/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

Most 3D renders have digital painting enhancements done in Photoshop.

>>6894519
Yes. This one looks like a combination of photobashing 3D render of the birb with actual photograph of heshlag. I really wonder what would ic thought of op Pic back when skynet art wasn't ruining their lives.

>>6894524
I mean, composition, lighting, etc.

>>6894517
looks like a shitty ahmed algoori painting subject

3d isn’t a microcosm of noneucludian horrors, it looks like an overpolished photobash with none of the underlying issues addressed
also, you need to stop spamming your uncanny valley natalie portman garbage, get a better model

>>6894552
It's not mine artwork. Someone on /tv/ made it.

I'd have said
>background 3D
>woman photobashed from two different pornstars
>moon is a stock photo or something
>bird 3D
>Water is two or three filters chained

Then again I'm not an artist, the fuck do I know

>>6894558
nigger, it’s not artwork, and you’re obviously the same esl pajeet spamming the same shitty model all over the board
>>/ic/thread/6893047
>>/ic/thread/6889629
>>/ic/thread/6890384#p6890388
kill yourself

>>6894571
calm down sir we are discussing art here

>>6894571
also
>>/ic/thread/6893035
>>6894573
go back to your discord tranny board, rajesh

Fancy 3D with some photobashing. Just looks like whatever AAA has been shitting out for years on Artstation.

Mixed media.
Shapes are solid, but it lacks the stiffness of 3D, I don't know how to explain.

>>6894594
That's what I thought. So the only thing we need to improve from now on is rendering and imitation of brush like strokes. Basically to put more focus on the details
. Our goal is to make our art linguisticable from "real" digital art.

>>6894605
>we
>our
kek

>>6894517
>If you saw picrel 5 years ago
for this one i'd think it's some elaborate photobashing, with the woman being one part, the birb and rock being another and the BG the third part.

>>6894517
I prbably would think is a new concept art bullshit technice of bunching together 3d, photobashing and overpainting. Quite sure i wouldnt like this one.

>>6894571
>noooooooo dont post or discuss art on the art board
go back

>>6894662
It's not art though? You are in the wrong board.

>>6894517
Average Faces was a big meme in 2013. StyleGAN and AnimeGANs were mainstream memes in 2018. The tech is really not so mind-blowing if you're old enough to remember the incremental steps it took to get here and five years from now we will be talking about The Next Big Thing

From the bad cropping and composition I'd assume it was one of those spammy monomaniacs who make uncanny porn with DAZ, but a slightly more effortful one who bothers to post-process in Photoshop afterwards.

>>6894666
Holy Santa!

>>6894517
5 years ago I would assume it's weird cgi

>>6894728
wierd in a good way?

>>6894762
no. It looks like shit.

>>6894517
Photograph with 3D/digital painting elements. Ain't no way a 3D model from 5 years ago would look so photoreal.

>>6894855
5 years? Davey Jones in pirates of the Caribbean was 20 years ago, so photo real many to this day think it was a mix of practical effects despite being fully CGI.

>>6894906
Yeah but that dude is humanoid, not a human. Same reason Thanos looks photoreal. If you try to make a normal ass human look photoreal while being 100% CGI it's about a million times harder.

>>6894855
>photoreal
lol
do pajeets really? Doesn't look photo real in the slightest.

>>6894949
You might be blind.

>>6894950
Sorry sir you're right sir she looks just like a real person sir my mistake.

>>6894517
Ai shit, pajeet color shit

>>6894947
>it's about a million times harder.
goes without saying.
I'm sure I saw photoreal cgi faces on cgtalk 15 years ago. they fucked the gallery though so I can't show you. :/

>>6894517
i'd think it was someone playing around with photoshop filters

>>6894954
Yeah they exist, but usually they're not this good.

>>6894982
the Asian ones were.

Looks like one of those super realistic dolls with a face photoshopped on and a painted background. That's why the hair and wrists are hidden.

What, the pajeets are roleplaying as 3D artists now?

>>6894517
It looks like a photo poorly edited onto a videogame.
Anyway, this is likely ANOTHER shitty AI bait thread, but that some butthurt AI loser.

>>6894819
You mean it in the cool way like "oh brother, that shit looks dope!", right?

>>6894517
I would've said it's a digital composite using photos.
Also, do we really need another veiled AI thread? Really?

>>6894605
>linguisticable
Rajesh, you need to update the thesaurus in WordStar.

>>6895202
Until we can have an explicit AI art general on this board, yes, yes we do need another veiled AI thread

>>6895234
>Until we can have an explicit AI art general on this board, yes, yes we do need another veiled AI thread
why don't you just fuck of to /g/ to spam your promtshit AI trannykun? there are dedicated generals for slopbot garbage there also you have been going for months and people still despise your poojeet tier posts when will you get into your thick skull that nobody actually likes AI shit here?

>>6895237
Nta but you don't need to like ai art in order to critique it sir. Have a good morning.

>>6895241
>but you don't need to like ai art in order to critique it sir.
giving promtiods advice is piontless because they are pre beg NGMI's who don't draw and as such have no work to speak of or to even begin critique.
simular to proptfaggots there is nothing to critique with AI slop apart from meme edits.
it doesn't understand what a "redline" is nor how it can apply the advice of pro's to improve it's "art" because it doesn't draw anything it generates slop by slamming pictures from it's dataset toghether Withouth any understanding of what it's actually doing, there is no talent to cultivate or uniqueness to appreciate because it has neither.
if you feed it nothing but rembrant it will produce rembrant derivitaves if you feed it chris chans autistic scribbles it will shit out derivatives of sonichu and never evolve beyond that piont because it's a machine that has no taste and as such can never actually develop something unique on it's own.
simularly there is no piont in clowning on AI slop because unlike a human being you can't hurt it in any way shape or form it's literally impossible to turn it into a lolcow as it's a souless automaton.

>>6895244
You are delusional. You have no idea how many pros are already using AI slop in their work flow. The bag is already out of the cat and I don't like it either but using AI is just a new standard for artists just like 2 decades ago with photoshop. I am old enough to remember my colleagues seething same nonsenses;
>digital art is not real art
>we need to stop these hacks
>it looks like shit
and so on. They are all using photoshop in the current year because nobody cared about their whining and feels just like in ze current year.

>>6895248
NTA but how many? name 20
>The bag is already out of the cat
your NPC brain has an error in the code
>I don't like it either
you're not fooling anyone, retard
>AI is just a new standard for artists just like 2 decades ago with photoshop
grim if that's the case
> I am old enough to remember my colleagues seething same nonsenses
your colleagues were right, and they still are right. but the downgrade is nowhere near as low as AIslop. I mean at least with digital art you were at least making art, just in a different medium. it's like comparing brushes to pencils, where as AI is more like in automated photobashing land

>I don't like it anyone, but get on with the times already !!! use AI SLOP RIGHT NOW!!!
who do you think you're fooling lmao

>>6895261
>>6895262
lmfao Do you still think ya be talkin to that one jeet from /g/ dont (you)?

>>6895278
learn english, rajesh

>>6895281
नहि।

>>6895234
>Until we can have an explicit AI art general on this board, yes, yes we do need another veiled AI thread
lmao, look at how the AI boys seethe that no one likes AI. There's boards on reddit where you can circle jerk each other, so go there.

>>6895295
I bet you don't even prompt. PYW or gtfo tranny.

>>6895298
>PYW
*PYP

>I bet you don't even prompt

Look guys, I love you and I care about this coomunity. that's the reason why I am doomerposting so much about ai recently. Can you even imagine how will internet art scene looks like 2 years from now? 96% ai content. the rest of 4% will be flagged as: /Not Sure If AI/ in everyones eyes unless you are 100% verified traditional,- vvich btw you cant even verify since artsist can just take ai generated pic and use it as a ref or straight print it on psych canvas, then put some paint and varnish texture on the top of it. MY point is; how do you fellow anons cope with all of this? because its coming ready or not.

>>6895339
>artsist can just take ai generated pic and use it as a ref or straight print it on psych canvas, then put some paint and varnish texture on the top of it

>>6895339
>how do you fellow anons cope with all of this? because its coming ready or not.
Not too concerned honestly? I said from the beginning that art jobs are more than just drawing, there's skill there that are developed through the act of getting better at drawing that enable them to be a cut above a proompter.
If a company needs art assets, and they're using AI to get it, are they going to use just a programmer to bang them out as they are? Hire a Proompter with no actual art skills? Or hire an artist with a resume of crafted quality assets showing an artistic eye, who can obviously edit the AI pieces as needed?
The same line of thought goes for all the art industries essentially - stock images haven't killed photography or art, so why should AI art?
This doesn't even get into the fact that drawing an creating work is just fun, so why should it effect people's personal pieces?

All this said, I do know AI is a bit of a different beast, since it comes closer to what the user wants, compared to stock art, but there is still that wall of it being exactly what you want that it will likely never pass - and I think that wall, and how annoying it is, is what will continue to spurn artists on, and continue ensuring they have a job in the work place.

>>6895234
>Until we can have an explicit AI art general on this board
Why though? You have other boards for that stuff. Here people are trying to learn to DRAW, not prompt.

>>6895298
>I bet you don't even prompt.
No self respecting draftsman does.

>>6895426
AI images will be like what phones with cameras are to photographers, but with fewer uses. Anyone has a camera on their pocket, but that doesn't make everyone into a professional photographer, because it's not just about being able to take a picture, now you can take a selfie while on vacation, but you'll stile hire a photographer for your wedding. Everyone being able to generate cool looking pictures won't turn everyone into artists, and while in some cases AI will replace real artists for smaller jobs, it will be like replacing a photographer because you can just use your phone.

>>6895298
>I bet you don't even prompt
why would I need to if it's just this for every picture I find on the search results

>>6895441
>>6895466
yeah, thats what i thought.

>>6895555
Holy interstela5555

>>6895451
Except you can almost instantly create a manifestation of something you imagined with this tool. Anyone who doesn't see the potential is either stupid, dishonest, or both.
Technical art skills are valuable because it gives a way to manifest something that you imagine. Thats it.
AI art frees people that don't have the time, resources, and privilege to sit around developing the now traditional art skills. It allows anybody to create the art that they choose. Anybody who loves art is excited about it. Only wannabe gatekeepers and dumbfucks who put all their eggs in a basket are upset about it.
Its hard to have sympathy to people who put all their time, energy, and money into developing a skill that everyone knew would become obsolete with technological advancements.
Its just science. You can try to resist change or embrace it. The choice is yours
Its time to put down the crayons and evolve to the keyboard

>>6895580
I wish there was an AI made specifically to make incredibly retarded posts on 4chan, so you could understand how artists feel.

>>6895592
We just use artists for that lmao

>>6895610
Ah, so that's why you're so angry at artists. My condolences dude.
If it helps, I think your post was really retarded, and nobody can take that from you.

>>6895621
???
Look I'm sorry your career plan fell through but its time to grow up and move on. Get a real job and whatnot

>>6895248
>You are delusional. You have no idea how many pros are already using AI slop in their work flow
Yes, it's almost ubiquitous in the industry right now. My colleagues use it, so do the artist in most studios now.
But you would not be able to see it, they use it as a base or as a quick iteration tool. The point is that it's not "used" as you imply and the artistic intent is still (and is going to be for the foreseeable future) very much hands on.

>Bou-hou AI
It's a tool, same as photoshop. Artists in the industry are still and will stay in demand.

>>6895655
It really just means that we can pay artists a lot less now. Just get third worlders to do it even more so now

>>6895580
AI doesn't not do what you think it does, and its creative intent is non existent. The millisecond you stop feeding it the totality of human artistic creation, it's running in circles, endlessly remixing the same image without ever evolving it further.

AI art needs a metric ton of human input to function. It's not smart, it look smart but most of the "computing" is Ugandan people endlessly labelling photos in 20 seconds in mills. It is not self sufficient, and the way it is designed, it won't ever function independently.

What I mean is that you are delusional.

>>6895671
>AI art needs a metric ton of human input to function
Just like people. You realize the criticism you have for AI can be applied to human artists too right?
Also, you do understand that you can feed non-artistic images into AI as well and it can learn from those, right?
You seem really latched onto this debunked criticism of AI. I would have more respect for you if you just said that its taking your job and you're scared. Because that is a real concern for you. But making up dumb stuff as cope just makes you look pathetic and I have much less sympathy for you and the other artists you speak for

>>6895669
This. Starfield was ousorced from Bethesda to India made exclusively by pajeets and look at that shitshow. Also I am fully vaccinated.

>>6895669
What I have observed is the opposite. A friend's studio just lost their main concept artist to a bigger one. He is doing more, better quality work and got more valuable. Then he got poached just like that.

>Just get third worlders to do it even more so now
We were working with Ukrainians for art assets circa 2012 mate. Not new. Art monkey already is not a sustainable job in any developed country. I wish it was, believe me.

>>6895671
>It is not self sufficient, and the way it is designed, it won't ever function independently.
..what?
after it's done, it functions entirely on its own, without internet access or any connection to its training dataset.
the way i read it, this post has fundamental misunderstandings about how AI works.

>>6895676
>You realize the criticism you have for AI can be applied to human artists too right?
No, people always imprint their art with their life experience and preferences. Even if a human copies or heavily references something, they are going to bring something.

>Also, you do understand that you can feed non-artistic images into AI as well and it can learn from those, right? You seem really latched onto this debunked criticism of AI
DE-DE-DE-DEBOONKED.
Ai churns out what you give it but remixed. You don't address my point at all. Oh cool you are going to feed it worthless boring non artistic images ? Ok now you have AI generated artless boring images.
It doesn't have intent, it's that simple.

>after it's done, it functions entirely on its own
Yes It's going to work.... churning out endless remixes of the things it has in its database.

Again, it has no intent.

>>6895698
you fundamentally don't understand how AI works. i should probably make an infographic or something eventually.

also the intent is with the person using the AI.
the AI itself also displays intent through the way it has learned its training concepts.

>>6895698
The prompted gives it intent
I think you should go learn how the tool actually works before you criticize it because you sound like a boomer talking about tik tok
Its not as scary and soulless as you think. It widens artistic horizons. It just puts a lot of gatekeepers out of jobs. If you're a real artist you will love AI. If you're a wannabe gatekeeper you'll hate it. Just get your head out of the sand first and try to understand how it actually works instead of believing everything you read on reddit

>>6895724
>ai pajeet also defends tiktok
You can't make this shit up

Why do non artists follow this board? What's the point? Even if you win or lose an argument in here it's not going to change the world, just let this board alone, so artists can use it as it was intended. Please.

>>6895724
>boomer talking about TikTok
>remember the "challenges"

Is that suppose to be an insult anon

>>6895724
>The prompted gives it intent
It gives a broad context but it absolutely isn't able to portray the intent of the artist whatsoever.
IE : You'll never get the exact pose or expression you want for example. I know because we tried...

>I think you should go learn how the tool actually works before you criticize it because you sound like a boomer talking about tik tok. Just get your head out of the sand first and try to understand how it actually works instead of believing everything you read on reddit
I work with concept artists that use AI in their workflow, I'm sitting a desk away from them. I check their work and we talk about it. I'm very much aware of the limitations of AI generation. The way I see it used is to generate iterations and do some quick idea cycling, the artistic intent comes after that. You'd never guess it has AI in it if I gave you the name of the vidya game. Also it's not really used for characters and more for ambiance and background concepts.

>If you're a real artist you will love AI. If you're a wannabe gatekeeper you'll hate it.
I'm indifferent. I never got to the point of using it in production because I stopped doing artwork for my job. And I practice at home for me so I don't really use "efficient" tools to achieve what I want, I just draw man.

>>6895745
pyvv
y
v
v

>>6895652
kill yourself parasite. you'll never be an artist

>>6895580
AIjeet tells artists to stop drawing yet still feeds their art to machines. trully goggles the non-shitskin mind

>>6895745
funny but i pretty much agree with most of the things you said here.
in its current form it is indeed best for early stages in a workflow. BUT-

>The way I see it used is to generate iterations and do some quick idea cycling, the artistic intent comes after that.
if that colleague uses AI as a base, then he is already building on top of existing artistic intent and decisions that aren't his.
even if it is not "real" artistic intent but merely an chance imitation of it, the concepts the model uses to put together the image are very much real.

>>6895652
>???
Let me point it out for you step but step:
I said "I hope they make a retarded post making AI, so you know what it's like to be replaced"
You Said "we have artists for that".
I said "Ah, so that's why you're angry at artists", implying you had been replaced by artists when it comes to making retarded posts, and thus why you were angry at them.

Really simple, easy to follow shit. So no, it appears that artists could never replace you're level of retardation, and I doubt an AI could be trained to hit this lows either. I guess you'll never understand.

>real job
What, like proompting?.... pfft.

I just created this artwork in 30 seconds. It is far better than anything the "artists" in this thread have ever created in their entire lives. Its unironically over for them, I am sorry but you gotta adapt to survive

>>6895779
you really seek the approval of people here to reaffirm your delusion lmao. the artist who was used in the slop machine is better than the people here. you're not better than anyone retard, because anyone can roll their face across the keyboard. that's the cope you are seemingly unable to explain. you either seek approval or artists to go ahead and say "huh, maybe this guy's right. if i use the picture vending machine it means I'll suddenly get better". you're possibly the world's most retarded groomer and shull. also that picture is generic, uninteresting high fantasy ArtStation shit that is painfully overdone.

>>6895784
>the artist who was used in the slop machine is better than the people here.
not that shitstirrer but you're an idiot. this is not how AI works.

>>6895779
>look at all the detail! It so good!!!!!
aijeets are actually the most smooth brain motherfuckers on the planet

>>6895788
You keep coming into threads to purposely misunderstand people, you stupid AI fucking retard. You know he was talking about the artists work in a data set that the AI was trained on.

>>6895804
he's a retarded attention whore, just filter his trip and don't engage.

>>6895784
I think its less seeking approval than mocking artists in their perceived safe spaces. Places like this are the sand that artists have buried their heads in.
You also have a fundamental misunderstanding of how AI works, which is part of why you're resistant and scared of it

>>6895804
yes. and that's exactly what i'm talking about as well. :)

so yes, you don't understand how AI works.

The cool thing about AI art is that it can even simulate the slop that human artists churn out
Just add "poorly drawn" to the prompt

>anons explain how ai works without jargon with the purpose to throw off anyone
>WOW YOU DONT UNDERSTAND AI
>never explains it what it practically does
>IT JUST DIFFUSES BECAUSE ITS IN THE NAME R U MAD YET SEETHING LMAO LOL
i honestly come here when i feel sad, then i see tripfag and aitrannies doing their usual spiel and feel pretty good about myself

and i mean, they never stop posting
its unreal how fucking pathetic someone could me

>>6895827
pretty good values though.

>>6895828
at this point i've explained every part of how AI works at some point.
but your head is just too empty. nothing is going in.
it is genuinely amazing how not even A LITTLE BIT got through, and how you still believe you actually know a single thing about how this all works.
but lol DIFFUSION FUNNIIEEEE XDDD

you're a genuine subhuman. post your work so i can laugh at you. can you draw better than me?
:)

>>6895827
i love how people say it can't generate lineart.
meanwhile see pic related. it can even gen "traditional" lineart...

>can you draw better than ME?
>posts not-his-own-work
epic troll fampai desu
almost made me like and subscribe and give 4chan gold

>>6895844
>can you draw better than me?
Yeah

>>6895828
AI fags don't even know how LLMs work. Once you demystify LLMs, AI becomes mundane statistics. They're just cultists worshipping their idol

>>6895804
to be specific, i'm saying that if you think an output is tied to an artist or any specific work, then you lack an understanding for how this works.

you're pretty much at the same level of understanding i was at before i ever touched SD or educated myself on any of this.

>>6895849
concession accepted.
so you're a shitter. maybe lay low and stop yapping when your betters are talking, eh?

>>6895851
Pretty much.
Anyone that can't explain proceedings with simple words but insist on using jargon, no matter how complex these proceedings might be, is either retarded or full of shit.

tripfag is probably on par with chris-chan autism wise

Daily reminder that AIbros think picrel is somehow the way in which people learn to draw. Absolute dunning-kruger moment in regards to machine learning and cognitive science.

>>6895751
Yeah why not. I usually hang in the towergirl thread for fun if you want to see more.

>>6895855
if you understood it better than me then you would also understand the jargon i used regardless of how simple the explanation is. (and you'd be able to correct my errors)

funny huh?
all this tells me is that you have a simple explanation in your head and refuse to listen to any other explanations.
i.e. you refuse to learn or listen.

>>6895851
>AI becomes mundane statistics
bellend tier understanding.

dunning kruger is insanely strong on this board, and not just for art it seems.

Anti-AI bros remind me of bernie bros for some reason

>>6895874
ai bros remind me of piles of feces for some reason

>>6895857
No suprise.
AItroons also think that whatever the algorithm machine remixes from stolen and then defragment and reconstructed pictures is their own effort.

Allowing everyone to have easy access to this has been like giving free guns to kids.

>>6895874
remember when they tried to not consider tron a movie cause it had cg? or when photoshop/digital tools became commonplace? different era, same delusional attitude. ai is just another tool in the box for those smart enough to use it. it isn't going anywhere no matter how much they hate it though

>>6895844
>can you draw better than me?
Anyone that draws can draw better than you, because you don't draw.
You are delusional if you consider yourself an illustrator lol.

>>6895859
That is pretty cute, but so what's the different exactly if I use AI to make a similar image?

>>6895900
The difference is that he drew his image, while yo didn't draw yours.
That's it.

>>6895900
>what's the different
Sirs, please redeem.

>>6895904
Fair enough, I was never good at drawing anyway.

>>6895892
And when they are prompting 8 hours a day in a couple years they're going to pretend they were never against it while they complain about the next new tool they don’t understand.
Its sad, but thats what you get when dealing with adult toddlers

>>6895908
It's totally fine. Have fun with AI, just don't be like those delusional idiots that think they somehow became draftsmen over night.

>>6895909
Lol, nobody is complaining about the tool, or not understanding it. We are just telling you that you are delusional idiots if you think you suddenly became artists.

>>6895904
Soooo the drawer wasted his time when there was a much more efficient method available?
Do you use automotive transportation?

>>6895912
Define artist lol
As far as I'm concerned, an artist is someone who imagines something and then uses a tool to manifest it. The only thing that differentiates artists using AI from artists using older traditional methods is that the AI artist is much more efficient

>>6895900
his one didn't have vomit inducing thumbs

>>6895900
WOAH! LOOK AT THE DETAIL! THE RENDERING! SO GOOOOOOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

>>6895913
do you get a little better at running every time you drive? is this the stupid question thread?

>>6895916
I'm talking about draftsmanship. Yes, anyone can be an artist. You can duct-tape a banana to a wall and be an artist. Stop being disingenuous.

>>6895925
Hands are getting better everyday
What will you whine about after they're perfected?

>>6895910
Thanks, I will. I've never seen anyone claiming to be a draughtsman for using AI though, sounds pretty ridiculous.

>>6895925
Arguable.

>>6895916
ai will literally never make the thing you imagined. If I imagine an anime girl with big tits, then type that into google and find images made by other people, that doesn't make me an artist.
artists are people that create art. art is the expression of human creative skill and imagination.

>>6895929
AI is much for efficient at getting whats in your head out into the world. Or do you think only people that went to art school and learned how to draw with pencils should be allowed to manifest their imagination?

>>6895933
>Arguable.
not really.
>>6895931
whatever I damn well please.

>>6895937
>AI is much for efficient at getting whats in your head out into the world.
ai will literally never make the thing you imagined. If I imagine an anime girl with big tits, then type that into google and find images made by other people, that doesn't make me an artist.
artists are people that create art. art is the expression of human creative skill and imagination.

>>6895936
How is using AI to manifest your imagination not art then?

>>6895894
i've already shown that i draw. check the archive >>6876072 >>6876105

>>6895910
then what do you call the people that were already draftsmen and are now using AI?
do you even realize that this is ultimatively where things are going?

>>6895888
i don't consider it my own effort at all. in fact it is effort that is being SAVED.
but i also don't consider it stolen because i'm not a low IQ bellend who thinks that learned concepts is the same as stealing, or that styles and stylistic choices should be forbidden to learn from.
the correct view is that it is plagiarism when it's visually obvious, the same way it has always been even before AI.

>>6895941
guess I need to post it again
ai will literally never make the thing you imagined. If I imagine an anime girl with big tits, then type that into google and find images made by other people, that doesn't make me an artist.
artists are people that create art. art is the expression of human creative skill and imagination.

>>6895939
Prompt for that image?

>>6895937
>whats in your head
but that's the trick. there is nothing in their head that resembles their final drawing. it's the process that creates it.

>>6895927
Indians love HDR. It was a fad in like 2014 when 4K came out on consumer devices but Indians seem to think HDR is photorealism and peak beauty

>>6895939
>not really.
Arguable.

>>6894558
>It's not mine artwork. Someone on /tv/ made it.
>artwork
>made it
Kek

>>6895944
>i've already shown that i draw. check the archive
Nice archive you got there, rajesh.

>>6895945
Let me ask again, I'll spell it out for you since it seems like you're not comprehending
If art is the expression of human creativity and imagination, then how is using AI to express your creativity and imagination not art?
I will consider you repeating the same thing again to be a concession

>>6895900
Perfectly illustrates what I meant with artistic intent. The cat is my cat, the character is my wife's character. My intent was to illustrate the way she annoys the kitten constantly by forcing hugs with him. Her expression is a bit scrunched up like aggressive cuteness or something, the kitten looks annoyed and panicked. He is getting squeezed a bit too much.
Not saying this is perfect, If I was still working I would have iterated to bring the intent more but that's what I wanted to draw because I thought it was funny.
When I look at yours, I see nothing. It's a cute stereotypical korean style anime girl holding a cat that looks perfectly neutral.

>>6895913
I drew it because it made me feel something. I look at it and I remember my wife being stupid with the cat. That's the whole point. What's the story behind your prompt ?

>>6895944
>then what do you call the people that were already draftsmen and are now using AI?
artists that use AI.
you are just a wannabe artist that uses AI.

>>6895948
Do you think drawers don't use a process?

>>6895955
>then how is using AI to express your creativity and imagination not art?
you didn't imagine what the ai shat out. you may have imagined an anime girl with big tits, but not the anime girl with big tits that was generated. Much like me googling an anime girl with big tits, I might find one similar to the girl in my head, but it won't be the one I imagined, and I had exactly zero input on what the resulting image looked like beyond my description of it.

>>6895945
>>6895940
most people can never draw what they imagine.
they are limited by their skill and eventually just accept what they drew as what they imagined.
it is a compromise.

take the example of a average non-skilled artist:
>imagine big titted anime girl
>try to draw that, it's shit
>to the best of their ability, they try to fix it to make it closer to their vision
>finished version is a compromise between their original vague vision and their ability.

notice how i can exchange that with a prompter in the same way.

>>6895956
Story behind my prompt? The same as the story behind your doodle, except I created my artwork faster than you created yours. I mean, feel free to take up cross-stitching if you just need to kill time but you look like a clown if you think you're a superior artist because you do something the slow way and produce an inferior product

>>6895961
Thats where refining the prompt comes into play. Have you ever even used an ai art tool? Lmao

>>6895967
he is a superior artist because his art depicts what he wanted it to. yours is mindless slop that was created with no intent.

>>6895967
>you look like a clown if you think you're a superior artist because you do something the slow way and produce an inferior product
He's the superior artist, because he knows how to draw, while you don't. I know you are desperate to be a good artist, but having somebody else do the work for you doesn't make you a draftsman.
The draftsmanship is something somebody is proud of, not some esoteric bs you make up in order to feel better about yourself.

>>6895970
you will literally never, no matter how many times you refine your generated image, get the exact image that was in your head. You might get it closer, just like I might find a big titted anime girl that looks more like what I imaged on page 73 of gelbooru than I did on the previous 72 pages, but it will never actually be what you came up with.

>>6895971
So basically if I imagine something and refine my prompt to get what I want, that defeats your entire view on this subject?
Okay, then I accept your concession :^)

>>6895952
>Arguable.
I disagree!

>>6895976
I think the issue with these people is that they never actually drew in their life, so they have no idea what it takes. They probably think it's the same thing as prompting.

>>6895946
>old man knocks out a horse in the 5th round with an uppercut, horse tongue flapping, eyes bulging, manga style

>>6895977
you will literally never, no matter how many times you refine your generated image, get the exact image that was in your head. You might get it closer, just like I might find a big titted anime girl that looks more like what I imaged on page 73 of gelbooru than I did on the previous 72 pages, but it will never actually be what you came up with.

>>6895976
I just created this art in 30 seconds.
You just come across as bitter and jealous, you realize that right?

>>6895967
>The same as the story behind your doodle
Well no it wasn't the same innit ?

>you look like a clown if you think you're a superior artist because you do something the slow way and produce an inferior product
Well... I work in a video game studio and you don't. I think you underestimate the "telling a story" part of producing artwork. Which is almost impossible with AI generated art.

>>6895985
Alright, good for you. I can do it to.
But can you actually draw?

See, that's the difference between people that draw and AI prompters. We can do both. You can't.

>>6895985
Be honest, the machine created the art. You just gave it the idea of what to create.

>>6895990
Can you prompt though? Show me something cool you've made, otherwise I won't believe you
I don't draw because its a waste of time when I can just prompt whatever I imagine. I draw with words
Doing both is irrelevant, you only need AI

>>6895580
>>6895652
Thank you come again

>>6895991
So the intent came from me (the artist)
Glad we're in agreement

>>6895985
I just found this image in 7 seconds
I had as much input into the creation of this as you did yours.

>>6895859
Soul
>>6895900
Soulless

>>6895998
The intent is not just "having an idea". It's mostly in the execution.

>>6895999
Now post something you drew and I will Google or prompt a similar image
See how this works now?

Good morning sirs

>>6896001
So perfecting the prompt, got it and agreed
AI art is art

>>6894517
Id say real woman with a noticably lower quality cgi greenscreen

>>6896002
>I will Google or prompt a similar image
I'm curious anon, what will your ai come up with?

>>6895967
>you bloody bitch bastard take up cross-stitching!! DO NOT REDEEM THE FUCKING DRAWING!!

>>6895993

and if you want something that words have a hard time describing?
would you img2img? a shitty sketch can only tell the AI so much, and if you can't draw, you can't help the AI much. you probably also don't have much idea of what you want it to look like.
Artists develop sense for design by drawing.

>>6896018
Their idea of art is just looking at pretty pictures. You're expecting too much asking for creativity and abstract ideas that haven't been fed into their proompt machine.

>>6895998
The pope created the Sistine Chapel frescoes, why were they attributed to Michelangelo when the pope was clearly the artist behind is outrageous.

>>6896025
Good point.

>>6896018
>>6896010
a-ai bros? our response?

>>6895993
>I draw with words
You are correct. You are an art director without the knowledge or skill of an art director.

>>6895956
That's a cute story, don't really see how an image made with AI couldn't have the same exact story attached to it though.

>>6895956
you know that if he knew that was the intent, he would have tried to converge on an image that ultimately showed that, right?

>>6896108
>>6896096
It's weird how pro ai anon always posts at the same time as pro ai tripfag

>>6896126
take your pills anon.

nta but this was my first try

>>6896126
promter tranny has been shitposting for months now he might be the ultimate crab as a few months ago he admitted to me he's a no draw and quit because he's a NGMI AI is his desperate attempt to still claim some artistic talent it's pathetic and sad.

We're getting closer

>>6896135
AI is gonna bring him back up to speed! and beyond, you fool! he'll show you! I mean, he won't show you because it's a secret project!

These honestly look cooler than what you posted

>>6896138
>>6896135
shitting on nodraws is all you can do, like the crabs you are. it's pathetic.
it perfectly highlights that you're a bunch of permabegs who simply don't want to lose your position at the bottom of the totem pole to nodraw prompters.

>>6896151
tripfag, not like this...

>>6896145
>>6896136
>>6896134
None of this is at all similar. Aijeet I thought you could post the same thing but made in a fraction of the time?

>>6896154
They do kinda look better though.

>>6896165
Is that a concession I see?

>>6896175
It's something.

>>6896165
Rendering? If that's the style you had in mind, sure. I like anon's linework more tho.
Subject? No, not in the slightest.

>>6896153
wat

>>6896151
Not a crab. I help anons all the time. I don't help nodraws, because why would I?

>>6896182
I didn't make them, just an observation.

>>6896196
Fair. I guess our taste differs then.

>>6896204
I was expecting a lot better attempts than this desu
guess I expected too much from aijeets that just type
>big bobs
into a generator and jack off to "their" art

Pretty kino, ngl

>>6896223
the fact that none of the shit you spammed resembles what the original artwork looked like, and didn't even represent the same idea, but you think they're good because they have pretty lighting is so funny. And you're supposed to replace us? What if you were asked for a commission, what if your boos needed a specific artwork? You can't even replicate someone else properly.

>>6896235
Now you're just being a big meanie!

>>6896239
he's right though. I assume you've generated dozens if not hundreds of pictures and are only picking the "best", and none of them are even close to the original artwork you're trying to recreate.

Best part is once you get the subject matter description, you can easily alter the style and vice versa!
Spooky...

>>6896246
How so?

>How so?
There's only two reasons why you'd ask this question:
1. You're so inept that you actually can't tell the difference between the source image and what DallE generated for you. Not surprising, given that you're impressed by its outputs.
2. You're a troll arguing in bad faith because you want attention.
In either case you can just stop posting, you've demonstrated that your tool wouldn't meet the specific need asked for and done enough tells on yourself.

>>6896250
if I asked an artist to draw
>>6896010
but got
>>6896134
>>6896136
>>6896145
>>6896204
>>6896214
>>6896223
>>6896230
>>6896239
>>6896248
>>6896250
10 revisions that looked like these, you would have been fired on the spot.

>>6896250
I'm your client, I asked for a drawing af my goblin wizard character in a precise pose going a specific thing in a specific setting. >>6896010 delivered, you didn't, none of the pictures are what I asked.

>>6896254
>You're a troll
that's obviously the reason and the only reason why aitards flood this board, it's easy attention.

>>6896262
I don't do commisions.

>>6896271
>I can't do commissions
ftfy

>>6896262
Oh you should have just used your words anon!

>>6896257
Depends on how you were asking

>>6896294
nothing there is a similar concept at all.

>>6896272
Nah I just don't do it.

Wowo all these devil gens looks stunning. Can you generate spyro the dragon having sex with Judy hopps in various styles?

>>6895998
yes, and when I order a pizza from domino's, the intent came from me (the cook)

>>6896306
if
>>6896280
>>6896250
>>6896248
>>6896239
>>6896230
>>6896223
>>6896214
>>6896204
>>6896145
>>6896136
>>6896134
is your best attempt when you're literally given the image they want, then no, you literally can't do commissions. you are incapable of creating what a client asks for if it's anything beyond generic over-rendered slop.

>>6896298
You're just a negative nancy

>>6896306
you don't have a style unique to your art. Why would anyone commission you?

>>6896010

>>6896318
I'm tired of this, you've somehow managed to get even further away from what you were going for despite never being close to begin with. you tried for 3 hours and failed completely. a decent artist could have drawn that picture, delivered it to their client, and been halfway through their next drawing already.

>>6896330
>woah dude look at the rendering!
you're not any closer than the other guy.

>>6896332
Just out of curiosity, while all of this was unfolding, YOU were drawing and not just shitposting, right anon?

>>6896339
no I had lunch and looked at a couple houses to buy. I'll draw when I get home

>>6896010
The post that killed ainiggers

LMAO, this thread is a complete utter debacle for AI bros. This is fucking hilarious.

>>6896010
Anon, you singlehandedly destroyed them kek.

>>6896332
Well now I'm just having fun

>>6896351
How so? Almost every single one of the AI images looks better than his doodle

>>6896358
holy cope

>>6896360
You should try having some intellectual honesty anon

>>6896332
>>6896336
that's really hilarious considering the original is >>6896010
and basically complete shit.
you sure have some guts making all these claims when this is supposed to be the goal lol..

Holy kino

>>6896351
I really wasn't expecting aijeets to seethe this much over my fire goblin lmao

I like how mindbroken the AIbros are with all the goalposting.
>b-but my slop looks better!!
>b-but the original looks like shit!!
>b-but are you drawing right now?!
>b-but Im doing it for fun!!
But it's not what the client asked for, you cannot do commissions when your attempts dont look like what the client is requesting at all, the high rendering, the short time, the low effort, it all goes to the toilet because it's not what the client asked for. All while you had a crystal clear reference, now imagine with an ambiguous one, or none.

>>6896214
I actually really like this one
Is that dalle 3 or SD?

>>6896382
are you really sure you aren't the mindbroken one? you're really going to tell me that >>6896363
doesn't fit your character well and is basically an improvement in every conceivable way?
are you really being honest with yourself?

and your pose is shit to begin with. if i ever bothered with comissions that's the first thing i'd change.

4 hours later and ai fags are still going crazy over this?

>>6896393
You're talking to the wrong guy, buddy. I knew you were a schizo, but not the one that pointed fingers at people in hope of landing a samefag.
And to answer your question, no, the slop doesnt look like the character at all, let alone fits the design choices of the original. Horns are different, hair is messier and more tribal, the rocks in the skin are gone, the clothes were not on the original design, the face is completely different and doesnt have any of the essence of the character... and I could keep going, but you get the point. Every positive thing I could say about the pic goes to the drain because it doesnt look like the character at all and it's not what the client asked for.

>are you being honest with yourself?
Manipulative question aside, of course. Im a design freak that takes in consideration every design choice I can gather from a character and I only divert from the path when I see design choices that could be added/expanded upon. Needless to say, I take design quite seriously and I can safely say the slop throwing all design choices through the window is a huge loss.
>but it's an improvement!!
Improvement in design is only when the original design choices are kept within the design regardless of how much is added or substracted. Making something completely different and dismissing the design choices is not improvement on this realm, specially in a professional setting.

>and your pose is shit to begin with. if i ever bothered with comissions that's the first thing i'd change.
There you go with the goalposting. Also, way to go being passive aggressive with your clients, tripfag. Another reason why you're not making it with commissions whatsoever.

>>6896393
anon that's a trolls doll. what part of the design is improved upon? what part of the design is even kept similar?

>>6896384
Dalle 3, I've been out with some friends making those on my phone. I'll post the prompt in a few

>>6896010
SIR PLEASE DO NOT POST THIS IMAGE. DO NOT REDEEM IT SIR. MOTHERTOAD BITCH

>>6896515
>stone studded ugly dwarf lady with red hair standing in a smoky dark volcano cavern while summoning fire between hands, stone horns, pointy ears, large yellow eyes, lava cracks along the floor, anime art drawing
Just add "doing a one legged yoga pose" if you want her doing that dumb yoga pose

>>6896524
no wonder you failed like 30 times lmfao

>>6895900
Another reason why u don’t pyw when dealing with ai shitters. They take your art and put it through ai like a bitch

>>6896527
Yeah I was trying to keep it simple since I've been busy but most of them turned out pretty well

>>6896531
>most of them turned out pretty well
kek

>>6896532
Which ones don't you like? And why?
I think they're awesome

>>6896294
>i-it depends tho
Holy cope

>>6896534
they all suck, anonykun.

>>6896538
You gotta use your words anon
Describe what you want

>>6896539
How so? Sure you're not just saying that because you know they were made with AI? You just come off as disingenuous

Just figured out you can add "a collection of" to the front of a prompt to generate multiple instances in each image
Force multiplier

>>6896544
because they don't look good. I know this is hurtful to hear since you worked so hard typing those words in and pushing generate, but none of them are appealing.

>>6896548
Soo you can't describe what supposedly doesn't look good?
I'm looking at them and they look great. Sounds like you're just bitter and lying :^)

>>6896551
>no, mommy told me my generated images are good!! You have to be lying! >:(
damn nigga this is sad

>>6896531
>>6896534
>>6896544
>>6896551
You seem like you're genuine here, so I'll humor you and point at this post here >>6896410.
TLDR: They are not bad per se, but in terms of design, the original design choices are thrown out of the window, which effectively render the whole endeavor a failure. They are good on their own right, but they failed at working on the character design of the original.

>>6896547
Okay, now you got me, what site or AI you used here? I want to experiment with it.

>>6896531
>I've been busy
So busy that you spent over 5 hours arguing about ai and failing to generate an image with an exact reference provided to you?

>>6896559
Dall e 3 on bing
Make a burner email to use it
Ignore the boosts and "wait times", they don't really affect it and it usually takes a few seconds regardless of the supposed wait time

>>6896563
How much time do you think it takes to check in and make a quick reply every once in a while? Do you think I'm just sitting monitoring this thread at home and doing nothing else? Lmao

>>6896584
unironically yes, that's exactly what I think.

>>6896588
Well I guess you're delusional? Don't know what to tell you lol
Sure you're not just projecting?

>>6896584
Excuses

>>6896596
Anon you were posting your generated slop every few minutes. The time stamps of your posts are betraying you.

>>6896601
Id make a couple posts then come back an hour later to make some more, which part is hard for you to understand?

>>6896530
I didn't put shit through AI, just wrote a text description of the image, it's not exactly a super unique image you know.

>>6896749
>it's not exactly a super unique image you know.
Evidently we learned aifags get mogged by anything remotely unique

>>6896764
??

>>6896769
what are you confused about exactly? Just look at the thread you're posting it.

>>6896772
I think you're misinterpreting whats going on. Wishful thinking on your part

>>6896776
>anon posted a drawing
>ai fags spent hours attempting to recreate it and failed
wasn't referring to your cat girl, though that also failed to capture the original artist's intent.

>>6896749
what AI are you using and how do I get it

Where is my spyro?

>>6896788
It's called DALL-E 3 and the free way to get it is through Bing image creator.

>>6896788
>>6896821
Buy an ad fagget

>>6896831

>>6896821
looks like real ipad painting

.

..

>>6896358
Are you retarded or just too pajeet ESL to understand AI """artists""" can't make exactly what they want to make. Anon asked them to recreate the same image with the same character.
All AI generated images that tried this didn't came even close to it.
AI bros say they can create whatever their imagine, but this is clearly not true.

Now, please, stop trolling nonsensically. You look like a desperate moron.

>>6896382
>it all goes to the toilet because it's not what the client asked for
Pajeets won't understand what you mean. They don't have toilets.

I hope the AI troll is at least having fun

>>6896944
I make exactly what I want to make, it's pretty easy.

>>6897007
Yeah, sure and you purposely didn't make the artwork you were requested to replicate, despite all the attempts you spammed, but it was all because you decided to, not because the AI can't, sure.

>>6897026
I'm not that anon, but I don't do commissions, sorry.

>>6897007
Alright, cool. Recreate this image >>6896010
without using the image itself, but only prompts.
Keep failing, cmon.

>>6897029
It's not that you don't want to. You simply can't.

>>6897037
>>6897038
I can, but like I said I don't do commisions. Sorry.

>>6897040
Haha, this kind of cope is hilarious.

Now at least we know how to instantly shut down any AI prompter that says they can create whatever they want.
They simply can't lol.

>>6896410
sorry, i don't care about commissions so i never knew this autism of "CREATE MY OC EXACTLY LIKE THIS REEEEEE" :)

if i have time in the evening i'll give it another shot, this time with manual input. and i'll try to time it. should be an interesting experiment.

>>6897057
>sorry, i don't care about commissions so i never knew this autism of "CREATE MY OC EXACTLY LIKE THIS REEEEEE" :)
When you try turning something mundane as commissions into some kind of unfathomable thing, it shows that you are coping very hard.

>>6897049
But I can though, it's pretty easy.

>>6897068
am i really? you're the one holding on to the OC part this much to make sure we don't meet your criteria.

again, be honest with yourself. the average client would absolutely be satisfied with the DallE outputs if all they wanted was a char for roleplaying or something similar.

also again. i'll give it a serious try in the evening if i can. we'll see then.

>>6897029
>>6897040
holy shit its the same tranny that shits on /tg/ AI spam threads
why am I not surprised you are also samefagging on /ic/? pajeets truly are the scum of this site

>>6897099
I take these images from various AI threads, no idea who you talking about.

>>6897087
>the average client would absolutely be satisfied with the DallE outputs if all they wanted was a char for roleplaying or something
Aijeets are so fucking clueless about art it's not even funny

>>6897124
sorry but i don't live in your degen furry OC bubble or wherever you come from.

>>6897087
>the average client would absolutely be satisfied with the DallE outputs
the absolute state of AI fags. maybe they'd be happy if you were a friend and you didn't charge for it. paying money for that shit? it better fit the bill. clueless AI fags.

>>6897099
i get posting to similar boards but letting your tranniness seep into board games? thats another level of kek

>>6897133
>client pays for thing
>proompter delivers differently thing entirely with 0 likeness to what was paid for
>client fires you and files a dispute for you not delivering on what was requested
>"tch, you should be happy, this is better than what you wanted anyway. I could totally have made that but I just didn't want to."

>>6897087
>am i really? you're the one holding on to the OC part this much to make sure we don't meet your criteria.
What? That's commissioning 101. OCs have to be depicted as you see them on character sheets or previous art of them.
It's the most basic requisite, no matter if you draw porn commissions online or work for a studio.
You can use it for random character design output, but not for finalized work.

If you have fun prompting, suit yourself, but don't pretend you can do things actual draftsmen can.

>>6897081
Yeah, you've proven this time and time again lmao.

>>6897115
Turns out you can't even prompt haha. Go play videogames or something, or are you bad at those too?

>>6897141
This pretty much sums up the idiocy of these morons, yeah.
I'm sure most of them at this point are just coping by trolling. They have nothing left.

>>6897157
Thanks.
>>6897158
I'm pretty good actually.

>>6897198
Is delusional trolling really all you have left?
Holy cope.

>I'm pretty good actually.
Post the last thing you drew. I'll wait.
inb4. I don't do commissions or some other way of running away from reality.

>>6897198
Is delusional trolling really all you have left?
Holy cope.

>>6897198
Wow, you really do prooompt and shitpost on this thread all day. Even on other boards, absolutely mind broken.

>>6897241
I'm not trolling.
>>6897243
I'm nta.

>>6897258
>I'm not trolling.
Then I guess there's a language barrier?
Why are you engaging in a debate on the matter if AI prompoters can do commissions and create exactly what they are told to create, if that's not what you are claiming?

"Guys I swear, I can do a backflip, I just don't feel like it right now"

>>6897291
I can only speak for myself, but I can do it pretty easily.

>>6897319
Can you prove it? Saying that you can, but refuse to do so "because you don't do commissions" is just trolling.
Now maybe you understand why I'm calling you a troll.
If your next reponse is going to be along the same "BS without evidence" lines, I'm not going to engage with you anymore, because you'll simply confirm that you are a troll.

I used to commission art occasionally but I've just been using ai lately.
If I cared about artists I would pay for some out of pity but I don't lol

>>6897359
Okay, let's do this. Let's play. I am the artists and you are commissioner. What exactly do you want me to generate?

>>6897566
Sweet.
>>6896010
Let's say pic related is my OC. This is the only image I have of her. Please post her getting fucked doggy style by a human paladin.
If you don't like NSFW, then I want to see her doing house chores. No clothing. Just her as you see her in this particular image.

>>6897574
That would be 350€. Give me your PayPal address. I will send an invoice. 50% upfront payment.

>>6897597
I'll accept your concession.

>>6897574
No clothing is nsfw

>>6897057
>>6897087
>sorry, i don't care about commissions so i never knew this autism of "CREATE MY OC EXACTLY LIKE THIS REEEEEE"
Kek, you call it autism, but you have no idea how strict the professional fields are when it comes to design, strict in entertainment, and unforgiving in branding and advertising. That goes to show how disingenuous you are in your trolling.
>smiley face
KEEEEEEEK, you okay, brother?
>the average client would absolutely be satisfied with the DallE outputs if all they wanted was a char for roleplaying or something similar.
Again, you have absolutely no idea how unforgiving the professional fields are on this regard. And even the average consumer can be strict too, no one takes lightly that you disrespect someone's design choices just to make your techo nonsense pass.
And even that is besides the point: Arent you the same guy that says artists are to be replaced? That these wonderful technology can do anything you want anyway you want it? Yet you people cant replicate someone's character even with a clean ref.
>well, I could, but I decide not to :))))
KEEEEEK do you honestly want me to believe that with all that petty attitude of yours you wouldnt take the opportunity to rub it in with a smoking gun? If you could do anything of worth you would've already done it, you just cant.
>b-but be honest with yourself!!
You cant even be honest with your argument. I already stated my case, you're a joke, Tripfag.

>>6897751
>furry coomer patrons
>professional field
LMAO

>>6897566
>What exactly do you want me to generate
This
>>6896010

>>6897753
>missing the point
Should I explain it with apples, anon?
>Point one: In professional fields such as entertainment, branding and advertising, design is an extremely strict element that cannot be taken lightly.
>Point two: In non-professional fields such as internet commissions and freelance jobs, design is something that a lot of people pay attention to when asking for a job to be done, it cannot be take too lightly.
Point three: If AI "artists" cannot respect design choices given by their clients, regardless of their/the job's) nature, their workforce is rendered worthless.
Does that makes sense to you or should I get the crayons?

>>6897751
>Arent you the same guy that says artists are to be replaced?
lol. i am an artist you braindead retard.

> And even the average consumer can be strict too
>can
yes and i'm saying many of these would already have passed. because the average consumer actually has no idea what they want and they WILL often accept changes if your changes are better than their own design.
are you going to deny this too? indeed, just be honest with yourself. you're only saying all this because you don't want AI to succeed here.

anyway, i'll give it a shot starting around now so you're free to judge then. :)

>>6897777
>i am an artist
no you're not

>>6897777
>lol. i am an artist you braindead retard.
That has to be the biggest lie you have said in this whole ordeal, Tripita.
>and i'm saying many of these would already have passed.
>because the average consumer actually has no idea what they want and they WILL often accept changes if your changes are better than their own design.
You really have not dealt with clients before, have you? I have, in three different work fields. It is true that some clients accept more than they should when it comes to design choices, or that they are easily convinced by changes, but that is because you already delivered most of the design choices as they expected you to do, what are some small changes here and there? Some clients dont mind, some others do.
Now, if you spit them something that looks nothing alike to what they asked, much like every single slop of that flame goblin, they WILL confront you about it. You really are delusional if you think people are going to stay shut about not getting what they wanted when money is on the table.
>i'll give it a shot starting around now so you're free to judge then.
Whatever you are supposed to be doing, you have aleady said it several times, for what purpose?
>another smiley face
Tripita, I know you're mad, but please, dont be so blatant about it, it's makes me feel kind of bad.

>>6897765
So you measure artistic skill by how well you can reproduce someone else's vision? At that point you are a tool, not an artist

>>6897794
>It is true that some clients accept more than they should when it comes to design choices
>more than they should
So they shouldn't give you artistic freedom?

>>6897811
entirely depends on what they're asking for. If I'm blizzard asking you to create artwork of tracer running through the jungle and you decide she should now be wearing a skirt and fleece sweater while playing basketball, guess who's not getting paid?

>>6897815
I like your corporate mindset. You must be a good cog that helps make great commodities

>>6897826
retard, it's an example of a client with a specific established character.

>>6897805
>So you measure artistic skill by how well you can reproduce someone else's vision?
In where did I talk about artistic skill? Artistic skill has nothing to do in this discussion. In professional fields if you cannot fulfill a job it doesnt matter of whether you are Kim Jung Gi levels of good or Chris chan levels of bad, you are out.
>>6897811
>So they shouldn't give you artistic freedom?
Of course, it is important to have some artistic freedom in order to get the juices flowing, but that is something you cannot abuse to the point of making something entirely different. People are normally okay when some liberties are taken, as it should be, but people accepting a work that is completely off to what they wanted is more than they should take, specially when there's money on the table.
Also this >>6897811, in some professional jobs, liberties are something to be careful with, or in some cases not try at all, because the same design choices are tied to other mayor elements related to the brand, it's image and the people behind it, as well as their image, you cant be too free with stuff like that because it's toying with stuff that are out of your jurisdiction as an artist.

>>6897834
So your big argument against ai is that it isn't good for specific corporate scenarios in the current business environment?

>>6897844
no, you already utterly failed at a simple oc too

quick WIP

ai bros we stay wining. for those of you who are new, the cope and seethe never stops - you learn to ignore it because they never have any real arguments, or when you ask them to elaborate, they call you a faggot or start turtling and backpaddling. spend more time prompting and less time arguing.

>>6897844
why are ai fags so fucking braindead?
>you didn't list every single example of things we can't do so that must mean that's your only argument!!

>>6897844
NTA, but are you just making dumb loaded questions in hope of landing the conversation straight to where you want it? Because so far you are missing the point so blatantly with the "so you are saying that" statements I dare to believe this is intentional.

>>6897850
Head way too small for the OC

>>6897877

>>6897890
watch them move the goal posts again

>>6897890
the character is recognizable at least, but it looks like absolute shit lol

>>6897891
Goalpost wasn't shifted, it's normal practice to ask for revisions when it's not hitting the mark. You wouldn't know I suppose.

>>6897900
"ai is an art force multiplier", 0 times 9000 is still 0 tho lmao.

so its only valid if you can commission shitty oc with it? i miss when anon would claim its stealing, or that its not reel art or the fan favorite "all you do is type words into a box"

>>6897918
the oc thing is being used as a counter to people claiming ai can create what they want it to. It can't. ai will never be able to take the image in your head and put it on paper (or a screen). you can fiddle with it for hours on end and hope that it spits out something close to what you want, but that's the best you'll ever get, and that's assuming that ai can ever fix the massive glaring anatomy issues.

>>6897923
>It can't
strange, i create things i want to all the time with AI. must be a skill issue.
>ai will never be able to take the image in your head and put it on paper (or a screen)
bold of you to imply that you can by traditional means.
>yes i can
but can you really? or do you start to hamper your imagination to fit with your actual skills

>>6897918
>all you do is type words into a box
That's all you should do tho. All the extra shit just makes for worse images as you are relying on inferior human instinct. The best ai images I've seen were just words in the box results.

>>6897926
I really don't know what the point of arguing with retards like this is, you blatantly don't care about having an actual honest discussion. you can't admit your toy is far from perfect.

>>6897927
>The best ai images I've seen were just words in the box results.
i can see that - additionally, sometimes the shortest prompts deliver the best results, but not every time.
>All the extra shit just makes for worse images
theres merit to the idea that highly trained models aren't actually "better" or LORAs should not be used, but it really comes down to personal preference.
either way the notion that "you didnt create it" is asinine once you learn more about the process and its way more complex and malleable than a slot machine
>>6897930
the reason i come to /ic/ is to have reasonable discussions about art, but its difficult when anon comes out of the woodwork to tell me "it's not art" or "it has no soul" like thats a legitimate argument.
>you can't admit your toy is far from perfect.
never claimed such, but it is incredibly advanced - either way, what does that have to do with the merit of the art itself?

alright i feel pretty gay now

>>6897890
>>6897850
what's all the weird swirly dark shit on her skin? where's the fire she's conjuring between her hands? why do her hands look like root vegetables? why is she stepping in a puddle of lava in a damp cool cave with a random building in the ceiling? why is there a manmade arch in the natural cave? why does it overall just look like total dogshit? I thought ai was supposed to excel at rendering

eh whatever. i'm done.
started around here >>6897777 so this is somewhere under 2 hours.
it's not great but i think there are many things i could have done differently. probably started painting too early.

>>6897936
anon you sound like a wet blanket lmao

>>6897940
2 hours for that when half of it was spent in photoshop isn't really the win for ai you think it is. You ironically could have just started from scratch with painting and had a better result. If I were the client, I'd file a chargeback
>y-you're just saying that since it's ai!
no, it looks fucking terrible and makes no sense. every extremity is ambiguous and looks terrible, and the environment is completely illogical because AI doesn't understand things like cool/warm tones or natural structures.

>>6897942
>you sound like a wet blanket for pointing out glaring flaws
okay

the seething never ends
>>6897958
>implying "glaring flaws" cant be fixed
nb4 "just draw it!"
no

>>6897961
I don't see the benefit to using ai here if you have to spend more time fixing all the mistakes than it would have taken to just make it from scratch.

>>6897955
there is a lot i didn't paint. that it painted for me.
also you think i care about "a win for AI".
i only care about using this as a tool to save time and effort.

>>6897963
>i only care about using this as a tool to save time and effort.
but you aren't saving time or effort

also reminder that this is a """"commission"""" so not really what i would do for myself personally as i wouldn't draw this or use this pose etc etc. pic related is still a better display for me.

>>6897965
yes. yes anon is.

>>6897968
not really when he still had to
>draw a sketch
>roll for what he hopes will resemble the image in his head
>make numerous corrections
and in the end
>still get a bad result

>>6897963
Eventually AI will save you time and effort, *idea2img will be a big help. I appreciate your effort trying though. without AI, how far do you think you'd have gotten in those 2-3 hours just painting your sketch?

*new development I saw a minute ago

>>6897977
>I appreciate your effort trying though
this
for an aijeet, he actually put in effort which is very surprising.

just noticed this thread has over a hundred posters
is it time for image synthesis to take over /ic/?

>>6897965
>having an entire background made out of nothing is not saving time and effort.
pic related is what i wanted to use initially.
and again, i didn't even put particular care into refining my output. i rolled 5 and just picked one for the sake of time.

also >>6896364, while not being used, also gave me inspiration for one of the hands.

>>6897973
i know it's bad. but clearly shows what is possible.
and my workflow is not optimal. i needed to take time to think about design and composition early on.
the way i did things this time was very haphazard. i just realized i didn't even care about which model i used, nor did i use any of the adjustment loras in my library. all things i did do for >>6897966
all of these are things that can help me get closer to what i want to have.

>>6897977
>without AI, how far do you think you'd have gotten in those 2-3 hours just painting your sketch?
i think i would have taken longer to have a solid base sketch in the first place.
i did not do this here since i hoped the AI would fix it. but it's probably still the best way to go about it.
time really isn't saying much imo anyway. normally i'm the type that just sits there and thinks about getting things right. and that thinking and erasing and starting over can take a ton of time.
if everything works out i think i'm pretty fast though, even without AI. but that's just not realistic. in 2 hours i can definitely at least get to laying down the colors and values. (again, only if i don't hit any roadblocks)

>>6897988
Its obvious that people want to talk about ai art, even the whiners
Why not make a general for ai implications discussion and a general for ai technique discussion? The people on /g/ and /tv/ make some fun stuff but I'd be interested in what people from a traditional art background come up with.
Plus this board wouldn't be so fucking slow

Not an AI guy, I thought I'd try lol. not even close to the OC, but stereoscopic!

>>6898000
nice trips
i agree whole heartedly - im desperate to see anons with /actual/ art knowledge take this up and create amazing things. i probably wont be the one to do it however, because last time i tried, whoever the resident /ic/ schizo is started shitting everywhere including the /g/ general.
AND im too much of a pussy and would probably get caught up in the dumbass arguing anyway - but as soon as a new general emerges, im game.

>>6898003
AI is genuinely great for brainstorming and inspiration.
if i wasn't trying so hard to match the damn OC i would have loved to go for something like this instead.

also notice how i'm a barely out of /beg/ painter. just think about what skilled painters can do with AI assistance.

>>6897988
>>6898000
the only reason why AI threads have so many replies is because they're full of attention whores, trolls, samefagging and baiters, the arguments that come out of them are always the same and these threads are always the same. This is a board for people that want to learn how to draw, not for image synthtetizers.

>>6898009
>they're full of attention whores, trolls, samefagging and baiters, the arguments that come out of them are always the same
agreed
>This is a board for people that want to learn how to draw, not for image synthtetizers.
do you speak for the whole board?

>>6898009
>image synthtetizers.
the correct term is synthologists btw
or synthophiles if you wish to be terse

>>6898005
>just think about what skilled painters can do with AI assistance.
skilled painters can do more by just painting...

>>6898011
just make a new board of you really need one so desperately, AI image generation and actual drawing aren't comparable and the former doesn't belong to this board, it shouldn't even be up to discussion.

>>6898005
Hyung tae kim would be one to look at. He is skillmaxed in painting and uses AI. however, I can't help but feel his work was better in the 2000s, all this shiny stuff doesn't make for better images, they are all forgettable now.

>>6898004
>>6898005
Actual artists don't care about AI image generators, it would be like asking a formula driver what he thinks about self driving cars.

>>6898014
if you do not wish to see it you could hide the threads
im sure you're not trying to stomp out new content from /ic/ - or do i not understand the point of 4channel?
unless you're a mod, your opinion (our opinions) mean nothing. anons on /g/ have been asking for /ai/ for ages, now AI is everywhere.
>>6898023
actual artists simply do not care what anyone else uses, and they (along with any reasonable anon) are able to appreciate art regardless of how it was created. im SURE you're not the kind of person to think someones trad art is bad simply because the means they used to create it, right?

>>6898026
>im SURE you're not the kind of person to think someones trad art is bad simply because the means they used to create it, right?
the point is that by using AI you're not creating anything yourself, no matter how much you prompt or retouch, a serious artist might not care about AI or even find some pictures cool, but the "prompt engineer" won't ever be considered their peer no matter how much they screech to be noticed.

>>6897777
>yes and i'm saying many of these would already have passed. because the average consumer actually has no idea what they want and they WILL often accept changes if your changes are better than their own design.
I can tell you never made a single commission in your entire life kek.

>>6897826
What a nice deflection. It's pretty funny how you've been unmasked for what you really are. A dishonest liar. It goes hand in hand with your use of AI I guess. You are consistent at least in this, since your can't do that with yoru AI images kek.

I AM AN ARTIST
>I AM AN ARTIST
I AM AN ARTIST
>I AM AN ARTIST
WHY DO YOU GATEKEEP A PROFESSION I WANT TO BE LIKE YOU, I AM LIKE YOU, I ASK A MACHINE TO MAKE STUFF FOR ME AND THIS MAKES ME INTO AN ARTIST JUST LIKE YOU

>>6898023
>Actual artists don't care about AI image generators
and yet basically every one of them has made a statement about it.

>>6897955
>You ironically could have just started from scratch with painting and had a better result.
That's the issue. He wouldn't because he's bad at drawing. He needs AI in order to do paintovers. Otherwise he has no clue what to do. Do you seriously think this guy could be capable of producing even this pile of shit he posted if he drew it from scratch? Don't fool yourself lol.

>>6898013
they can do even more with AI.
go through more ideas at once. have specific reference. you think painters wouldn't be inspired by AI output?
maybe not with the current forced stigma. but eventually these things won't matter at all. people will see AI for what it actually is. which is just a machine that can create.

>>6898049
a few, and for free, but i don't like the idea of commissions so yeah. and this adherence to other people's shitty ideas/OCs is part of the reason why.

>>6898019
>Hyung tae kim
wow, haven't heard that name in a while.
interesting stuff.
i'm surprised he lets the AI do faces that much. i wouldn't.
or maybe his style just changed.

>>6898023
>ur not a real artist if you are not on my side!!!!
that's all you're saying. the reality is, real artists are also looking into AI. at least the ones that aren't retarded and just parrot the dumb misinformation that antis say.

>>6898047
I see normies use AI to quickly generate placeholder images or memes or just to have fun, and none of them have the audacity to call themselves the creators of that image or artists, its just retards on this board, twitter, or people with fully fledged mental illness like shadiversity that do it, normal people have the mental capacity to realize that AI generations isn't the same as actuality drawing.

>>6898054
are YOU an artist, anon?
:^)

>>6897963
You praise AI for the amazing rendering it gives, but in order to get a result that you actually want, you have to turn said rendering into the dog shit you just posted?
You just confirmed what we were saying since the start. AI can't produce what you want to the letter. It only gives very rough aproximations.

>>6898064
even being able to draw a stick figure makes you more of an artist than someone that asked AI to make something for them.