IT'S OVER

[Anonymous No.6669689]

Photoshop now includes AI image generation tools.
Ludditebros, we lost.

[Anonymous No.6669695]

>>6669689
I was saying back in September that the luddites would be forced to stop whining when it was built into photoshop. I hope they enjoy their cucked generative AI kek.

[Anonymous No.6669702]

>>6669689
kek. that was even faster than expected

[Anonymous No.6669704]

but to be honest, that adobe firefly thing is very crappy compared to midjourney

[Anonymous No.6669709]

>>6669704
MJ is purely generative AI if I'm not mistaken. PS is a full suite, it can do way more for your creativity when you have all the traditional digital stuff right there, built to work with it.

You can also use them together. Gen something in Midjourney then edit it in PS using its generative AI tools as supplemental stuff.

[Anonymous No.6669710]

>>6669704
Makes you wonder what kind of training data is scraped for stable and midjourney to output something on the level of actual artists

[Anonymous No.6669712]

Yay! I love bloated crap in my software!

[Anonymous No.6669718]

>>6669712
it's literally the most useful tool they've added to photoshop since the invention of layers

[Anonymous No.6669720]

ngl as an environment/background nerd I'm kind of pumped to see how people learn from this.

It would be interesting to see people want to learn how to do environments more because they see how much better their stuff looks when its not against a white void.

Of course the realist in me knows I'm basically dead in the water because its reduced my pursuits to a generative fill tool.

But that's okay because art is fun.

[Anonymous No.6669722]

adobe also tracks your brush strokes to train their ai btw
cucked software for cucked "people"

[Anonymous No.6669726]

>>6669689
I could have used this yesterday. quick photo restoration job, took 10 minutes, but this would have do it in 10 seconds.

[Anonymous No.6669727]

>>6669722
I know a ton of people will get in this, new and old artists, but I do feel like they'll lose a lot of users just because it's shady as fuck that Adobe will be training AIs on your work, which obviously devalues your work. And eventually people will ask why would they would use this cucked software when they can just generate entire images of whatever they want.

[Anonymous No.6669736]

>>6669727
you're wildly overestimating twitter naggers.
back when PS became subscription based, everybody was saying they would lost all their user base, and there were plausible reasons. you know how that ended up

[Anonymous No.6669737]

>>6669689
I draw with a pencil on paper and have no use for AI, but I used Photoshop/Adobe Suite for years as a print ad designer. This would have been very handy for all those times real estate agents asked us to bring dead trees to life, remove power lines, etc.

[Anonymous No.6669740]

Jeez, to think all those gadgets and software from 90s/early 2000s y2k media that seemed silly and impossible from a technical and engineering standpoint would eventually become reality.

[Anonymous No.6669748]

>>6669710
Stable and Midjourney were trained on gigabytes of various visual data from all over the web. They're black boxes that require the user to experiment with codewords to receive random results from a chaotic mess. LORAs are more specialized but it's precisely that they're specialized that their results often end up looking like a counterfeit of whatever they were trained on.

tbf I stand by my position that AI would be pretty cool if you had more control over it, and of course if there were foolproofs for segregating AI images from 'normal' images since this tech is photoshop on steroids.

[Anonymous No.6669752]

>>6669740
I would have coomed to death if I had this technology in my early teens. Or rather my parents would have had to murder me, I would have been too pitiful to exist.

[Anonymous No.6669758]

>>6669748
You have plenty of control over it, it's an iterative process getting what you want. Like for example say you generate 1000 images, 1 will be exactly what you wanted and you can just delete the others(or not, they're probably cool too). Also gigabytes? Come on now. The model is a few gigabytes but they trained on billions of images.

[Anonymous No.6669759]

It's already over, Raul

AI has no copyright
No monetized platform
And no fair use

Having AI integration for painting tools doesn't mean anything at all for your kind.

We on the other hand, may find use for it as we can modify generated images and make them copyrigtable

Get over the denial stage already

[Anonymous No.6669763]

>>6669759
>AI has no copyright
>No monetized platform
>And no fair use
All of these ideas are completely wrong and Adobe is here to make money on that fact.

[Anonymous No.6669767]

>>6669763
AI system =! AI generated images

This is useless for you

[Anonymous No.6669769]

welp, this shit sucks. let me use my GPU adobe! over a minute and no progress.

[Anonymous No.6669770]

>>6669767
They are the same thing.

[Anonymous No.6669771]

>>6669770
Yeah, right
Have fun getting banned. Again

[Anonymous No.6669774]

>>6669758
The gacha effect is what gives this tech a sour taste. You're essentially spitting out tons of pretty junk data which is serviceable for NPCs with aphantasia but useless if you have a concrete idea that you want to execute. Plus the danger that it dilutes the art pool with automated junk leaving true manual creatives little room to breathe.

[Anonymous No.6669777]

>>6669771
What? And they are. The idea of generative AI is text and image to image or inpainting and SD does this just like Adobe is going to, the only notable difference is that the former will have censorship.

>>6669774
I don't understand why. Any artist creates tons of junk data until they get to the good stuff.
>Plus the danger that it dilutes the art pool with automated junk leaving true manual creatives little room to breathe.
This is just a perspective, you can argue that there is more good art than ever and that there are more creative people making more creative things because they aren't nearly as limited as they were prior. Even looking at professional artists, they usually just work constrained in their own style. But now any one can create art in any style.

[Anonymous No.6669779]

>>6669777
Pick up a pencil and draw, Akmed.

You're just wasting time deluding yourself that this would give you a shortcut to anywhere

[Anonymous No.6669782]

ok it's working now. I'm no ai artist. what do I do? I'm afraid I'll get seen typing bazongas.

[Anonymous No.6669787]

>>6669777
>But now any one can create art in any style
What a Wonderful future, where all artists are simply reduced to "training data," where illiterate, unskilled normalfags just find real artists, use their work to make a new picture shitter, and gloat that they've become a master of a new style.

[Anonymous No.6669788]

>>6669777
The junk data of artists usually doesn't leave their heads and their scrapped notebooks. Any manual work of art however kitschy it might be had more thought (technical, creative) put into it by the artist than hundreds of images generated from a prompt - which are just that, automation.

>This is just a perspective
We've seen the spam on pixiv, DA and others. AI spam is an obnoxious thing.
Effort to make art has been a decent filter all these years and centuries because really, not every idea deserves to be heard.

[Anonymous No.6669789]

>>6669777
I'm not sure that comparison is the same, if you're learning to draw and getting better and better you'll eventually be able to draw what you wanted from the get go and be able to output it without the "junk data." The Ai models are just a gacha roll in the sense that it'll always be a random generation with you guiding it. It can take you a thousand generations or one to get that one you need, it's not consistent in that sense.

>But now any one can create art in any style.

In any style that's mixed within the latent space of overlap of artist's images in the past as training data? I don't really see how that will create anything moving forward, not to mention all the AI art I've seen so far is just an amalgamation of the styles that have been present that give it that off AI look. If anything I truly worry about the evolution and growth of artist's in different styles going forward in the face of generative AI

[Anonymous No.6669790]

it's over...

[Anonymous No.6669795]

>>6669779
Why when I have a shortcut?

>>6669787
>where illiterate, unskilled normalfags just find real artists, use their work to make a new picture shitter, and gloat that they've become a master of a new style.
The entire history of art right here.

[Anonymous No.6669796]

>>6669795
What a nihilistic worldview.

[Anonymous No.6669809]

>>6669788
>The junk data of artists usually doesn't leave their heads and their scrapped notebooks.
The junk data of a promper usually doesn't leave their PC and recycle bin.
>Any manual work of art however kitschy it might be had more thought (technical, creative) put into it by the artist than hundreds of images generated from a prompt - which are just that, automation.
Nonsense.
>We've seen the spam on pixiv, DA and others. AI spam is an obnoxious thing.
You can say traditional spam is an obnoxous thing too, being close to objectively lower quality too.
>Effort to make art has been a decent filter all these years and centuries because really, not every idea deserves to be heard.
Yeah, future generations will laugh at cunts like you.

>>6669789
> and better you'll eventually be able to draw what you wanted
This is a pipe dream for most and prompting is exactly the same. You swim through latent space until you find stable prompts that mostly just work. It is not nearly as random as you think it is. The thousand generations analogy can refer to 1000 different prompts trying to get a new style you like, or whatever. Not just 1 single image.

>In any style that's mixed within the latent space of overlap of artist's images in the past as training data? I don't really see how that will create anything moving forward, not to mention all the AI art I've seen so far is just an amalgamation of the styles that have been present that give it that off AI look. If anything I truly worry about the evolution and growth of artist's in different styles going forward in the face of generative AI
What happens when you mix orange with blue? A western cartoon style with an eastern anime style? You get something new. There are an infinite amount of ways to create new styles using AI.

[Anonymous No.6669812]

>>6669796
It's not nihilistic it's reality. You're being a stubborn idiot that refuses to look around and see what amazing accomplishments people are achieving.

[Anonymous No.6669813]

>>6669809
>The junk data of a promper usually doesn't leave their PC and recycle bin.
Pixiv galleries tell us otherwise.

>>6669812
Art is a reflection of it's time so AI junk perfectly reflects these modern times dominated by junky people (both the sense they're hedonistic addicts and the fact they're NPCs whose presence is only that of noise).

Sad state of affairs but it be what it be.

[Anonymous No.6669815]

I selected half to generate. I feel like I have traveled back to 2019 with Artbreeder.

[Anonymous No.6669816]

>>6669790
And it still looks terrible like it just adding filters practically or clipart

[Anonymous No.6669820]

BTW i think adobe is using the stock repertoire for this to avoid copyright infringement, it will be very hard to use this function for illustration works (certainly not something that prompters will be able to do)
>>6669790
example of what i'm saying

Overall, this is prettymuch photobashing on steroids. I can easily prompt what i'm looking for in adobe stock and photobash it into the image in a few minutes, this is just kinda quicker and more gacha.

I can see some uses for digital painting too considering the nuanced selection system, especially talking about areas where full 100% control isn't needed like textures, color comps, thumbnailing a composition...
I wonder how it will deal with le unappropriate prompts like nipples, how will it recognize male from female?

>>6669777
this dude is retarded

[Anonymous No.6669821]

>>6669689
I've always just used gimp and vegas studio, how good is this tool actually?

[Anonymous No.6669822]

>>6669809
>This is a pipe dream for most and prompting is exactly the same. You swim through latent space until you find stable prompts that mostly just work. It is not nearly as random as you think it is. The thousand generations analogy can refer to 1000 different prompts trying to get a new style you like, or whatever. Not just 1 single image.

Yeah but that's my point, even with strong prompts, it's not a consistent 1-1 output everytime. That's still more random than an artist outputting what they want on a canvas with enough skill. Not sure why you're saying it's a pipe dream when it's definitely achievable with work. Not to say that this matters to what we're talking about, but dumbing down the skill ceiling of an artist to a pipe dream is a weird characterization if you're trying to be lenient on the idea of a model generating being more consistent with just a stable prompt, even with controlnet and other addons that boost accuracy. It's quite literally a microcosm of an artist in that sense.

>What happens when you mix orange with blue? A western cartoon style with an eastern anime style? You get something new. There are an infinite amount of ways to create new styles using AI.

We're still talking a limited amount based on the various datasets, even if we were to mesh together outputs of training data images and mash them together, what exactly do you mean by new style other than the plasticky look of most popular AI generated images that are renditions of already existing frameworks of style?

[Anonymous No.6669823]

>>6669813
>Pixiv galleries tell us otherwise.
No they don't. They're posting their best.

[Anonymous No.6669824]

>>6669820
>this dude is retarded
His verbose advertorial language combined with poor rhetoric makes me think he's a marketer.

[Anonymous No.6669826]

>>6669823
Their best junk, yeah.

[Anonymous No.6669828]

>>6669822
>Yeah but that's my point, even with strong prompts, it's not a consistent 1-1 output everytime.
It can be. Either way what does this matter? You can edit it afterward, we're talking about seconds generating a base to work on vs something that takes and artist days, weeks, or even months and years. And your idea of what an artist is will never be relevant, if you create art you are an artist. Art has never been about the effort put into it. It's about the expression.

>We're still talking a limited amount based on the various datasets,
There is an infinite amount. The amount of datasets is not finite, it is infinite.
>what exactly do you mean by new style other than the plasticky look of most popular AI generated images that are renditions of already existing frameworks of style?
Gonna be real with you here anon, are you blind? Pay more attention to AI art. If you can't see how the majority of it are showing new art styles you are actually insane.

[Anonymous No.6669829]

>>6669826
Just like the majority of artists yes. Not everyone has talent or puts effort into their art.
Like feel free to post your best, I highly doubt it would shame the typical NovelAI shitter.

[Anonymous No.6669830]

>>6669824
Or just your average cultist.

We've long since passed the point when the two have become intertwined.

[Anonymous No.6669831]

>>6669820
Yeah. it does seem to pull from the image you use as a base... but has no comprehension so results are just... well pic rel.
(looks kinda interesting tho)

[Anonymous No.6669834]

>>6669830
He's delighted that he can finally be just like his favorite artists, training LORAs on their work to reach their skill level in an instant. Like the kid who thinks he's now six feet tall because he jumped on Daddy's back.
It's pretty adorable!

[Anonymous No.6669835]

>>6669829
Do you know many artists who shit out thousands of pictures a day the way AI trannies shit out their garbage?

[Anonymous No.6669839]

>>6669830
I hate the A(nt)I(-Christ).

[Anonymous No.6669840]

>>6669820
>I wonder how it will deal with le unappropriate prompts like nipples, how will it recognize male from female?
>this dude is retarded
how ironic

[Anonymous No.6669844]

>>6669824
>Retard is verbose now to this nigga
>Others are advertising they say when others don't want to hear "use AI" everyday on Mongolian basket weaving forms
>keeps making pro "AI" threads everyday like it's their job to shill
How much monopoly money are getting paid in anon

[Anonymous No.6669849]

>>6669828
>It can be. Either way what does this matter? You can edit it afterward, we're talking about seconds generating a base to work on vs something that takes and artist days, weeks, or even months and years. And your idea of what an artist is will never be relevant, if you create art you are an artist. Art has never been about the effort put into it. It's about the expression.

You just said you needed thousands of generations possibly to get to what you need. By definition, that isn't consistent there's no can be, that means it's random. It matters because you've been arguing it's not random this entire time.

I don't know if you're not on major social media sites, the vast majority of generations have no editing whatsoever, I fail to see what that has to do with this. My idea of an artist is just the normal person learning to draw/paint and develop their own style..? I don't get it, are you just being obtuse on purpose. Sure, I'm all for any kind of art when the ethical nature of it isn't so terrible, and I'm okay with AI art eventually becoming a new category of art like photography or the like as long as it's separated from drawing/painting.

>There is an infinite amount. The amount of datasets is not finite, it is infinite.

>Gonna be real with you here anon, are you blind? Pay more attention to AI art. If you can't see how the majority of it are showing new art styles you are actually insane.

I'd be glad to see some of these posted, all I see on twitter, artstation, and pixiv are past renditions of style based on artists before with a glossy AI look over it. You're free to prove me wrong I'm actually wanting to see the new styles if you have any because I haven't seen any.

[Anonymous No.6669850]

>>6669831
Yeah that's what i mean, this does look pretty dope tho, i mean you probably don't want such a lack of control on a central figure but i guess you could use it in areas where it is less needed, do paintovers, or go full AI editing smaller and smaller areas (even though this feels like it would take longer than really painting it)
Overall it looks like a pretty sustainable use of AI to me, this gets the stamp of some level of trust

>>6669828
is this actual bait? Was this written by an actual AI? Can you ask the AI to draw this in her style?

[Anonymous No.6669851]

>>6669689
Its content aware fill but it works this time.

[Anonymous No.6669858]

>>6669849
>You just said you needed thousands of generations possibly to get to what you need.
I was making an analogy, don't take it literally.
>the vast majority of generations have no editing whatsoever
100% are edited. What the hell do you think a prompt is? I'm probably not going to read further than this kek.

>>6669850
>Can you ask the AI to draw this in her style?
Yes.

[Anonymous No.6669863]

>>6669858
>I was making an analogy, don't take it literally.

I honestly thought this would be a decent conversation, but you can't just backtrack like that and have me take you seriously. What a disappointment honestly

>100% are edited. What the hell do you think a prompt is? I'm probably not going to read further than this kek.

Are you actually trying to argue inpainting is editing is what I'm thinking you're getting at? Is this a joke, come on. You've got to be kidding me 100%?

[Anonymous No.6669866]

>>6669858
>100% are edited. What the hell do you think a prompt is?

It's even worse what the fuck is this changing your prompts and using them is considered editing now jesus christ

[Anonymous No.6669867]

yall niggas responding to a chatbot trainer

[Anonymous No.6669869]

>>6669850
>(even though this feels like it would take longer than really painting it)
Yeah, gatcha all the way down to little details, just takes too long and isn't satisfying.
I don't see myself using this for more than curiosities sake. well, maybe for fixing seams in textures.

[Anonymous No.6669872]

>>6669863
>Are you actually trying to argue inpainting is editing is what I'm thinking you're getting at? Is this a joke, come on. You've got to be kidding me 100%?
No, he's actually arguing that prompting alone is editing.

[Anonymous No.6669873]

>>6669850
hmm..

[Anonymous No.6669874]

>>6669867
Well then might as well report these posts as bots then

[Anonymous No.6669878]

>>6669866
Art has changed.

[Anonymous No.6669879]

>>6669873

[Anonymous No.6669883]

>>6669858
Prepare to be eclipsed, misarable faggot! Will your feeble prompting can be able to beat this and DTIYS?
>>6669869
i guess LARPing francis bacon will be the way to go

[Anonymous No.6669890]

>>6669718
You are a dumb faggot.

[Anonymous No.6669893]

>>6669873
guess she did draw this in her style after all. Coom model detected anyways, what kind of porn do you usually prompt? Make francis bacon porn pls, you can't really go wrong on this one

[Anonymous No.6669894]

>>6669878
Honestly maybe we deserve this, I can't believe there's actual retards out there that think prompting is now editing as well.

[Anonymous No.6669910]

But can it generate porn? If can + accept LORA's then stable diffusion is obselete.

[Anonymous No.6669913]

>>6669910
it can even generate "white fist" for >>6669869 , it got flagged for inappropriate content. I had to type "white hand" like some kinda chump

[Anonymous No.6669915]

>>6669913
*can't even. can not!

[Anonymous No.6669917]

>>6669893
I don't do porn.

[Anonymous No.6669919]

>>6669812
Everyone has their AI art filter turned on lmao.

> look at the AI art I gene-
No lol.

[Anonymous No.6669921]

I saw it. I can't unsee it. jannies saved anons eyes, yet I, the one without sin, must suffer the memory? why have you forsaken me?

[Anonymous No.6669929]

>>6669689
>editing photographs is now art and related to /ic/
fuck off to >>>/p/

[Anonymous No.6669931]

srry im just here to post cat

[Anonymous No.6669935]

>>6669929
Haven't you heard? Image generation has redefined art, artistic integrity, and artistic identity. All of your platforms will be flooded with generated images, anything you draw will be open season for somebody to use for "training data," and you'll just have to smile and say thank you while you go back to flipping burgers.
Welcome to the future.

[Anonymous No.6669941]

>>6669935
Aight so will they be inspired to remove kebab or want to be rascist

[Anonymous No.6669964]

>>6669890

You're an idiot who thinks sticking his fingers in his ears and saying "LALALA!" loudly will change the future.

Moron.

[Anonymous No.6669979]

>>6669929
/p/ doesn't want them as much as we do.

[Anonymous No.6669992]

>>6669964
>most useful tool
>Barely have control of what your putting in your picture besides Le prompt
>most examples is random ass stock photos that could've been dragged and dropped anyways from other sources or google
>examples include taking a deer and copy pasting it on top of another layer and doing the same with a sign
>It's the future he says

[Anonymous No.6670015]

>>6669992

That's not the part that's useful, dumkopf.

[Anonymous No.6670020]

>>6669689
>You can now pay for something an open source program could do better a year ago!
Only positive of AI is that jewobe will finally drop dead

[Anonymous No.6670036]

>>6669894
You're actually arguing that you can't edit a prompt.

[Anonymous No.6670054]

>>6670036
Because no one here is calling prompting editing. When we say using AI as a tool it means producing an image, and then editing it and touching it up fixing the stupid artifacts and issues with what the model generated. That's editing, not fucking deleting a negative and re-generating. Are you actually fucking retarded? Even regular AIbros would call you retarded for that you do realize that right>

[Anonymous No.6670058]

>>6670036
How are you this out of touch with everything, even AI related

[Anonymous No.6670059]

>>6670054
>not fucking deleting a negative and re-generating.
But that edits the image. Do you know what a seed is?

[Anonymous No.6670061]

>>6670058
Do you know what inpainting and img2img is?

[Anonymous No.6670064]

>>6670059
the whole pic is changed if you change a single letter of the prompt, with the seed. maybe only a little though? I have not tested extensively. still, its a "new image" if all the pixels change.

[Anonymous No.6670073]

>>6670061
Yeah, and I can definitely tell you you're a leech for using img2img and a retard if you think inpainting actually counts as fixing/editing in the context of the comments before

[Anonymous No.6670076]

>>6670064
>the whole pic is changed if you change a single letter of the prompt, with the seed.
No it isn't. You can control the degrees of a seed too. You haven't tested shit by the looks of it!

>>6670073
You can use it on your generations to edit them, this is a very important aspect of prompting.
>if you think inpainting actually counts as fixing/editing in the context of the comments before
Extreme damage control haha. Editing an image isn't editing an image?

[Anonymous No.6670083]

>>6670076
>You haven't tested shit by the looks of it!
10k images beg to differ, but that was back in the beta.

[Anonymous No.6670087]

>>6670076
>Extreme damage control haha. Editing an image isn't editing an image?

If anything you're projecting, utilizing different prompts/negatives and inpainting is the norm of what you should do if you want to maximize wahtever you're looking for. If you think those little extra steps are considered editing, it's honestly laughable how lazy you are.

For all the talk about the work that ai "artists" do it's amazing how going the extra step of editing over the image and fixing the broken parts after generation is rarely ever done, but here's the answer. Even after all that you get to see the same output of wonky images with artifacts everywhere and disconnected objects because it's been 100% edited. Just bravo

[Anonymous No.6670129]

>>6670087
I get it. You're coping with how much work you have to do vs how much prompters have to do. You walked uphill both ways, okay Gramps.
You're also larping as if your work is 100% perfect every time, what a pathetic man.

[Debater No.6670139]

>>6670129
Says the niggas literally making same dam posts almost every day and can't go 5 seconds saying you should use x for months now

[Anonymous No.6670144]

>>6670129
Honestly I'm just laughing. I actually couldn't believe it this whole time when you said every ai image is 100% edited that you were actually telling the truth. It's just that most prompters actually don't have the capabilities of fixing the mistakes or they can't see it. If anything good on you for sticking to your guns lmao, most people here can guarantee a consistency as they learn to draw, but you're at the mercy of a model that lacks that consistency as you stated above.

Not to mention, better generative models with simple UI/UX will become commonplace if you're rooting for it, meaning there's even less of an incentive to actually dive into it to the degree that you have considering you aren't even touching it up.

I don't doubt generative AI will be a tool for artists to use, but the way that you're larping as if you who clearly lacks the observational skills shows me you don't even touch drawing or worse you just gave up on it lmao. At that point I'm not really sure what the end game is, it's pretty pathetic and the projection is just nonstop because of that insecurity through your posts.

[Anonymous No.6670160]

>>6670144
>It's just that most prompters actually don't have the capabilities of fixing the mistakes or they can't see it.
You are a mongoloid critic that has no self awareness. This goes for your art too, it goes for all art in the eye of a person like you that doesn't like it. You're talking about consistency but I'm sure all you can make is consistent shit while a prompter can make all sorts of stuff, some good and some bad. In both cases people are just making what they want to make though.

>Not to mention, better generative models with simple UI/UX will become commonplace if you're rooting for it, meaning there's even less of an incentive to actually dive into it to the degree that you have considering you aren't even touching it up.
And here you blatantly demonstrate that you don't even understand that people just like making art. It doesn't matter if a new paint brush will be invented someday or that Photoshop is getting yet another update. People are going to make art in the meantime and after the fact.

[Anonymous No.6670173]

>>6669695
>forced to stop
It has only begun

[Anonymous No.6670177]

>>6669689

Ok. Kek. Create your masterpiece and post it here.

[Anonymous No.6670178]

>>6670160
You can rage about it all you want and I know I touched a nerve but it’s honestly really sad. the fact that the models have been built upon the very images by artists who have been learning and drawing like the people here to get good enough and get here you are trying to drag others down is honestly deplorable.

You don’t like art, you just like the end product without the work. And I mean this because you tried to say that generating normally using the features in the model like in painting was considered editing. You’re worse than the average ai bro at that point. You come in these threads trying to shove this shit and argue with people who you know don’t like it in the first place, and you do it half baked when you don’t even draw it’s honestly pathetic

[Anonymous No.6670194]

>>6669992

Constantly changing words and generating hundreds of images wasting time and electricity or money if you dumb enough to pay for it. Need another extension that requires changing words and generating hundreds of images just to get a little bit of control. What kind of retarded workflow is that? And the end result? Not even something that's yours to begin with. Might as well be a factory worker at least you get paid for your labour.

[Anonymous No.6670201]

>>6670178
>You can rage about it all you want and I know I touched a nerve but it’s honestly really sad. the fact that the models have been built upon the very images by artists who have been learning and drawing like the people here to get good enough and get here you are trying to drag others down is honestly deplorable.
Absolutely pathetic cop out. No I'm not mad, I'm astutely pointing out what kind of person you are.
>You don’t like art,
Yes I do and there's absolutely nothing wrong with liking proper art piece. You like the craft more and that's fine, but that isn't what art is. And again you're trying to act tough bragging about all the time you spend on things that are now automated. Who are you trying to impress?

[Anonymous No.6670202]

>>6669689
>IT'S OVER
To digital artists! MWAHAHA! Back to trad, folks! In the future digital artists and AI prompters gonna be the same!

[Anonymous No.6670206]

>>6670202

[Anonymous No.6670208]

>>6670201
And yet, here you are wasting your time arguing with people. Which is a task that is now automated. Necking yourself would save you a lot of time and money so you should get on that as soon as possible.

[Anonymous No.6670215]

>>6670208
You seem mad.

[Debater No.6670220]

>>6670206
But anon what separates this from a printer. And how much are really paying to set up this shit when pen, pencils and paper can be bought for 2 bucks or found somewhere randomly on the ground sometimes.

[Debater No.6670223]

>>6670208
Alright anon are admitting to be a bot then

[Anonymous No.6670249]

>>6670201
>that isn't what art is
AI generated pictures aren't art, pretty or ugly.
>automated
the thing is AI didn't automate drawing, it bypassed it

[Anonymous No.6670268]

>>6670249
You're so retarded lol.

[Debater No.6670271]

>>6670201
>who are trying to impress
Same thing can be said about your need to come here everyday too now my nigga

[Anonymous No.6670274]

>>6670201
>but that isn't what art is
Maybe for braindead consoomers. A lot of people do, in fact, care about the actual effort, thought, and consideration behind the creation. Why do you think people are so fascinated with art drawn in strange media, or watching people draw, or watching behind the scenes documentaries, or why finding previously unknown planning sketches for famous art pieces make international news?

[Anonymous No.6670275]

>>6670268
And YWNBAA AIcuck

[Anonymous No.6670283]

>>6670268
I am perfectly correct. it's fine to like pretty pictures. a sunset is pretty but isn't art.

[Anonymous No.6670285]

>>6670178
>models have been built upon the very images by artists who have been learning and drawing
They always seem to conveniently leave out the fact that without real artists drawing things and real photographers photographing things, their picture shitters would've never worked in the first place. For as much as they love to posture and act like they're the superior ones, they're the ones who are entirely reliant on the people they mock. It's pretty pathetic.

[Anonymous No.6670309]

>>6669759
>no fair use
Most of generated images classify for fair use under parody laws, especially if style was changed in img2img case

For plot showcasing different samplers or alike it counts towards research category of fair use you dumb shit
And it is earning profits, only fanbox decided to “ban” it but guess what, all accounts I was following are still up, so I guess they aren’t enforcing their policies as usual

[Anonymous No.6670314]

>>6670309
Fair use fall under 2 terms

1. It is different from original
2. It does not compete with the original
You cannot claim fair use while also saying that you intend to replace the artist.

>all accounts I was following are still up
*for now

[Anonymous No.6670316]

>>6670314
2 weeks more rajesh
Also who in their right mind claims they want to replace the artist? Isn’t it better to coexist? If AI was to indeed replace artists it’d lead to stagnation of the entire technology most likely

[Anonymous No.6670317]

>>6670316
Sure sure, whatever

[Anonymous No.6670320]

>>6670316
>who in their right mind claims they want to replace the artist?
Seems like 90% of the vocal AIposters on 4chan, as well as anybody who makes targeted models.
>Isn’t it better to coexist?
AI shitters are more like parasites than anything.

[Anonymous No.6670327]

When do you think AI would get to the stage where you can just put in a few character sheets and just have AI draw a whole ass toonboom scene based on your script? And like, you just edit out the mistakes, feed that in and the AI just doesn't make those errors again, it just gets better at getting what a Sam is or a Melody means.

How many steps are we to that?

[Anonymous No.6670332]

>>6670327
that would be an absolute souless slog, we're not pixel janitors.

[Anonymous No.6670339]

>>6670201
The craft is the reason why people love drawing/painting and why the people commission and support the artists they like. The reason we love certain pieces of works is the story behind it all from the person whose life experiences and learning in whatever genre have culminated to produce that piece that resonates with you. Art is one of the most parasocial things even now more than ever, you can "act tough" with what you think art is but at that point you might as well be missing the half of what makes something good. It's the creator's influence and beliefs unconsciously imprinted in the work they produce whether it's a story or a drawing which is pretty obvious but I guess that doesn't mean anything in your "art piece?"


No one here is trying to impress anyone, you're just bringing people down and refusing to acknowledge the people who made your model and "art" possible and outright spitting on their love of the craft because you couldn't do it yourself. It's really just pathetic through and through as your insecurities keep showing through when you could just do a little work to learn to draw and still generate? Oh sorry, kek it means you got to do more than "editing" by inpainting and changing some prompts around which is apparently work. I've never met such a worthless spineless excuse of a human being rejecting the very thing that makes art art and trying to project himself as better while simultaneously dragging down others with his worthlessness.

[Anonymous No.6670344]

>>6670339
>The craft is the reason why people love drawing/painting
lol

[Anonymous No.6670345]

>>6670285
Honestly, it boggles my mind the cognitive dissonance these types of people portray.

[Anonymous No.6670349]

>>6670344
AI leeches like you with a job they hate will never get it.

[Anonymous No.6670351]

>>6669689
>bait opening post
>off topic thread (Photoshop goes on >>>/gd/
>less then 30 IPs
The jannie gave up and left, right?

[Anonymous No.6670355]

>>6670339
Brohan, there are people in this world who will never get it. And there are people who refuse to get it because they’re bitter. I’ve only come to truly accept this recently, and it’s drastically improved my own work. It doesn’t mean you have to be neutral on the topic, but it just ain’t worth it. These people will exist forever, and so will the people who practice and understand real arts.

[Anonymous No.6670363]

>>6670332
How WOULD it be a slog? I'm not challenging your premise, but I'm new to what the AI does, what it's capable of, and what it could be used to make.

I picture like, you as an artist, you draw a basic character template around whatever you're trying make, right? Like you put in a fucking hamburger dude, following a couple of preset guides to draw a character into, (and that's like generation 1, we make an AI that's able to pose or animate this character according to descriptions and work YOU put into the thing, you personally, you train one of these things as an artist to make YOUR babies, you fuck that machine with all the art you can, and you just adjust it later to better match your style, and look, and so on. And then after that's set in, you got at the start, mid scene discussion animation and art down easy, and save all your animating energy for the action scenes, where all the money's for production will go to instead, so you can just go ham with the handdrawn stuff.

And then just later generations can make those picture shitters better art enablers, and just fill in the blanks of child imagination, get it better to look like what you want, and you just do one man animation studios just pumping out little hybrid defiances of God and the validation of thousands of hours of inbetweeners no longer needed. So now they're free to grab a picture shitter and make more animations themselves.

That's what I'm wanting to get out of this and I want to know what the steps are to that. So what would I have to have sorted out to get to that? What's the roadmap to giving every fucking ideas guy all the tools he needs to get off his ass and just fucking draw, you just put it in and the more you put in, the faster it figures it all out. That sounds cool, I want to make that a thing, I want a box that does THAT.

[Anonymous No.6670364]

>>6670355
You're right 100%, I need to stop it's not worth it I need to just continue to work on my own stuff, thanks.

[Anonymous No.6670376]

>>6670363
Did you take this from a Reddit post?

[Anonymous No.6670397]

puppet animation had already crippled the western scene and you want it to go a step beyond.

[Anonymous No.6670409]

>>6669722
Schizo post

[Anonymous No.6670411]

>>6669720
ye bro keep going, i love people pursuing enviroment art and i will start soon after getting a good grasp of anatomy

[Anonymous No.6670415]

How is this related to art? This belongs on /p/ at best.

[Anonymous No.6670457]

>>6670376

Chatgpt

[Anonymous No.6670464]

>>6669689
WHAT THE FUCK is the purpose of these threads?
What is the purpose of keeping repeating ITSOVERITSOVERITSOVERITSOVER like a drone over and over and over again?
Is it some kind of new Emo nihilism fetish?
It looks like someone is trying REALLY HARD to push this hopeless defeatism, I really wonder for what purpose...

[Anonymous No.6670476]

>>6669689
>another AI fag thread acting like something people have been aware of for a long time is new technology
This is the content-aware-fill feature Photoshop has had for years. But this is just another inflammatory shillIng/spam thread, so you don't really care.

[Anonymous No.6670536]

>>6669709
So you can be even more a faggot with no skills at all?
Then again you're a streetshitter so I'm not surprised

[Anonymous No.6670559]

>>6669689
>Photoshop
Can't believe people still use this bloated overpriced shit. Started using Affinity and CSP years ago and never looked back.

[Anonymous No.6670565]

>>6670415
AI pajeets from /g/ have long since invaded /ic/ for their new scam

[Anonymous No.6670572]

He was always right btw

[Anonymous No.6670760]

>>6670572
Of course this pretentious faggot is looking for the great reset and everyone except him to own nothing and be happy. He is a milionare. Just waiting for the all ze cheap fresh young sushi smellin pussy flow all the his masion. Typically ic newfags will glorify him. Pathetic.

[Anonymous No.6670772]

>>6670760
pol has rotted your brain. Get some fresh air

[Anonymous No.6670814]

>>6670772
Who?

[Anonymous No.6670816]

>>6670760
Your mother should have drowned you in the bathtub

[Anonymous No.6670821]

>>6670760
Nobody ironically likes Miyazaki in Japan. Only weebs.

[Anonymous No.6670828]

>>6670821
Based Yakuzachad exposing jappedoring to the brainwashed westerns keks

[Anonymous No.6670838]

AI has been domesticated. Wild West era is over. Anti-AI activists have won. Only corporate drones doing graphics will use it like they use a gradient tool. Using unlicensed software will be a criminal act and be actively prosecuted, like they do in China and Russia. I salute you "government must control us" winners on this issue.

[Anonymous No.6670860]

>>6670376
No, I just wrote that when very high yesterday. I still want it, artboxes you pump your art into and it makes more of your art to your style and whatever limitations it can't just algorithm out.

[Anonymous No.6670872]

>>6669759
I don’t care about making money with AI. Not in direct way, who would pay for something worthless after all. My nation has lowest unemployment rate in Europe and possibly the world. Thousands of janitorial, menial and nightshift positions left unfilled is really strangling our economic growth. Puting creatives as well as coders and lawyers into factories and warehouses is necessary for our development. I mean they can still be creative in their free time, right?

[Anonymous No.6670888]

>>6670206
AIfags really like to scrape the bottom of the barrel.

[Anonymous No.6670893]

>>6669704
>>6669709
Adobe trained their model on images they specifically have the rights to

[Anonymous No.6670903]

>>6670872
>My nation has lowest unemployment rate in Europe and possibly the world. Thousands of janitorial, menial and nightshift positions left unfilled is really strangling our economic growth. Puting creatives as well as coders and lawyers into factories and warehouses is necessary for our development.
You mean all those hordes of migrants won't do the work?

[Anonymous No.6670910]

>>6669689
We lost when photograph became a thing, portrait paintings were never the same since

[Anonymous No.6670913]

>>6669722
dubs confirms
>>6670409
>fed uses "schizo" word
totally 100% on target

adobe works for the devil

[Anonymous No.6670972]

>>6670910
Yeah if only we never invented photography and film. Literally zero benefit for humanity at all.

[Anonymous No.6670986]

>>6670972
this but unironically

[Anonymous No.6670994]

>>6670409
>Amazon apparently tracks every time you tap and turn the page on your Kindle, which is a lot of data to collect.
>Schizo

[Anonymous No.6671007]

>>6670838
>Adobe is a corporation
what are you on about

[Anonymous No.6671088]

>>6670903
They all go to Germany where they get the most gibs.

The fact stays that creative professions are finished, the only future for creatives is 14/7 in a factory for quarter the previous wage. Machine creativity is shit, it probably won’t even improve much untill real AGI becomes a thing (if ever) but you can’t argue with the speed and being nearly free. Aesthetics of the future are spartan minimalism because all art will be toxic for decades as a result of AI workplace revolution.

[Anonymous No.6671141]

>>6671088
Factories are heavily automated already so even that won't be an option.

>Aesthetics of the future are spartan minimalism because all art will be toxic for decades as a result of AI workplace revolution.
Yeah that will probably be the case. Bare walls look nicer than tacky Ai slop.

[Anonymous No.6671339]

>>6671141
Factories still need a lot of people. Machine learning is very poor at performing complex tasks in the physical world such as machinery maaintenance. Workers also have the advantage of being very versatile while machine can do only a single task.

[Anonymous No.6671362]

>>6669689
20 years in the future, kids will wonder how people even shopped photos before ai

same for everything visual arts related. this is the end of an era.

[Anonymous No.6671386]

>>6669964
>take picture of road
>transform tool
Much less work and time than this retarded garbage. Did your s.0ylent shake fry your brain?

[Anonymous No.6671653]

>>6669689
Artists took advantage of AI tech for years, charging customers $200 for a few simple clicks. Now they are complaining because customers are not willing to pay them this time as AI tech improves and even non-artists can use it

[Anonymous No.6671770]

>>6671653

>https://specialedresource.com/special-education-resources-for-adults

[Anonymous No.6671840]

>>6671339
Machine í much better than human. The only thing kêp thế job í it cheaper to compensate for human death than mainternance a machine

[Anonymous No.6671866]

>>6671840
Machine is usually better at the single taks it can do. It is absolutely useless for any other task. You hire workers because they are versatile and can perform many tasks.

[Anonymous No.6671870]

>>6671840
what the fuck kind of keyboard are you typing?

[Anonymous No.6671926]

>>6671870
probably mobile end long pressing letters?

[Anonymous No.6671946]

>>6670860
Of course its a stoner

[Anonymous No.6672102]

>>6669720
>it's ok that my skill is obsolete now, because art is le fun

[Anonymous No.6672507]

>>6669689
shame you can't use this in the pirated version
>>6669720
great use case. imo, environments are not nearly as interesting as characters, and take a LONG time to render, but with a tool like this, i might as well play a little with them. don't expect the luddites in this board to approve it, but anyway, most people here are completely clueless about everything.
>>6671362
it could be the beginning of a new era, but then again, art is constantly reinventing itself with new tools. more like business as usual

[Anonymous No.6672540]

>>6672102
He's falseflagging.

[Anonymous No.6672770]

>>6671653
>source: my ass

[Anonymous No.6672817]

>>6669689
just follow the money, and you'll understand the agenda behind the luddites
hint: stable diffussion has been doing this very same shit since months ago, and for free

[Anonymous No.6673094]

>>6672817
>free

[Anonymous No.6673586]

>>6673094
yeah
for free

[Anonymous No.6673592]

>>6672102
Yeah it is because it's an interesting way to challenge myself to make something new.

Sucks for the guys who rely on environment painting to make money though. I wonder how places like FZD are gonna handle it where speed is everything.

I can already see the school including prompting 101 or visual development language or some other bullshit course title.

[Anonymous No.6673595]

It's over.

[Anonymous No.6673599]

>>6673595
If no one has jobs UBI will be implemented then we can all be NEETs and draw all day before being rounded up and slaughtered like cattle to feed the machine god

[Anonymous No.6673601]

>>6673595
>>6673599
based AI

[Anonymous No.6673608]

>>6673599
There will be no UBI. You'll be forced to work cleaning toilets and taking care of elderly people and other shitty jobs because robotics is lagging far behind. This is the future greedy techtards choose.

[Anonymous No.6673610]

>>6673608
Can't make me work anon. The day Im forced to wipe an old man's ass is the day I take the 9mm express

[Anonymous No.6673611]

>>6673601
This will be slop children will consume from now on

[Anonymous No.6673614]

>>6670760
that was about the real estate bubble in the 80s in japan, similar to what's happening now. tons of people hated the developers and speculators
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_asset_price_bubble

[Anonymous No.6673618]

>>6673611
better than the current thing

[Anonymous No.6673674]

>what do you mean I have to disclose who im stealing from?
>NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
tick tock, AI trannies

[Anonymous No.6673678]

>>6673595
Much as I hate HR, they are replacing them with the equivalent of touch tone messaging.

[Anonymous No.6673683]

>photoshop, select the subject
>subject selected. what changes would you like to to make?
>make clothing invisible
>warning, this action will generate content which violates federal law. are you sure you wish to continue?
>proceed
FBI, OPEN UP

[Anonymous No.6673686]

>>6673595
Anon the AI thing is just an excuse to keep investors in.
Those people got laid off because interested rates increased and because of COVID overhiring.

[Anonymous No.6673808]

>>6673683
kek

[Anonymous No.6673874]

>>6673586
if you're not paying for the product, you are the product. do you think this is done out of the goodness of their heart or genuine love for art?

[Anonymous No.6673904]

>>6673874
and if you're paying for the product, you are the product. dumb statement

[Anonymous No.6673917]

>>6673904
You must be new. NTA but let me give you some “totally free (not)” examples that I remember that some people here might remember, too.

Let’s take scribid for example. If anyone here is not a 22 and below zoomer you might remember a PDF sharing platform back in the day where you could get totally free books because everyone was uploading PDFs to their site. It was THE online course club back then. Guess what happened when people did all the legwork uploading books to their website? They fucked everyone in the ass by making their service paid only to view books that people uploaded to their site.

How about Smart.fm. Weebs back then used this service to learn Japanese. It was a dedicated platform where you could make courses for the community to learn the Japanese language (sort of like what memrise is before memrise fucked everyone in the ass, too). What did they do after everyone contributed? Pulled the plug by making everyone pay for their service. And when nobody wanted to pay they double fucked everyone by removing community courses and squeezing it to the bare essentials.

There are many examples I can sit here and try to recall but the point is so many of these companies use lab rats such as yourself and then when they got enough of what they wanted they pull the plug, turn a 180 and fuck its users left, right and in the mouth.

[Anonymous No.6673922]

>>6673674
openAI sucks the cock of the music industry, but 2D artists are A OK to exploit. Spineless fucks, like every AI Proompter

[Anonymous No.6673924]

>>6673922

Artists aren’t loaded in millions enough to fight OpenAI but people like Drake, Ye, Bieber, etc has enough money to take them down in the event of getting sued.

[Anonymous No.6674096]

>>6673601

Those are img2img frames of an existing video.

[Anonymous No.6674105]

>>6673922
Because artists are faggy individualists who like to larp as misunderstood loners.

Meanwhile musicians can swallow their ego enough to have labels and jew lawyers.

[Anonymous No.6674178]

>>6673917
you've put it better than I could. the AI companies offloaded legal risk on millions of suckers so they could train their AI on copyrighted material.

[Anonymous No.6674617]

This AI stuff is really taking off, isn't it

[Anonymous No.6674633]

>>6671653
100% this. Also pen stabilizing, and other examples.
>b-b-b-but now it's an ethical thing, I've ALWAYS cared about that shit, seriously!!
horse shit, grasping at anything now that it's affecting you negatively.

[Anonymous No.6674712]

>>6669689
Adobe firefly is fed with their own datasets, but it never was about muh stolen assets but muh shitty drawings are worthless.

[Anonymous No.6674735]

>>6674633
>grasping at straws
You really think that an artist being upset at somebody else using the artist's artwork to make a program designed to create knockoffs of that artist's artwork is grasping at straws?

[Anonymous No.6674743]

>>6674735
ya
just don't use it

[Anonymous No.6674758]

>>6673674
this is peak clown world what the fuck.

the company's whole business model is that they don't pay for the shit they use from artists and photographers so if they disclose that they got their shit without paying, they might be sued.

fucking amazing.

[Anonymous No.6674780]

what's even crazier is selling prompts
I've made over $100 so far lol

[Anonymous No.6674787]

>>6669727
you are coping hard if you think people will drop the literal industry standard over this dumbass squabble

[Anonymous No.6674841]

>>6674096
That's from modelscope, a text2video generator.

[Anonymous No.6675315]

>>6671386

Once again, that's NOT the part that's useful, and if you weren't so stupid you would see the actual functionality of this tech.

[Anonymous No.6675322]

>>6673683
unironically already happening. not the FBI part, but AI aiding in CP content

[Anonymous No.6675408]

>>6675315
>"it's actually very useful!"
>leaves without elaborating
What did they mean by this?

[Anonymous No.6675429]

>>6675408

It is extremely useful for extending photographs past their previous edges, and for blending multiple photographic elements together.

Also, any elements you add to the environment will match the color and lighting of the other photo-elements automatically.

Also, you can add reflections, like puddles of water and such, by just typing them in, and it will reflect the existing elements.

Basically you can automate a lot of things that would take hours by hand.

That's why the tech is actually impressive. The "type in what you want to see" part is actually the least impressive part of it all.

[Anonymous No.6675432]

>>6675429
Imagine if they were smart enough to offer these tools first before imagegen trash to entice artfags and content creators. I'd wager they would have seen a lot less pushback from the creative industry. These are actually useful features for photo manipulation. Now I know a lot of people will refuse to touch it out of principle, and I don't blame them.
>all this and they still can't manage to create a decent bucket tool

[Anonymous No.6675446]

>>6670464
They're doing this to cope, AI will never generate them legal money. On the other hand, photoshop just enabled artists to be able to use AI. Someone needs to have good understanding of art if they have to use PS' AI for anything outside of photo editing.

Artists are winning left and right, people are finally siding with artists, patreon, fanbox are starting to ban ai generators, csp was forced to stop their AI generation ideas because of the extreme backlash.

Let them cry about how we're luddites. Just enjoy your popcorn and enjoy creating actual art. Ignore the pajeets who refuse to learn how to draw. What a buncha bums.

[Anonymous No.6675458]

>>6669689
so who owns the pictures that are being used to generate these images? are these trained off licensed/free stock images, or are they scraped from google images?
im sure the copyright owners would not be happy with adobe selling access to ai models derived from their work

[Anonymous No.6675466]

>>6675458
>As part of Adobe’s effort to address generative AI-related copyright infringement concerns, we are training our initial Firefly model on Adobe Stock images, openly licensed content, and public domain content where copyright has expired.

[Anonymous No.6675473]

>>6675458
>>6675466
It's PR talk.
>your creative cloud data will also still be scraped unless you opt out goy, and if you do well too fucking late it's already in the dataset lol
"opt-out by default" jews can go fuck themselves, never giving them another $

[Anonymous No.6675860]

Honest question, if there was some kind of brain scanning tech that let you import whatever you see in your imagination directly into photoshop, would you guys complain about it?
So many of the arguments here seem to boil down "art" to "I can precisely control a small object in 3-dimensional space"
Kind of crazy that most artists seem so dead-set on reducing creativity down to physical labor.
That's why from an outside perspective it just seems like the real argument is "I've spent 10 years learning this skill, and now I'm salty other people won't have to."
I get why that sucks, but still...

[Anonymous No.6675941]

>>6675860
But creativity isn’t physical labor? No one has ever said anything like that. Your creativity and artistic voice is formed from your life experiences, interests and upbringing, as well as your mental state. Drawing is just one of the many outlets for your inner mind, it’s a means of communication.
This is why there is no such thing as an “AI artist’, because the prompter is, at the end of the day, unable to put their own creativity or voice in the image, and are the one reducing “Art” to a bunch of booru tags and keywords, no doubt frustrated that they can’t “do more”.
It’s their loss, really, because they are forced to rely on other’s work which they might not like or identify with creatively in the first place, and are slaves to the technology and the data of artists that were put in. They are unable to properly communicate their creativity and ideas, hence the seething and venom towards artists.

[Anonymous No.6675945]

>>6669689
Graphic Designer job is now obsolete, kek

[Anonymous No.6676004]

>>6675941
You didn't answer their question. Given what you've written there, I'd like to see your answer.

>if there was some kind of brain scanning tech that let you import whatever you see in your imagination directly into photoshop, would you guys complain about it?

[Anonymous No.6676024]

>>6676004
Will they be able to play ads in head with it or will be "free."
>Some people rather not call an ambulance despite it being able to take you to the hospital you know

[Anonymous No.6676063]

>>6675941
But that's exactly my point.
Obviously, the guy gacha rolling 1girl prompts is the furthest from being an artist, though you could make the argument that even he still is one. He is "choosing" the tags he picks, the outputs he likes. He is communicating his inner world through the medium of AI.
He might be frustrated that he can't properly express it, but then again neither can an amateur artist, or even many artists with a lot of experience. That doesn't make bad artists not artists.
And that's not even touching on the people that do put a lot of time and effort into making art with AI, dictating composition/lighting/poses/artstyle/colors, touching stuff up manually. Everything a "regular" artist does except moving their hand with a pen in hand for every single line.
The single-minded focus on the 13-year-old twitter kid who typed "pretty girl" into midjourney and brags to his friends that he has a career in art is so ridiculous it might as well be a strawman.

[Anonymous No.6676067]

>>6676063
A AI pejeet will NEVER move on from prompting and praying. He is ALWAYS going to be beholden to whatever the AI wants to put out, whereas the bad/amateur artist can draw exactly what he intends to draw. It will be drawn badly, but it's still the exact subject matter. Pajeets can only hope the AI works as intended.

[Anonymous No.6676080]

>>6676067
But you do have almost complete control nowadays, if you want it, know how to use the tools and spend the time to get there.
If I have a perfect picture in my head, and spend 5 hours using SD and PS to get it 99% there, that isn't art.
But if I spend 30 seconds drawing a stick-figure that doesn't even remotely resemble what I had in my head, that is art? Why? Because I picked up a pen in my hand and put ink on paper?

[Anonymous No.6676106]

AAAAHHHHH I REGRET NOT OPENING A PATREON IN 2013 BECAUSE MUH "I'LL NEVER SELL OUT" MUH PRINCIPLES. I FUCKED UP BADLY.

[Anonymous No.6676113]

>>6676080
Yes, because you put in the human effort to create a human product. Why is the concept of perfecting what your body is capable of doing with your own two hands so terrifying for you?

[Anonymous No.6676126]

>>6676113
>>6676113
I mean, if you want to go down that route, then I'm using my hands to type on the keyboard.
Again, surely the artist's argument can't be that art is only art if you're doing physical labor.

[Anonymous No.6676151]

>>6676080
this philosophical discussion about what art truly is are pointless, exactly because filthy niggers like you destroyed the meaning of art a long time ago with dada shit

[Anonymous No.6676156]

>>6675860
how do you explain that people like me who are not artists hate your fucking guts then? you have to make up your shitty indian mind, friend. is it either pro artists who are mad about this or nobodies who can't even draw? make up your fucking mind or shut the fuck up

[Anonymous No.6676167]

>>6676126
Don't be disingenuous. The difference is that an artist is still doing the work of expressing their mind with their own body, whereas the AI prompter at the end of the day is no different than a person who has is commissioning artwork very fast and essentially for free, and then going "no, I don't want it like that, do it again" until they get what they want.

I will ask you again - why are you so afraid of putting in the effort to draw yourself? Answer the question.

[Anonymous No.6676169]

>>6676167
>"no, I don't want it like that, do it again"
How many artists don't erase and redo?

[Anonymous No.6676172]

>>6676004
>You didn't answer their question. Given what you've written there, I'd like to see your answer.
NTA, but I wouldn't mind that in of itself, no. but I am against all tech that messes with your head unless absolutely necessary for the preservation of life and quality of life. he also said
>Kind of crazy that most artists seem so dead-set on reducing creativity down to physical labor
there's nothing crazy about having full control upon your end result. that's why mark making tools will never be replaced, period

[Anonymous No.6676174]

>>6676169
Oh my fucking god. The difference is that the artist hones their own craft, their literal own work that they put down. The AI artist does nothing of the sort, because at the end of the day the AI generator is still doing all the work. Emphasizing positive/negative tags or adding more tags isn't even remotely the same. Don't even try.

[Anonymous No.6676176]

>>6676169
they're erasing their own mark making, you realize that right? erasers exist in real life. it's not a slot machine, they're correcting their own work

[Anonymous No.6676185]

>>6676174
>own work
What artists aren't inspired by others' art? Is that ethical?

[Anonymous No.6676191]

>>6676185
>inspired by
>exactly 1-to-1 the same as an AI being fed direct pixel perfect copies of another artist's work

You'll do and say anything to justify AI. You also still haven't answered the question. For the third time: Why are you so afraid of putting in the effort to draw yourself?

[Anonymous No.6676202]

>>6676191
Shakespeare stole all his plots. Does that make him a bad artist?

[Anonymous No.6676204]

>>6676191
I'm done talking to you until you answer the question. Enough running away. For the fourth time: Why are you so afraid of putting in the effort to draw yourself?

[Anonymous No.6676214]

>>6676191
that guy isn't me, i'm not afraid of putting in effort to make art, like i said you can put just as much effort into AI art as you can into drawing.
So, also for the third time: If you can spend just as much effort, express yourself just as well, and can rely on your imagination just as much as drawing, why are you reducing "art" to the physical act of moving your pen?
Let me put it a different way, is somebody who uses a line or circle tool in photoshop not an artist because they can't draw a straight line or circle freehand?

[Anonymous No.6676222]

>>6669689
I don't see the problem, I was never totally anti-ai anyway. Could be cool to just use it for backgrounds, or using it to make quick fixes if you keep fucking up certain things, or as a fun way of starting an image to paint over etc.

People act like this will immediately make everyone an artist, when the majority of what I've seen of "ai aritsts" has been absolute shit. You can have a robot drawing for you, who has all the data from all the greatest artists in the world, but there's no accounting for taste.

[Anonymous No.6676224]

>>6676214
It is the human endeavor and investment itself that makes it worthwhile, be it moving the pencil, chipping away at the wood, splashing the paint, or even moving the mouse in MS paint. It's a pointless and distractory argument to get into "hurr the circle tool" when at the end of the day the artist is still utilizing the tool MANUALLY to get the end result. Typing in 50 million prompts and download a lora derived from scanning an actual artist's pictures isn't even remotely the same.

"Oh, the breasts didn't come out large enough this time. Let me add one more parenthesis on that positive input, there that should do it."

Fuck out of here. It is not the same and it never will be the same. But you'll never admit it, because you love your AI and your continued acceptance of AI requires you to act like there is absolutely no difference.

[Anonymous No.6676236]

>>6676224
You're just too blind to see it.

[Anonymous No.6676248]

>>6676236
As opposed to you, who has to fight against the concept of doing physical endeavor in the definition of art because that completely filters you and all the other pajeets. You people want so fucking badly want to be seen as artists, yet you don't want to do even an iota of the work to be called one. It's the only reason you people are here clogging up /ic/, and this place was shit enough as it is.

[Anonymous No.6676254]

>>6676224
>It is the human endeavor and investment itself that makes it worthwhile, be it moving the pencil, chipping away at the wood, splashing the paint, or even moving the mouse in MS paint.
Then why not by using language? Like poets or writers do?
>"Oh, the breasts didn't come out large enough this time. Let me add one more parenthesis on that positive input, there that should do it."

"Oh, the breasts didn't come out large enough this time. Let me erase part of it and physically draw 2 larger circles this time"
is the exact same thing, minus, for the fourth time, physical movement of a pen.
It's your vision that matters, it's depicting and communicating your inner world. Like, in your mind, can quadriplegics not be artists?
You keep saying these words like endeavor or investment, yet apparently someone spending 5 hours working with AI is less effort than somebody spending 10 seconds on a stick figure? How does that argument make sense?
You're the one who can't admit that the real argument here is: "I've spent all this time learning this skill, and if you want to make art you have to suffer just as much"
You're literally trying to curtail human expression because you're salty it won't take people a decade of training to express their inner worlds the way they want to.
You fuck on outta here.

[Anonymous No.6676290]

>>6675432
>Now I know a lot of people will refuse to touch it out of principle, and I don't blame them.

I do. So many people have developed a knee-jerk reaction to anything that uses AI tech, that they're unwilling to understand the potential tools that they have at their disposal.

That's fine, more work for me.

[Anonymous No.6676312]

>>6676063 You’re correlating “bad art” with “bad expression” which isn’t the point of my post at all. Your skill level and the quality of your work doesn’t matter because at the end of the day, it is still your own voice. What does choosing tags do, exactly? The AI will only ever interpret a thing the same way, wether it’s with you, or another prompter. It’s an approximation of internet data, not of your spiritual or cultural interpretation of a word put through your own creative lens.

Arguing that taking time to prompt makes you an artist is also useless. Say you commission someone for an artwork and dictate every single part of it like an autist, does it make you the artist? No, it doesn’t. You’re merely a commissioner. Does spending hours choosing your character’s appearance in a game make you an artist? No, just some guy who plays video games. Choosing how things look does not make one an artist. Wasting hours on something does not make you a master of it. Your skill does. And it’s why the general consensus even with non-artists is that prompting can’t be equated to art, because it isn’t expression, only regurgitation with no context nor meaning, and it’s difficult to properly enjoy beyond the surface.

>>6676004
It wouldn’t, because the mechanical act of drawing itself is probably one of, if not the most attractive aspect of it. It’s why art is often used in therapy, as penning lines is soothing and somewhat hypnotic. It’s why you’ll see kids fill their school notes with doodles even if they’re not art-inclined. It’s the infamous “just draw” in it’s most simplistic interpretation.

While creating a perfect image out of thin air could be an attractive idea in theory, it’s like cheating in a game. Once you get rid of the obstacles standing between you and your goal, then that goal becomes meaningless.

Why do people knit if they can just buy clothes? Because it’s enjoyable. Same thing with art.

[Anonymous No.6676323]

>>6676312
Seems to me many people find making AI images enjoyable.

[Anonymous No.6676344]

>>6669689
Reminder the CCP has backdoor access to your art with Adobe, & now they are using the user's pieces for creating the AI stuff WITHOUT YOUR CONSENT. It's pretty much art thief at this point. Reminder to not store your shit on the cloud.

[Anonymous No.6676350]

>>6675458
Ironically the CCP. Adobe has chink software built into it.

[Anonymous No.6676352]

Banning art is a slippery slope.

[Anonymous No.6676354]

>>6676352
>If you don't like or accept AI art you are going to become.... le Nazi!

Christ, you people are reaching at this point.

[Anonymous No.6676371]

>>6670559
I actually bought one of their software awhile. The program didn't even run on my machine when I installed it & it was a legally-owned copy. Save your money & look elsewhere. Adobe has gone to poo (no seriously, their CEO is a fucking poo, look it up).

[Anonymous No.6676375]

>>6670821
And the real irony is Miyazaki hates weebs

[Anonymous No.6676381]

>>6670206
Those robots draw better than any AI.

[Anonymous No.6676384]

>>6676371
What was the error it gave you? Or was it just a CTD?

[Anonymous No.6676445]

>>6674743

I won't... You want to use my work? Pay me. I don't go to your house and fuck your mom because your front door is unlocked. It's not free for all. Compensate fuckass.

[Anonymous No.6676454]

>>6676352
>m-muh nazis
You're only banned off art platforms who don't want to host bootleg trash. You can make your own AItrannygrifter platform (it already exists) (its flopping because AI cannot exist without leeching off actual artists in every way imaginable).

[Anonymous No.6676462]

>>6676352
Good thing we aren't banning art then.

[Anonymous No.6676496]

Can you retards hurry up and continue arguing so we can hit the bump limit and start a new AI thread? There are only 9 threads in my filter i want to hit 10

[Anonymous No.6676601]

>>6676445
What's available for human eyes is available for scraping. The AI learned from it just like people get inspired from seeing artwork posted online.
Are you going to start paying out to all the people whose art you've seen and internalized and learned from?

[Anonymous No.6676608]

>>6673922
>>6674758
i love how you guys are treating openAI as if they were stabilityAI lol

[Anonymous No.6676613]

>>6675432
>>6676290
The problem was never about the technology. It was about Stable Diffusion releasing it for free and enabling anyone to make any kind of amazing art they wanted, easily. No one was crying about Dall-E or Midjourney before that.

[Anonymous No.6676636]

>>6676156
You are just bandwagoning retards with dumb opinions.

[Anonymous No.6676639]

>>6676174
>The difference is that the artist hones their own craft,
Ai artists also learn about their craft...

[Anonymous No.6676641]

>>6676312
>What does choosing tags do, exactly?
Output unique art that expresses your ideas...

[Anonymous No.6676649]

Behold the mighty army of self-proclaimed art purists, who have taken it upon themselves to unleash their scorn upon the realm of AI-generated art. How entertaining it is to witness their paradoxical rants, as they spew forth their disdain while conveniently relying on technology to manifest their own creative endeavors.

Oh, dear critics of AI art, pray tell, did you forge the very tablet upon which you sketch? Did you craft the intricate lines of code that power your beloved software? Alas, those digital strokes cannot compare to the divine grace of a traditional brush upon canvas, or so you claim.

But fear not, oh noble guardians of artistic authenticity, for your sage wisdom has revealed the path to true artistic righteousness. Yes, indeed! Create your own brush, fashion your own canvas, and concoct your own pigments from the depths of nature itself. Only then, and only then, shall you be deemed worthy of lamenting the intrusion of technology, my dear antiquated souls.

So, take up your wooden sticks and horsehair, smother your canvases with homemade concoctions, and revel in the purity of your artistic endeavors. But remember, dear grandpa, that progress knows no bounds, and even the tools of creation evolve. The intersection of art and technology beckons, whether you choose to embrace it or linger in nostalgic defiance.

May your disdain be your guiding light, and may your hypocritical cries echo through the annals of time, for what is art without the condescending judgments of its self-appointed guardians?

[Anonymous No.6676656]

>>6676601
he would if he could oy vey

[Anonymous No.6676680]

>>6676649
This was written by AI, how can I tell? It makes too much sense.

[Anonymous No.6676682]

>>6676639
>Ai artists
not a thing

[Anonymous No.6676684]

>>6676649
This sounds like chatgpt being told to make an argument while sounding high-falootin'.

[Anonymous No.6676708]

>>6676649
pajeetbot will have its mind blown when it finally achieves sentience and realizes fundies are transferable and i can still make shit with my finger and some dirt

[Anonymous No.6676713]

>>6676708
I wonder how AI proponents will do when that big solar storm we're overdue for finally hits. Digital bros will have a bit of a hill to climb, but AI people will still have exactly 0 drawing skills. No NFTs or crypto to shill either.

[Anonymous No.6676740]

>>6676713
they will furiously masturbate to my drawings in the dirt

[Anonymous No.6676756]

>>6676740
>No cumming on the dirt artwork you plebs. Cum ONLY in the cum hole!

[SEGA No.6676767]

>>6669828
>There is an infinite amount. The amount of datasets is not finite, it is infinite.
*laughs in interpolation*
The jig is up, Sam. The latent space is static and its outputs are finite. There is no magic. There is no "mixing styles". There's only interpolated images all the way down.

[Anonymous No.6676769]

>>6676767
You can combine models in an infinite amount of ways. You are dumb, very very dumb.

[Anonymous No.6676772]

>>6676767
>each of those "finite" zillions of images can create a new model
>you can then merge those models with each other in zillions of ways
yes, finite

[Debater No.6676773]

>>6676769
Why do near all your examples include anime or softcore porn

[Anonymous No.6676775]

.le sage

[Anonymous No.6676777]

>>6676769
Yet still all you can do is interpolate.
Photobashing via gacha rolling. How progressive and innovative!

[Anonymous No.6676779]

.

[Anonymous No.6676780]

>>6676777
You are a loser.

[Anonymous No.6676783]

..

[Anonymous No.6676786]

you still need basic artistic knowledge and sense, a thing 99.9% of the AI bros don't have.

[Anonymous No.6676787]

>>6676786
99% of AI bros make better art than you so what do you mean?

[Anonymous No.6676789]

>6676780
Yet you keep coming back

[Anonymous No.6676796]

>6676789
Not like it's hard to impress "AI" niggas literally you can spam their own shit at them and they still clap like a monkey

[Anonymous No.6676797]

.,

[Anonymous No.6676799]

>>6676787
>make
nah, not really

[Anonymous No.6676801]

.
.

[Anonymous No.6676804]

,
,

[Anonymous No.6676807]

>>6676780
Don't @ me when you can't draw 3D objects in perspective on a sheet of paper using nothing but the power of your mind, faggot.

[Anonymous No.6676808]

>>6676807
>literally a bunch of gay lines on paper
absolutely pathetic

[Anonymous No.6676810]

>>6676787
>>6676808
pick up a paper sheet and a pencil and draw a cute animu girl, nothing too fancy
once you finish, place your pencil on top of your drawing without covering too much the girl
grab your phone, take a picture and post it

[Anonymous No.6676813]

>6676808
says the spamming nigga

[Anonymous No.6676817]

>>6676807
nice drawing, shame its wasted on this thread

[Anonymous No.6676818]

>6676787
But anon I thought it's democratized that anyone could've made

[Anonymous No.6676830]

>>6676810
>>6676787
>>6676808

no? alright then
it was the perfect opportunity to show "Luddite" off

[Anonymous No.6676843]

>>6676830
They unironically think wasting hours prooompting better combinations of wordart is a better usage of their time than drawing anything. They constantly shit on artists yet want to be accepted as one so bad, otherwise they wouldn't be here in the first place making nonstop threads.

[Anonymous No.6676849]

>>6676843
well, that's too bad
i too wanted to draw a cute girl

[Anonymous No.6677002]

>>6676849
With AI, the only limit is your imageanition