/lit/ - Literature

>>22067072

>>22067072
If it’s a digital Amazon release, who the fuck cares?
Tweak it till it looks right for the book.

>>22067075
Also, which one should I use?

>>22067084
>>22067083
It is indeed a digital release, maybe a few paperback copies for myself and close friends. But I know people on both sides of the AI argument can be extremely autistic

>>22067084
Not that one

>>22067096

You’ll get shit on for actually finding these “covers” good.

>>22067103

>>22067109
>>22067104
Not saying they’re masterpieces, but they’re cheaper than paying half a grand for a good artist

>>22067115

>>22067122

>>22067125

>>22067072
Heard from a relative who frequents writer's groups, conventions, &c.
There are groups out there who will actively smear your work for using AI art, because of their hate for AI content. They explained to me one person in the community who had used AI work and was totally review bombed, not for the content of their work, but for just using AI cover art.
If you were Stephen King, or some other crazy notable author, I'd maybe find fault in using AI art. But I don't think its reasonable, for newer authors, to be expected to pay a real artist when AI cover art can be used.

>>22067137
What a bummer. Maybe I’ll credit the art to a pen name artist

>>22067072
Wait, let me consult my crystal ball
how the fuck should we know?

>>22067248
Because I know people on 4chan post about AI all the time, and I know there’s at least a handful of self published authors on this board

>>22067072
I hope so.

>>22067096
This is the best one. But really, none of them are good for cover art. These are landscape shots. You need a picture where the eye is drawn towards a central figure in the middle of the page. Also you need to account for the title author text. It's going to cover up the landscape.

>>22067072
People won't even recognize it if you don't tell them. And they will like it UNTIL you tell them, then they will inexplicably be angry about it

>>22067072
No but I will shit on you for using a "le Lone Figure facing away from the viewer towards a fantasy Environment" video game cover meme

>>22067072
Edit your pictures. Don't just go with the base generation. Thats what annoys me most about 99% of AI images. Put it back into inpainting and fix up any minor details and AI fuckery

How the fuck can AI draw such pictures? It is uncanny.

>>22067970
Well it beats anime face, and anything else is too easily called out for being AI

>>22067248
Are you a fucking retard?

>>22067982
This. Use AI-generated art as a beginning, not an end.
>>22068078
Stable Diffusion was trained by associating images with key words/phrases, and then devolving those images into noise.
It generates images by taking key words/phrases, generating a noise image, and then repeatedly denoising it until an image emerges.
Here's an example of "European style castle in Japan":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:X-Y_plot_of_algorithmically-generated_AI_art_of_European-style_castle_in_Japan_demonstrating_DDIM_diffusion_steps.png
The AI knows what European style castles look like, and what Japan looks like, so by applying both prompts simultaneously, produces a blend.
Here's one where it alternately applies "cow" and "horse" in alternate generations, producing a hybrid cow/horse:
https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/39339941/197556926-49ceb72b-daf3-4208-86f3-c2e7e9cd775a.gif
Hopefully this is enough to get started.
>>22067137
"Artists" who seethe about AI are the ones who fear being replaced by it, and were never very good to begin with.

>>22069003
It all went straight over my head. But if AI is drawing the pictures OP is posting, then it is over for 90% of freelance illustrators.

Also, anime face has to go

>You will own nothing
>You will create nothing
>You will abandon creativity
>You will let the algorithm take charge

>>22070026
This "ai" (which is in reality just a matrix multiplication machine) is not drawing anything, all it is doing is taking a picture it was fed, grounding it into a fine paste then mixing it with other similar pictures
It's a glorified collage machine

And to answer OP's question, yes, you WILL get shit on for using ai garbage for your garbage book's cover. Nobody who can affect the double slit experiment likes ai garbage

>>22070026
Certainly you understood the pretty pictures, though?
>>22070043
Most human "artists" are little more than glorified collage machines.
They're the ones seething about being replaced, because they weren't very good to begin with.

>>22070094
>Certainly you understood the pretty pictures, though?
Yes, that's for certain!

>>22069003
>"Artists" who seethe about AI are the ones who fear being replaced by it, and were never very good to begin with.
That isn't a very good argument. By that logic the only "good" artists are the ones doing Duchamp conceptual art trash (a random object just plopped onto an gallery pedestal) or interior semiotics bullshit. I guess if you just want to do this for yourself and your friends there are much worse things you could be doing as a hobby. But I'm not sure what the point is of trying to publish books with the flood of gpt trash prompted by 3rd worlders and saggy tits wine moms. Just so you can see it on the Amazon store and feel special? Lmao