/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

[Anonymous No.6398496]

Well-renowned artists are adapting to using AI toolsets in their workflow.
Why aren't you?

[Anonymous No.6398499]

>Well-renowned artists are adapting to using AI toolsets in their workflow.
>Why aren't you?

[Anonymous No.6398500]

>>6398496
Because I have soul

[Anonymous No.6398501]

>>6398500
>SOVL
non-argument by a brainlet
>>6398499
>basedak posting
As expected. Thanks for proving my point.

[Anonymous No.6398509]

>>6398501
>S°○y.jack gets WORDFILTERED too on /ic/

4chan used to be chevere.

[Anonymous No.6398513]

>ai subhuman at it again

[Anonymous No.6398515]

>>6398501
Can it draw an inverted potato mandrake with the mandrake’s flower genitals anatomically correct and blooming above ground?

[Anonymous No.6398520]

>>6398515
That's the point you inbred moron - you use AI as a TOOL. You're supposed to fix the minor issues yourself.

[Anonymous No.6398521]

>>6398496
>renowned
Who?

[Anonymous No.6398524]

>>6398521
https://www.pixiv.net/en/artworks/76666764
someone more popular and successful than you will ever be.

[Anonymous No.6398529]

>>6398521
Seriously, I've never even seen this guy's art and I have a pixiv account and regularly browse gelbooru, sankaku and other boorus.

[Anonymous No.6398534]

>>6398496
>Made an actual drawing based off of a glorified moodboard maker
So you're admitting that AI "art" needs help from humans to look decent.

[Anonymous No.6398544]

>>6398534
are you illiterate?

[Anonymous No.6398548]

>>6398544
Are you a cocksucking faggot?

[Anonymous No.6398554]

>>6398548
yup, you are illiterate. And retarded. As all "artists" on this board.
Read again
>Well-renowned artists are adapting to using AI TOOLSETS in their workflow.
AI is a TOOL. A tool won't do your work on its own, it needs to be guided by an expert.
Now go back into your discord and cry there.

[Anonymous No.6398557]

>>6398496
He did a complete redraw you absolutely braindamaged retard.
Get a fucking life and stop making shitty trolling posts.

[Anonymous No.6398563]

>>6398557
Yes. He adapted an AI toolset into his workflow. Thank you for admitting exactly what I said. Now get a life and learn to read.

[Anonymous No.6398565]

>>6398496
im not vaxxed

[Anonymous No.6398567]

No rules, just tools
Except skill > tools every day for all of time.

[Anonymous No.6398568]

>>6398496
I'm not skilled enough. I'm currently looking for improving my technical competence rather than achieving speed.

[Anonymous No.6398574]

>>6398496
I don't enjoy using it, I do art to feel good because I like doing it.

But I won't be an hypocrite, AI for backgrounds is really nice because it never works out of the box, so heavy overpainting is needed, in the end, the background ends up being a photobash you appropriate for yourself.

There is something a bit nauseating about using AI like this for characters that I simply don't find it enjoyable, call it autism, but for me it's like dealing with a dead corpse whereas when I draw my characters, I can feel the life in them.

[Anonymous No.6398581]

>>6398496

so this faggot just slightly edits AI generated art and calls it his own? I also don't see any ai tags on his "work" which he should be putting. finally, he has the nerve to charge money on a fanbox for art that's 90% not made by him? technique he's not even tracing, he's just editing the head and eyes , gross

[Anonymous No.6398585]

>>6398496
Yes I made it generate another bat h of delicious BBC pictures yesterday. I tried to put my wifes picture in jamalbots dataset but her bf wouldn't let her... It's a violation of her rights, he said? Seriously fuck these luddites

[Anonymous No.6398587]

>>6398496
i don't care about drawing this kind of thing, so whatever.
what exactly is it that upsets you about this? that someone beats off to this without knowing it was based on ai?

[Anonymous No.6398591]

>>6398587
he didn't even fix the broken hand

[Anonymous No.6398593]

[Anonymous No.6398614]

>>6398496
Why bother using it as a tool? The end product still looks like AI shit with no visible improvements.

Also, AI can already generate literally anything with no artefacts. Pic related is Midjurney with no help and 6 word prompt

[Anonymous No.6398619]

>>6398614
Full body shot of a woman in an amusement park please

[Anonymous No.6398620]

>>6398614
>no artifacts

[Anonymous No.6398632]

>>6398524
someone called g.m? isn't that a car company?
What are they popular for?

[Anonymous No.6398634]

>>6398593
>Aitards so mindbroken they are starting to shill CCP garbage
grim

[Anonymous No.6398638]

>>6398496
retards using ai has me doubting all their future work. I was looking at pascal blanche's twitter today and I see him posting tons of AI shit, then posting his own work and it just looks AI made too... (pretty sure it's not on close inspection).

[Anonymous No.6398639]

>>6398620
*artefacts!

[Anonymous No.6398640]

>>6398638
>pascal blanche
Checked him out, some of his shit is interesting. You should look up Roger Dean if you don't know him.

[Anonymous No.6398641]

>>6398639
a.i. is arty facts!

[Anonymous No.6398649]

>>6398496
What capitalism and the meme of efficiency does to a mf

[Anonymous No.6398653]

>>6398649
typed an anon while devouring his 6th big mac and washing it down with a monster energy drink.

[Anonymous No.6398656]

>>6398653
>t. american

[Anonymous No.6398662]

>>6398557
So the redraw involves not drawing the top of the bikini straps so it doesnt hang onto anything and ends under the chains like the AI too?

lol

It's not a redraw it's an edit

[Anonymous No.6398663]

>>6398653
>Eating food and drinking means you support capitalism you hypocrite

[Anonymous No.6398665]

> nother AI thread
Fuck off pajeet-kun!

[Anonymous No.6398666]

>>6398663
>fast food and soda
>food
pot kettle, etc

[Anonymous No.6398674]

>>6398666
I quite literally can't remember the last time I hate fast food. Not everywhere in the world is like the US.

[Anonymous No.6398675]

>>6398662
I agree with you, but it's pretty obvious the bikini is tied to the chains

[Anonymous No.6398678]

I want a GPU and 10 fingers for Christmas.

[Anonymous No.6398681]

>>6398678
I want a bunch of christmas elf waifus

[Anonymous No.6398695]

>>6398640
>Roger Dean
I know him, I bought The Ladder after playing Homeworld many moons ago.

[Anonymous No.6398707]

>>6398496
>renowned artist
>anime pinups
That's just some hairy dude who helps other hairy men cum, pretty fruity and whorish if you ask me

[Anonymous No.6398709]

>>6398681

[Anonymous No.6398723]

>>6398675
Anon you may need glasses, no its not. It straight up disappears under the chain. Doesnt coil around it or anything.
Even if it was tied to the chains, they would not behave that way with weight pulling at it. Get back to your fundies instead of wasting time in this thread, /beg/.

[Anonymous No.6398725]

>>6398496
>Why aren't you?
I asked for most efficient way to use ai atleast 8 on this board but instead information that could help me i got ignored because seething bitches like (You) would rather shitpost nonsense that actually discusses how to use it. Now i just draw my own shit wasted my with this garbage.

[Anonymous No.6398728]

>>6398709
Yeah but more though

[Anonymous No.6398732]

>>6398723
Relax anon, you need to let your imagination work a little bit. Concentrating on fundies so much will leave you a permabeg.

[Anonymous No.6398734]

>>6398732
pyw

[Anonymous No.6398738]

>>6398732
>AItard calling anyone a permabeg
lmao

[Anonymous No.6398743]

>>6398728

[Anonymous No.6398761]

>>6398734
>>6398738
All I'm saying is fundies can turn into a millstone around your neck, take it or leave it

[Anonymous No.6398766]

>>6398761
>learning to do stuff can be a disadvantage
The fact you don't get permabanned while spouting such retarded claims is a joke.

[Anonymous No.6398804]

>>6398766
It's not about learning to do stuff, it's about focus. Tunnel vision and target fixation are real but not easy to see.

[Anonymous No.6398818]

>every month ai takes leaps forwards
>every month the /ic/rab seething intensifies

[Anonymous No.6398824]

>>6398678
So glad AI is normalising strabismus.

[Anonymous No.6398825]

>>6398818
>months ago it barely managed to create a generic drawing and fails at anything else
>now it still barely manages to create a generic drawing, and still fails at anything else
yes, yes...2 more decades etc etc

[Anonymous No.6398832]

>>6398825
Thanks for proving my point about the seething lol

[Anonymous No.6398834]

INDIA SUPERPOWER BY 2020

[Anonymous No.6398836]

>>6398496
im not a hack, for one

[Anonymous No.6398839]

>>6398832
sure, hide from the truth if that makes you feel better. in the end, ai can only thrive on genericness by design and you know that. no amount of "no u!!" can save you from this simple fact.

[Anonymous No.6398855]

>>6398839
Still bent out of shape from the assblast? Please continue being in denial, it's very amusing

[Anonymous No.6398858]

>>6398834
SIRS

[Anonymous No.6398862]

SIR PLEASE DO THE NEEDFUL
REDEEM AI IN YOUR WORKFLOW
WHY DID YOU NOT REDEEM THE AI DID I NOT TELL YOU TO REDEEM THE AI
SIR SIR SIIIIIIIIIIIIR

[Anonymous No.6398867]

>>6398761
>AI

Like I said, you're wasting time in this thread instead of learning fundies, /beg/.

[Anonymous No.6398868]

>>6398496
Don’t care. Unless ai physically takes my drawing materials away from me or saps my abilities to draw, doesn’t affect me. Will continue drawing because I enjoy making my own shit.

[Anonymous No.6398869]

>>6398867
I've done what I can, the rest is up to you.

[Anonymous No.6398878]

>>6398496
Best artists that ever lived were before AI and even digital tools, and I have not seen a single AI-generated or assisted image that ranks among great art. Also, for anyone who can draw well, integrating AI would be like working with a handicap. It would slow you down. Any other questions?

[Anonymous No.6398887]

>>6398496
Because I'm not a hack. And definitely not a degenerate coomer.

>>6398501
Uh oh somebody's triggered

[Anonymous No.6398941]

>>6398496
Kek at all the seething analog artists in this thread. The truth is that consumers of art only care about getting their pretty pictures and you're all assblasted that AI is doing exactly that at 100x the rate brgs here can. Quality over quantity is a cope. Sure AI artwork is devalued to shit but if we're able to sell enough generated works then that compensates enough to turn a profit.

[Anonymous No.6398944]

I want to get good

[Anonymous No.6398946]

>>6398868
How will you make money then

[Anonymous No.6398950]

>>6398496
It's boring. I don't want to spend my time polishing an algorithm's turds.

[Anonymous No.6398952]

>>6398496
i'd rather be a hobbyist forever than be a robot's bitch...

[Anonymous No.6398961]

>>6398499
fpbp
>>6398501
soulless post

[Anonymous No.6399003]

>>6398496
>Well-renowned artists are adapting to using AI toolsets in their workflow.
Why aren't you?
Because art is not only meant as a performative tool but also as a method for self discovery and expression.
Whatever the "tools" are for production of coom and bland AAA garbage are meaningless in the personal practice of soulful art, meant for you first and the rest of the world second.
I know autistic npcs like you don't get what people mean for soul, the binary code in your brain doesn't understand human connection and insists that we're all meant to sit down, wageslave and consume, just like you, and that nobody will ever now care about the honest and simple human craft of handmade artistry, because nobody ever cared for yours.
I trust that there will be people out there that will care and enjoy what I do by myself, even if it takes me a bit longer to produce it, why don't you?

[Anonymous No.6399005]

>>6398858
>cyborg modi...
the west is DONE

[Anonymous No.6399035]

I used to think if I could magically generate any drawing I want that I'd be happy, but after drawing for years I realized that the joy comes from the act, not the final result. I don't want to press a button and have an image generated for me, how is that any different from just seeing someone elses art? Its fun and interesting, but its not drawing. That's like saying you made a game when you just played Skyrim and chose some dialogue options which lead to different scenes.

Don't the people using AI to make art feel this way? Don't they want to draw? I understand grifters are not interested in drawing so they are fine with lying to everyone, but don't you feel like shit when you obfuscate just how much work the image generation did?

[Anonymous No.6399044]

>>6399035
like playing guitar.

[Anonymous No.6399046]

I dont use AI shit but i think its funny that heavily rendered anime pin up artists are seemingly the most terrified about it

[Anonymous No.6399052]

>>6398496
Looks like it's generated from 方天戟/げっきー

[Anonymous No.6399059]

>>6398496
This is the smart thing to do. If you're already an established artist you're completely braindead if you don't take your best work, train an embedding on it, then use it to tune up your existing work with img2img or just it as a base with txt2img.

[Anonymous No.6399061]

>>6399059
pyw, only someone who doesn't draw would say something so retarded.

[Anonymous No.6399064]

>>6399046
yeah I feel bad for them
but really its not hard to dodge it, just do some figures in perspective, frame your pinups differently or put emphasis on hands and you'll be out of reach of the AI meme for another decade or two

[Anonymous No.6399065]

>>6399059
training an embedding is more expensive and time consuming than just actually taking the time to draw
call me when they make it cheap and accessible
>>6399035
AI sorted out those who see art as just "picture pretty and those who actually enjoy the process of creativity
i am at least thankful for that

[Anonymous No.6399066]

>>6399035
>Don't the people using AI to make art feel this way? Don't they want to draw?
Speaking for myself, no. When I make something using AI it feels like I made it and it satisfies my creative urges. I do draw and paint sometimes but it's so slow and painful(literally hurts my hands) that I don't have the urge to do it very often.

[Anonymous No.6399067]

>>6399061
>You have to draw to know the sensible thing to do
Stay in the dark ages luddite. You better be mixing your own colors from berries and natural pigments in the world. Art isn't art unless you do everything by hand. Using Photoshop? That's cheating. Photoshop has had AI assisted tools for like 10 years now.

[Anonymous No.6399068]

>>6398496
he couldnt be bothered to fix the right hand

[Anonymous No.6399069]

>>6399067
Point proved.
If you don't draw why are you on this board?

[Anonymous No.6399070]

>>6399065
What the fuck are you talking about? I train embeddings within a day on my computer. It's not expensive at all. Especially since the 3000 series GPU got discounted with the introduction of the 4000 series.

[Anonymous No.6399074]

>>6399069
To critique art.

[Anonymous No.6399075]

>>6399070
gpu cost big money
my monkey hands are in poverty

[Anonymous No.6399078]

>>6399075
Ook ook. Well for those of us in the first world, they're really not that expensive.

[Anonymous No.6399081]

>>6399078
you sound like the exact kind of poster on /g/ whos always mocking people for literally not buying the latest and greatest parts while their house is on fire so i will not trust your word

[Anonymous No.6399085]

>>6399081
A 3000 series GPU isn't the latest and greatest. And you can even train on a 2000 series card. You can buy a 3060 for like $350.

[Anonymous No.6399086]

>>6399081
nope that anon is right 3060 is cheep right now. most people tablets cost more than this and i know third outworlders have enough money to get tablets because i've seen a bunch of their degenerate art so they can easily afford a 3060 gpu.

[Anonymous No.6399088]

Prompting is boring

[Anonymous No.6399090]

>>6399066
that's understandable. as long as it brings you joy then I support it.

[Anonymous No.6399091]

>>6398496
Absolute fool's errant. Prompting is obviously easier to replace than the actual image generation, the people that "work with AI" will have it harder than the people that do everything themselves, because there will be nothing special about their work when the full AI flooding happens

[Anonymous No.6399093]

>>6398501
t. bugman

[Anonymous No.6399098]

>>6398557
>"he redrew an AI generated image 1:1 that could have well been just edited to change the size and proportions and added a few touches to change the values and a few splashes of color or could have well just added a filter and made some other very minor changes like the generic anime eyes, mouth and added lines and changed the size of the head-- it is completely different" >>6398581

Niggers really go defending this shit but parrot how AI is bad.

[Anonymous No.6399102]

>>6398868
based. fuck the bug "people" devoid of passion

[Anonymous No.6399111]

>>6399003
King. this is the only art worth making

[Anonymous No.6399117]

>>6399059
>>6399067
>>6399074
>Does not draw
>Let me tell you stablished artists what you should do to succeed
lmao

[Anonymous No.6399120]

>>6399117
>Established
Kek no.

[Anonymous No.6399129]

>>6398946
>how will you perform like a monkey for spare change on the street corner?
Art for money is even more soulless than using ai.

[Anonymous No.6399132]

>>6399066
You're just a consoomer with an insatiable lust for colorful toys and candies and all manner of goyslop. You'll even go so far as to say your "creative urges" have been fullfilled. Even though using text to image is just about as creative as using any search engine. Oh NO my $0Y addled fingies can't hold the pencil for over 5 minutes. WWWAAAAAAAAHHHH.

[Anonymous No.6399157]

>>6398496
>why aren't you
I'm not an artist, I'm some fag smearing shit on a tablet for an average of 1.7 (you)s on various drawthreads. I'd totally use AI if I was getting paid but why would I give a fuck when my "workflow" is just throwing random lines until it's done or 2AM, hoping it's enough to stay sane another day

[Anonymous No.6399165]

>>6399035
It's the ultimate NPC test
>>6399157
based

[Anonymous No.6399193]

>>6398557
>complete redraw
that belly button is the same pixels from the AI guaranteed

[Anonymous No.6399397]

>>6398496
Because I want to be able to actually draw. Duh. The whole point of this board

If I wanted to learn violin I ain't gunna put on CD.

[Anonymous No.6399405]

>>6399397
that artist CAN actually draw. That's the point, why are you fags so hell bent on being illiterate? Here's their art without any AI usage.
You can use AI as a TOOL, then you refine it using your SKILLS.

[Anonymous No.6399412]

>>6399405
Quit being an artist to work as a retoucher assistant while AI evolves more and won't need any retouch at all.

Yes, surely a great tool, too bad it's not used as a tool, but as an automation. 99% of every single AI art already has 0 human input in the final image.

[Anonymous No.6399416]

>>6399405
The AI art is as bland and their drawn art, and that is why other artists should use AI to create art.
The op asks a simple question, anons give a simple answer.

On how many layers of retardation are you?
Actually, post your work.
You do draw, right?

[Anonymous No.6399426]

>>6398681
lmao what in the goddamn

[Anonymous No.6399429]

>>6399035
it feels bad, honestly.

There is no dopamine rush in editing out ai generated art, It doesnt feel pleasurable to do.

As I said before, I draw because I enjoy doing it, seeing the character come alive with your strokes feels great, planning the lighting, the shading and getting it just the way you imagine it, it' s awesome, finetunning that facial expression so it gives the exact emotion you envision.

Unbelievable that AI fags want to get rid of these sensations just to get quick results instantly, sonthey need to generate thousands of the samee images to get the feeling we get from making a single sketch.

We should be the ones getting AI fags to draw, not the opposite, they are the ones missing out.

[Anonymous No.6399432]

>>6399429
I tried AI a lot, all of them, got some pretty nice results, but got bored because the lack of control and the feeling It's not mine, I'm just looking the AI do it's thing. I do understand a non-artist enjoying it, though.

[Anonymous No.6399443]

>>6399035
It just highlights how mentally ill techcels are. They're dopamine addicts looking for any distraction in diverting attention from their sad lives.

[Anonymous No.6399445]

>>6399432
I guess it's kind of an escapist fantasy for me, it may be autism.

When I draw a character, I can imagine its voice, its personality, the environment, its alive in my mind,

When its lewds, its almost as you could touch every inch of what you are drawing, point out the breathing, the expressions.

When its editing AI art, it feels like a corpse, its dead, not mine, there is nothing to viscerally experience, its not something my mind created autistically in painstaking detail imagining what that character is, how it acts, how it sounds, so alive that it needs to be translated into a drawing so other people can see it as well as I do.

Ai art feels dead.

[Anonymous No.6399447]

>>6399426
It's background characters anon, even the AI has no time for that.

[Anonymous No.6399450]

>>6399405
Yeah I want to be able to draw the full image myself. I want to be able to sit down with a pen and paper and actually be able to draw. I don't photobash and trace 3D models like the rest of the crutch addicted faggots on this board either.

[Anonymous No.6399459]

>>6399445
Is this an autism thing? I feel the exact same way. Drawing lewds is so intimate. I feel like I am caressing their whole body mentally. Especially when it's an original character of mine.

Working off AI just feels like photoshoping an image more than drawing. Just a few touch ups here and there and it looks good enough to please normies. Unfortunately it's so boring, even though it's easy as fuck and only takes a few minutes, it's not very fun to do.

[Anonymous No.6399466]

>>6398946
The techfags are promising UBI. We will adapt by forcing them to deliver.

[Anonymous No.6399469]

>>6399090
Do you support cp as long as people enjoy it?

[Anonymous No.6399474]

>>6399466
> UBI

> you will own nothing and you will be miserable
> you won't own even the fucking artwork you drew yourself
> meanwhile billionaires will need more sheckels, using the work you made of course
> here is your handout, now proceed to the bread line.

[Anonymous No.6399485]

>>6399474
Yes, AItards are subhuman.

[Anonymous No.6399487]

>>6398614
Actually there are a lot of inconsistencies or "artifacts" but I'm obviously not gona point them out to a technerd. If you can't figure out why and would rather tell me that I'm lying I understand that. To you this looks good but you're not a creative person. You don't have the trained eye to distinguish between mediocre and masterful work.

[Anonymous No.6399488]

>>6398496
Harshit, 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.6399490]

>>6399088
Pretty much, asking an AI to draw something for you, isn’t that the same as commissioning a robot?

[Anonymous No.6399494]

>>6398496
By drawing what I love and what the corpos/weak lanklet herbivore MC-kuns hate.

[Anonymous No.6399495]

>>6399088
>>6399490
It's about as fun as searching Google images.

[Anonymous No.6399498]

>>6399494
Based. Artists must become the ugly bastards to the techies' waifus.

[Anonymous No.6399500]

Sorry, best I can do is ambiguously tanned Beach Chad with no eyes for your NTR fantasies.

[Anonymous No.6399504]

>>6398728
It's disgusting that you can litteraly see different artists in the faces of these zombified reanimations. It's obvious why I won't use this. I respect my craft. I respect individual artists hard work. I'm not gona piss on them by utilizing this unethical algorithm made by a bunch of greedy, arrogant and shortsighted silicon valley nerds.

[Anonymous No.6399512]

>>6399459
Maybe it's exclusive of people without aphastasia or with very high spacial cognitive functions.

But yeah, I can imagine the drawings with visceral detail, touch, voices, expressions, something I was surprised to find out not everyone else does.

I wonder if there are book writers that are incapable of imagining the characters in their minds.

[Anonymous No.6399596]

>>6399504
Don't worry that's just your imagination

[Anonymous No.6399617]

>>6399494
Based

[Anonymous No.6399719]

>>6398496

[Anonymous No.6399772]

>>6399487
I'm not really an artfag but I can tell the head dress and her jewelry looks fucked up at a glance

[Anonymous No.6399779]

>>6399469
lol, well there should be no victim with AI generated cp so check mate

[Anonymous No.6399784]

>>6399405
The colored figure is still AI. The hair decorations are a dead giveaway, the artist just fixed up the hands and eyes

imagine being this much of a no draw to not see that

[Anonymous No.6399786]

>>6399779
>no victim
Not if there's real cp on the dataset.

[Anonymous No.6399787]

>>6399786
good thing there isn't any, right?

Right?

[Anonymous No.6399788]

>>6399784
>imagine being this much of a no draw to not see that
Congrats on being so much of a no draw to not realize it's been drawn before AI has surfaced and that art was drawn by hand from the scratch.

[Anonymous No.6399791]

serious question, I know AI is good at making a fully rendered mess, like super detailed portraits stealing shit from the internet and you only need to fix the hands and some weird details
but what about figure drawing? specifically, dynamic action poses? if I want an action pose of someone dancing and I want it in a very particular angle
how long till AI can do that?
because I never really gave a fuck about making art like pic related (not AI btw), I'm more into simple comic/manga style with characters moving and being expressive as fuck, in fact, I think I'm going to work on animation at some point...
is AI going to kill my passion too? should I spend my time studying poses and dynamic figure drawing or should I just move to 3D animation? I still feel young and I think I can change my path before it's too late
I just want to tell stories I don't care about super-realistic art

[Anonymous No.6399793]

>>6399788
I, too, can just lie and say things on the internet

[Anonymous No.6399796]

>>6398557
>using AI toolsets in their workflow.
can u read niggerbrain?

[Anonymous No.6399798]

>>6399791
>how long till AI can do that?
Maybe never. It'd need to actually understand space, perspective etc. to do that and that'd require it to function entirely differently- as an actual AI and not a meme machine learning photocopier.

[Anonymous No.6399803]

>>6399798
Good to know, because perspective is one of my favorite things to learn and explore (I'm studying topography)
and 3d software makes it so much easier now, but I still want to draw characters to inhabit those worlds I'm creating

[Anonymous No.6399807]

>>6399791
AI can turn a gesture sketch into a body, or a stick figure into a body. So there's that. I don't think they can do perspective stuff though like someone's hand close to the camera

[Anonymous No.6399826]

>>6398581
yeah, it's almost the same except with shittier colors, looks like she got a sunburn

[Anonymous No.6399838]

>>6399066
>I make something
>ai
> creative urges
I actually feel bad for you. Even autistic people can draw and for someone like you to not be able to express it without pressing a button is too sad. Even tracers have more creativity than you…

[Anonymous No.6399857]

>>6399596
Oh it's certainly not. Without artists this algorithm wouldn't be able to stylize anything. That's a fact.

[Anonymous No.6399870]

Go on Facebook and look at the hoards of nomies who handed over their photos and credit card info to make AI art with Lensa. Your "adapting" ai into your art makes it as worthless as a normie Facebook app. The good news is that if artists are done for, so are the AI fags who hope to get rich from prompting.

[Anonymous No.6399890]

>>6399870
Turd world shitters will still scam dumbasses by using ai on fiverr.

[Anonymous No.6399893]

>>6399870
>AI fags who hope to get rich from promoting
that's the funniest part
the anti-artist narrative is hilarious because AI fags are not making money with this
nobody is going to need an AI "artist" in the future, why would you pay some random faggot to push a button when you can do it yourself
not only that, AI is going to work without human intervention in the future making you completely useless
AI artists are beyond fucked, there's no money there

[Anonymous No.6399907]

>>6399893
It's even more amusing when you consider how many times the people shilling for this are reduced to gloating about artists having to "get real jobs" and not being able to earn commission money; they are only thinking of imagery as a vessel to make money, they literally cannot comprehend why artists would be irritated by this for reasons beyond a potential loss of income.

[Anonymous No.6399910]

>>6399890
Yes, but only the turd world who shit in the streets anyway. Smug english speaking prompters will be stuck spamming the same hundreds of images with two likes.

>>6399893
AI can entertain normies with goldfish attention span, but AI shitters will never be artists

[Anonymous No.6399911]

>>6399893
I always said that, they feel so happy to see artists being fucked that they can’t see this technology is the worst, it will discard everyone eventually.

[Anonymous No.6399925]

>>6398496
Because nobody has made an AI that makes ugly flat cartoons and I want to make ugly flat cartoons because I hate beauty and I hate Anime and perspective i just want to make cartoons out of spite but nobody is willing to make an AI that could make cartoons becasue it makes them weebs to vomit.

[Anonymous No.6399973]

>>6399447
>Whole argument is about AI being a tool to speed up process ( >>6398520 )
>Still finds excuses to not fix the horrible shit it produces

>That's the point you inbred moron - you use AI as a TOOL. You're supposed to fix the minor issues yourself.
>you use AI as a TOOL. You're supposed to fix the minor issues yourself.
>You're supposed to fix the minor issues yourself.
>It's background characters anon, even the AI has no time for that.
>fix the minor issues yourself.
>It's background characters
>fix the minor issues
>even the AI has no time for that
>a tool to speed up process
>fix the minor issues
>no time for that

[Anonymous No.6400197]

>>6399838
Don't feel too bad, I'm enjoying myself

[Anonymous No.6400198]

>>6398524
>Another bugperson purely inspired by seasonal anime and gacha games
Oh actually anon I do know this artist. I've seen thousands upon thousands of them. I even like anime but I'm so sick of this generic stuff

[Anonymous No.6400216]

>>6399973
Don't bother anon, those retards are too jaded, with their too far up their ass to listen to reason.

[Anonymous No.6400222]

Did jannies actually only delete anti AI posts...

[Anonymous No.6400224]

>>6400222
They didn't delete any posts aside from the wojak, what are you on about, schizo

[Anonymous No.6400232]

>>6400224
this entire meme bait thread should have been deleted...

[Anonymous No.6400310]

>>6398496
>pic
>well-renowned artist
I hope this literal who isn’t a well-renowned artist, because this touch-up is lazy as shit. The “artist” couldn’t be fucked to fix the chains, the hands are still bad enough to have been drawn by the AI, and arms look bad(especially screen left).
Everything else looks good I guess, the colors and rendering are the best part after the edit, but if the BG panels are any indication, that fully rendered character could’ve been drawn better if it was actually drawn, not generated. And if it was actually drawn it wouldn’t be riddled with so many lazy mistakes.
>>6398581
Lmfao, devastatingly lazy, no wonder it still looks bad, all they did was resize the head and draw the eyes/bangs.
>>6398614
>Also, AI can already generate literally anything with no artefacts
>pic is what AIcels settle for
Look into her eyes and tell her that kek
>>6398634
Can you explain what >>6398593 means?
>>6398941
Top to bottom wrong, consumers care PRIMARILY who created the art and what they were/are about. No one wants to buy from an asshole.
Production art for video games for example is a different story, the concept art scene was all about max efficiency for years because those images aren’t the final product. If AI art was the final product of anything it would be steaming hot diarrhea.
AIcels like AI art only because it was created by AI; they like the novelty and the taste of power to create things, meanwhile with the simplest tools of pencil and paper they are useless. They are consumers only, not artists themselves. AI slop is not more beautiful or unique compared to real artwork. You just like it because you think it empowers you to stand toe to toe with people who’ve actually devoted the time to create beautiful things from their mind’s eye.
And, you’re not selling anything. No one is buying the slop you’re selling. God hasn’t blessed you with the visions, and that’s okay. Make your money some honest way instead.

[Anonymous No.6400318]

>>6399870
I still find indescribable joy from drawing my shit myself.

It feels good when you translate something from your mind to the canvas in the exact same way you imagine it, something you can only do with years of practice.

AI fags will never feel that joy of seeing something you imagine come alive the exact same way you imagine it, they can only make dead collages from the imagination of other artists.

[Anonymous No.6400321]

>>6400318
I feel indescribable joy from making you seethe and cope.

[Anonymous No.6400336]

>This tool that speeds up concepting is LE BAD because...
>because... IT HURTS MY FEELINGS OK!?!?!?!

[Anonymous No.6400341]

>>6400336
it doesn't speed up concepting because it doesn't concept. the output isn't really a concept but a vague something, that's why it's useless in this regard. that's what you people don't get.
the appeal is just that it's easy to use and people use it for fun as a toy.

[Anonymous No.6400345]

>>6400341
It is a great way to stimulate your imagination and get a feel for certain looks. Saying that is has no use in concepting is pure delusion.

[Anonymous No.6400352]

>>6400345
anon, let's just say you're trolling and keep it that way...

[Anonymous No.6400353]

>>6400341
large language models seemingly do actually understand concepts, that's what's so cool about them.

[Anonymous No.6400357]

>>6400352
Not an argument. The piece in the OP was also made 20x quicker using AI. Artists who choose to use modern tools will just surpass the luddites, simple as really.

[Anonymous No.6400371]

>>6400357
well, you posted a nonsense picture with no concept in response, what else am i supposed to say? this is what is the most frustrating, that you just straight up don't comprehend how and why the image is useless to any concept artist.
making something quicker doesn't make it better or even usable. throwing some flour on top of sugar is many times faster than baking a cake, but doesn't make it a cake, or even a better one.
there's no point in polishing a turd ai made, unless what you create aims to be equally bland and useless. but most creators don't aim to create bland things like op pic , so it's useless to them...

[Anonymous No.6400380]

>>6400216
Hahaha. As if you're the reasonable here.

This is me btw
>>6399504

Aside from what I wrote there I would like to add that most of us fell in love with the process of creation/ the craft.

We're not being unreasonable; you just don't understand us. It's like we're different fucking species at this point.

[Anonymous No.6400385]

>>6400345
How underage are you? Random character generators have been a thing for decades now but nobody over 18 ever tried to pass off the output of a randomizer as their own art without redrawing it first

[Anonymous No.6400390]

>>6400385
>but nobody over 18 ever tried to pass off the output of a randomizer as their own art without redrawing it first
Can you read? Nobody talked about this.

[Anonymous No.6400399]

>needing AI to create the most generic standing big boob anime woman picture ever

[Anonymous No.6400414]

>giving up your thoughts to this machine and letting it literally picture things for you will totally stimulate your imagination

[Anonymous No.6400421]

>>6400385
Wether it was made using a character creator or generative AI, it is the creation of the person using the tool. It's just that generative AI has now reached a point of quality and fidelity that is so high it blurs the lines between hand-crafted and automated. It'll only get worse(better) in the future.

[Anonymous No.6400441]

[Anonymous No.6400453]

>>6400390
>Nobody talked about this
OP posted a traced AI image

[Anonymous No.6400948]

>>6399791
Depends on how dynamic you mean, but AI is able already to do more then just simple standing from various angles type of stuff.

[Anonymous No.6400951]

>>6400345
Question for you. Why do you even need concepts to stimulate your imagination? Like, what are you gonna do with that? Draw worse less skilled version of it? Use it for book/3D model/game, all of which will be automated soon by the same AI? For personal use? Then why waste that time on drawing the final product for the concept when you can get the AI to do it. You see the problem here?

[Anonymous No.6401017]

>>6400232
This.

[Anonymous No.6401036]

>>6400345
So this is the newest aphantasiac cope...

[Anonymous No.6401062]

While I don't believe in using Ai as a replacement for actual art.
I do think it's a nice tool for generating references or design ideas.

[Anonymous No.6401066]

>>6401062
Is it though? You think highly of it. Have you actually gone on to incorporate it in your workflow or is this hypothetical? Pyw if you have actually gone through that process.

[Anonymous No.6401071]

>>6401066
It's mostly hypothetical because I'm a lazy bastard so I haven't actually put it into practice yet.
But I still think its a good idea.

[Anonymous No.6401080]

>>6401071
It also doesn't help that when I do draw I keep forgetting to actually USE references, because I'm a retard.

[Anonymous No.6401084]

>>6400345
I love how the only thing ai can do halfway right are tits and faces but fails everything else.

[Anonymous No.6401099]

>>6398520
>minor
You've obviously never actually sat down and tried to fix a whole AI image. Once you start drawing over it, you'll see just how many horrible glaring flaws there are. The more you look at any ai image, the more you see artifacts
probably fine to just do small touchups on worthless coomer shit like this that no one looks at for more than 3 seconds while spanking their monkey, but for actual art it takes just as long if not longer to redo an AI generated image than it would to draw it from scratch.

[Anonymous No.6401118]

>>6400357
Surpass how? I still experience joy from manually drawing every part of my art. Tell me how I am being surpassed by lazy software faggots exactly?

You make it sound like competing with other artists and ai prompters for scraps is or ever has been a worthwhile endeavor. What makes you think it’s anything but a retarded idea to try and make a living from something as non-essential and saturated a field as art is?

Art is only worth doing for self-fulfillment and enjoyment. If you’re so caught up in making money with art that you’ll adopt technology that essentially erases the artist’s purpose entirely, why not just go get a real job already? You’ll make a better paycheck and you won’t have to bend over backwards to compete with an already saturated market. Are you retarded or something?

[Anonymous No.6401133]

>>6398496
Can AI art have its own containment board already... shit is so annoying.

or real art can have its own containmenet board idc

[Anonymous No.6401135]

>>6401118
If you have a back and forth long enough with AIjeets, the conversation typically devolves into them talking about income, whether if it is how artists will get fewer commissions, will have to get real jobs, or how only those progressive enough to use image generators will be able to profit from art in the future. They can't imagine art, both the creation of it end product, as something more than a means to make money and something to be consumed for instant gratification and then immediately forgotten. It's like mocking a filmmaker for continuing to produce lower budget, vision-focused indie films, saying he should just hook up with big production houses to help shit out Meet the Fockers 2 or Iron Man 4 because that's the easiest and fastest way to make big money, quality or artistic integrity be damned.

[Anonymous No.6401140]

>>6398496
I am, but I hide the fact because
>muh soul
>fake artist
>stealing art
>not real art
>unfollowed

[Anonymous No.6401143]

>>6401135
right, its usually complete amateurs who gave up on the second page of the Loomis book, who only wanted to become an "artist" to draw shitty porn for Twitter followers.

[Anonymous No.6401163]

>>6400357
Nah, maybe in commercial art speeding up has a use, but if you are just random poster of pictures on the internet with fans then speed does not give you any competitive advantage, unless we are talking about extremes where the person takes months to post single pic.
Most arthoes can produce 1 pic per day, which is enough to get most algorithms in your favor, posting more of the same quality does nothing, if anything it makes it worse since it gives your fans the idea that you are cheating in some way.

[Anonymous No.6401169]

>>6401135
AIfags always go back to the income argument because they think that income is the only thing that is threatening artists and all that the anti-AI artists care about. After all, is AI stealing your pencil and forbidding you from drawing? They dont understand that just getting internet points and people sharing your artwork is so much more rewarding.
>Muh attention whore
No shit nigger, when I make something that I love I want as many people to appreciate it as possible. I can just get some other job to get income and get my life fulfillment from drawing in free time, but at the same time I want it to be meaningful and for people to appreciate it and see it, to have some change.

[Anonymous No.6401172]

>>6401163
Pumping out pictures too fast unironically cheapens your work, both in the sense that your quality or at least consistency is likely to suffer, and in the sense that fans will get overexposed and burnt out on your style. Just look at what AI has already done to the highly rendered, late 2000s hentai VN style.

[Anonymous No.6401178]

>>6401169
A healthy desire for acknowledgement and validation of one's efforts is a fundamental aspect of being a human. It's why one of the first things a child does when he learns to make a mark on a piece paper is to scribble something that's supposed to represent something or someone and show the result to a parent.

[Anonymous No.6401356]

>>6398496
this shit is just automated plagiarism, instead of stealing 500$ from one artist it steals 1$ from 500 hundred artists and this "process" hides it.

[Anonymous No.6401365]

>>6401178
>NOOOO, You are a fucking attentionwhore. You deserve all of this negative shit happening to you. If you dont want your stuff to be stolen and then used for AI, then just dont upload it on the internet so nobody can see it. That is the only rational thing to do.

[Anonymous No.6401366]

>>6398496
Because I don't want my personal style to be flattened? Art is about self-expression and personality, not just looking good.

[Anonymous No.6401377]

>>6401356
I don't like AI art but why do artist keep spreading this retarded augment. There isn't a single bitmap pixel in any of the AI weights whatsoever. It wouldn't be Machine learning if it was.

[Anonymous No.6401387]

>>6401377
>There isn't a single bitmap pixel in any of the AI weights whatsoever.

You are absolutely right, but so is the anon that you quoted.

AI does not store any bitmap information, but can perfectly memorize complex patterns of pixel locations and their respective distances in correlation to different tags. Being a machine, it is incredibly effective in doing so, to the point it could perfectly reproduce certain parts of an artwork in certain conditions.

It also does not learn like humans, it's a stupid myth to make AI sould super advanced, it doesn't reason or understands complex concepts, for now, it's just advanced math and pattern following.

[Anonymous No.6401395]

>>6401377
All AI faggots say this yet they won't try their greasy hands on the music industry. Why are they so afraid of litigation from record companies? I'm not a techcel so I don't understand those terms, but I recognize a double standard when I see one.

[Anonymous No.6401399]

>>6401377
The goal of stable diffusion and the like is literally to reproduce the training data. It's just a sophisticated xerox machine. And you don't even need to know how exactly it works to realize it, since the AI wouldn't wouldn't be able to do anime at all if it weren't for all the art it was fed. It's still stealing even if it's not literally copy-pasting data as is.

[Anonymous No.6401404]

>>6401395
Also, musicians aren’t retarded cucks that don’t care to be fucked.

Most artists aren’t doing anything, some are even trying to play the “avant-garde” trope, saying it’s just a tool and you shouldn’t fear it.

That retarded cuck, Samdoesart, someone made a fucking model off his artwork and he just posted a small and almost timid complaint, like:”Hey, p..please, c…could you not use artwork for that?”

Only recently, after some ridiculous moves from corps like DA and Celsys, artists actually raised their voice a little… and what happened? Yeah, things could be different if artists joined forces.

[Anonymous No.6401407]

>>6401377
>There isn't a single bitmap pixel
it's not about pixels. tell all your friends.

[Anonymous No.6401413]

>>6401407
OHNONONO. WHAT DO WE DO PAJEETBROS?

[Anonymous No.6401414]

>>6401404
…And? Musicians are backed by record labels. What are artists backed by? You need money, status or connections to money or status to wield power. Most artists are lucky just to make a few bucks off of a commission.

Samdoesart is just a lowly social media influencer, not a stacked record company with money to burn on litigation. What you expect is unreasonable in the context of reality.

[Anonymous No.6401425]

>>6401404
Thanks for saying that. Artists will just wake up when it's already too late.

Believe it or not, I know many artists that barely know about AI and the ones that know, only make fun of the hands and foot problems, simply ignoring how the rest looks good.

[Anonymous No.6401426]

>>6398496
So what you're saying is. There's nothing stoping me from finding someone's AI generated art, tracing over the composition, adding the nessearry adjustments, then claiming it as my own? Because Ai is not real art, it's free to take from Ai "artist", right? They're taking work from others so it's fine to take back from them, right? Okay? Okay.

[Anonymous No.6401429]

>>6401404
It's weird to see these people celebrating the idea of online commission artists not making chump change off commission work, like they're sticking it to some wealthy, overpaid donothings. The vast majority of lowly commission artists aren't even making a living wage. If you want to fuck over somebody who makes shit tons of money for entertainment, look at the musicians with record labels, film actors, sports stars, etc.
I can only imagine it's late zoomers and thirdworlders who think making $500 a month is some huge salary, and/or who worship musicians and athletes and the like as hardworkers unlike those artists with their God-given talents

[Anonymous No.6401430]

>>6401426
Yes. AI holds no copyright. And AI isn't real art either. But you can make it real art if you use your artist skills.

[Anonymous No.6401431]

If you obey all the rules, you will miss all the fun.

[Anonymous No.6401438]

>>6401431
My father used to say that. I haven't visited him in jail in a long while... maybe for christmas...

[Anonymous No.6401439]

>>6401414
>>6401395
It has nothing to do with fear of the music industry

Music is more complicated for copyright for a number of reasons. You have royalties on the actual melody (the sound itself) and you have royalties on the likeness of a song (i.e who wrote it). This gets complicated especially if you have disagreements within the band itself.
Music AI can easily break this,
Also lol at the notion that musicians don't take shit., talents routinely gets fucked by the labels who often take up to an 80% cut the excuse being they take on most of the (((risk))). Mind we are talking fractions of a cent being taken within all these stakeholders in a record.
Its a big reason why now most artists make most of their big income from live performances and also why there's huge controversy with other parasites like (((ticketmaster))) trying to get a cut.

Comparing the two is nothing alike. Artfags(of the schizo /ic/ type) cope.

[Anonymous No.6401442]

>>6401439
How does that musician cock taste, buddy?

[Anonymous No.6401443]

>>6401439
>ITS NOT THE SAME BECAUSE ... IT JUST IS OKAY?
like clockwork.

[Anonymous No.6401447]

>>6401430
Thanks. Honestly, fuck trying. This will be my new future.

[Anonymous No.6401449]

>>6401443
stay mad no amount of bitching here or in court will change that fact. You cannot copyright styles or ideas just as you have case if someone can reproduce your style by hand.

The prompting will continue until moral improves.

[Anonymous No.6401452]

>>6401377
Do you know how lossy compression works?

image data doesn't need to be stored into pixels at all, actually the worst and most ineffective way of storing image data are pixelmaps.

[Anonymous No.6401453]

>>6401439
>music, like coding, is so braindead simple that it makes it very easy to show copyright violation
Codemonkies and musicians, I kneel

[Anonymous No.6401455]

>>6401449
>cannot copyright ideas
lmao in what fucking world do you live in?
>the prompting will continue
you are already obsolete.

[Anonymous No.6401458]

>>6401452
AI weights are not a form of compression, if that was the case the weights would be terabytes if not exabytes in size. You would also be able to "extract" lossy images from the initial training database if you could.
>>6401453
I say its more of a fault in the royalties law for music then any technical issue.

[Anonymous No.6401459]

>>6401439
tldr:

We can steal art easily, while music would be a pain.


Just cope obsolet artists, you all should die because you're the ones making this world shit.

[Anonymous No.6401463]

>>6401455
>>cannot copyright ideas
>lmao in what fucking world do you live in?
I know right? A world where you cannot copyright/patent ideas, styles or methods. It's almost like a world where copyright law was written that way. Oh wait!

[Anonymous No.6401465]

>>6401463
you can patent ideas though however...

[Anonymous No.6401467]

>>6401429
>those artists with their God-given talents
>those artists with their God-given talents
>those artists with their God-given talents
>those artists with their God-given talents
>those artists with their God-given talents
Anon, we worship real artists. The one who paint on canvas, sculpt figures or doing anything that produce 'physical' artwork. Maybe try doing some 'physical' artworks which AI isn't creeping...yet.

[Anonymous No.6401471]

>>6401449
Sir, the main thing you can copyright are ideas, thats the whole point of copyright. It copyrights the ideas of inventions and the artistic ideas. You cant copyright the idea of 2D anthropomorphic mouse, but you can copyright the more specific idea of black 2D anthropomorphic mouse with red shorts, gloves and drawn in the specific style of Disney.
Fanart actually fall under copyright violation, and it is partially illegal to make money off of it. If you decide to sell fanart, then the character owner can demand financial compensation or a cut from your profit, it just rarely happens because fanart on its own does little to no damage, AI does damage on the other hand.

[Anonymous No.6401476]

sigh, man i liked /ic/ I fuckin hate pajeets

[Anonymous No.6401478]

>>6398496
I think it would be most optimal if the artist could draw the pose and then have the AI make a basic model from some key words over the pose constraints and then the artist add their own details and then the AI does a detail polish and the artist can fix that polish if they need to.
It seems like more work, but the AI will naturally have error due to having no creativity and therefore the end art will be reduced, this kind of process would still preserve a lot of artistry and ultimately make better art.

[Anonymous No.6401509]

>>6401478
You can sorta do that with masking/outpainting.
i.e you start with base image (ai or human maid) and mask over the parts you want to change or fix based on the prompt you set.

[Anonymous No.6401577]

>>6401467
Digital artists are artists too. Your opinion is just that; an opinion. And coming from a technerd it doesn't hold much credibility anyways.
Source: decades of working in paint, drawing, sculpting in both clay and blender and digital drawing.
I arrived at this conclusion a long time ago when I realized that in order to produce high quality paintings in photoshop you'll need the same fundamentals. It's just a different medium. Yes there are "cheats" like control-z and whatnot but if you're shit your end result is gona be shit anyway. You can still apreciate and recognise the skill level of an artist through a digital work. If you say you can't then you're either being disingenuine or inexperienced.

[Anonymous No.6401586]

>>6401476
They are like parasites. I come here less and less. I feel like it's almost a liberation.
I take consolation in knowing that they'll just regurgitate their same biased/ false talkingpoints to less and less of us. Getting nowhere all the while knowing that they're full of shit and that most people disagree with them. As we find meaning in other things and other places.
They didn't win shit. They're still the same mediocre losers that they always were bickering and fighting for the continuation of these corporate companies usery of creative people.
A bunch of disgusting vultures.

[Anonymous No.6401596]

>>6401395
twitter.com/Yamkaz/status/1599187736824807424

[Anonymous No.6401597]

>>6401172
When prompters brag about how fast they make their "art" they're really just bragging about how little value it has

[Anonymous No.6401598]

>>6401596
sooo how long until musicians go into panic mode?

[Anonymous No.6401603]

>>6400948
Only because it copied someone else's shit. It can't make up those poses on its own, retard.

[Anonymous No.6401628]

>>6401598
more like the labels or publishers, musicians get fucked either way. Its the live concerts that matter for them.

[Anonymous No.6401732]

>>6398496
>because it teaches you to make shit anatomy with shit proportions like your pic
>because it's glorified tracing
>because you're copy pasting a plagiarized picture which would make me feel like shit and like it isn't mine
>because there would be no "me" in it, and devolve me into a dipshit who cannot draw from his imagination, only copy other pictures
>because it looks like fucking garbage
any other questions?

[mailto:sage No.6401767]

>>6398496
>FOTM chasers with no imagination use SOVL-siphoners to shit out even worse slop than before
Next you’re going to tell me the AI thread spam is a result of your perma/beg/ ass getting BTFO by artCHADS

[Anonymous No.6401783]

>>6401172
Prompters aren't limited to just one style. They can use any style known to man, just so long as they have some idea what to type into the magic box.

[Anonymous No.6401835]

>>6401783
All styles will be worthless soon. Even performance art will one day be proompted video holograms.

[Anonymous No.6401842]

>>6401783
Then why do people insist on continuing to "train" models on specific artists' works, if they're already capable of generating any style known to man? Why must they feast on artists' old droppings in order to generate something which comes anywhere close to approximating a specific, consistent style?

[Anonymous No.6401853]

>>6401842
>Then why do people insist on continuing to "train" models on specific artists' works, if they're already capable of generating any style known to man?
Because doing so grants them additional flexibility within said style, and the ability to more consistently narrow their results to things resembling that artist's works, even beginning to blend that artist's style with any other in human history.
>Why must they feast on artists' old droppings in order to generate something which comes anywhere close to approximating a specific, consistent style?
Because that's how the tech works. The AI isn't a human, so it can't infer as well as a human could. Instead, it makes a bunch of guesses until it hits something acceptable, then uses the new information from us calling one of the outputs desirable, and feeds it back in until it makes what we want.