/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

[Anonymous No.6378345]

Instead of bitching about AI. How about you use AI as a tool to help improve your shitty art?

[Anonymous No.6378353]

>>6378345
AI kills your creativity.

[Anonymous No.6378357]

Shut the fuck up. How many AI threads do you faggots need?
There are like a hundred of them created every week go join one of those.

[Anonymous No.6378360]

>>6378345
idgaf about AI stop spamming your shit

[Anonymous No.6378364]

>>6378345
Coomarajeet, I am going to add toilets to all my paintings of anime girls floating in voids and there is nothing you can poo to stop me

[Anonymous No.6378365]

I'd rather just stop doing digital art and sell handmade sculptures on the street or something at this point.

[Anonymous No.6378368]

>>6378345
>photobash a 3D model
>run it through image2image
>then redraw the entire thing from the ground up, ignoring practically everything in the AI-generated image
Alright, first off, this workflow is straight up pants on head retarded. Just draw the anime girl, idiot. If you insist on being a tracing/photobashing faggot then just do that. The middle step of feeding the thing through an AI is so incomprehensibly redundant and inane that it boggles the mind.

Furthermore, what utility does this or any other AI image generation have besides drawing generic pinups of generic anime girls in generic styles? Can I use this to create images of my own characters, in my own style, in any pose, with any expression, costume, whatever I want? Oh, what's that, I can't??? Haha, well, then, it's completely useless to me! And if you knock on my door trying to sell this garbage to me again, I'm not going to call the police, I'm just going to shoot you and dump your corpse in a hog pen somewhere.

[Anonymous No.6378369]

>>6378345
how about you stick a wine bottle up your ass and cannonball down a stair case

[Anonymous No.6378370]

>>6378345
>let ai helps u
>cant draw anything without ai now

[Anonymous No.6378371]

isnt it easier to just type a prompt and photobash that instead of photobashing twice in a row

[Anonymous No.6378379]

I think it's not a bad thing, OP
People can paint with tea leaves if they want to, so why don't just draw how they feel like doing so? It's not stealing something from anyone and it's not like there is some "META" on making art
It's supposed to make you happy, so if it makes you happy go for it

How do you even train an AI with your art in the first place tho?

[Anonymous No.6378384]

>>6378371
>isnt it easier
Congrats. You missed the point. This is why you're NGMI.

[Anonymous No.6378387]

>>6378368
What if you feel stuck on something and need some push or specific inspiration on what you are currently making? An unfinished piece
Is it cool to "ask" the AI and not necessarily just trace it or go with the image it presents, but use it as a guide

[Anonymous No.6378389]

>>6378379
>People can paint with tea leaves if they want to
That's using a different style brush. Not at all comparable.

[Anonymous No.6378390]

>>6378345
I don't get it. Why not just base your drawing on the first image? Why bother with letting the img2img steer you toward something else in the first place?

[Anonymous No.6378391]

>>6378379
>How do you even train an AI with your art in the first place tho?
SD can be trained on a painter's style (including your own art) using embedding/hypernetworks, i believe. i haven't done it myself, so i'm not sure how good the results are.

[Anonymous No.6378396]

>>6378387
>I don't draw

[Anonymous No.6378399]

>>6378389
My point is, people are saying Photobashing + AI + Drawing from observation is a slow workflow

Maybe my example wasn't clear, sorry, instead of leaves, something time consuming. I don't think there is something as "bad workflow" in terms of time (Unless this is your job)

>>6378396
Oh but I do draw! :D

[Anonymous No.6378400]

>>6378391
SD?

[Anonymous No.6378413]

how do you train stable diffusion with your own art? sounds fun

[Anonymous No.6378417]

>>6378345
Looks exactly the same thing this guys always draw. That's just some gimmick show off, because most famous artists won't dare go against AI.

They will play this progressist cuck role and try to find a way to fit AI in their workflow just for the sake of using it.

[Anonymous No.6378420]

>>6378413
The same way you steal artists' artstyles but instead you put your own stuff down the blender.

[Anonymous No.6378422]

>>6378417
But they are against it

[Anonymous No.6378423]

>>6378420
that doesn't really answer the question, does it?

[Anonymous No.6378427]

>>6378422
Palmer and Karla Ortiz? 2 lone soldiers while all other famous arists simply try to kiss AI's ass (like OP) or stay silent even when people are making models from their art, like Samdoesart.

The vast majority protesting against AI are small artists.

[Anonymous No.6378430]

>>6378427
>Samdoesart
I don't follow that guy, but after seeing the drama about it on here, I went to his instagram page and he was indeed complaining about it

[Anonymous No.6378434]

>>6378427
Steve Zapata made the best argument on the automation of AI art/entertainment and the artists who had AI trained on them like Rutkowsky or that Disney woman are rather disheartened about it
There's also the plethora of jp artists who requested their art be taken down from danbooru and even those who abandoned making art altogether

[Anonymous No.6378435]

>>6378430

[Anonymous No.6378436]

>>6378345
Looks like Zankuros finally drawing black girls.

[Anonymous No.6378459]

>>6378435
>>6378434
I believe most famous artists don’t say anything because they know their job is safe, once you’re famous don’t buy your art because the art itself, but because they want an art from YOU.

Anyway, nice to see some of them at least try to say something.

[Anonymous No.6378460]

>>6378345
>AI can't remember my chosen waifu
>She's not even from an obscure series
It has been a huge waste of time.

[Anonymous No.6378462]

>>6378459
Just look at Jazza. He makes videos based on some AI trash (which earn him both attention and money), gleefully talks about how he didn't have to pay anybody for art (which is weird to bring up in the first place, since I thought he was supposed to be an artist himself), then just preemptively brushes off criticism with "oh well deal with it lol." Sadly channels like his which appeal more to normalfag outsiders than they do to actual artists have a lot of sway with how the public perceive things, and he has more motivation to make clickbait, low effort videos which sell children on the idea of free art machine than he does encouraging them to learn to create on their own.

[Anonymous No.6378511]

>>6378427
>All
Stop making shit up. Most big artists don't say anything it because they're sick of hearing about it, but if you ask them they'll tell you they don't like it. The guy in the op is really an outlier. Maybe knowing people trained on his style mindbroke him.

[Anonymous No.6378512]

>>6378427
small artists need to make an anti-AI collective. (but call it something simply pro artist, with implications)
Or merge like voltron.

[Anonymous No.6378519]

>>6378345
>using the AI generation of your own work for a reference
Literally why.

[Anonymous No.6378530]

>>6378519
Because it aids in providing you with a different interpretation in real time with different lighting, form, color, scenery, the results are limitless.

[Anonymous No.6378531]

>>6378519
He holds the opinion only the artist should be able to train the AI on their works. Since people did it for him must be feeling some retarded sense of responsibility of something.

[Anonymous No.6378558]

>>6378511
>don't say anything it because they're sick of hearing about it
Someone fucks your ass and you better forget about it, but if someone ask you, then you say you hate getting your ass fucked?

No they are pussies or progressive fags they wanna look cool using this new “tool”, telling it won’t steal jobs (or our artworks), that it’s the same of what happened with digital art.

That’s not a time to “not talk”, it’s a time to go with all we got against it, this is the worst thing that happened to art and what our most “”””respected”””””” representatives do? Fuck them, make lots of models from them and try to make as much money as possible, until they finally notice something has to be done, one way or another.

[Anonymous No.6378591]

>>6378345
Okay bet What's the best site for anime/ semirealistic art, i wish to become a pro renderer.

[Anonymous No.6378614]

>>6378345
are you retarded? the AI step is completely redundant for the final product

[Anonymous No.6378619]

>>6378345
uh, why not go from 1 straight to 4?

[Anonymous No.6378620]

>>6378345
>how to rob yourself of gains and give yourself a false sense of accomplishment

[Anonymous No.6378624]

>>6378614
>>6378620
This. Relying on this will make your gains go in reverse not to mention time wasted on the prompt gacha getting something workable vs drawing it directly in 15 min.

[Anonymous No.6378626]

>>6378345
I don't get it, 2 looks better than 4

[Anonymous No.6378637]

>>6378345
If I were making art this way, the amount of dread I would experience as a result would feel like a heavy rope around my neck choking the last bit of breath out of my limp withering body. How much does an artist have to hate himself and his craft to submit himself to this brand of sadomasochism?

[Anonymous No.6378639]

>>6378619
He could have made 6 images in that time-frame.

[Anonymous No.6378640]

>>6378639
to what end?

[Anonymous No.6378641]

>>6378345
>How about you use AI as a tool to help improve your shitty art?
But the 4th stage in OP is worse than where stage 2 left off. The AI literally made the artist worse than he otherwise might’ve been.
Try and twist your hand the way she has her hands twisted, that’s not something a human being would fuck up on their own. And that sloppy tiddy doesn’t even read as a tit at first, I thought it was a mistake of some kind before realizing the artist thought they could just slap an oval where a tit should be and call it a day. Reliance on AI means running into sheer braindead mistakes because you’ll be following it too closely, and lack confidence in your own abilities.
If you’re going to be a prompter, just prompt and be happy with that AIslop you get.
If you wanna work off of AI you might as well just retouch the generated image and draw/paint over it.
If you want to get good at drawing, just draw from scratch and construct a logical, anatomically sound character with 3D volumes so you fucking get what you’re doing, instead of relying on the floating point associations or whatever of a fake brain model.

[Anonymous No.6378644]

Thank you
Ai is great

[Anonymous No.6378647]

>>6378530
>interpretation
>as if the machine has the sentience to “interpret” anything
It’s more like recreating patterns from associations it’s made between images it knows are similar because of human confirmation.
So what you ask of it will always be derivative of things that have already existed, it will never seek to create something new in an interpretive way, it doesn’t have experiences that it can process beyond patterns being recognized and confirmed by a human being(think captchas).
Human beings might draw inspiration from the things around them, but the impetus for making art outside of money is to make things that haven’t existed that don’t exist yet. You can try to do that with AI, but you’ll always have your hands tied by the fact that you can only describe to it things it’s seen thousands if not millions of times already.
Maybe it’s a distinction without a difference, tl;Dr I don’t respect AI art generations as being even roughly equivalent to artwork. “Work” being the operative part now.

[Anonymous No.6378654]

This isnt even a prompt Nigger but an actual artist who recommends Ai steps

[Anonymous No.6378660]

>>6378420
The potential of this is the only bright spot in this entire catastrophe for me. It won’t change anything about the world, the human condition, or my chances of being a pro artist, but having a personal AI trained on my work exclusively means I can basically have multiples of myself working on a project, even if they’re all retarded clones.
I’d rather have worked with other human beings with their own competencies, shared that common victory and struggle and victory, and done so in a way that we all grow and profit from.
But that is literally going down the drain and my consolation prize for sticking around to watch humanity lose its soul might be that I get to make my art anyway, just with no one to give a shit about it. And any actual work I put into it will be minimized by the fact that 1) AI touched it and 2) it’s probably garbage like all the other AI art.
Will I ever have time for that project as a wage slave even if I have an AI slave? Will I kill myself before I finish my magnum opus, or after? Who knows, we’ll see what happens.

[Anonymous No.6378667]

>>6378591
>ignores genuine post
Ai fags really are worthless

[Anonymous No.6378670]

>>6378647
This is not remotely true though and shows you haven't even looked at the AI.
>>6378641
No ones really found the sweet spot yet, it's pretty difficult to work with. Once someone gets the workflow optimized it'll be worth using.
>pic related my experiments with the ai and a sketch.

[Anonymous No.6378684]

>>6378345
I will fix my shitty art by myself by improving.

[Anonymous No.6378689]

>>6378345
Only nonartists or permabegs think using AI as a crutch is a good idea.
If you're new this shit would rob you of your gains and make you dependant on AI.
If you're more experienced it wouldn't even be needed at all because fixing the machine vomit takes as much time as making the original sketch yourself for lesser results.

Basically same as always, kill yourselves AIggers

[Anonymous No.6378693]

>>6378345

Being an artist is not about the end result.

If you want to be an artist don't ever touch this shit.

[Anonymous No.6378694]

>>6378427
This guy is right. This is EXACTLY what's happening. There are only a few artists with reach speaking up against this.
Most don't care about anyone else but themselves. They know they'll survive; fuck the rest.
I also saw a transexual (female to male) on youtube talking about it. That was a great video. Great talking points. Don't remember the channel or anything but the person definitely deserves praise for that one..

[Anonymous No.6378696]

>>6378670
>it... its not true because... its just not, okay? you just don't know the technology!
typical AIjeet answer

[Anonymous No.6378697]

>>6378644
Fuck off cattlebrain.

[Anonymous No.6378698]

>>6378637
this. drawing feels like freedom to me and this is the opposite of that.

[Anonymous No.6378707]

>>6378689
>because fixing the machine vomit takes as much time as making the original sketch
or stop being a loser and improve your prompting game, way less to fix then

[Anonymous No.6378710]

>>6378707
nigger how about you improve your sketching skills instead by actually drawing once in your life? how do you live like this, always looking for crutches? you'll never learn

[Anonymous No.6378718]

>>6378710
or just do both???
Why are you picking the easy path of only improving one when you could be improving two fields?

[Anonymous No.6378769]

>>6378718

>Why are you picking the easy path

dumbfuck

[Anonymous No.6378773]

>>6378718
As if "improving your prompt game" is hard work compared to drawing. As if it's even work. One requires skill while the other just requires some hours of fucking around.

I learned blender years ago in adition to painting and drawing. Now that requires considerably more effort than prompting of all things...

[Anonymous No.6378779]

>>6378371
It's even easier to get an artist to do it for you but then whats the point. People who shill this shit were never artists and are braindead consoomers

[Anonymous No.6378785]

>>6378345
Zankuro got best of both worlds.

[Anonymous No.6378802]

>>6378345
AIfag, you do realize stuff like tracing over 3d references is still looked down upon in the normal illustration world by both artists AND normies? Even nips get shat on for it unless they hush hush. Raw skills and design are what people care the most about, and if you're a beg then AI will make your work way too inconsistent in the first place, so there's no point utilizing it. It's the same thing as seeing a beg trace over a 3d model, you'll immediately notice something is wrong.

This guy could have drawn the exact same pic, at the same speed, with the same quality, without using AI at all.

[Anonymous No.6378829]

>>6378773
I was learning 3ds max back in the day and recently I've been learning this AI shit. I find it to be very similar actually, the skillset doesn't overlap with drawing but it's not as easy as it looks and you can definitely feel improvement after using it for a while. Also it's very fun for me to be learning new stuff.

[Anonymous No.6378830]

>>6378353
>>6378370
if you just use for posting content than it doesnt, if it gives you a time to breathe and draw what you want then why not.

[Anonymous No.6378833]

>>6378829
It's as easy as it looks. Don't spread lies. The only learning, is learning what ai is shit at and not to use those words(scissors, hands, any complex actions/positioning)
You can learn everything there is to know in a single page guide on whatever forum/discord of the AI you use.

[Anonymous No.6378836]

>>6378833
It's only getting easier too. Project a little into a few years when computers can just read your mind and give you artwork you desire infinitely.

[Anonymous No.6378838]

As an animator, I just want something that can generate decent background art from my line drawings because I fucking hate painting.

[Anonymous No.6378840]

>>6378836
Yeah, look at the midjourney v4 people say it felt too easy.
>Does anyone else feel like Midjourney v4 is "too easy"? This was "Close-up photography of a face" and it feels like you didn't make it. Like it was premade

[Anonymous No.6378845]

>>6378833
I don't think so. It's easy to get decent results but to go back to the 3d modeling comparison that's like making a utah teapot dragging a nice metalic texture on top and being like "wow so easy".
>>6378836
That is the end goal though, so eventually it should be as easy as describing what you want to see in natural language and getting exactly that.

[Anonymous No.6378850]

>>6378840
Well? They were training the AI by using it, surely they knew this was going to happen. Maybe technerds aren't that smart.
>mfw prompt sisters are already getting replaced

[Anonymous No.6378853]

>>6378845
nigger you can achieve these results in mere hours
its 100% negligible compared to actually learning how to draw, render, color etc
you AIjeets are all fucking delusional

[Anonymous No.6378857]

Based on the anger, can we say AI has won?

[Anonymous No.6378858]

>>6378857
If AI wins nobody wins. Not even delusional tranny-humanist technerds.

[Anonymous No.6378861]

>>6378614
>>6378619
>>6378417
This. Inefficient method just to add AI to the process and show how cool and progressive you are.

[Anonymous No.6378868]

>>6378840
>it feels like you didn't make it.
This is what AI is for, make the art for you so you don’t need to do not a single artistic step.

That’s ridiculous and not needed, why skip the art process entirely? Soon, humanity will forget how to make art and generating it will be the norm. I just wonder who thought it would be a good thing.

[Anonymous No.6378879]

>>6378853
I've done both and I don't agree, but who knows, maybe you're right.

[Anonymous No.6378883]

I wonder if he knows about all this.

[Anonymous No.6378890]

>>6378879
If prompting a few words and pressing enter is so hard, why not actually make the art yourself? You not only will have full control of the outcome, but you will be able to feel the pleasure of actually being proud of doing it.

[Anonymous No.6378893]

>>6378883
I keep forgetting he's alive and well, gives me whiplash each time

[Anonymous No.6378912]

>>6378345
1. Using AI models that were trained on other people's artworks and photographs without their knowledge or consent, and without compensation, is unethical. Use of this software signals approval of the means by which it was created, and benefits the perpetrators of what can only be described as massive copyright infringement, both financially and in terms of public perception.
2. Creativity, design, visualization and drawing skills are developed by practice. Just as sitting on your ass all day will cause the muscles of your legs and thighs to atrophy, so, too, relying on AI to get you past the difficult parts of art-making will result in the diminishment of whatever skills you possessed, and preclude you developing new skills. Simply put, your brain will become duller, lazier and less capable for lack of use.
5. Once you become reliant on AI, you will have ceded your own individuality and you'll be unable to produce anything novel or interesting. Your anime pinups will look like the ones the AI was trained on. You won't have a unique style.
4. Drawing is fun. The problem-solving is intellectually stimulating, and the feeling of graphite scratching gently against paper has a meditative effect. Drawing is nothing like prompting.

[Anonymous No.6378926]

>>6378890
I think you are making the art yourself and it gives me pleasure and satisfaction. Drawing it yourself would be a lot harder and time consuming.

[Anonymous No.6379016]

>>6378829
I'm the anon you replied to here. The 3D guy.
I asked a friend of mine to download sd. We talked over the phone and he sent me pictures of the ui. Through those images I guided him as to how it worked. Told him some prompts and what did what.
And I haven't even touched the program.
I would say it's significantly more challenging to learn a 3D software than this. More specifically blender as that's the only program I've touched.
Keep in mind you'll have to learn navigations and shortcuts, UV-unwrapping, pbr-textures, baking normals, rigging, adding bones, animations, shaders/nodes depending on the project ofc. Oh and let's not forget all the small things that can go wrong. Searching google for similiar problems for hours. Why does my seams look off? Why do I suddenly have extra verticles? Why when I import this model I get these artifacts? The list is endless.
Took me a couple of years to really get the hang of it.
It's far more time-extensive and complex.

As someone with a fairly good vocabulary I just fed him some prompts and his results were decent off the bat.

[Anonymous No.6379036]

>>6378912
>Using AI models that were trained on other people's artworks and photographs without their knowledge or consent, and without compensation, is unethical.
Free use is a bitch. Also, this statement is coming from someone who more than likely either pirated or referenced another painting/drawing or image without the author's consent or attributing the original piece.
>Muh copyright infringement
The prompt engineer merely offered a tribute and used the Ai as a medium.
>You're just being lazy
That's a fine way of saying increasing your workflow, Ai is no different from using 3d models as a point of reference
>Muh style
The field in which everyone and their dog aspires to has already been saturated by chinamen way before the advent of Ai, just take a look at /asg/ and what they aspire to by directly copying off someone else in the hopes they will steal their style without their consent mind you.
>You're not having fun
Say that to the rest of the other board that have dedicated Ai generals with a plethora of users discovering their creativity generating tantalizing imagery in real time allowing their imaginations to run wild. As a matter of fact someone ran my drawing through the Ai and we were all amazed at the different interpretations and renditions the Ai output before our eyes.

[Anonymous No.6379045]

>>6379036
Why didn't you img2img a penis to the unrelated OP pic of your futa general miku?

[Anonymous No.6379046]

>>6378912
>i pirate art tutorials, art programs and take reference from other people's work but that's completely ethical because i'm hooman with snowflake feelings-ism

[Anonymous No.6379048]

>>6379036
>users discovering their creativity generating tantalizing imagery in real time allowing their imaginations to run wild.
>creativity
you retards are literally letting a derivative photobash bot do everything for you and you call that creativity
actual fucking cattle

[Anonymous No.6379050]

>>6379036
>Ai is no different from using 3d models as a point of reference
AI is no different from asking someone else to draw it for you. Not even a single pixel there was placed by you. There’s a world of difference from simply using a visual reference.

[Anonymous No.6379052]

>>6379016
Sure, I've learned many of those things but in 3ds max(pretty much the same). The biggest difference is the skill floor, with AI generators it's very easy to get decent results but the skill ceiling is still very high for now and that's where I find it to be similar and fun to work with. Eventually the end goal is to make it so easy that you don't need any skills beyond being able to communicate in natural language but it's not there yet, and the point of 3D modeling software is the same I.e. to make things as easy as possible.

[Anonymous No.6379060]

>>6379046
>requesting a program to make me an image from a soup of melted images is the same as a human who observes and draws!

[Anonymous No.6379063]

>>6379060
Good thing it isn't the same, there would be no need to make AI if nothing in the world changed. >Why make car when human legs

[Anonymous No.6379067]

>>6379036
>referenced another painting/drawing or image without the author's consent
Humans aren’t robots, we can’t perfectly copy anything, instead, we learn concepts and we understand what we are doing, that’s why referencing works as just a reference. AI is like photobashing thousands of artworks at once.

[Anonymous No.6379069]

>>6379036
3D models are still going to be more reliable reference. Anytime someone posts an AI generated image that's supposed to dunk on artists, immediately there's noticeable problems with perspective/anatomy/gesture, and these problems are endemic to how AI assembles images. AI art programs just rapidly collage pre-existing 2d art together, they don't function off understanding 3d volume or rules of nature.

If you're having fun with it fine, just don't act smug about technology you don't understand. AI shillls seem to have fallen for the AI branding and think what amounts to a refined Google search engine is actually a magical drawing genie that has human design instincts.

[Anonymous No.6379071]

most people i see just use ai to make pinup girls and porn.
not all, but most.
not much creativity.
artists do that too, actually, but at least they're drawing.

[Anonymous No.6379073]

>>6379060
>>6379067
Nobody cares about you, the Artist. People want to consume content without having to go through a middle man and the Ai allows consumers to bypass you directly. Nobody cares whether or not the Ai has the ability to observe and actually draw as long as it provides a relative content to the request it suffices a demand. The argument that the Ai doesn't actually draw and is just photobashing a frankenstein image together from other sources is a very poor argument.
>>6379069
By your logic you might as well reference a live model in front of you but we do not have the luxury of having a personal model on demand to assist you with gesture, perspective, and anatomy instead you supplement that with the aid of software.

[Anonymous No.6379082]

>>6379036
By creativity you mean the random gacha game? Yeah, this is an autonomous solution, not only the rendering, but the whole image is made by the AI, so the creativity is actually the result of an algorithm.

[Anonymous No.6379092]

>>6379036
>discovering their creativity generating tantalizing imagery in real time allowing their imaginations to run wild
Oh it's you again. How's work going today?
>>6379069
That's what I don't get about people arguing for this as an artist tool. Short of handing over the reins to have it finish your work for you, there's not really much it can give you as reference material that isn't already handled with more consistent accuracy by other resources.
>>6379073
>make an argument
>get told it isn't actually the same thing
>no one cares!!
OK

[Anonymous No.6379094]

>>6379073
If you are just having fun having with an instant image generator, it’s ok for me, what really is ridiculous are those AI shills trying to pass as “artists” when just like you said, AI generators simply bypass the need of an artist. Your attitude is acceptable for me, but those that use AI to pretend they are actual artists are simply being hypocrite, they are trying to become what they hate so much.

[Anonymous No.6379105]

>>6379073
Why is it a bad argument? NTA, but saying "UHM AKSHUALLY UR WRONG" isn't a proper response. If you know so much about this technology, explain why, in technical but concise details- and with proof- it isn't just automated photobashing. Really, I'm curious and willing to change my mind.

Enlighten us.

[Anonymous No.6379110]

>>6379094
That's just someone getting a high from seeing their idea be translated into an image and wanting to express themselves to others.
>>6379105
In the context where people care whether or not the Ai doesn't actually draw and is just photobashing images together is a poor argument since consumers just want to see content regardless if you used Ai, photobashed, referenced, or directly copied like K*vshinov and he is living proof of that.

[Anonymous No.6379119]

>>6379105
Photobashing can't mix two different styles seemingly without someone or soemthing heavily painting or changing somehow everything and making the different styles into one. Other than that they are photobashing through some noise denoising method but the people interested in making art for free doesn't even know what photobashing means and they probably couldn't care less

[Anonymous No.6379124]

Fair Use laws exist. There are restrictions involved on what you can and can't do.
Fair Training laws need to exist. Yesterday.

[Anonymous No.6379137]

>>6379124
It's good to be me, fuck fair use laws

[Anonymous No.6379146]

>>6379119

To put it simply

It has the ability to recognize and organize shapes, form, colors plus all the neat filters it can run the image through.

[Anonymous No.6379149]

I can't wait for the youtube gurus to seriously shill AI art to fix your flaws. Forever fucking up any up and coming artists with baaad habits.

[Anonymous No.6379153]

>>6379149
>Forever fucking up any up and coming artists with baaad habits.
We already got those with "easy ways to draw x, y and z"

[Anonymous No.6379155]

>>6379137
And what have you made with your lack of laws? Fuck off larper.

[Anonymous No.6379156]

>>6378368
You sound like one of those calarts faggots with deformed and autistic cartoon drawings lmao. Kys

[Anonymous No.6379160]

>>6379073
Okay, if you want to develop an understanding of how to make art based on inaccurate 2D collages feel free. But this isn't an argument you care about anyway because you have no intention on doing anything outside whatever the botslop throws in your lap. Most of you can't even be bothered to inpaint and start seething when someone mentions the word "photoshop"

[Anonymous No.6379165]

>>6379155
This

[Anonymous No.6379170]

>>6379105
okay, it's actually pretty simple. Photobashing uses multiple digital assets(pictures for example) and blends them into one final piece. Diffusion models don't work like that, the way they work isn't so simple though and I can't explain it to you, so if you want to learn more then I suggest you look it up for yourself.

[Anonymous No.6379175]

>>6379110
You didn't answer the question. People shit on Ilya daily and nips hate his shit, all of his work in japan flopped and his ghost in the shell redesign got shat on by most- Why? Because it looked exactly like the 700 other stuff he did. Guess what will happen eventually after AIfags spend a few months on their new toy? They'll get bored, because they have no passion for it. Same thing for consumers themselves. AI can't even do my coom shit right. Why bother?

This tech shot itself in the foot by being so accessible and easy to use. This is what's going to kill it in the end.

And on the other hand, most people following artists and consuming art are actually other artists, at least in non-nsfw circles- and you're not going to win over this side any time soon. So no, artist will keep going, no matter what.

tldr: you're a faggot

>>6379156
NTA but py(human)w

[Anonymous No.6379186]

Where do I find i2i even? Google brings nothing.

[Anonymous No.6379195]

>>6379186
you have to run stable diffusion. either locally on your computer or by renting a gpu through colab or paperspace or some other service.

[Anonymous No.6379196]

>>6379165
How is that anything to do with fuck fair use?

[Anonymous No.6379198]

>>6379170
>its not photobashing because... It's just not, okay? look it up luddite
I really can't tell if this shit is satire or not

[Anonymous No.6379202]

>>6379170
"Actually let me explain, uhm- it doesnt work that way, uhm- it's not simple, 300 iq stuff I swear, I can't explain, uhm- er..... ggrks!!"


Just admit it. You don't know jack shit about what you're talking about. Just leave and stop embarrassing yourself, brother.

[Anonymous No.6379206]

>>6379170
It is virtually the same, but in a way only a machine can do, since you're using just tiny fragments, aka noises, of countless artworks tagged and trained with proper weights in the dataset.

[Anonymous No.6379209]

>AI isn't elaborate photobash-ACK
https://nitter.it/GSNotArt/status/1588439657641291777

[Anonymous No.6379218]

>>6379209
^ ^ ^ Virus ^ ^ ^

[Anonymous No.6379226]

>>6379202
>kim jung gi
i miss him bros...

[Anonymous No.6379228]

>>6379226
He died so we could use his art

[Anonymous No.6379233]

>>6379202
>"Actually let me explain, uhm- it doesnt work that way, uhm- it's not simple, 300 iq stuff I swear, I can't explain, uhm- er..... ggrks!!"
LMAO accurate, these AI promptlets are clowns.

[Anonymous No.6379240]

>>6379218
Nitter is a twitter alternative frontend, no viruses there

[Anonymous No.6379241]

>>6379170
Whatever it is, It's fucked up.

[Anonymous No.6379242]

>>6379240
printscreen, I'm not clicking it

[Anonymous No.6379245]

>>6378845
>That is the end goal though, so eventually it should be as easy as describing what you want to see in natural language and getting exactly that.
No, this is false, because symbolism will always have space for interpretation. End goal would be neural links so you could stream images from your mind to the AI.

[Anonymous No.6379250]

>>6379245
I'm talking about the current iteration of models, if we have brain-computer interfaces obviously we won't need language

[Anonymous No.6379252]

>>6379242
https://twitter.com/GSNotArt/status/1588439657641291777
Better?

[Anonymous No.6379253]

>>6379218
lol it isnt, tard

>>6379242
nta but here's the first 4 images from this

better res archive: https://files.catbox.moe/qrd3t5.png

[Anonymous No.6379255]

>>6379250
My bad.
These threads are salt mines.

[Anonymous No.6379261]

Do AIlets know the models don't actually have any images in them, and even if they wanted to photobash / copy they literally could not?

[Anonymous No.6379264]

>>6379206
No, what you describe would require access to the training data.
>>6379198
>>6379202
Anyway this shit is too complicated for me to explain, I don't understand it well enough. If you want to learn you got the internet, nothing is stopping you.

[Anonymous No.6379278]

>>6379264
>I don't understand it well enough

So your point is that you don't know what it does. Then why did you even bother trying to argue against the fact it's photobashing? I mean, again, your words here: You don't know what it does or how it works. I'm telling you bro, just stop.

[Anonymous No.6379287]

>>6379241
Nice. I can't wait for the lawsuits.

[Anonymous No.6379298]

>>6379287
It's like retarded people gonna commit plagiarism before realizing they can img2img with high denoise

[Anonymous No.6379302]

>>6379253
So AI is just statistical photobashing. Interesting.

[Anonymous No.6379304]

>>6379302
Interpolative google search

[Anonymous No.6379305]

>>6379241
any more shots of this conversation or more context?

[Anonymous No.6379307]

>>6379304
Searching for what does not yet exist?

[Anonymous No.6379325]

>>6379278
None of these faggots know what they're talking about. No matter how many times they post garbage photobashes full of flaws they insist that what they're prompting came from a magical drawing genie. They clearly don't understand the technology but get defensive when someone points out the limitations; worse than that they *insist* those limitations don't exist, and when asked to provide contrary evidence they just default to this "YOU'LL SEE! TWO MORE WEEKS!" shit as always. It feels like arguing with children trying to tell you that Santa Claus is real.

[Anonymous No.6379347]

>>6379325
They really weren't joking about the salt mines.

[Anonymous No.6379357]

>>6379302
It's micro photobashing in a pixel level. It can create "new" images using this technique, but only by using pixel data from other artworks, it's totally different than a human using references or inspirations.

[Anonymous No.6379359]

>>6379347
>pretend to be heralding a technology that claims to disrupt the art world
>actually here's all the ways it doesn't do that
>OMG U MAD BRO???

So that's all you have left. I still have a career drawing and you and everyone else is bored of your new gacha toy, so now all you have left is shaking your fist at everyone who left you behind to stagnate with your botslop. Just go back to /g/ in your dying stable diffusion thread where even they admit the novelty has worn off.

[Anonymous No.6379381]

>>6379307
>Interpolative
Learn what words mean

[Anonymous No.6379388]

Alright, because I've seen this posted a few times I just want to clarify something real quick. I don't know who posted it, and I can't be bothered to find the post, but someone said something along the lines of
>AI doesn't even have the concept of form or anything
The AI can learn form in the exact same way you do: by looking at many many pictures of form, and by picking up on those patterns. If you consider that ultimately something knowing form = something can translate form onto paper in a way that is understood by the viewer, then many AI pictures display a far better understanding of form than the vast majority of artists. If you don't consider that, then there is no metric you can use, because at that point it's subjective.
>AI art is all flawed, therefore AI is bad
Because human art is rarely, if ever, flawed, right?

[Anonymous No.6379389]

>>6379381
Yeah, I'm asking the question

[Anonymous No.6379391]

>>6379305
You can search the midjourney discord for
"Are there any current examples of"
to see whatever followed, it's prob not worth it, just a couple of AI-heads chatting about legality but getting nowhere.

[Anonymous No.6379396]

>The AI can learn form in the exact same way you do
wrong, techjeet. use your shit stained hand to scroll up and read, nigger. or better yet go fuck some jumper cables if you're so blindly enamored with machines.

[Anonymous No.6379400]

>>6379388
AI doesn't understand anything. It just copies. See https://twitter.com/GSNotArt/status/1588439657641291777
AI can't imagine and "draw" something from another angle if it's not in it's data base because it has no understanding of the thing it's generating. Don't compare the human brain to a dumb algorithm, idiot.

[Anonymous No.6379401]

>>6379400
not in its training database*

[Anonymous No.6379402]

>>6379359
>pretend to be heralding a technology that claims to disrupt the art world
Seems it disrupts enough, based on how much of a salt mine this place has become.

>I still have a career drawing and you and everyone else is bored of your new gacha toy
Sentences like these are why people make fun of you. It's unironically sad.

>>6379400
The models don't hold any pictures. Even if it wanted to copy it couldn't. It's pattern recognition, just like you and I do it.

>AI can't imagine and "draw" something from another angle if it's not in it's data base because it has no understanding of the thing it's generating.
You are so unbelievably offbase it's actually unreal how confident you feel about the shit you're saying. Look up the definition of delusion.

[Anonymous No.6379404]

>>6379400
AI shills are honestly too stupid to grasp how AI even works. To them they think that it's only a patch away from giving them the ability to make entire movies on command. It's completely pointless to argue with them because their only aim is "please stop drawing, please stop succeeding at things I've failed at"

[Anonymous No.6379407]

>>6379402
>Even if it wanted to copy it couldn't.
Except it actually can. There are already examples of overfitting with midjourney, pajeet shill.

[Anonymous No.6379408]

>>6379388
>The AI can learn form in the exact same way you do
Nope, that's why you can get a great rendering, lots of details and still some bizarre "mistakes" like multiple limbs, fings, sometimes even the abscence of the torso...

It only happens the AI only uses pixel data it stole from other images and try to fit them together using approximation. It doesn't know what it is doing.

[Anonymous No.6379409]

>>6379402
>Seems it disrupts enough, based on how much of a salt mine this place has become.
Nigger you have been making at least a thread a day and you take the time to reply 24/7 to anyone and you have the balls to tell other people they are salty?

[Anonymous No.6379410]

>>6379389
interpolation is a type of estimation, finding the missing data points. So merging of 3 photos, Skull, Robot, Future, The AI will blend between those based on it's estimates, the statistical likelihood of pixels being in certain places.
In the latent space, terminator skulls have weighting towards those word tags, so you may get a terminator skull from those prompts, and risk copyright infringement if you use it commercially.

[Anonymous No.6379412]

>>6379400
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3G0dx1Q0R8

[Anonymous No.6379418]

>>6379402
humans do not learn like a computer
you're not a computer
you will never be a computer
you have no memory card, you have no PSU, you have no motherboard
you're a human being, who happens to be a fucking retard

[Anonymous No.6379422]

>>6379418
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=67r7fDRBlNc

[Anonymous No.6379423]

>>6379402
>The models don't hold any pictures. Even if it wanted to copy it couldn't
A pot of melted pictures is still a pot of melted pictures.

[Anonymous No.6379425]

>>6379402
>>6379400
Sorry, that was mean. Better answer is that the way we draw things we havent necessarily seen from every angle is through extrapolation. This extrapolation comes from pattern recognition, and applying those patterns to other things. AI works on this pattern recognition basis as well, so that's why it can draw things from different angles that it has never seen.

>>6379408
There simply is no pixel data.

>>6379407
Overfitting is copying in the same way a human would copy if all they had to learn how to draw was the exact same image and literally nothing else. As in, the humans entire existence was that one image. That's how it works. You have to remember the AI is very limited on its knowledge.

>>6379409
>you have been making
Hahahahaha. Holy shit! This is really taking a toll on your mental health, huh?

>>6379418
Pattern recognition. That's it. That's all there is.
>you have no memory card, you have no PSU, you have no motherboard
These models work on networks with no inherent memory. The only memory they use is to set up the actual network, but the actual process isn't memoized at all. It is the exact same as saying that the only memory your brain uses is it's physical configuration, but the thoughts themselves aren't in any way stored. It's the same, with different underlying mechanisms, of course. It's a different brain.

[Anonymous No.6379428]

>>6379388
You've posted this cope in every spam thread, fag. If any of it were true you would've posted evidence.

[Anonymous No.6379430]

>>6379278
I understand it well enough to know it's not photobashing, but not well enough to explain it to you.

[Anonymous No.6379432]

>>6379425
>Overfitting is copying in the same way a human would copy if all they had to learn how to draw was the exact same image and literally nothing else. As in, the humans entire existence was that one image. That's how it works. You have to remember the AI is very limited on its knowledge.
So yes it can copy you fucking troglodyte
God I wish you AI niggers all jumped off a bridge already
>>6379430
>its not photobashing because... its not okay? its just not.

[Anonymous No.6379434]

>>6379425
>humans pattern recognition bots
This retard is back with his incredibly oversimplified popsci weasel shit
>there simply is no pixel data
Doesn't matter how many levels of obfuscation you want to use

[Anonymous No.6379436]

>>6379425
>so that's why it can draw things from different angles that it has never seen.
it literally cannot. you're beyond saving, holy shit. do you still believe in santa claus too?

[Anonymous No.6379439]

>Download Stable Diffusion
>try to find if there is any illegal photographs in its folders
>disappointment
Emad... please. release the data i want it

[Anonymous No.6379443]

>>6379436
>it literally cannot.
If that were the case, then how would it be able to create new pictures?

[Anonymous No.6379445]

>>6379439
it's available https://laion.ai/blog/laion-5b/

[Anonymous No.6379447]

>>6379425
>I'm not mad
>proceeds to reply to everyone

[Anonymous No.6379448]

>>6379443
It cannot make them from different angles. Are you braindead? Why do you think 90% of ai is used to produce portraits or, at most, a scuffed low angle shot? Do you AIggers have eyes?

[Anonymous No.6379449]

>>6379443
Just like I can make a new image by photobashing different images. If I don't have the image I need, I can't do it. Of course the AI does it with million of images at the same time. That's why you're so easily fooled.

[Anonymous No.6379450]

>>6379445
Is this a triple letter bait? Why is this not on github?

[Anonymous No.6379453]

>>6379447
I was just answering the questions, relax.

>>6379448
>>6379449
Got it, I'm defeated.

[Anonymous No.6379456]

I like AI art

[Anonymous No.6379457]

>>6379402 >>6379425 >>6379443


>Even if it wanted to copy it couldn't
See >>6379241 >>6379253

I'm not convinced, and experienced the same thing. I've tried prompting stuff on a rather popular character and I immediately noticed the face was copy-pasted from a single artist's work, (and I mean photoshop copy paste style) but plastered on random deformed pinup body #700.

Also seemed to hate to show hands, or shy away from any poses other than the tardgaze stand. AI couldn't do shit like make the anime girl do a handstand or differentiate between two different characters because it was too dumb. I'm collecting examples atm, it's meme-worthy.

The power of AI I guess. Honestly pretty disappointing.

[Anonymous No.6379466]

>>6379457
isn't that what the kids call a "skill issue" ?

[Anonymous No.6379467]

>>6379457
Could you show where they copied the art from? I want to post more example of plagiarism on twitter

[Anonymous No.6379471]

>>6379457
>Someone plagiarizes using traditional art
>"The artist plagiarized!"
>Someone plagiarizes using AI
>"The tool plagiarized!"
Good one.

[Anonymous No.6379473]

>>6379457
Inb4
>y-you are just u-umm, not prompting right!

[Anonymous No.6379474]

>>6379457
As an artist, I tried all available AI, they are extremely good at rendering stuff and random portraits, but the lack of control makes it hard to imagine in a serious, large scale production.

[Anonymous No.6379480]

>>6379471
Prompter is not an artist, AI is not a tool, its replacement.

[Anonymous No.6379481]

>>6379471
>"The tool plagiarized!"
Yes, what's wrong with that statement? The "tool" plagiarized on its own.

[Anonymous No.6379482]

>>6379457
>Copy pasted
Absolutely untrue. It might be that the AI found a bunch of similar faces in their learning set and created connections in between all those, but it absolutely did not do anything even close to copy-paste as you're suggesting. Like I said before, you have to understand these things are like brains with a very limited set of experiences they can learn from, and on top of that they are really good at picking up patterns. Also
>not posting the model you used
If you train a model on one single picture multiple times, you can absolutely get very close to that picture back, because that's all the AI will learn. It will still not be copy pasting.

>>6379474
>but the lack of control makes it hard to imagine in a serious, large scale production.
I don't even know why people are so mad about it, but it's absolutely hilarious. You will for a very long time have way more luck describing what you want to an actual artist than trying to use an AI for anything really specific. That being said, I can see studios using it for brainstorming and then being like "we want you to draw this."

[Anonymous No.6379487]

>>6379482
>If you train a model on one single picture multiple times, you can absolutely get very close to that picture back, because that's all the AI will learn. It will still not be copy pasting.
To elaborate a bit on this, if an artist tends to draw the same face over and over, that will also be picked up by the AI, so the sameface phenomenon is really easy to pick up. Not only that, but it happens all over the place, you're just hyper aware of the faces.

[Anonymous No.6379488]

Did I say I like AI art? Because I love it

[Anonymous No.6379492]

>>6379474
Just make AI do the entire production. AI will rarely appear in media because of how bad it works as a tool. Even when it can do characters from the ground up and the characters look good, the director will be unhappy because the details dont tell a story or something else. AI art however will dominate the moment it can replace the directors.

People will not work with AI that has this little control over the product, so AI will instead work alone without any creative dipshit around, just 100% human free media.

[Anonymous No.6379494]

>>6379482
>Absolutely untrue. It might be that the AI found a bunch of similar faces in their learning set and created connections in between all those, but it absolutely did not do anything even close to copy-paste as you're suggesting.
Anon, you're wrong here. It picks up these patterns on a pixel by pixel basis so close that it may as well be photobashing. This is why models trained on small datasets are so prone to "overfitting".

[Anonymous No.6379497]

>>6379482
>Like I said before, you have to understand these things are like brains with a very limited set of experiences they can learn from.
Holy pajeetery. Just because you have less neurons than c. elegans it doesn't mean this machine learning algorithm is remotely similar to the human brain.

[Anonymous No.6379498]

>>6379488
we get it bro, you have no taste

[Anonymous No.6379500]

>>6379492
>People will not work with AI that has this little control over the product, so AI will instead work alone without any creative dipshit around, just 100% human free media.
What the fuck am I reading lol
Unironically kill yourself if you hate humans so much

[Anonymous No.6379502]

Keep replying to bait lads.

[Anonymous No.6379503]

Post your face when you're not indian

[Anonymous No.6379506]

>>6379494
>It picks up these patterns on a pixel by pixel basis
That is all its world is, relations between pixels. That does not at all equate to it using those exact same pixels, that is just false, because it doesn't have those pixels anywhere within its network. It's the same when you look at a picture and afterwards you don't literally have the picture stored in your mind, it instead becomes just a bunch of connections in your brain. You know as well as I do that the thing isn't literally copy pasting pixels.

Here's another angle: If you ask the AI for art made by X, then it will give you a bunch of stuff which is characteristic of X. I don't know how this is surprising or undesirable. If I asked YOU to draw me an anime picture, you will give me a bunch of stuff which is characteristic of anime, because you've looked at anime a lot and picked up on all those patterns, which you then put into paper, together with a bunch of other experiences and biases you have.

[Anonymous No.6379508]

>>6379506
You know what's the saddest part of your posts?
The fact that you aren't a bot.

[Anonymous No.6379512]

>>6379508
They might as well be. Devoid of any humanity.

[Anonymous No.6379515]

>>6379508
Sure man, I am so sad. You do you.

[Anonymous No.6379516]

>>6379508
He might be one. He makes just as much sense as a bot.

[Anonymous No.6379517]

>>6379516
I dont think he is, he genuinely tries to make good points.
The problem is that his points are just parrotings of popular technology youtube channels

[Anonymous No.6379519]

>>6379500
No, it is needed to first kill as many people as possible before I kill myself. Efficient killing machine would prefer killing itself last because if it kill itself, then it can no longer kill others. Humanity haters like myself will commit suicide after all other wastes of oxygen like you flesh golem are dead.

[Anonymous No.6379521]

>>6378345
/ic/ doesn't draw, how is it improve their non existent art?

[Anonymous No.6379526]

>>6379506
>That is all its world is, relations between pixels. That does not at all equate to it using those exact same pixels, that is just false, because it doesn't have those pixels anywhere within its network. It's the same when you look at a picture and afterwards you don't literally have the picture stored in your mind, it instead becomes just a bunch of connections in your brain. You know as well as I do that the thing isn't literally copy pasting pixels.
See pic.

>Here's another angle: If you ask the AI for art made by X, then it will give you a bunch of stuff which is characteristic of X. I don't know how this is surprising or undesirable. If I asked YOU to draw me an anime picture, you will give me a bunch of stuff which is characteristic of anime, because you've looked at anime a lot and picked up on all those patterns, which you then put into paper, together with a bunch of other experiences and biases you have.
So you equate randomized machine noise to individual human biases and and experiences because you lack psychological knowledge. You replace that which you do not or cannot grasp with randomness like a good little cultist.

[Anonymous No.6379528]

>>6379519
NMake sure to kill emad and the other indians

[Anonymous No.6379533]

>>6379508
Same shit every fucking time.

[Anonymous No.6379539]

>>6379533
>ask to create x
>deliver x
What is the problem here?

[Anonymous No.6379542]

So what I'm getting here is the 'AI' part in image generators is pattern recognition and tagging and the rest is advanced photobashing.

[Anonymous No.6379544]

>>6379506
>That is all its world is, relations between pixels.
The absolute state of pa/g/ts

[Anonymous No.6379547]

>>6379471
The problem is the tool plagiarizes whether you mean to or not. I might want to make a piece about the plight of Afghanistan. I type "afghan girl" and use the image because it's so striking(and I'm a zoomer who hasn't seen it before).

[Anonymous No.6379549]

>>6379539
Anon....

[Anonymous No.6379556]

>>6379533
Obvious img2img is obvious

[Anonymous No.6379562]

>>6379556
lexica crawled the stable diffusion discord during the august beta for the images. img2img wasn't available in august.

[Anonymous No.6379566]

>>6379562
img2img was available even without the webgui, it's just most retards didn't know how to use it from the command prompt/terminal

[Anonymous No.6379568]

>>6379566
No it wasn't. This was before they released the weights.

[Anonymous No.6379569]

>>6379556
obvious cope is obvious.

[Anonymous No.6379570]

>>6379568

[Anonymous No.6379572]

fyi, Stability AI devs browse /g/. There's a good possibility the guy we're talking to now is not a naiive shill but a component of the blind idiot god himself.

[Anonymous No.6379574]

>>6379533
Yeah, there's a reason why they even admit that they're hesitant to use copyrighted music due to the risk of "memorization and overfitting," and why coding AI have come under fire for reproducing lines of code 1:1 from their training sets.
Tracing and other forms of passing off manipulated works of other artists as original creations have long been shunned, criticized, punished, whatevered in the world of art, both in terms of professional work and even in the realm of fucking Deviantart shitters. Just because a machine can do it now without the user knowing that it's occurring shouldn't constitute a free pass.

[Anonymous No.6379577]

>>6379569
Whatever makes you sleep bob

[Anonymous No.6379580]

>>6378345
>I have no mental images the thread
you will be forever limited to AI's generic shitty suggestions. keep it up retards, I am so looking forward towards competing with you in the future

[Anonymous No.6379583]

>>6379580
pyw

[Anonymous No.6379586]

>>6379253
>>6379209
so it copies artworks eh?
OH EMADDDD WE HAVE A CLASS ACTION LAWSUITTTTT
THAT BILLION DOLLARS YOU GOT FROM INVESTORS WILL BE GOING TO USSSSSSSSS

[Anonymous No.6379594]

>>6379586
Wrong board? /mu/ isn't here

[Anonymous No.6379596]

>>6379594
nigger what? did you not read that link

[Anonymous No.6379598]

>>6379596
No, I don't click random links on 4chan

[Anonymous No.6379605]

>>6379598
ah oh well. Don't need you to. Lawyers will read it just fine.
Anyways this is a big W for artists. AI niggers can no longer use the "it just learns like a human bro" any longer

[Anonymous No.6379607]

>>6379605
Will it affect the AI developers or only the end users?

[Anonymous No.6379609]

>>6379607
Both
inb4
>but i got me muh local copy

[Anonymous No.6379611]

>>6379609
So it will affect Disney?

[Anonymous No.6379614]

>>6379611
If youre trying to say something spit it out lol.

[Anonymous No.6379616]

>>6379614
No, I'm just asking

[Anonymous No.6379618]

>>6379616
What are you asking
Final (You)

[Anonymous No.6379620]

>>6379618
Will it affect the fucking rat?

[Anonymous No.6379643]

>>6378345
but the finished product looks worse than what the AI crap glued together

[Anonymous No.6379651]

>>6379620
No, Disney will put a stop on the law if it sees it can hurt their movie production

[Anonymous No.6379654]

>>6379570
Yeas, someone made it before. but you couldn't use it without the weights(22nd of august)

[Anonymous No.6379657]

>>6379654
You don't need to add weights in your prompt for img2img, the only extra setting is deciding how much denoise you want in the image

[Anonymous No.6379679]

>>6379657
You misunderstand. You could not use stable diffusion outside the discord until they released it to the public.

[Anonymous No.6379683]

>>6379679
If you knew how to compile it yourself and use the command prompt you could. The files were already on github for grabs

[Anonymous No.6379687]

>>6378345
how would that even work. unless you are able to make consistently keep the same style.

[Anonymous No.6379693]

>>6379683
No, if that were the case someone would have done it back then. you can't img2img without the weights. The code to run stable diffusion with the weights was on github for a long while, but there were no weights to use it with so it was functionally useless to outsiders until august 22.

[Anonymous No.6379698]

>>6379683
Nah he's right. The weights(that's the ckpt file) were not avaible on github, just the code. So theoretically you could have trained your own model if you happened to have a bunch of a100s laying around.

[Anonymous No.6379699]

>>6378345
sorry no one is buying your shitty ai pajeet

[Anonymous No.6379701]

>>6378357
There seriously need to be a contained thread for all these ai people. I'm kinda tired of seeing all the threads being made that don't need to be a thread......

[Anonymous No.6379704]

>>6379698
and a spare $600,000 for the compute costs.

[Anonymous No.6379722]

bros im new to the AI shit and i'd like to improve on posing, what is the best free AI aplication that can generate simple but also complex and dynamic poses for drawing references?

[Anonymous No.6379733]

>>6379722
just find reference images online, there's enough drawn stuff with interesting and complex dynamic poses.

[Anonymous No.6379738]

>>6379253
>This purely mechanical use of training data is like scanning a photo, utilizing every pixel in the scanned picture, rather than a human taking inspiration.
You should stop posting this as if it's some massive blow to AI. It's really embarrassing.

>>6379586
Lol. Lmao even.

[Anonymous No.6379768]

>>6379738
>Lol. Lmao even.
lmao lol he doesnt know there already is one
lol lmao it will set precedent
Lol Lmao AI shills can no longer use the "its like a human taking inspiration bro!" line to defend themselves

The incoming cope form ai shills will be better jerk off material than the slop the ai has ever produced

[Anonymous No.6379777]

>>6378353
Creativity doesn't exist. You are a deterministic meat computer that's deluded itself into thinking it has free will.

[Anonymous No.6379781]

>>6379777
Based deterministic chad

[Anonymous No.6379794]

>>6379777
nta but determinism doesn't preclude creativity

[Anonymous No.6379807]

>>6379777
Creativity is what meat computers can do. sand computers can go suck a doorknob!

[Anonymous No.6379808]

This reminds me of the video of the Reilly rhythms anime face process where you just ignore all the construction. Does anyone have it.

[Anonymous No.6379817]

>>6379777
>reads one Dennett book

[Anonymous No.6379881]

>>6379036
>Also, this statement is coming from someone who more than likely either pirated or referenced another painting/drawing or image without the author's consent or attributing the original piece.
>>6379046
>i pirate art tutorials, art programs and take reference from other people's work but that's completely ethical because i'm hooman with snowflake feelings-ism
I don't pirate software, and I don't even work digitally. But at least you admit (in the midst of a logical fallacy) that there is such a thing as piracy. Piracy is when the little people use the corporation's product without paying for it. When the billionaire hedge funder-owned corporation uses the little people's products without paying for them, it's called "progress" by cucks like you.

[Anonymous No.6379883]

>>6379881
You're the one saying it's progress, that never came out of me

[Anonymous No.6379884]

>>6379883
So you're against AI art using the work of other artists in the training sets?

[Anonymous No.6379887]

>>6379884
>*AI art programmers

[Anonymous No.6379888]

>>6379884
No, I'm not against piracy

[Anonymous No.6379896]

>>6379777
Dikshit, I am going to add toilets to all my paintings of anime girls floating in voids and there is nothing you can poo to stop me

[Anonymous No.6379899]

>>6379896
I will wait, have you started already? Because I know you won't

[Anonymous No.6379903]

>copying styles is exactly what artists do when they reference artists!
ok, but where do art styles come from then

[Anonymous No.6379904]

>>6379899
The future is flushed, Abhisheet

[Anonymous No.6379906]

>>6379903
original art style is a myth

[Anonymous No.6379907]

>>6379904
That one is old, make more

[Anonymous No.6379908]

>>6379903
Ideas come from Plato

[Anonymous No.6379912]

>>6379903
The Orient

[Anonymous No.6379916]

>>6379903
From lack of skill, there is a reason you can tell AI image apart from other AI image and from human art and from a child human

[Anonymous No.6379923]

>>6379903
There's plenty of similar style artists and even those who attempt to outright copycat another artists' styles, and yet people with even a minimally trained eye can pick out whose work is whose.
>>6379916
>child human
The GPT-3 isn't sending us its best.

[Anonymous No.6379952]

>>6379907
Maybe over the weekend

[Anonymous No.6379954]

>>6379952
You won't, but try to surprise me

[Anonymous No.6379959]

>>6379954
Mukesh, life isn't an instant gratification gacha game like your software is.

[Anonymous No.6379960]

>>6378345
Now the aphantasiacels get to pretend to be us.

[Anonymous No.6379963]

>>6379959
Yeah, at least AI deliver something every time a button is pressed. /ic/ on the other hand

[Anonymous No.6379967]

>>6379777
So, this is the result of artists abandoning God...

[Anonymous No.6379975]

>>6378345
>AI as a tool to help improve your art

No, thanks.

I'd rather not steal someone else art

[Anonymous No.6379981]

>>6379975
Is pic related? I've seen you posting the same thing in some other thread

[Anonymous No.6380036]

>>6379402
and this is why /g/ needs to ban all ai threads
pajeets once had 6-7 "generals" up at the same time
fucking tards

and to speak on behalf of programmers, no we dont care about this ai bullshit only pajeets and idiots who dont know how ai works think is revolutionary and "just 2 more weeks"

[Anonymous No.6380039]

>>6380036
Why you keep changing decades to weeks? Most people working on AI believe AI will take over most jobs in 2 decades, not 2 weeks

[Anonymous No.6380044]

>>6379975
I'd love to steal someone else's art, fuck copyright.

[Anonymous No.6380050]

>>6379981
>I've seen you posting the same thing

I stole this picrel from someone else, you're assuming anons are the same person?
You must be new on 4chan.

[Anonymous No.6380053]

>>6380050
Not assuming, you were

[Anonymous No.6380061]

>>6379402
>The models don't hold any pictures. Even if it wanted to copy it couldn't.

>>6380050

>LMAO

[Anonymous No.6380072]

>>6380053
>Not assuming, you were

>Now I'm you, and I'm gonna pretend to be a retarded redditor.

Y-you must be the same anon, I"m 100% sure of it!!!???21@1

>random spacing

Where's my upvotes, and karma fellow redditors?

[Anonymous No.6380075]

>>6380044
I'm sure you're a pirate too. All this AI shit is very similar to piracy up to the stealing part. AI shills even act very similar to people that defend piracy. Isn't it funny that it isn't illegal yet?

[Anonymous No.6380077]

[Anonymous No.6380080]

>>6380072
I haven't used pleddit ever since they changed their UI so I'm not sure why you act like this

[Anonymous No.6380083]

>>6380075
Piracy is an objective good.

[Anonymous No.6380084]

>>6380080
>I haven't used pleddit ever since

>You're thinking, and acting like a Redditor, and you used to be one.

Welcome to 4chan, this place is hell.

[Anonymous No.6380086]

>>6380083
If piracy wasn't a thing you wouldn't see ridiculous DRM schemes or unreasonable prices. It's a net negative on society. Just like AI.

[Anonymous No.6380089]

>>6380084
Take your meds

[Anonymous No.6380093]

>>6380083
Its only good because most pirates are still moral people with good hearts and they end up buying the product if they truly like it. I guess the same thing is with AI model trainers who dont have artist killing fetish. AI is out for 4 or so months already and I have not heard of people complaining about lack of commissions. Greg Rutkowski complained about AI art not because it was affecting his work, but because every time he googled his work, he would get flooded with AI slog that used his name as prompt and worried people will associate AI slog with him.

[Anonymous No.6380097]

>>6380075
>it isn't illegal yet?

It isn't illegal yet because the big corpo, and lawyers didn't figure out how to make money from AI yet, it's all about the money, even laws.

Give it time, Disney, and or Nintendo will sweep in, and bribe some American big shot, and rewrite the copyright law.

AI will be monopolized by those in power, and plebeians will go to a for-profit prison.

[Anonymous No.6380105]

>>6380093
Good, fuck those greedy cunts.

[Anonymous No.6380115]

>>6380089

>Sopa de macaco

Ofc you're Huezilian, btw where's your picrel from?

[Anonymous No.6380118]

>>6380115
From my backyard farm

[Anonymous No.6380330]

>>6379583
reading comprehension retard

[Anonymous No.6380334]

>>6380330
You won't get better if you don't work on your skills anon

[Anonymous No.6380515]

>>6379817

[Anonymous No.6380591]

>>6379768
>lmao lol he doesnt know there already is one
Oh, I read about that. It won't win, though, sorry.

[Anonymous No.6380616]

>>6379975
I legitimately don't get what's being stolen here, could you elaborate? The last picture seems to be different than the others. What am I missing?

[Anonymous No.6380619]

>>6380093
The thing about AI is that most people who use it literally don't care about artists. They don't like them or dislike them, they just want to look at pretty _art_.

[Anonymous No.6380622]

>>6379402
"Blerghblerghblergh! No! you're ignorant! Look up the definition of blergh! Hah! Sure showed them!"

You're not proving anything you moron.
He is right. The AI is just copying a bunch of shapes together based on billions of pictures, paintings and drawings that it scraped without any consent or regard for the artists that it ripped off.
And yes it "holds" pictures. Without these billions of images it wouldn't be able to create ANYTHING.
I think it's YOU who needs to re-educate yourself.

[Anonymous No.6380626]

>>6380622
>The AI is just copying a bunch of shapes together based on billions of pictures, paintings and drawings that it scraped without any consent or regard for the artists that it ripped off.
So is every artist.
>And yes it "holds" pictures. Without these billions of images it wouldn't be able to create ANYTHING.
Neither would anyone.

[Anonymous No.6380631]

>>6380626
This is your brain on the reductionist dogma

[Anonymous No.6380635]

>>6380631
No matter how many layers of copium you surround yourself by, it doesn't make what I said untrue.

[Anonymous No.6380640]

>>6380631
It is insane that you're genuinely suggesting someone who is drawing isn't using previous knowledge of things they've seen to make their pictures.

Are you actually serious right now?

It's funny, because you described exactly how it happens at a high level, but you don't have the foresight to see that, because you think humans are super spexul and can "feel, man". I hope you're either religious or a pothead, because holy shit, the amount of delusion.

[Anonymous No.6380662]

Humans have the capability to understand and visualize 3d forms and to represent them as 2d shapes. AI doesn't.

[Anonymous No.6380666]

>>6380662
Then how come many AI generated stuff has a better sense of form than the vast majority of what humans make?

[Anonymous No.6380703]

>>6380640

>ai feelz...

[Anonymous No.6380717]

>>6380666
Because it's been trained on stuff made by humans. It's been trained on – you guessed it – 2d images. Because that's what it mimics. 2d shapes and patterns.

[Anonymous No.6380719]

>>6380717
It's trained on photos too, retard.
Just like you are, trained on photos and other people's art.

[Anonymous No.6380728]

>>6380626
The fucking difference is that it steals our original work without our consent. Also it has BILLIONS of images in it's datasets that it can draw from down to the exact color and pose or whatnot.

You're comparing humans to a stupid algorithm made by greedy corporate elites. You're the cow defending a software made by a bunch of technerds who know they're too big to get away with mass plagiarism.

We humans do not create in the same fashion as this abomination you worship.

[Anonymous No.6380729]

>>6380719
I said 2d images. That inludes photos, you absolute cretin.

You are, once again, trying to obfuscate the fact that humans perceive 3d forms and can translate them to 2d. AI doesn't.

Don't try to argue about art when you have never lifted a pencil.

[Anonymous No.6380735]

>>6380729
>Hurr a photo is made by humans
Why would that even matter, retard?
>You are, once again, trying to obfuscate the fact that humans perceive 3d forms
You learn 3 dimensionality from looking at the world, retard. You don't see 3d, you absolute brainless tool.
>Don't try to argue about art when you have never lifted a pencil.
>I'm getting shit on hard, so better play the "you're not even an artist" card, even though it has literally nothing to do with the discussion, and even though I don't know this person at all.
Retard. Your whole argument against
>Then how come many AI generated stuff has a better sense of form than the vast majority of what humans make?
is
>Because it learned it by looking at 3d forms
And you think you won the argument.
Lol.
Lmao even.
Cope.

[Anonymous No.6380741]

>>6380728
>You're the cow defending a software
I'm giving you facts, tool. Never have I in my replies even implied humans were better or worst than the software. The intellectually cornered animal has the propensity to hear what they want to hear.
Dumb rat.
>as this abomination you worship.
You don't know me, faggot.

[Anonymous No.6380773]

>>6380735
you must me really mad, your misquoting basically everything here, kek

[Anonymous No.6380884]

>>6380640
If you're replying to
>>6380622 (me)
Then no. I never said we don't draw from what we see but it's incomparable regardless.
This algorithm is currently far less advanced than a human illustrator. And it works very differently from how we would.

EVERYTHING it creates is derivative of some artists work; whereas we can actually learn the fundamentals to such a degree that we don't need to sit and look at references. We come up with original consepts all the time. Believe it or not.
Without us your toy wouldn't even evolve in any meaningful sense. It's the artists of the past and the future that this thing relies on and is dependent upon.

Although I do agree that your take is a reductionist one.
We're much more than a mere copyright infringement machine. Like this theft-AI that you worship. There is more to illustration and visual arts than tracing and copying. But what the fuck would you know about that? You don't even draw nor paint.

And the other comparison you made;
I said without the library of billions of images it wouldn't be able to create anything.
You replied: Neither would anyone.

As if every illustrator has a 6.6 billion image database to draw from. As if every illustration and painting is simply a copy of a copy of a copy. If this was true then we'd still be copying stickmen back from the caveman era to this day.
We get inspired, we expand upon, we imagine, we draw from dreams and personal experience.
We have so many INDIVIDUALS who have contributed to this visual medium.
One look at the history of arts and you'd see how absolutely ignorant your one-liners are...

Also our creations deserve to be protected from usery by greedy multi-billion dollar corporations to make a profit.
I didn't start painting and drawing back in the 90's to be some sort of cow to be milked by greedy nerds.

[Anonymous No.6380891]

>>6380884
>EVERYTHING it creates is derivative of some artists work;
This is false, why do people say shit like this? It learns from whatever you give it, including photos. If you ask it for a specific artist then of course it's going to give you a specific artist.
>As if every illustrator has a 6.6 billion image database to draw from.
You are literally processing visual data for 90% of the time you are awake (and even a lot of the time you are asleep, actually).
>Like this theft-AI that you worship.
You sound like an absolute tool.

The rest of your post is just morals, which is fair, but I don't really care to discuss. It's a fine convo to have, though.

[Anonymous No.6380908]

All this arbitrary semantic bullshit to conceal the fact he melted down billions of images without the image makers' consent to build an automatic image reconstructor to make a new grift market at the expense of the aforementioned original image creators.

[Anonymous No.6380919]

>>6380908
What you gonna do? Call the internet police?

[Anonymous No.6380922]

>>6380919
Seethe for a bit then proceed with my usual business.

[Anonymous No.6381038]

>>6380591
Oh, damn. Thats crazy. Crazy cope.

[Anonymous No.6381042]

>>6380919
What are you going to do, do the same with copyrighted music? You're not afraid, are you?
See ya Raj

[Anonymous No.6381044]

>>6381042
How am I supposed to coom to music? There are no gcp

[Anonymous No.6381051]

>>6381044
>avoiding the answer
Yeah, thats what I thought. Heres your final (You)

[Anonymous No.6381054]

>>6381051
I just answered, there isn't enough interest for music compared to making cp

[Anonymous No.6381056]

>>6381051
Plus, you don't even draw so why are you bothered by AI?

[Anonymous No.6381059]

https://github.com/AUTOMATIC1111/stable-diffusion-webui
Just download and install and operate it. Then tell us what you think.

[Anonymous No.6381060]

>>6381059
It's great

[Anonymous No.6381077]

>>6381059
Last time I tried it said it couldn't recognize my GPU and ran out of memory when I switched to CPU :(

[Anonymous No.6381078]

>>6380891
>You are literally processing visual data for 90% of the time you are awake (and even a lot of the time you are asleep,actually).

Nobody in their right mind would disagree with that. But we are more than that which I extended upon in my op. You just chose not to adress any of it. Because it doesn't support your argument of; Everything is just a copy of a copy..

This algorithm is not a sentient thing.
You're gona see this whole visual medium stagnate because of this.
And no it's not a false statement. Truth is this so called latent space is not a space in 3D as of yet. It would have to go through a series of iterations and updates before it can actually calculate objects in true 3D space. As of right not it utilizes a visual library so vast that it contains 100k+ images of any particular object you can imagine. It calculates through these sets. And still we see overfitting to a degree of plagiarism to this very day.

As if I sound like a tool. You litterally ARE the tool.

[Anonymous No.6381080]

It gives me cp for free and legally. I'm pro ai

[Anonymous No.6381087]

>>6380891
Oh and my last TWO sentences were actually regarding the morals of this; the rest of the text were directly adressing your talking points.

I feel like you dismiss a lot of them because you're disingenuine. You want to put people into a strawman so that you can more easily control the conversation. This is why I've concluded that arguing with you a waste of time - futile. You might actually be one of the zombies mentioned here >>6380515

You'd be a great politician.

[Anonymous No.6381088]

>>6381080
>for free and legally
You're just exploiting the legal blanks until AI regulators sanitize the web into banality. PC integrated AI regulators might become a thing too if the history of fear and greed is anything to go by.

[Anonymous No.6381090]

>>6381088
>web
Why would I care about the web, only retards post their shit online

[Anonymous No.6381091]

>>6381090
So you're gonna turn into one of those hoarders with scandinavian cp mags and cp tapes huh

[Anonymous No.6381094]

>>6381078
>Truth is this so called latent space is not a space in 3D
I can't believe you just said this. Holy fuck the lack of understanding you display is astonishing, as is the conviction with which you express these flawed views on the topic. Please, look up the definition of hubris, and just stop.

[Anonymous No.6381097]

>>6381091
I delete the generations after every session, don't want my kid accidentally finding out my real preferences

[Anonymous No.6381099]

>>6381097
Oh well that's different then. Yeah

[Anonymous No.6381103]

>>6381059
you fa/g/s always sound like used car sales man with constant bitching about getting people to try it
>people who trace/photobash and use 3d models are at least not this vocal about glorifying their shortcomings
>y'all motherfuckers are trying to sell a product not a tool since your incessant on the meme "use it or get left behind" but you retards are doing it for art that can stick figures/skeletons show more skill then your overly rendered or pieces of shit

[Anonymous No.6381105]

[Anonymous No.6381106]

>>6381103
tracers were the first to jump the ai hype train

[Anonymous No.6381108]

I will never forgive /g/ niggers and India for killing pixiv
NEVER

[Anonymous No.6381254]

6381056
>double (You)ing me
>still coping
ahh delicious tears

[Anonymous No.6381258]

>>6381254
pyw

[Anonymous No.6381273]

>Dont respond for hours
>ai schizo replies within 2 mins without a (You) to notify them
Yeah, this is their kryptonite. Starve these street shitters from attention and they start dilating lmao
My work is done here

[Anonymous No.6381275]

>>6381258
That anon can't draw. I'm pretty sure I lost time discussing with him in the past, unless not knowing how to quote is a common thing now that /ic/ is filled with twitter tourists

[Anonymous No.6381601]

don't be mean to the AI... you're gonna hurt its feelings :(

[Anonymous No.6381898]

>>6379907
>>6379954
>>6379963
The latest Loo-chan, ready to protect all the anime girls floating in voids from man-made horrors beyond imagination

[Anonymous No.6381911]

>>6381898
Give it up. Joke's not funny.

[Anonymous No.6381925]

>>6381911
Chanda, I am going to add toilets to all my paintings of anime girls floating in voids and there is nothing you can poo to stop me

[Lilly No.6382084]

>>6381898
You missed the dotty boys on the "Bi" in big tech

[Anonymous No.6382290]

>>6382084
Ah yes I did

[Anonymous No.6382517]

>>6381273
They're unemployed pajeets with nothing better to do than shill for king street shitter

[Anonymous No.6382614]

>>6381898
You think you could learn something from the AI?

[Anonymous No.6382661]

>>6382290
I have fixed it for posterity
>>6382614
You mean could I learn something from the rendermonkeys it has access to? Also lmao at it straightening out the lines on the toilet—clearly it has never used a loo before or else it would know they are rounded.

[Anonymous No.6382664]

>>6378345
its over

[Anonymous No.6382705]

>>6382664
>its over
It's just beginning.

[Anonymous No.6382711]

>>6382661
well it is better at rendering, that's pretty clear

[Anonymous No.6383392]

>>6379777
You say that with the relationality of someone who still assumes free will as an axiom.

[Anonymous No.6383394]

>>6378345
#2 actually looks better than #4.

[Anonymous No.6383396]

Why this thread is still alive?