I don't really care about others generating it. I've been using a generative synth for ages (NotePerformer), and I'll probably be incorporating some generative art in my game eventually. I do care when lazy slopspammers post some crappy elf girl on /tg/ with an inane question.
>I do care when lazy slopspammers post some crappy elf girl on /tg/ with an inane question.
Let's not pretend the "bad question + unrelated image of a girl" problem is something that came into being with AI.
Because I am lost and I want to keep others from the same
Anon, it's ridiculously easy to turn your computer off and go for a run. Stop pretending you're some cautionary tale heroin addict. You're here for the same reason the rest of us are; because you want to be.
indifferent. i think people overhype it because they imagine a much greater amount of competition with traditional artists than actually exists. they think of art as a pure commodity like sugar, rather than a social commodity where who the artist is remains as if not more important than the art itself (nobody pays $10k for furry porn just because the artist is *good*, nobody pays $10 for depressed emo furry scrawls just because the artist is *bad*, but people pay $10k and $10 to artists all the time...), and where the possibility of intention in how something was done matters.
imagine a picture of a happy couple, but with a bloodied knife on the table. with a human, you know that this discordant scene was done on purpose, telling us something about the scene in the picture or at least about the artist. with AI art, it's harder to tell if the knife was prompted for, or if it just got thrown up by the computer fever dream when asked for "a happy smiling couple in the kitchen". that's true of basically every detail in a picture.
what's funny is that neither AI prompters nor traditonal artists really understand this. it sutis both to imagine that there's an existential threat.
Stupid moron. Most artists don't occupy a social position, or have a niche in the art world that allows for ludicrous valuations of their art (i.e Andy Warhol). Most earn their living anonymously through the very jobs now jammed up by "AI" goyslop. You think, artist = famous artist, exhibited in galleries.
How do I feel about microwave heating up my slop?
How do I feel about EuroPop from 1980s'?
How do I feel about slop culture of the past 2000 years?
I don't think about it.
same, those same motherfrickers crying about how it's bad to publish their work on other sites (even though it's fricking free advertisement for them), with AI we can finally say to them "you don't want us to use your work fine, we'll go for AI and you'll be forgotten fricker"
same, those same motherfrickers crying about how it's bad to publish their work on other sites (even though it's fricking free advertisement for them), with AI we can finally say to them "you don't want us to use your work fine, we'll go for AI and you'll be forgotten fricker"
https://i.imgur.com/sQUtx1o.png
I just enjoy how the people who were all smug about how robots would replace manual labour jobs are seething now that they're the first ones on the chopping block.
It's almost poetic.
Anti human morons.
"Because the technology is just gonna get better and better and better and better. And it’s gonna get easier and easier, and more and more convenient, and more and more pleasurable, to be alone with images on a screen, given to us by people who do not love us but want our money. Which is all right. In low doses, right? But if that’s the basic main staple of your diet, you’re gonna die. In a meaningful way, you’re going to die." DFW, 1997
> it’s gonna get easier and easier, and more and more convenient, more and more pleasurable, to be alone with images on a screen, given to us by people who do not love us but want our money
There is no difference between what you've described and YouTube or TikTok or BOT. If you really believed this, you wouldn't be /here/ and AI would be pretty low on your list of concerns.
All AI development should be ceased. All machines, data storage, chip manufacturing etc. that enables it should be destroyed. All "expertise" in the field, whether experts or technical manuals, should be destroyed. Laws and institutions constituted internationally to abolish it.
I just enjoy how the people who were all smug about how robots would replace manual labour jobs are seething now that they're the first ones on the chopping block.
It's almost poetic.
Human art is fine for a bunch of barely civilized apes. Pure silicon will transcend it to a level our poor monkey brains can barely comprehend. I welcome our superintelligent supercreative autodidactic and recursively evolving overlords.
We don't. The problem is that slopmaker "prompt engineers" (not even local AI, they literally just use midjourney) believe "I am le real artist now" and start shilling their patreons and spamming their creaturas everywhere outside of aislop containment zones.
They combine the obnoxiousness of a twittergay western incompetent hack artist with unlimited volume of a streetshitter spammer.
most of them are third world mentally moronic cryptogays too.
AI art is just a tool. Your average AI hater hates AI with no bounds - they pretend it is about artist rights and whatnot but really they are just your modern day Luddites who think it’s somehow gonna make their whole careers redundant because they are dumb reactionaries with no vision.
Also funnily enough they seem to not really give a frick about programmers who by their standards have been absolutely raped by copilot and whatnot.
I think AI Art is really cool, but I still think art made by humans is cooler. A lot of digital art has already been plagued by a lack of creativity, endless rehashing of popular trends, and I don't mean that kind of art, but I do truly believe that AI art will never be able to create something original, like the drawings of A. A. Milne, or the animation style of Bakshi or Bluth. People with skill and their own unique voice will always stand out against the glut of rehashed AI art, just like they stand out with their own unique voice against the current glut of rehashed digital art.
That being said, it does bring me great pleasure to think of something silly like "A dog firefighter in the style of Rembrandt" and have it generated on my home PC in under a minute. I genuinely love AI Art that is used for silly things.
what i mean is, how would i know if something i make is unlike anything else? like even if i drew something myself by hand, there's no way i could be consciously aware of all the influences that have shaped my mind throughout my life that will affect what and how i draw
just being a human doesn't guarantee unique art
2 months ago
Anonymous
>what i mean is, how would i know if something i make is unlike anything else?
So one way is to go the art PHD route, like was mentioned, where you have a deep knowledge of art, art styles, and artistic conventions, and you deliberately break them in a way that you're pretty sure you haven't seen before - but I don't think this creates very lasting or popular art styles. It's kinda the thing that results in "nobody's ever put a banana on a toilet seat with a neon sign above it that says SEX before" type of art.
The other way to go is to not worry so much about trying to be unique, and just letting your own collection of experiences and inspiration come through in a unique and personal style. It might not be incredibly unique, but it'll probably be a lot more coherent than the PHD guy, and it'll still be unique enough because it's your personal experience driving your art, and literally everybody's experience is unique. Cartoonist Bill Watterson for instance has a unique artstyle that is still derivative of the artstyle of the Peanuts, Krazy Kat and Pogo cartoons. But the combination of the influences is what makes it unique.
2 months ago
Anonymous
i'm mainly talking about laymen, like myself, who have no particular desire to try to make unique art, and just likes what they like regardless of how unique it is
that last sentence kinda shot yourself in the foot though, saying that combining styles can create a unique style, as that is something an AI can do
even simpler than that, if someone can reliably recognise a piece of art as being done by an AI, does that not by itself make it unique? as in unique to AI? even if it's just because of defects that a human would never make, that's still unique, unique doesn't mean good
2 months ago
Anonymous
>who have no particular desire to try to make unique art, and just likes what they like regardless of how unique it is
Then I don't understand the question in the first place? If you don't care then that's fine
>that last sentence kinda shot yourself in the foot though, saying that combining styles can create a unique style, as that is something an AI can do
I don't think it's really the same, mainly because AI can't take a combination of art styles, apply them to a character, and then keep it consistent in creative ways the same way a cartoonist can (see attached image). I can imagine that there's workflows using AI where for example someone could use an image of a 3D model to keep the generated art consistent, but then there's so much human effort in creating the model and posing it, that it's really just a tool and not an AI generated style.
>unique doesn't mean good
well that is why I said something unique and cool lol
I don't really care about others generating it. I've been using a generative synth for ages (NotePerformer), and I'll probably be incorporating some generative art in my game eventually. I do care when lazy slopspammers post some crappy elf girl on /tg/ with an inane question.
>I do care when lazy slopspammers post some crappy elf girl on /tg/ with an inane question.
Let's not pretend the "bad question + unrelated image of a girl" problem is something that came into being with AI.
Anon, it's ridiculously easy to turn your computer off and go for a run. Stop pretending you're some cautionary tale heroin addict. You're here for the same reason the rest of us are; because you want to be.
indifferent. i think people overhype it because they imagine a much greater amount of competition with traditional artists than actually exists. they think of art as a pure commodity like sugar, rather than a social commodity where who the artist is remains as if not more important than the art itself (nobody pays $10k for furry porn just because the artist is *good*, nobody pays $10 for depressed emo furry scrawls just because the artist is *bad*, but people pay $10k and $10 to artists all the time...), and where the possibility of intention in how something was done matters.
imagine a picture of a happy couple, but with a bloodied knife on the table. with a human, you know that this discordant scene was done on purpose, telling us something about the scene in the picture or at least about the artist. with AI art, it's harder to tell if the knife was prompted for, or if it just got thrown up by the computer fever dream when asked for "a happy smiling couple in the kitchen". that's true of basically every detail in a picture.
what's funny is that neither AI prompters nor traditonal artists really understand this. it sutis both to imagine that there's an existential threat.
>what's funny is that neither AI prompters nor traditonal artists really understand this.
The people that don't understand this are ones that don't do either AI art or traditional art or are bad at both.
Stupid moron. Most artists don't occupy a social position, or have a niche in the art world that allows for ludicrous valuations of their art (i.e Andy Warhol). Most earn their living anonymously through the very jobs now jammed up by "AI" goyslop. You think, artist = famous artist, exhibited in galleries.
How do I feel about microwave heating up my slop?
How do I feel about EuroPop from 1980s'?
How do I feel about slop culture of the past 2000 years?
I don't think about it.
I was extremely addicted to Dall-E 3 for the first few weeks after it released.
I'm having a lot fun seeing "artists" seethe
same, those same motherfrickers crying about how it's bad to publish their work on other sites (even though it's fricking free advertisement for them), with AI we can finally say to them "you don't want us to use your work fine, we'll go for AI and you'll be forgotten fricker"
Anti human morons.
"Because the technology is just gonna get better and better and better and better. And it’s gonna get easier and easier, and more and more convenient, and more and more pleasurable, to be alone with images on a screen, given to us by people who do not love us but want our money. Which is all right. In low doses, right? But if that’s the basic main staple of your diet, you’re gonna die. In a meaningful way, you’re going to die." DFW, 1997
if you hate technology so much, turn off your pc and go live your life in a forest, you won't be missed
I am not your enemy, the techno-class and their manipulation machines are the common enemy of all individuals, the cause is humanity.
> it’s gonna get easier and easier, and more and more convenient, more and more pleasurable, to be alone with images on a screen, given to us by people who do not love us but want our money
There is no difference between what you've described and YouTube or TikTok or BOT. If you really believed this, you wouldn't be /here/ and AI would be pretty low on your list of concerns.
moron. Those things are just as bad, and will in fact be the vectors for AI slop.
Cool, so why are you here then?
Because I am lost and I want to keep others from the same
You have to be pro-human b-because, YOU JUST DO!!! OKAY???
All AI development should be ceased. All machines, data storage, chip manufacturing etc. that enables it should be destroyed. All "expertise" in the field, whether experts or technical manuals, should be destroyed. Laws and institutions constituted internationally to abolish it.
I just enjoy how the people who were all smug about how robots would replace manual labour jobs are seething now that they're the first ones on the chopping block.
It's almost poetic.
karma got them, and that's a good thing
>How do you feel about AI Art
it's cool. i have fun with it.
>and do you care if others enjoy generating it?
no.
I only care about it when an annoying homosexual goes onto an entertainment board and keeps edging to ai
>How do you feel about AI Art
I'm enjoying the salt it generates more than anything else it can do.
I really enjoy making characters and training LoRAs.
AI art is evil, only real art created by real humans has a right to exist
Human art is fine for a bunch of barely civilized apes. Pure silicon will transcend it to a level our poor monkey brains can barely comprehend. I welcome our superintelligent supercreative autodidactic and recursively evolving overlords.
artist seethe is so delicious
they have such a child's understanding of the world and technology. watching them reason through this issue is so entertaining.
We don't. The problem is that slopmaker "prompt engineers" (not even local AI, they literally just use midjourney) believe "I am le real artist now" and start shilling their patreons and spamming their creaturas everywhere outside of aislop containment zones.
They combine the obnoxiousness of a twittergay western incompetent hack artist with unlimited volume of a streetshitter spammer.
most of them are third world mentally moronic cryptogays too.
AI art is just a tool. Your average AI hater hates AI with no bounds - they pretend it is about artist rights and whatnot but really they are just your modern day Luddites who think it’s somehow gonna make their whole careers redundant because they are dumb reactionaries with no vision.
Also funnily enough they seem to not really give a frick about programmers who by their standards have been absolutely raped by copilot and whatnot.
I think AI Art is really cool, but I still think art made by humans is cooler. A lot of digital art has already been plagued by a lack of creativity, endless rehashing of popular trends, and I don't mean that kind of art, but I do truly believe that AI art will never be able to create something original, like the drawings of A. A. Milne, or the animation style of Bakshi or Bluth. People with skill and their own unique voice will always stand out against the glut of rehashed AI art, just like they stand out with their own unique voice against the current glut of rehashed digital art.
That being said, it does bring me great pleasure to think of something silly like "A dog firefighter in the style of Rembrandt" and have it generated on my home PC in under a minute. I genuinely love AI Art that is used for silly things.
yea i agree
Milne's style already exists though, gimme something original and cool
i'm not an art professor, how would i even recognise something original?
Milne had a degree in math, he figured it out.
what i mean is, how would i know if something i make is unlike anything else? like even if i drew something myself by hand, there's no way i could be consciously aware of all the influences that have shaped my mind throughout my life that will affect what and how i draw
just being a human doesn't guarantee unique art
>what i mean is, how would i know if something i make is unlike anything else?
So one way is to go the art PHD route, like was mentioned, where you have a deep knowledge of art, art styles, and artistic conventions, and you deliberately break them in a way that you're pretty sure you haven't seen before - but I don't think this creates very lasting or popular art styles. It's kinda the thing that results in "nobody's ever put a banana on a toilet seat with a neon sign above it that says SEX before" type of art.
The other way to go is to not worry so much about trying to be unique, and just letting your own collection of experiences and inspiration come through in a unique and personal style. It might not be incredibly unique, but it'll probably be a lot more coherent than the PHD guy, and it'll still be unique enough because it's your personal experience driving your art, and literally everybody's experience is unique. Cartoonist Bill Watterson for instance has a unique artstyle that is still derivative of the artstyle of the Peanuts, Krazy Kat and Pogo cartoons. But the combination of the influences is what makes it unique.
i'm mainly talking about laymen, like myself, who have no particular desire to try to make unique art, and just likes what they like regardless of how unique it is
that last sentence kinda shot yourself in the foot though, saying that combining styles can create a unique style, as that is something an AI can do
even simpler than that, if someone can reliably recognise a piece of art as being done by an AI, does that not by itself make it unique? as in unique to AI? even if it's just because of defects that a human would never make, that's still unique, unique doesn't mean good
>who have no particular desire to try to make unique art, and just likes what they like regardless of how unique it is
Then I don't understand the question in the first place? If you don't care then that's fine
>that last sentence kinda shot yourself in the foot though, saying that combining styles can create a unique style, as that is something an AI can do
I don't think it's really the same, mainly because AI can't take a combination of art styles, apply them to a character, and then keep it consistent in creative ways the same way a cartoonist can (see attached image). I can imagine that there's workflows using AI where for example someone could use an image of a 3D model to keep the generated art consistent, but then there's so much human effort in creating the model and posing it, that it's really just a tool and not an AI generated style.
>unique doesn't mean good
well that is why I said something unique and cool lol
>how do you feel about Ai art?
SEEEEEEXXXOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!