can you prove it?

Why do i need to prove this, we don't ask people who don't do something like code, to be able to recreate it after looking at a coded program right? How on earth do you expect someone who only prompts to know the fundamentals and recreate it in other mediums.

If you have the knowledge beforehand of drawing, that translates to other mediums, but not the other way around

>nebulous "regular person"
Regular person whose never touched drawing? I don't know how that's so hard to understand

>Why are you saying no one who knows the fundamentals can use AI?
Where did I ever say that? I want you to point it out because you seem to lack the reading comprehension. I said the average prompter that uses AI with no drawing fundamentals can't actually understand and learn the fundamentals simply by generating. They can't transfer that idea of what they generate into other mediums you fucking retard. I can't believe you need someone to spell it out for you

>Poop isn't art and neither is hanging a banana on a wall but using a tool to create pictures is inarguably art whether you like the tool or not.

Who says that? If you're trying to deny this as art, then people are free to deny you as an artist this isn't a one way street are you retarded.

>It's literally a program just like photoshop. Photoshop literally has it built in.

Again, photoshop before generative fill wasn't built on scraped images of copyrighted data so no it's not the same, but I'm getting used to all the bad faith arguments over and over

>Your problem is that you literally cannot think critically because you're an emotional wreck or you don't understand what a tool is. It's really embarrassing.

Stop projecting, I don't care if you use AI but you feel threatened because I called you out on not using it as a tool like you preached. If your whole shtick is generating and inpainting to get the image you're no better than the regular prompter monkey that spams

>>6809719
>I want to have mature conversations.
X'D

>>6809736
>I didn't say this and I don't even think they're mildly important either, I don't care about objective qualities of art I just like what I like and respect that others like what they like. AI also has its own understanding of these mechanics too so it's barely relevant in the first place.

At this point, all you're telling me is that the model is doing the bulk of the work, even the decision making of having good fundamentals. Why exactly are you so attached to the idea of being an artist if you're not even putting in yourself into the process that matters more than the machine doing the work for you. That just straight up looks like the epitome of laziness moreso than an artist in any case

here's the redpill:
the people who have the energy to use generative AI will prevail, autists in other words, I don't have the energy, it doesn't activate anything in me but I recognize it can be used to accelerate the creative process hugely no matter the intention, all it takes is the dedication to use it

>>6809734
5, midjourney shits out higher quality than SD these days. No skill required, no knowledge, it's really just a Google search now(always has been)

>>6809721
Right now it's a tool and if it becomes autonomous and multimodal then it will be an artist. How is this too complicated for you to see?

>>6809738
>Why do i need to prove this,
You made a retarded claim and I'm calling you out on it. I'm done replying to you. This is beyond pointless at this stage, you're just blowing air in random directions. Unironically arguing art is poop, Jesus.
>so no it's not the same
All of the dumb arguments you guys have were used against photoshop back in the day. That's what I was saying. You must be young if you didn't know that.

>>6809693
Neat nigga, though the "tool" you use basically is more /gd/ since it's basically Photoshoping and filters.
>and needs its own board already because near all AI threads are just either image dumps or spam
>you don't even need to have created shit yourself cause not like AIfags actually care the things they "create"

>>6809734
Depends on how much you want to learn I suppose.

>>6809746
>You made a retarded claim and I'm calling you out on it. I'm done replying to you.

Did you just skim past the example I gave you, I asked that question because everyone knows how retarded you are for claiming the idea of fundamentals not being important and somehow looking at generated images and prompting them give you the same fundamentals like drawing/painting does you absolute moron.

>All of the dumb arguments you guys have were used against photoshop back in the day. That's what I was saying. You must be young if you didn't know that.

Again another excuse sidestepping the obvious point of millions of trained images of copyrighted data in the models vs photoshop before generative fill. There was no argument for this back in the day but you do you pal. I wish I could just gaslight and lie through my way. I could save more time and effort to continue generating without thinking since fundamentals aren't that important becasue at the end of the day I can rely on the model to do the hard work for me. Shut the fuck up you absolute loser what a fucking disappointment

>>6809746
>Right now it's a tool and if it becomes autonomous and multimodal then it will be an artist. How is this too complicated for you to see?
No, I see that clearly, I'm saying "learn to use a tool that won't matter in a few years" seems kinda funny. I'd rather get the real thing for as long as I can, not jump to the this and find at the end, all that time using ai, I could have used to advance my real art instead, since ehtats what I'd inevitably return to once ai is like that.

>>6809755
>I'd rather get the real thing for as long as I can
What gives you the right to determine what is "the real thing"?
Or are you telling me you only create cave paintings?

>>6809755
This, why on earth would I not advance my actual art skills and just adapt to the easier more streamlined version in the future if I need to. The worth of an artist doesn't change unless you advance your own skills and fundamentals. That's why this whole prompter as an artist makes no sense to me. Unless you were lying about it all and want to rely fully on AI to make art which isn't a tool at that point

>>6809756
>What gives you the right to determine what is "the real thing"?

Well for one, it's not copyrightable. It's straining further from being "the real thing" in real legal time since other mediums don't have that kind of handicap

>>6809757
guess what no one fucking cares outside of xitter malding circles, guess what zoomers who grow up with AI certainly won't give a single fuck, when the economy is getting fucked anyway, art is the last thing people use money on either way

>>6809758
It's copyrightable in Japan, and that's really all that matters when it comes to 2D art.

>>6809743
autism wins once again

>>6809746
>It will become an artist
>mfw nothing AIniggas make can even be considered their work if that happens
>Prompt fags still are not artists even in their "dream" scenario

>>6809759
You okay

>>6809763
I use AI for fapping purposes I don't consider myself an artist, I don't care about such an useless label when you apply it to twitter spics who doodle anime girls doing reddit memes

>>6809761
Not sure how true that is, for all the AI talk in japan I don't really see much of it taking off in any real venture

Can't we all just be friends?

>>6809766
I'm tony the tiger

>>6809758
>Well for one, it's not copyrightable.
False.
You can copyright AI assisted art. You just have to make atleast some meaningful changes to it like fixing the hands for instance which most AI artists already do anyway lol.

>>6809763
it can be an artist all it wants, i'll still use it as an assistant/slave.

>>6809774
>which most AI artists already do anyway
which most artists already do anyway

>>6809769
no.

>>6809756
Humans=real
Digital tool=aproxamating real
Ai=alien

>>6809774
No, just barely fixing the hands doesn't make it copyrightable. I know this because someone posted about submitting to the USCO on a piece. It takes a lot more than just inpainting or painting over a few spots to gain copyright as a whole for the image. At that point you only gain copyright for the actual drawn over parts of the image

>muh copyright
who gives a fuck about copyrighted content if you have an endless supply of content?

>>6809784
Companies and corporations...? What is up with the actual retards in this thread today

>they confuse the technique for the art
you guys are forgetting that art is primarily a form of communication.
transfering ideas and emotions.
the only reason we have been learning how to draw and paint for so long is because that was the best way to convey these things that could not be put into words.
for some reason artists nowadays have confused the medium with the actual message.
ai is just a new way of conveying the message faster, with no required training.
anyone can now convey what they feel, not just people who have been drawing for all of their life.
how is this a bad thing?

>>6809785
you think mickey mouse will compete with an endless stream of gigaslop?

>>6809213
>>6809260
I just run it locally, billions of images if I want. I can set a pw and access it from work or let my friends fuck around.
I wish people weren't so linux-phobic, because it's as easy as "git clone <url>" and bingo-bango, play around with this ML nonsense to your heart's content.
It hurts me to see people paying for SD, but I also get it. I love cooking but I still order delivery.
(And I know it doesn't require linux, but these things are piss easy in linux but I was actually filtered trying to set up python and git in windows)

My two favorite SD activities are making stamps and making figurines/dollhouse shit.

>>6809786
My art communicates my love of drawing...

>>6809778
unfortunate.

>>6809788
no you fucking dunce, it's for companies/corporations to abide by not the average shitter who has been tracing or stealing art and putting it on t shirts for a quick buck

>>6809788
First mover advantage

>>6809786
this, this is also why control is by far the most important thing about AI art. and why non-artists will always be limited even when using AI.

>>6809792
what content do companies need to copyright if the free stuff overwhelms them? artwork just won't be a product

also you own the IP even if you use AI to generate depictions of it :)

>>6809789
Also, beg-tier tradchad here, and I despise the nonsense narrative of "hating on artists" or "why would you physically make art when machine learning AI can do it"

All things have their place, and I sketch daily and have a number of artists I deeply admire.

>>6809798
Instead of hiring a prompter, they will still require artists to touch it up which is the whole point of the generated images lack copyright thats all it is. Im not talking about IP here

>>6809804
even if you AI generate Mario, Nintendo holds the IP...

>>6809800
Yeah that's a weird one, I like AI and I like non AI art, I even like art from artists that hate AI like Anato Finnstark. If it looks good it looks good, simple as.

>>6809812
I like AI art but I hate AI anime and AI 3DPP because for some reason you manage to make it look the same almost every time

>>6809811
Are we just on different wavelengths or something? The whole reason the copyright status of generated images being denied was to prevent companies from just generating their IP images and not needing artists to touch it up. We're not talking about the fucking IP and who holds it that has no relevance to any of this

>>6809816
oh glad to know I can generate super mario shit with AI and sell it freely since no one holds the copyright!

>>6809814
Ain't no shame in it.

>>6809238
>4. Generating filigree for my CNC/laser engraving
Especially with ControlNet, lots of possiblities that I don't need to spend ages on for piddly background noise. I can give ControlNet a hexagon frame and get some interesting patterns and so on.

This turns me into "curator" during this part of the process, but 1. there's nothing wrong with that, 2. I can devote my energy to the main subject

>>6809817
I mean go for it, I don't know what that has to do with what we're talking about but ok

>>6809822
IP keeps one from doing this

why are artists the most retarded people using a bunch of made up semantic bullshit as arguments?

>>6809814
Isn't that sort of anime/manga taken to its logical conclusion though?
It's always been riding the line of abstracting the form and providing information
Anime has always been "slop" in a sense.

>>6809834
yes and no, some manga has breathtaking scenes but if you just focus on characters doing instagram poses you don't have anything interesting

>>6809825
yeah damn its annoying maybe you should go back to code or whatever the fuck you do

Dollhouse figurines and stamps is top shelf SD

>>6809825
Which one do you take issue with the most?

>>6809824
Then don't do it..? Like what the fuck do you want me to do

>>6809839
looks horrible

My advice for you guys
>for the female artist
Onlyfans or plumber, plumbing will be the last thing to get automated (probably)

>for the male artist
Plumber, plumbing will be the last thing to get automated (probably)

>>6809847
In another context you'd say "soul", but I appreciate your cope.

>>6809851
If it was actually done by hand then yeah "soul"

>>6809854
The point is that you only know it wasn't done by hand due to this current context.

>>6809742
I'm explaining to you that the process doesn't matter like you think it does, it's different in every medium. AI's process isn't the paint's. Again, effort is not even remotely relevant in this topic. That's just how you're coping and expressing your pride.

>>6809752
>Did you just skim past the example I gave you
Yes I did kek. Fundamentals aren't important to creating art. Most art is made without them in mind.

>There was no argument for this
You're honing in on one aspect and ignoring the grander argument against new artistic tools "not being fair" or "cheating" therefore making artists not "real artists", it was retarded then and it's still retarded now.

>>6809755
Why wouldn't it matter? What does mattering have to do with anything? It's just art, you do it for fun or because people enjoy it. There are loads of ways to make art and none of it "matters". It's just a hobby or profession.

>>6809858
But that's kind of the point, if you have to lie about it then you know inherently something has more value which is why as autistic as "soul" is it still exists

>>6809849
>Become plumber after 3 years of training
>So did everyone else
>Not enough jobs to go around
Hmm.

>>6809864
That cat either has soul or doesn't, which is it?

my honest reaction when I nut to AI made porn artwork knowing full well that some xitter fag didn't get engagement or comfy points from me

>>6809758
>Well for one, it's not copyrightable.
You can copyright AI art by taking a photograph of it, using Photoshop, or just winning a court case showing significant human input(probably easy enough since ComfyUI is a thing).

The fact you think only copyrightable art is art is really fucking funny though. Copyrights are decades old. Art is as old as humanity. Did the Neanderthals not make art because they didn't have corporate approval?

>>6809763
>>mfw nothing AIniggas make can even be considered their work if that happens
The tools they use make them an artist. The AI that he was talking about, that's literally borderline alive, would be the artist and people wouldn't be using it. Very different things.

>>6809861
>I'm explaining to you that the process doesn't matter like you think it does, it's different in every medium. AI's process isn't the paint's. Again, effort is not even remotely relevant in this topic. That's just how you're coping and expressing your pride.

Everyone has thousands of ideas that don't have value. The effort makes a whole lot of relevance if everyone is able to do it, there's an inherent loss of value in it regardless of your "it doesn't matter" attitude. Artist's pride isn't a bad thing, just like taking pride in anything you do isn't bad. People are gonna call you out on your process and you can defend it, but at the end of the day the only facts that remain are the models are going to get even simpler to use as time progresses even if you want to live with the title of artist. We have different views on photographers, sculptors, and painters because they're inherently different under the umbrella of "art." You can tell others to cope about it, but you're extremely hypocritical if you don't realize that difference.

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

Deal with it.

>>6809861
>Why wouldn't it matter?
It was a response to the general trend of saying "learn to use ai tools or be left behind you Luddite"

artist this artist that even subway sandwich woman is called a sandwich artist, pure wordplay

>>6809869
You can't just take a photograph of a piece of art and claim copyright are you stupid.

>or just winning a court case showing significant human input

Yes, because that isn't what I was arguing if you read the post. The raw output as challenged in court and denied is the non-copyrightable result.

>The fact you think only copyrightable art is art is really fucking funny though. Copyrights are decades old. Art is as old as humanity. Did the Neanderthals not make art because they didn't have corporate approval?

Again, you can do whatever you want with it, as a hobby or for commercial gain. If you want to pursue monetary gain, you can't use the raw output and I'm just stating it from the court rulings.

>artist
>ist
>racist
>ist
Everyone who identifies as an artist needs to go back to /pol/, you're being problematic.

>>6809867
Forced soul

>>6809767
well the not posters own artwork is a tab here and if it's the AI work I'm not sure why you keep wanting to post them here
>If it's taking the credit why should anyone come to you

>>6809872
They do have value you're just a sub-human who doesn't value life. Effort is how you personally gauge beauty or whatever but that's not how I personally gauge beauty at all. You're also money obsessed which is worthless in this discussion.
> Artist's pride isn't a bad thing
It is when it's making you act retarded. Earlier you were also disregarding the AI artist's pride, implying that's a bad thing. Unless that was someone else.

I'm also not defending the process I have, I'm simply explaining that it is a process because TONS of anti-AI people think there is no process which is objectively incorrect.
>but at the end of the day the only facts that remain are the models are going to get even simpler to use as time progresses
A good thing. Just like Photosohop was a great thing for painters and illustrators. Despite most painters and illustrators sperging out violently when it first came out -- exactly like they're now doing against AI. In some decades you'll look back and laugh at how dumb you were. Hell I doubt it will even take that long.

>You can tell others to cope about it, but you're extremely hypocritical if you don't realize that difference.
Why would you say this? You're literally projecting if I change what you said like so:
>We have different views on photographers, sculptors, AI users, and painters because they're inherently different under the umbrella of "art."

>>6809884
it's funny

>>6809880
Autist
You need to leave too son.

>>6809861
>Yes I did kek. Fundamentals aren't important to creating art. Most art is made without them in mind.

Yeah in your case, all the bulk of fundamentals is from the training data. I don't think we disagree there, but you're really ignorant if you think fundamentals are somehow not significant in creating art and I don't really know how to argue that with someone who appears to be surface level with art in general. It's more so ironic when someone says that and tries to argue he's a real artist to people who are learning to draw and trying to get better in their own way.

>You're honing in on one aspect and ignoring the grander argument against new artistic tools "not being fair" or "cheating" therefore making artists not "real artists", it was retarded then and it's still retarded now.

It's a pretty huge discrepancy that defines generative models vs. photoshop or any other drawing program. It quite literally set off a shift in the public and the way it'll affect everyone in the future, but you've been arguing in bad faith this whole time so what did I expect

bro you used a calculator? NOT A MATHEMATICIAN SWEETY

lol he's seething now

>>6809875
Don't pay shitposters any mind and try to think about these things from a higher perspective. AI will make us all jobless eventually, it's pointless trying to eternally chase money at this stage of society. People will do what's fun or useful, whether they like using AI or drawing. Even if someone or something is better at it than they are, they'll do what they want.

>>6809879
>You can't just take a photograph of a piece of art and claim copyright are you stupid.
Yes you can and there are plenty of cases surrounding AI that haven't entered court yet. The two we've seen so far have literally nothing to do what most AI artists are doing. Massive companies like Blizzard are going to be copyrighting AI artwork soon too.

>>6809881
Just because it's AI?

>>6809858
SOVL
anyone who says otherwise is an AIphobe

>>6809892
yeah dude what dont you understand?

>>6809891
>Don't pay shitposters any mind and try to think about these things from a higher perspective. AI will make us all jobless eventually, it's pointless trying to eternally chase money at this stage of society.
That is already my position.

>>6809888
They're significant in creating art that YOU like. This is a pea brain discussion compared to the topic I'm trying to focus on dude. And are you so shallow you can't like art not following them?
>It's more so ironic when someone says that and tries to argue he's a real artist to people who are learning to draw and trying to get better in their own way.
Seriously though, you are genuinely mentally challenged if you can't understand what I've been telling you lol. You really want to think that there is only one form of illustration and the rest don't count, huh.
>It's a pretty huge discrepancy
It isn't relevant to the grander point that dumb arguments were made against photography then digital art and now AI. You're cherry picking, grasping at straws.

>>6809885
>They do have value you're just a sub-human who doesn't value life.

uh I mean I don't really care about AI as a whole, but trying to take credit for other's works and saying its your process while endangering the livelihood of not just artists, but most people who rely on work because of the looming threats of AI is pretty much the definition of not valuing other's lives because you want to be seen as significant to regular artists. I don't even understand why you said this nowhere did I ever say anything like value of life you schizo.

>You're also money obsessed which is worthless in this discussion.

Is it really? I don't have a problem if you use AI as a tool, but if you're just generating and inpainting and expecting a paycheck you're part of the problem.

>Earlier you were also disregarding the AI artist's pride, implying that's a bad thing. Unless that was someone else.

Don't think that was me, but even then I wouldn't pride myself off of using other's works when they don't want it. At most using it as a reference and drawing something in my style feels the most acceptable if I wanted to take pride in it.

>Hell I doubt it will even take that long.
Again, I don't care how far AI goes, I know it'll be even easier to use in the future if it gets better and I can always choose to use it in conjunction with the drawing skills I've been honing. Regardless, I don't understand this chastizing of artists who dont use AI because they don't want to ethically step over their bounds. That's pretty disgusting regardless

>Why would you say this? You're literally projecting if I change what you said like so:

Because you're making fun of artists who don't want to use AI, you should be realizing there's no need to engage and if you like it and believe in it show the work and success to actually make the point? This is just a petty outrage at /ic of all places and I say this as someone neutral on AI

>>6809902
>uh I mean I don't really care about AI as a whole, but trying to take credit for other's works and saying its your process while endangering the livelihood of not just artists
You're so far down the twitter troon hole that I won't bother reading the rest. Be better.

I believe in karma and artists are getting fucked because of hitler

>>6809895
Did you notice the blur in the lower left, by chance?

>>6809910
*right, sorry, English is my third language.

>>6809899
> You really want to think that there is only one form of illustration and the rest don't count, huh.

The majority of people post illustrations, even in the ones you've posted earlier in the thread, no other art forms rely on scraping data and the images of other artists all compiled to train from, so I don't see the point of bringing up other art forms that isn't AI.

>It isn't relevant to the grander point that dumb arguments were made against photography then digital art and now AI. You're cherry picking, grasping at straws.

You don't really believe that right? gen AI is the most disruptive tech to come and it's set to remove jobs from all sectors. It's not grasping at straws at least engage with the main point of it. If you take that function away, you'd have nothing compared to photoshop where you take away generative fill, you're left wiht a program that doesn't rely on trained data, and can still function by itself as a canvas, and editing software. You're extremely disingenous in your arguments when it doesn't fit your narrative quite frankly you pea brain

>>6809912
dont worry pajeet

>>6809902
I lied I read the rest
>Because you're making fun of artists who don't want to use AI,
I didn't do this. I'm just here trying to help you guys understand that creating images makes you an artist and that you can use fancy technology to do that. You don't have to be a caveman using fingerpaints or pencils. You can do that though, I think that's really cool too.

>>6809914
>no other art forms rely on scraping data
All visual arts do. Please kill yourself if you want to argue otherwise.

>>6809905
Quite ironic when SD wouldn't even exist and be able to generate the quality without the scraped images. But then again, delusion is a real thing. I don't know why it's so hard for people to acknowledge that, it doesn't stop you from using AI in the first place but attaching yourself that strongly to AI with an "artist's pride" is even worse than the people here who reject it fully.SAPDV

>>6809915
I'm not worried nor Indian.
Does it now have soul, knowing it was a ruse, and actually handmade?

>>6809918
And you wouldn't be able to draw if god didn't give you eyes and things to look at. You are completely mind fucked by retarded trannies. You're probably one yourself.

>>6809920
It's not tho

>>6809920
yeah as Its been said before but since you're a dumb techie you'll never understand what its being meant by soul

>>6809923
No? You think I deliberately added a blur to confuse the viewer?

>>6809858
is this AI?
Does it have SOVL?

>>6809926
Sure.

>>6809917
>All visual arts do. Please kill yourself if you want to argue otherwise.

I'm not even trying to be hostile I don't understand the animosity. I can be honest about the way it works even if i use it, and a human learning off of reference is completely different to the idea of a 24/7 running code scraping unauthorized data without licenses and feeding it into the training data for models to learn off of. I can't tell if you're actual scum or not, normally people who use these models realize it's not a good feeling that it takes inherently from artists and can sympathize. You're just off the deep end of projection filled with that artist's pride you mocked. What is actually wrong with you

>>6809930
Don't be so non-commital friend, surely something has soul or it doesn't.

>>6809929
It can have forced soul

>>6809931
woman moment

>>6809931
You're being retarded. I asked kindly, please comply.

>>6809921
Because a human is equivalent to a machine/piece of code now? Of all the bad faith arguments, you gotta get a new one. There's a reason the court rulings stated the LLM's don't have the human reasoning or learning capabilities to attain human authorship right? I'm so glad we discovered exactly how humans learn and how the brain functions, and we applied that exact same process to a model made by code. I get that you're insecure about it with the tranny comment but it's really not helping you

>>6809933
Definitely forced soul

>>6809935
I'm sorry but you're not an artist please cope further regardless with some more inpainting. Less talking more prompting promptfag retard

>>6809941
I don't know what "forced soul" means

>>6809934
you gotta let her grow her dick out

>>6809943
ok

>>6809943
It means you're a retard

>>6809946
And you don't either, I see now. You're unhappy with how this discussion has gone.

That's understandable.
It's a nice picture of a cat sitting in the branches though, wouldn't you agree?

>>6809940
>muh law
Nothing you're talking about matters, it's all just cope. You're trying to anthropomorphize and denounce tools. It's retarded.

>>6809950
you like putting words in people's mouths dont you?

ick on 'eck poster is more of an artist than anything I've seen on /ic/

I think you've probably reached your limit in this discussion, I can see you're getting agitated.

It's a pretty cute cat though, I wonder who made it.

>>6809952
>You're trying to anthropomorphize and denounce tools. It's retarded.

No one brings up the argument of "learning" more than AI proponents with their models. You're trolling with your projection now, if you're not gonna listen to reasoning or the law, then you're just retarded. Grow up

>>6809958
>No one brings up the argument of "learning" more than AI proponents with their models.
You're lying. You even just brought it up yourself for no reason other than to cope.
>if you're not gonna listen to reasoning or the law
The law isn't settled nor does it have literally anything to do with what art is. It's just nonsense from the business world. A world where AI is and will continue to be copyrightable, mind you. Because that world produces """ethical""" AI art.

>>6809858
Is this AI or not

>>6809950
It's a picture of a cat in a tree. It looks wierd, like Fernando Botero got Alzheimer's.

>>6809858
cute cat

>>6809858

>>6809957
>who
It's not a who yet

Side note guys, why are cats so funny and also cute
I want to kiss their smoochy mousey faces

>>6809965
>You're lying. You even just brought it up yourself for no reason other than to cope.

Why are you actually so stupid, don't do this to me I thought you were better than this.

>The law isn't settled nor does it have literally anything to do with what art is. It's just nonsense from the business world. A world where AI is and will continue to be copyrightable, mind you. Because that world produces """ethical""" AI art.

I didn't realize a judge ruling on the validity of copyright of generated images isn't worth anything? Again, you're just absolutely retarded did you just run out of steam after all the gaslighting.

>>6809972
Holy shit! Real?!?¿¡??? 2 tails!

>>6809965
Kek why are AItrannies so autistic

>>6809976

>>6809977
>Why are you actually so stupid, don't do this to me I thought you were better than this.
Nice adhom there, why didn't you refute me in any way here? You are lying and coping.
>I didn't realize a judge ruling on the validity of copyright of generated images isn't worth anything?
What does this have to do with art? Why are you implying you can't copyright AI art?

>>6809976
Ignore filename. Cute regardless.

what is this thing of pretending to be innocent and logical when you obviously come here to annoy people

>>6809978

>>6809980
cute cat

>>6809980
Incredible I wonder who the artist is? It's a mystery!

>>6809988
Now as a personal exploration, try to view the picture outside of the context of this thread and your feelings

It's a nice picture, isn't it?

>>6809986
Real?!??! How does it do that?

>>6809984
Only brainlet sub-humans think that people can't contradict themselves in their actions. I'm being logical, I enjoy annoying people, and I'm right about literally everything and I came here to help you all cope.

>>6809991
I drew this

>>6809990
Not especially. I don't like the face.

>>6809982
>Nice adhom there, why didn't you refute me in any way here? You are lying and coping.

Because you're gaslighting terribly. I don't know why I need to spell out everything for you. Do you think artists are arguing for AI and want to say the models learn exactly like humans? Whose best interest is it in to say AI learns like humans and spread that narrative? Why do you think big AI proponents like Yann LeCun from meta argue like that? I get that you're trolling but you're not even doing a good job

>What does this have to do with art? Why are you implying you can't copyright AI art?

Are you seriously this retarded. This isn't an opinion, the ruling exists.

Judge Beryl A. Howell of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia found that the U.S. Copyright Office was correct in denying copyright protections to a work that was created entirely without human involvement. Friday’s ruling will be a critical component in future legal fights as lawyers and inventors test the limits of intellectual property laws when applied to AI.

Computer scientist Stephen Thaler attempted to get a copyright for a piece of visual art titled “A Recent Entrance to Paradise.” The piece was created using a computer system Thaler owns called the “Creativity Machine.” Thaler wanted to transfer the copyright from the AI to himself.

>>6809995
The absolute cope.

>>6809994
Real??!?? How to train my cat to do this?

>>6809993
>I'm being logical,
nope

>>6809980
Thanks for the reference, very cute kot

>>6809999
Wasted quads. The picture is shitty.

>>6809996
>Because you're gaslighting terribly.
I am not. You're just mentally retarded and coping. Bringing up these retarded arguments that have nothing to do with what I was talking about. You're probably a woman or a faggot.

You can copyright AI art. No one is going to challenge any "ethical" AI artwork.
https://aibusiness.com/nlp/adobe-s-top-lawyer-proposes-ip-protections-for-ai-generated-art
And AI will eventually create works indistinguishable from human works and people won't have fun trying to prove otherwise. This isn't settled. The Thaler case has nothing to do with AI we're making either, that was art made STRICTLY by a machine and he's appealing regardless. His arguments are sound too.

>>6809999
you just have shit taste

>>6810000
just give it a pat

>>6809980
I love him, would pet/10

>>6809726
lol i tried. i had to pretty much draw the whole thing though. i can see why you chose a zebra.

>>6810009
>I am not. You're just mentally retarded and coping. Bringing up these retarded arguments that have nothing to do with what I was talking about. You're probably a woman or a faggot.

Even when you get the explanation, you pivot because you can't defend anything :(


>You can copyright AI art. No one is going to challenge any "ethical" AI artwork.

Hey retard can you read properly, you can copyright it if it's used as a tool. If you use it simply to output an image without any touching up it's not eligible for copyright. There's multiple cases like the famous book with generated images where the generated parts don't receive copyright you absolute fucking tard.

>And AI will eventually create works indistinguishable from human works and people won't have fun trying to prove otherwise

yeah in the future but who knows how long that's gonna take. There's all sorts of issues with scraping better data and now with the spam of AI images it's even harder to parse through the good data. Not to mention, you're retarded but there are going to be better programs for AI detection. The thaler case has everything to do with machine learning, because it's literally the same principles of how the LLM's work. When legal experts are even talking about the implications on the still ongoing cases of ruling the validity of copyright in the big model cases, I don't see how you just casually disregard all of that and cherry pick out the things you like.

All your arguments are from a few months back, and it's really confusing how you can be so autistic about all the wrong shit you spew. Maybe spend a little time looking into it oh wait, i forgot you don't want to do the bulk of work in anything. Keep going loser, you can call yourself an artist but no one else has to. If you spam some prompted images though I'll give you an "you are an artist" comment though :)

>>6809272
Almost every lora I've thought up someone made for me for free. Why not make your own though?

>>6809976
this is how the AI fags will get you, huh.

>>6810027
Cats are truly too pure for this world

>>6809500
Boy, you nodraw fags sure love that strawman.

>>6810023
What a pathetic way to live your life. You aren't going to change that AI art is here to stay and you still aren't refuting a single point I made previously. You're now just coping because you know I'm right about the law garbage too. You can generate fill an AI generated image and copyright it, right? Does this even matter? No. I don't care about copyrights and neither do you.

>What a pathetic way to live your life.
Yeah going to other boards just to piss off people, its crazy that some people enjoy wasting their time like that

>>6810031
I'm not wasting my time, I'm trying to help people.

>>6810030
I can change whenever and pivot because I have the underlying skills to succeed in the future in drawing and the knowledge of how to use SD. It's not even comparable in time and effort to learn. As does every other artist if they really want to or if it's necessary. Prompting alone doesn't get you anywhere but you believe that's the case since you're just waiting til it's indistinguishable from regular art.

I didn't know you were a judge or that the legal system somehow doesn't matter? Learning how to use SD really does up the narcissism for neglected folks like you. Also why does changing matter if AI art is here. You don't care about copyright or being able to monetize so why bring it up in the first place you moron.

You can't stop AI by whining to the jannies.

nah you just enjoy nagging people, I bet you dont even enjoy making ai pics as much, its just that you can troll with it

>>6810033
>goyim golem argument
And what does this have to do with art?

>>6810032
Might fine saviors complex from a dunning kruger we got here

>>6809365
>I don't want to learn to be good at something
Do
Something
Else

>>6810035
I'm generating right now and trust me if I was posting images this thread would have turned out a lot worse than it did. More shitpost fuel for the copers.

>>6810032
what do you want them to do?

>>6810036
God you're beyond pathetic projecting and wanting all the reward without work. You truly belong here regardless since you don't even post your work when you prompt

>>6810041
Chill out and enjoy art like sane humans.

>>6809566
>I'm pretty sure I had tougher journeys on the toilet than that.
The first step is to stop using the street.

>>6810043
I haven't expressed any desire for reward and I've explained that work is not relevant in the creation of art. You are a soulless beast that only seems to care about money.

>>6810044
>just enjoy watching your loved ones suffer anon.
tell that to my friends who will lose their livelihood to this demon in 10 years.

>>6810047
You do, you want the title of artist. That's been evident the entire thread from your first post. I'm sorry life doesn't work that way and I'm sorry you're this obsessed with thinking money is the only reward at the end of the day, still waiting for your work. For someone that talks big of 100k images generated, I dont see anything

>>6810052
Blame the game not the players.

>>6810052
Stop it, he gets to be an "artist" so it doesn't matter if people lose their livelihoods. We gotta make sure he feels good about his work even when he doesn't do any

>>6810053
No, I have that title. You implying otherwise is extreme cope.

>>6810047
>that only seems to care about money.
when artists mention money, it's not for want of money, its for sustaining a lifestyle that lets them output art without being tired from their day job. people who truly love it want to spend most of their time on art.

AI art is art the same wsy s.o.y.lent is food.
https://youtu.be/t8NCigh54jg?si=YNllGNYh40Vq3AVR
Get a load of the comments.

>>6810057
No you don't I;m sorry pal :( Keep coping though. Still waiting for the glorious art

>>6810055
It's not my fault if someone lost a job because society shifted because technology improved for the betterment of humanity.

>>6810059
Most people making related arguments don't even make money from their art. It's just a loaded argument coming from the generic twitter tranny.

>>6810061
I do and you are a very sad person coping extremely hard.

>>6810062
>I do and you are a very sad person coping extremely hard.

No.

>>6810063
Yes sorry.

>>6810064
I'm not gonna snap you out of your delusion, keep grinding bud

>>6810062
How WADU Works: Inside JPMorgan's Mass Tracking System for Employees https://www.businessinsider.com/jpmorgan-chase-employees-describe-fear-mass-workplace-data-surveillance-wadu-2022-5?amp
>betterment

This whole thread and the one autist AIfag has really hammered home how worthless it is to read this whole thing. Back to drawing

>>6810067
https://aibusiness.com/verticals/how-ai-helped-a-paralyzed-man-walk-again---with-his-mind
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/23/health/ai-stroke-speech-neuroscience.html
https://clickup.com/blog/ai-art-generators/
https://techeela.com/problems-that-ai-solves/
https://techcrunch.com/2023/08/23/lex-ai-writing-tool-seed-round/

>>6809213
>>6809260
>>6809275
>>6809289
I followed this guide from /trash/ https://rentry.org/voldy since I use NVIDIA
And I manage to make my first few AI art. Now I need to know HOW to "make models" or "capturing concept". I don't want to download pre-made nor official models, I want to make my OWN models. /trash/ and /g/ called me retard for trying to find my own way..

>>6810070
>he can't create art while typing at the same time
ngmi

>>6809592
sorry, kinda missed your reply somehow.

again, i don't care about this.
and i even agree, machines don't have authorship. but i as a human have authorship. so what if i design a character but finish the illustration using AI? like in pic related? i hope those edge cases are also addressed. most of the discourse is still about AI being black and white, either you use it or not, but a lot of the time, especially for artists, the workflows will be hybrid in nature.

but that is not what i'm talking about. i'm saying that it is "learning" and "training" using similar processes as humans, because it is mimicking how neurons work in our brains. this has NOTHING to do with sentience, human rights, and all this other shit.
it seems like every time i mention this, you people make this mistaken assumption. and this is because you don't understand how these systems work. you keep assuming that "learning" and "training" are for humans only. but this is EXACTLY what has changed and this is why AI are booming right now.
it's precisely because they CAN do this now.

this doesn't mean they can do everything a human can, very far from it. but they can do some of the things that used to be unique to us.
honestly, this is the basic fact that people need to come to terms with here before even beginning to talk about AI.


>There's a huge difference between companies mass training on unlicensed copyrighted data to make a profit, and a single human using reference you absolute bad faith tard
i always find the corporate argument tired. because most, if not all of the images you see people make here are from stable diffusion. if you didn't know: it is open source. everybody can use it for free. And it is arguably more powerful than the paid options. It certainly is more versatile.

you know that rock paper scissors thing? they didn't have to pay to use any of this either. it's all open source.

>>6810062
>betterment of humanity.
get in ze pod
eat ze bugz
consoom ze pornz
your attempts at resisting is not slowing the progress towards utopia(virtual utopia, resources are limited you see, shant be wasting them on silly things such as 'real life')

>>6810073
Are you retarded I swear the prompters are getting even lazier and dumber than ever

Fact:
The math of ML (what you're calling "AI") is from the 1900s, it's basic linear algebra and calc.
Any STEM undergrad can implement this shit.

Fact:
There is no putting this genie back in the bottle.
For all the cope about legislation and "I raise my wig in protest madam!" just lol, no.

Fact:
You will need to adapt to this new paradigm, it isn't going back in the bottle.
It isn't a "device" created by some single entity. It's just mathematics and programming, and it has immense cultural implications which means everyone is working on it.
This isn't like nuclear technology where you can monitor sale of materials.

It's not going anywhere, and you need to start dealing with that reality.

>>6810072
>there are god uses, therefore it's not going to be bad
lets hope the good outweighs the bad.

>>6810085
It always does. A lot of the "bad" uses you guys will cite are actually good too.

kek seriously what motivates you to come here and argue nonstop you mentally ill techfag, then that corny way of speaking "its not going anywhere" like you're an anime villain

>>6810083
>You will need to adapt
how? simple question. how? don't be short sighted with your answer.

>>6810087
accept reality

>>6810079
>so what if i design a character but finish the illustration using AI?

This is the kind of shit I hate. If you're gonna use AI at least use it more than a render filter to do your work for you. You lose your style and what makes your work yours because even if you use a lora trained on your work and tune the weights, the plasticky AI feel still comes through because the base model of SD encompasses 99% more than the images you put in.

>i always find the corporate argument tired. because most, if not all of the images you see people make here are from stable diffusion. if you didn't know: it is open source. everybody can use it for free. And it is arguably more powerful than the paid options. It certainly is more versatile.

yes, but you act like stability isn't making a profit and planning IPO like they've mentioned. All the big models are doing the same thing, whether you pay for it or not

>>6810081
No nigger, I'm ESL, so shit is more difficult for me to understand.

Let's say I want to put this Garfield into a folder to tell the machine to "learn and train" to draw like this character where I just press a button, and it makes a model for me that contains information to draw like pic related, and obviously it should be separate files of each Garfield and not in one picture or it confuses the retarded machine.

So, how do I make this example picture into a model?
>Show your on /ic/ first
Tell me what to draw then, if it means getting help with learning on "making model file"

>>6810086
tell that to my friend who just got turned into a paperclip

>>6810089
go to therapy

>>6810088
However you want or the way that suits you, what the hell are you asking?

>>6810091
No you fucktard just youtube it, there's a literal video within the first 3 with the keywords you mentioned that tell you how to do what you first asked.

>>6810093
for what?

>>6810079
You couldn't remotely get close to drawing/painting that yourself. It only looks "pro"ish because its stealing from actual artists who are the ones that deserve the attention. Fuck off. The world doesn't need more idea guys. You're just spamming and making it harder for actual artists to be seen.

>>6810090
>plasticky AI
nta but you can avoid that. watercolor prompts especially avoid that plastic look.

>>6809870
You know anon the models and other stuff can prob be claimed by the AI companies if you use their shit. Isn't a portion of stamped with their watermark anyways
>you even need to use tokens for some of them
>also the constant look what "AI" can do
>also the mention either SD or Midjourney, that or Chinese model

I don't know many artists who need to keep mentioning the branding of the tools they use anon

>>6810101
The world is getting more idea guys and you don't need to draw/paint to create art like that any longer. Get over it and realize this is a good thing. "Actual" artists will be a remnant of the past just like candlemakers.

>>6810102
Thats not the style I want to go for though, at this point the best it offers me is a board of references for posing. Other than that, it's too annoying to fix up if i render the whole thing. I'd rather continue to improve my skills at that point