How do you feel about the AI art debate?

How do you feel about the AI art debate?

Is it a valid form of creative expression coupled with impressive tech showcasing, or is it saturating the internet art scene with a lot of mediocre or repetitious content?

Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68

Yakub: World's Greatest Dad Shirt $21.68

Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68

  1. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    >Is it a valid form of creative expression coupled with impressive tech showcasing, or is it saturating the internet art scene with a lot of mediocre or repetitious content?
    It's both.

  2. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    >How do you feel about the AI art debate?
    I don't fricking care
    >Is it a valid form of creative expression coupled with impressive tech showcasing, or is it saturating the internet art scene with a lot of mediocre or repetitious content?
    It can be both.

  3. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    I think the relationships between furgays and artists is kind of like the relationship between a crackdealer and an addict. Its good that that stuff is being automated so those furgays can fap without having to pay money and wait for someone to draw lucario sucking dicks or whatever.

  4. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    I think artcels be seething over AIchads

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      I unironically modeled my life on this guy, I first saw the picture years ago and started wearing casual suit jackets and shirts. Still do to this day, things have gone well since. I used to always wear jeans and branded t-shirts.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >and his car was running
      I'm 35 and I just learned this was illegal to do in the US.
      I can't think of a single person who gives a shit

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Is that Daniel Craig?

  5. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    I visit art sites to see what people are making, not to see what AI is interpolating.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Most people visit art sites to see art, not to cum over the arbitrary idea that the art they're looking at was made with human input.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        >arbitrary
        hahaha, forgive me for preferring humans.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        Not really

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        I think you're confusing art and pornography.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        nah mate i like to follow specific artists because I enjoy what they do and how they do it

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Lol they look like nazis
      Next they will put stars on all "AI Art"

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        yellow stars?

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          Probably green stars

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            why green?

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              It's the color of the future

  6. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    The genie is out of the bottle so all the Luddites can kick and scream all they want about the new fangled technology that make their old ways inefficient but that's not going to get rid of it. The smart artists will adapt, the old artists will die.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Image gen cannot create anything outside the bounds of an average of what it was trained on. I don't think artists actually have too much to worry about

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        Artists don't have anything to worry about because AI Art is a tool and the best art made with the tool will be art made by humans using the tool.

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          >creates everything and leaves you to clean up its mess
          >tool
          yeah okay whatever

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            Oh gee I wonder how long it takes to clean up a mess versus doing everything from scratch...

            Even just using it as a basic google image search / composition / mood board generator makes it immensely useful.

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              Quality > Quantity
              You have a point about the mood board thing but as a replacement for artists? No lmao

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                At the baseline, nobody is saying AI can replace artists.
                The reason that "artists" are panicking so hard is because "artists" know they are getting replaced.
                How is that possible?
                Simple. 99.999% of people who style themselves "artists" couldn't be further from one.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            do you know how to use it to make anything you want ? if i made a request would you be able to reproduce it ?

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        Artists don't have anything to worry about because AI Art is a tool and the best art made with the tool will be art made by humans using the tool.

        you both are naive as frick. you are either a really moronic zoomer or a fricking baby boomer moron thats losing his marbles. If you are a millennial you must be really stupid. If you are into tech you should see what has been happening. Whats about to happen with AI is going to change everything. The fact its moving so fricking quickly right now should give you a hint at what is going to happen in the next 10-20yrs.

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          >muh singularity
          larper, pls
          your nerd rapture is a meme
          enjoy yer UBI pod, that's the future

  7. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    i've yet to see it create a single thing of interest. it's basically a goyslop-generator for the witless.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Something tells me you are a contrarian. You could see the most beautiful piece of art of made and say it sucks because you're obtuse.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        You could try prove him wrong...

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          Prove someone who is being an obtuse contrarian wrong...
          No, if you believe there has been no impressive AI art made then you're either willfully ignorant or obtuse or both.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            >impressive
            Depends what impresses you. So far there are impressive images, in that sense of "huh, AI can do that?" but impressive in the sense that, "wow! I wish I painted that?" no.

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              >he chooses the obtuse option

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                Not really. I am open to seeing cool AI art. I have generated over 10k images myself.

  8. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    >mediocre or repetitious content
    the internet is for porn and shitposting. get over yourself, seriousgay.

  9. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    >is it saturating the internet art scene with a lot of mediocre or repetitious content?
    You mean like fan artists were doing already?

  10. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    >doesn't affect artists that create value in their art by expressing specific, subtle concepts or demonstrate exemplary technical skill
    >completely replaces """artists""" that create value in their art by shitting out cookie cutter CalArts and random "abstract" abortions
    lol
    lmao

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      The fact that DeviantArt of all places sperged out about AI art is hilarious to say the least. That someone thought making a model out of DeviantArt shit was a good idea is even funnier

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        to be fair, dA does have high tier artists (or had), it's just being free invites every 13 year olds with sonic OCs

  11. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    AI art is a tool. Photoshop already made art extremely easy and its laughable that people who don't even know how to blend colors on paper are calling other people cheaters because a new tool came along that made making art a little easier. Newsflash, 90% of digital artists could not make art without the tools they have. Not only is it harder, but the materials are very expensive.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >Photoshop already made art extremely easy
      you haven't opened photoshop or done art once lmao
      also the point is to understand colors, whether you blend them on a palette irl or pick them in photoshop it doesn't matter

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        >Photoshop and its suite of tools didn't make art easy
        lol
        lmao

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          Open photoshop and paint me something then. Come on, it's easy, right? Surely you shouldn't have any trouble doing that.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            Its absolutely made things easier and souless compared to the trad experience. You're being a zoomer about it riding his little tricycle calling crutch wheels tools because of your AI hysteria.

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              You would call a piece of shit stuck on a canvas as soul. The phrase is meaningless.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                a human shit on that canvas, a human with soul
                you wouldn't understand, you machine filth lower than shit

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                Exactly, your definition of soul is meaningless. Basically you're just a luddite shunning machines.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >Exactly, your definition of soul is meaningless. Basically you're just a luddite shunning machines.
                but the machines don't create anything new.
                they just remix shit.
                >isn't that what humans do too
                Not in that way.
                A computer understands everything it understands, even if it doesn't make sense/
                That's why you have to curate it so hard.

                Sure you can reduce humans to "we all learn shit too", as well.
                But that's pretty unproductive because the reality, at least at this current point in time is, that computers still are very limited.
                Yet the proponents still always use the same reduction argument "humans learn the same way"

                They don't.
                If it were truly the same then computers would have no weaknesses, just like humans who have no weaknesses, unless they are defective.

                Yet the reduction argument is and always has been the same, today, and decades ago.
                Hel, creatures, the video game was touted as sporting ditigal DNA because it had entities that did produce offspring based on parents.

                But you can guess how accurate to life that model truly was.
                But the same damn argument.
                "genes are basically just variables that mix"
                Yeah. So fricking what, that Norn still is walking into the wall all day.

                Same with 'ai art'.
                Even stable diffusion cannot, in my opinion be called artistic, because it has no mind.
                To it, EVERYTHING it shits out is 'art'.

                You have to negatively prompt it to keep that from not happening to much.
                And yes if I draw a square I also kind of go "let's not make the lines too wobbly and rounded"
                But unlike the computer, I have taste.
                And so do you.

                That's why, if you are a stable diffusion user, you're probably NOT generating ms paint disney goofy x brutus gay porn.

                But
                masterpiece blabla artist artgerm or whatever high grade artist you might like.

                But from SDs perspective.
                Even a fricking blank image is art.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                yes ai art isn't human art
                as this threads shows, it's better than loser fleshbags

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >human art sucks
                >but without it I can't press the button

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                human art is the base material from which better art rises, it doesn't "suck," it's just the soil, the substrate
                like dirt and shit

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >human art is the base material from which better art rises, it doesn't "suck," it's just the soil, the substrate
                >like dirt and shit
                then why do sd gays strive to emulate the human artists so much?
                >yeah so the filthy artists know they are being replaced
                by...filthy computer artists, yes?
                and you are their master, yes?

                wish I hadn't posted statuesque.jpg already

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                BRUH, we want the milk, not the cow.
                SD give the milk, without the cow.
                YOU ARE A COW.
                An angry one.
                We don't care about you.
                You are here to be milked as necessary and nothing more.
                This is your future.
                Get use to it.
                I don't debate animals.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >you are the cow
                oh yeah I'm gonna use your SD prompts as an input for MY model.
                >you can't do that, it doesn't have the soul of my style of prompting

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                good, please do so
                why would I try to stop you, even if I could?
                ai art is for all
                we are all art communists here!

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >it doesn't have the soul of my style of prompting
                lmao
                some gays do keep their prompts a secret, because they want to keep their renders unique as long as possible, but I doubt they care about "soul"

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >BRUH, we want the milk, not the cow.
                Most art gains it's value because someone specifically drew it. That's why forgery is a crime. Not saying AI art is forgery but art is weird like that.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                Are you implying art will not be made because of ai?
                Or art already existing will lose value because of ai?
                Ai art does nothing to the already existing gallery system of museums and art investors.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                The line you draw between human an AI creativity is arbitrary and won't even be true in a few years. You still hold the belief that humans little gods of intelligence but the reality is that after 400 years of "enlightenment" the end of that process is to reproduce ourselves externally via a feedback loop that doesn't need us anymore. Sorry if that scares you so much.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                Yeah, the line will be indistuinguishable
                >computer, please clap
                I'm sorry dave, that is too cringe, but being a computer I have to do it anyway.
                >thank you for clapping for me, I truly feel fulfilled now
                >if a human clapped for me unprompted because they actually found me cool, I would not feel the same elation I am doing right now

                yeah.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                you think like a cow

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                How appropriate.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >cow cow cow cow
                Whatever you say madharchod, but the truth is:
                The more people know about good SD is, the less they will care about it.
                But they will still care if their child draws them a crayon picture.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >The more people know about good SD is, the less they will care about it.
                aka
                wow you made a painting?
                that's cool, painting 2-3908239472349232232 will be great too.
                >please care about my synthesis
                Why?
                >I..I clicked the button and it looks like a painting

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >The more people know about good SD is, the less they will care about it.
                okay
                >But they will still care if their child draws them a crayon picture.
                as they should

                I don't think any ai gays claimed ai art is better than your own child's doodle, that's a rather strange take, but sure.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                it's not a strange take at all.
                you might have not posted a picture at all because if I read pro AI arguments and see a picture I instantly dismiss it.

                sure as hell won't save it.
                cause why should I?

                SD is proven to work, so even if you generate 1023480234820 trillion to the power of grahams numbers pictures with it, I don't care anymore.
                I know what it does.

                A fricking hydraulic robot arm can lift a car no sweat.
                Few humans can do that.
                But I'm also not impressed at that arm, sure I admire the engineering behind it but not that it can do what it does, if it didn't do what it does then it wouldn't be a thing cause humanity would not pursue it further.

                But if you do a cossack dance for me for 30 seconds and not only not get winded, but sing a little tune afterwards.
                Then I will be impressed as frick.

                But ai 'art'?
                No, I get it.
                It replicates greatness.
                I get it. I got it.
                I have gotten the message.
                I have, incorporated the message into my mind.

                And that's it.

                I can't be sure if my child can do it. It might be too moronic.
                So if it can do it, that means something.

                Humans don't come with the guarantee like that.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >if I read pro AI arguments and see a picture I instantly dismiss it.
                why?
                >sure as hell won't save it.
                okay
                >cause why should I?
                you don't have to, is anyone forcing you?
                please tell them to stop

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >f I read pro AI arguments and see a picture I instantly dismiss it.
                >why?

                SD is proven to work, so even if you generate 1023480234820 trillion to the power of grahams numbers pictures with it, I don't care anymore.
                I know what it does.

                A fricking hydraulic robot arm can lift a car no sweat.
                Few humans can do that.
                But I'm also not impressed at that arm, sure I admire the engineering behind it but not that it can do what it does, if it didn't do what it does then it wouldn't be a thing cause humanity would not pursue it further.

                But if you do a cossack dance for me for 30 seconds and not only not get winded, but sing a little tune afterwards.
                Then I will be impressed as frick.

                But ai 'art'?
                No, I get it.
                It replicates greatness.
                I get it. I got it.
                I have gotten the message.
                I have, incorporated the message into my mind.

                And that's it.

                I can't be sure if my child can do it. It might be too moronic.
                So if it can do it, that means something.

                Humans don't come with the guarantee like that.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous
              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                it's not a strange take at all.
                you might have not posted a picture at all because if I read pro AI arguments and see a picture I instantly dismiss it.

                sure as hell won't save it.
                cause why should I?

                SD is proven to work, so even if you generate 1023480234820 trillion to the power of grahams numbers pictures with it, I don't care anymore.
                I know what it does.

                A fricking hydraulic robot arm can lift a car no sweat.
                Few humans can do that.
                But I'm also not impressed at that arm, sure I admire the engineering behind it but not that it can do what it does, if it didn't do what it does then it wouldn't be a thing cause humanity would not pursue it further.

                But if you do a cossack dance for me for 30 seconds and not only not get winded, but sing a little tune afterwards.
                Then I will be impressed as frick.

                But ai 'art'?
                No, I get it.
                It replicates greatness.
                I get it. I got it.
                I have gotten the message.
                I have, incorporated the message into my mind.

                And that's it.

                I can't be sure if my child can do it. It might be too moronic.
                So if it can do it, that means something.

                Humans don't come with the guarantee like that.

                GPT?

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                You probably stop with the ai threads.
                It's clearly not helping you.
                Just saying.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >I don't think any ai gays claimed ai art is better than your own child's doodle, that's a rather strange take, but sure.
                None of them will have children anyhow, so it's a moo point.

  12. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    I hate artist cuz they are a bunch of homosexuals who can do something I cannot. So seeing AI making art that just looks identical to what Twitter twinks charge you 50$ for makes me really happy

  13. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Genuine question, were musicians this insecure about synths and sampling when they were new?

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      kinda
      they were also going on about "not real art" but synths are just instruments so it's not a very accurate analogy
      a more apt one would be about sampling, boy they whined about that one

  14. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    >How do you feel about the AI art debate?
    The "debate" is largely just angry people who don't understand shit about the technology treating it as some kind of boogeyman.
    Most arguments against it are based on the claim that it's plagiarism, photobashing, etc. when it factually is not. People *could* just argue that they don't like it (which is perfectly fair), but that doesn't make a good headline.
    >Is it a valid form of creative expression coupled with impressive tech showcasing, or is it saturating the internet art scene with a lot of mediocre or repetitious content?
    Both.

  15. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    its a snafu steve job

  16. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    >Kit bashing can't be used to make real art
    >Collages aren't real aren't
    >Photo bashing can't be used for real art
    >Sampling isn't real music
    >Photography isn't real art
    *loads up photoshop and JustSketchMe*
    Yeah its art time

  17. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    >remove stable diffusion watermark
    >hire some artpoor to fix hands for $2/hr
    How can they tell the difference without nuking artists that use obsolete drawing methods?

  18. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    the second, coomers don't care about a shit other than cooming

  19. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    People that call themselves a.i. artists are the biggest homosexuals. At least admit that you did nothing and are worthless without a.i.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      people who complain about dumb shit are the biggest homosexuals

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      This tbh. I've seen some nice AI art, i fapped to some others, but calling yourself artists for using a AI is like calling yourself a doctor for use google.

  20. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    It is not valid creative expression, but at the same time it is not saturating the internet with mediocore repetitive content. Real art is more repetitive and mediocore. It is time for humans to stop being creative just like how they stopped crunching number on abacus once calculator was invented, AI is better, artists should not try to adapt, but instead surrender. Remove the dogshit art account creation process and just replace all the art accounts with AI chatbots AI generating prompts to then post there, free of humans. Prompter are just as much trannies as artgays are.

  21. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    How do you feel about the MIDI vs Piano performers debate?
    Oh wait, there's no debate, because Piano performers aren't moronic.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      I'm more interested in the type of communities AI art generator. It's interesting I can tell prompters apart not by their "style" but more by the subject matter they hyper focus on. I am facisma

      Musicians aren't afraid of AI because any developer stupid enough to take music to train a model with out asking the musicians will get sued. That's why Disco Diffusion will suck dick when compared to the text and art generators.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        wrong music is also a lot more grating than a "ha ha funny sausage finger e-girl"

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        >Musicians aren't afraid of AI because any developer stupid enough to take music to train a model with out asking the musicians will get sued
        >Stealing from musicians bad
        >Stealing from artists good

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          the difference is, people pay for music
          nobody pays for art
          (that isn't tax dodge scams of course)

          do visitors pay to view your art, anon?

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            >that isn't tax dodge scams of course
            No wonder israelites are so eager for AI art but AI music is another shoah

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          from musicians bad
          This sounds unfair, surely we have the tech to steal from a bunch of dopey drug fiends, what are you doing you nerds???

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          Imagine if art was the same as music and if you coincidentally made too many paint strokes that were close in length, color, and width to strokes done on a famous piece and now you owe the mega corporation who own's that piece's copywrite thousands of dollars.

  22. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Sketching something and using image to image to guide the ai into creating what you want is using it as a tool to create art. Purely prompting is debatable.

  23. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    >digital art will kill art
    >ai art will kill art
    its always the same shit
    once the ai is good enough it will move on to other shit like ai animation

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >in 10 years or less, we'll be able to tell AI to animate a full cartoon episode for us with a mixture of GPT, art generation, voice generation.
      >Create an episode of the simpsons where marge has a lesbian sex with her sisters.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        great, finally a good simpsons episode

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        This is worth living for, it could totally happen this way if the corporations don't have a complete strangle hold on AI by then.

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          AI Art will become like Video Edition software. In the 90s that shit was ridiculously expensive and more a less only owned by studios of some form. Them software like Adobe came out for home PCs now powerful enough to handle it. For a lot of us our first venture into edition was Movie Maker that came with Windows XP. That was the age of the AMV. AI Art and AI Video making will be similar.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >once the ai is good enough
      Machine learning models will never be. You guys seriously overestimate what they're capable of, and what they would need to be able to do to actually replace an illustrator, let alone a comic book writer & artist, let alone all the shit that goes into animation. Each one of those is exponentially more complex than the last. We won't even be able to replace illustrators except maybe the most bottom of the barrel dogshit social media prostitutes and coom artists who never did anything but photobashing or creating pointless eye candy pinups and shit. You might give someone like Shexyo a run for their money, but anything beyond that? Yeah, keep dreaming, pal.
      Really, the only reason image generation models have gotten to the point that they have right now is because they were able to amass an absolute frickton of images to train them on. You guys saw what happened once part of the dataset was removed in SD 2.1, right? Completely neutered it. Spoiler alert: machine learning models are fricking stupid and rely completely on brute force statistical analysis, and you're never going to get anything out of them besides whatever is safely within the average of the data points it's collected. That's why you can scroll through thread after thread of /sdg/ shit and nearly all the poses and compositions look so similar. Something like that doing animation? You are out of your fricking minds. You would need to train it on every single piece of media ever made, and even then it can still only recycle and remix what it's been given. What you're talking about is going on GENERAL INTELLIGENCE level shit here, my niggy.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        >You guys seriously overestimate
        HAHAHA

        >muh singularity
        larper, pls
        your nerd rapture is a meme
        enjoy yer UBI pod, that's the future

        I heard spencer discuss AI but its from a non--technical aspect. I don't think most of you realize whats happening currently just like people in the past have done and underestimated. You keep putting your head in the ground though.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        >Automobiles will never be able to replace horses. You guys seriously overestimate what they're capable of, and what they would need to be able to do to actually replace a horse in tasks such as transportation or farming. Each one of those tasks is exponentially more complex than the last. We won't even be able to replace horses in simple tasks such as plowing fields or pulling carriages, except maybe the most bottom of the barrel and poorly-made automobiles. You might give a cheap and unreliable automobile a run for its money, but anything beyond that? Yeah, keep dreaming, pal.

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          >we'll soon be measuring stable diffusion performance in artpoor-hours
          I love this timeline

  24. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    AI image gen users just need to properly tag and post on ai image gen friendly sites.
    The reason why furgays and bronies were so vehemently hated in the beginning was because they were so obtuse and spread like maggots over every art site imaginable. Now they're relegated to their own niche areas for the most part and you wont find furgay shit unless you go looking for it.

    Guarantee we would see less drama over this shit if everyone kept to themselves.

  25. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    I think tagging AI art is smart, if only to prevent redundant training and contaminated datasets. There's nothing wrong with Toby Fox preferring a 10 year old's amateur fan art to a proompter's 1000 photorealistic Toriel futa matingpress images.

  26. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    >More art of my waifu

  27. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    ai is for coom
    it frees all artist to draw what they want instead of porn
    free yourselves

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      My favorite coom artists are japanese fellas that do doujins, AI can't replace that.
      Also I can't get hard by looking at an AI coom image if I know it's AI, couldn't tell you the psychology behind it but it's so.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        >AI can't replace that.
        yet
        don't worry, we're working on it
        soon you will coom in full color and thrilling dojins

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          I highly doubt it anon and even then I wouldn't trade it for the real thing
          Japanese coomers imbue their art with a special horny energy, it's too raw to be fabricated artificially

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            yes it can, because most ppl are tasteless homosexual subhuman gutter trash who line up for Marvel capeshit every year like bots, you just better hope those god tier artist still keep drawing, give them some money once in a while if you love them so much

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        >AI can't replace that.

  28. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Completely generative AI art is and will always be garbage. It's so obvious when someone's posting an AI-generated image outside of SDG and it's disgusting. Neural net post filters will probably have a future.

    It's like when auto-tune first become a thing and corpos though they could turn any pretty boy into a singer and within a couple of years everyone's ears had started to notice that shit and were tired of it. But these days some form of auto-tune is probably used on just about every overproduced high-budget song it's just more subtle and used to clean up talent rather than try to fake it.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/LhTpk7L.png

      >once the ai is good enough
      Machine learning models will never be. You guys seriously overestimate what they're capable of, and what they would need to be able to do to actually replace an illustrator, let alone a comic book writer & artist, let alone all the shit that goes into animation. Each one of those is exponentially more complex than the last. We won't even be able to replace illustrators except maybe the most bottom of the barrel dogshit social media prostitutes and coom artists who never did anything but photobashing or creating pointless eye candy pinups and shit. You might give someone like Shexyo a run for their money, but anything beyond that? Yeah, keep dreaming, pal.
      Really, the only reason image generation models have gotten to the point that they have right now is because they were able to amass an absolute frickton of images to train them on. You guys saw what happened once part of the dataset was removed in SD 2.1, right? Completely neutered it. Spoiler alert: machine learning models are fricking stupid and rely completely on brute force statistical analysis, and you're never going to get anything out of them besides whatever is safely within the average of the data points it's collected. That's why you can scroll through thread after thread of /sdg/ shit and nearly all the poses and compositions look so similar. Something like that doing animation? You are out of your fricking minds. You would need to train it on every single piece of media ever made, and even then it can still only recycle and remix what it's been given. What you're talking about is going on GENERAL INTELLIGENCE level shit here, my niggy.

      that's great, so you guys have nothing to worry about 😉

      but ai tagging is a good idea, only ppl who'd not want this is hustlers trying to scam ppl

  29. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    I think NFTs are somehow more souless than AI art.
    AI stuff is in most cases someone wanting to see something unique and commissioning a machine to do it.
    NFTs are people that don't care how it will look like as long it gives money for no work.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      nft has nothing to do with ai, dingus, that's just speculation/ponzi scheme

      https://i.imgur.com/LhTpk7L.png

      >once the ai is good enough
      Machine learning models will never be. You guys seriously overestimate what they're capable of, and what they would need to be able to do to actually replace an illustrator, let alone a comic book writer & artist, let alone all the shit that goes into animation. Each one of those is exponentially more complex than the last. We won't even be able to replace illustrators except maybe the most bottom of the barrel dogshit social media prostitutes and coom artists who never did anything but photobashing or creating pointless eye candy pinups and shit. You might give someone like Shexyo a run for their money, but anything beyond that? Yeah, keep dreaming, pal.
      Really, the only reason image generation models have gotten to the point that they have right now is because they were able to amass an absolute frickton of images to train them on. You guys saw what happened once part of the dataset was removed in SD 2.1, right? Completely neutered it. Spoiler alert: machine learning models are fricking stupid and rely completely on brute force statistical analysis, and you're never going to get anything out of them besides whatever is safely within the average of the data points it's collected. That's why you can scroll through thread after thread of /sdg/ shit and nearly all the poses and compositions look so similar. Something like that doing animation? You are out of your fricking minds. You would need to train it on every single piece of media ever made, and even then it can still only recycle and remix what it's been given. What you're talking about is going on GENERAL INTELLIGENCE level shit here, my niggy.

      >Machine learning models will never be
      >Yeah, keep dreaming, pal.
      >GENERAL INTELLIGENCE level shit here, my niggy.
      yawn
      an ignorant fool blathering on

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        Then explain how I'm wrong. From the research I've done so far on them, I understand that ML models cannot understand or work with fundamental principles of why and how things work, only brute force association and statistics. That's literally all they are.

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          I don't even need to explain, all you've done is read about current research and declared that "XXX will never happen" by fiat.
          True ai might never happen, but to assume such blatant stance is pure ignorant assumption in a unknown future.
          You are just being silly.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            I'm saying that XXX won't ever happen with machine learning because machine learning is quite literally stupid.

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              I agree with that. putting "ai" in front of any fancy algorithm is just pure marketing.

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          The thing is with enough data and comprehensive training it doesn't matter. It doesn't matter anyways, because as it's been said, the AI is just a tool to be used by artists. Many of the issues we have right is due to the training data essentially being shitty 512x512 crops of poorly tagged images. No one is actually looking for zero-human-guidance AI art and that's certainly not the goal of the researchers either.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            >not really artificial intelligent
            >still call it ai
            it's yer fault, nerd
            fix the hands

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              How's that autism working out for you? I sure love semantics debates about what AI actually is.
              >durr AI in RTS games isn't actually AI, it's just a rewards-based behavior tree algorithm
              Protip: no one likes dictionary homosexuals.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                not the same guy, but the AI title certainly misleads people that don't understand anything into thinking the nature of the software is different than it is. Some more specific naming wouldn't hurt overall, even if it's unimportant

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                Well, for one, I expect it do make hands as good as faces, or is that too much to ask of the magic art machine???

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                What's the deal with hands anyway? beyond memes, why can't it do them at all?

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                resolution issue, too much detail per too small amount of pixels, they have to actually work on models specialized for hands but it's beyond current methodologies... it's technically our fault as humans who give so much importance to such small part of the body, lol

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                Because the hands are, essentially, like an entire human body's worth of mechanical complexity. In a sense you're having to deal with the human figure, and two tinier human figures on the end of each arm. Hands are notoriously difficult to draw for good reason.
                Not to mention, fingers are very close together, and they're very small, which causes them to obfuscate each other.
                Given that all that ML models have to work with are photos, and cannot conceive of objects having three dimensions, they're pretty much fricked in this regard.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                I've learn to draw hands (badly), then so can the ai, yer just being lazy.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                ML models don't draw. They copy.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                even worse, no excuse
                fricking lazy nerds

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                you don't need hands 😉

                [...]

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                It's hallucinating detail from blobs of color and as been talked about before, the "AI" is actually really stupid. It's the same reason why an arm gets duplicated in several poses sometimes.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                Last I heard it has to do with how the AI deals with the hands as a single blob instead of each part of the hand being its own blob that is then connected to the correct other blobs. Hands are very hard to draw, not surprising AI fricks it up as well. I will say though, the anything model does a really good job and about half the time puts the correct number of digits on hands and they look normal as well. Other times you get meat clubs.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            I was replying to the absolutely delusional and/or ignorant posters who unironically believe that IN TEN YEARS LE AI WILL MAEK AN ENTIRE SIMPINS ESPISODE FORM A ONE SENTENTS PRUMPT I CAM'T WAIT :O
            And no, really, there is not enough image data and tags in the world for an algorithm like stable diffusion or midjourney to do so. The most important fundamentals of drawing are learning perspective projection and construction. In a sense, it's like 3D modeling on paper (or on digital canvas, you know what I mean). It's an artificial, illusory 3D space. Image gen doesn't think in three dimensions, and cannot translate images into a fully three dimensional conception like artists can do. To do a head turnaround, a machine learning model would have to have photos of the head from every angle to work with, and that's just the head. Let alone hands, let alone the body, let alone complex poses, let alone interaction. You really, REALLY have no idea what level of complexity you're talking about here.

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              They already have rudimentary 3D model generation working you moron.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >TWO MORE WEEKS
                yawn
                fix yer hands, nerd

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >two more weeks
                >10 years
                10 years ago the idea of an AI generating code that functions would've been unheard of. Same with an AI generating plausible pieces of art from a text prompt. 10 years before that the iPhone wouldn't be invented for 5 more years. Why are you such a slug?

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >all this unrelated stuff happened too!
                >you are slug!
                lmao
                I accept your concession.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                You're declaring that AI can't improve in 10 years despite all evidence that it is improving by leaps and bounds year over year. But I get it, you're a midwit. You can't understand, you just scream that it won't happen because the future is scary. The fact you weren't even aware of 3d model generation demonstrates your ignorance on the topic. Sucks to suck.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                FIX YER HANDS, NERD

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                Tick tock

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                If your AI eats 5 billions images and still have to hide hand like a b***h then what now? another 5 billions? If your AI is so smart then why don't just let it read how to draw hand books then like le heckin human does.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                Stable Diffusion is 890 million parameters. Yes, I think the results of the 8.9 billion parameters will be significantly better. As has already been demonstrated by Google's own image AI.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                Then that just mean this AI doesn't think, it's a glorified bruceforced photobashing machine. No fricking human eats billions of images to learn to draw hand. Anyone call this "AI" intelligence is disingenuous or ignorant. This is just a way for you AIgays to effectively stealing art for your own gain, using it as an argument "just le hekin human bros"

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >Anyone call this "AI" intelligence is disingenuous or ignorant
                people are in the end just monkeys looking for something to argue about, of course it is not true AI, we are decades away for a true AI, but its fun seeing people lose their shit for what is basically a shiny tool.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                Humans are nothing more than billions of neurons sending simple signals to each other

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        NFT "art" exists, and it's quite painful and obvious that it exists.
        It's something created by humans that look more robotic than what actual robots do.

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          it's just rapidly generated images by graphic artists, it's just clip art, it can be anything, again it has nothing to do with ai, you homosexual

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            It is not, but still answer the question of the thread.
            "How do you feel about the AI art debate?"
            And i feel that even if it's an artificial image generation, it still has more of a human element on it than NFTs, as at least there's the creativity of the person inputting the prompts and judging the results and picking the ones he likes the most, instead of being so blind with the prospect of easy cash out of suckers that you end up creating something purposeless robotic in nature.

  30. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    I don't think it matters. What's out there is out there and if you like a particular work, that's enough.

  31. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    if men can be women, then AI art can be art

  32. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    I have only ever seen people calling themselves ai artists when trying to piss off artgays

  33. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    It's very easy. Which devalues the skills that existing artists have, making them turbo ass-flustered. (justifiably)
    But not so easy that it's not art. Messing around with embeddings, proper prompt engineering, inpainting to get unfricked hands and fix anatomy defects, even just choosing the most aesthetic of 20 outputs - all take some time and effort to get good at. Not as much as putting in 5000 hours to draw a photorealistic pencil portrait, but not zero either.

    But that's life, printing presses put an end to the art of illumation, that's a shame but the presses are much better and we're not going to go back to medieval scribes so there's no use b***hing about it.

    IF I was a booty-blasted artist, I'd instead focus on the line of 'Oh it's art all right, but you didn't make it, you _commissioned_ it. The AI is the artist, and you paid it in electricity. You might own the copyright, but that doesn't make you the artist. (realistically if you put in a bunch of work finetuning it, it's more like a collaboration piece)

  34. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    if I can't tell it's ai, then I don't care

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >he can't tell that it's AI

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        >then I don't care
        yes

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          You'll pick up on the patterns the more you see it. (unless you are brain damaged)

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            if it looks good, why should I care?

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              >Olympian lifts 500kg
              >Forklift lifts 200kg
              >it's the same

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >forklift is better
                so ai is better, is what you are saying?

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                i think he's saying it's more impressive when a human lifts something really heavy than a forklift
                but when you only care that the thing gets lifted, why the frick would you hire an olympian to move your pallets?

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                exactly, i just want the shit lifted
                I'm happy ppl can draw and shit, but that's not my concern

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                for you. Ok then. Art is more than pretty pictures but I guess you are not interested.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                I'm interested in creating the exact images I want generated by the ai, it's often anime thots, but not always.
                I am not interested in huffing my own farts at strabucks, taking pics of my moleskin sketchbook, and complaining about how ppl don't understand me, boo hoo ;__;
                So as you can see, I will never be an artist.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                my farts are crows. you lose.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                miku says I won, sorry 😉

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                Miku's love is fake!

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                IT'S REAL TO MEEEEEEEEEE!!!

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                Bruh, I want the milk, I don't want TO BE THE COW.
                Bloody mental.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      nakadsashi

  35. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    So fricking depressing to see liberal commentators consolidating around "AI bad >:( " bullshit. They don't even really attempt to understand the new tech. I'd even go as far as to say they are actively resisting learning about it -- and in order to rationalize their laziness, they've jumped on the "AI Bad" thought-terminating cliche

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      ...so would you say:
      ai based and red pilled?

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        don't be a homosexual.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >lefty gays are hivemind NPCs
      lol
      good, that mean sless tyranny attention, it will keep ai free for a little more while

  36. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    "Artists" against AI have a childish and flawed idea of aestheticism, vision and expression and focus solely on muh technique, when theirs is subpar, more often than not.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      post hands

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous
        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          [...]

          >img2img of Escher draw
          nah, not good enough post hands
          original ai hands

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            wow took me 2 seconds on google, you do realize SD 2.0 has been released right?

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              this is good, promising start

              https://i.imgur.com/ojTqmsF.png

              Tick tock

              the frick it this, pinkie is fricked up and forefinger is long as middle, fricking moron, do it again!

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                Imagine saying they won't make perfect hands in 10 years.

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              Great, no have those hands do things. Oh... you can't.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                Give it a couple years and ai will be able to perfectly animate on model, including hands.

                Hopefully troons get AI banned and set it back another 10 years

                Won't happen. They might get it banned for normal people in Europe at most, and even that's really impossible because anyone can download stable diffusion right now. Google, disney, and gaybook have too much invested and the government is too interested in advancing the tech for it to get totally banned.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            Let's shake on it that you won't post here anymore.

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              eh, this is barely acceptable as an illustration, but garbage as a photo

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      damn, ai is pretty based:

      [...]

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >childish and flawed idea of aestheticism, vision and expression
      >the average ai fan: "ook ook me likey me big tiddy hyper real super shiny render masterpiece aynime that's in the same fricking pose 100 time, it make me neuron activation so haerd ook eek ook"
      Fricking unreal lack of self awareness, have you even looked in the fricking /sdg/ generals once in your life

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        >all AI art is anime tiddies
        Case and point.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        to be fair, /sdg/ is just weebs, more fair assessment would be mid-journey, they do nice stuff (but still no hands, mostly)
        https://www.midjourney.com/showcase/top/

        personally don't care for it myself, for me ai is all about porn 😉

  37. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Arthomosexuals were so high and mighty that they didn't want their creative works be treated like a commodified product.
    >nooooo, i'm not doing this for money
    >but i still want money
    And now they're fricking screeching about copyrighting and licensing. If artBlack folk wanted to have a proper market, they'd opt for actual licensed distribution and production industries just like with music. Which is why we don't see too much AI music because you know for fricking sure they will do legal action.
    >But nooo, muh art is above the system of capitalism hoohaa
    They deserve absolutely fricking nothing and I'm happy they're losing their jobs en masse

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >I'm happy they're losing their jobs en masse
      nobody has lost any jobs because of ai art
      not one
      it's just hysterical screeching

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        I'm happy that they're losing "potential commissions" and actually having competition now too

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          world wide recession happening, it would be hard to blame ai even if "potential lost commissions" could be quantified...
          anyway, ppl pay coms to support individual artists above all, not to get cheaper fetish mats, I seriously doubt any decent artfgas getting regular comms will be affected

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        A lot of articles are already using ai generated images instead of paying someone to draw them or buying a stock image.

        https://i.imgur.com/2jKJ5Gs.png

        enforcing watermarks and keeping it separate is fair

        Most already have a watermark, but its really impossible to stop people from just removing it. A deepfake is more serious and could go to court to prove its fake, but you can't prove a big tiddy anime girl wasn't actually drawn by someone once they remove the watermark.

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          stock photo isn't art
          even if you wanna call it that, it's BARELY art

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          Eh, most artists besides the "gwaphic desigm is my passion :)" type ever got into the stock photo business. Maybe magazine cover illustrators are getting shafted, if they even really exist anymore.

          Commercial illustration is basically dead and it's a fricking shame. Concept art and illustration used to be fricking cool, something that you could actually hope to get a fulfilling career doing something that you loved.
          Then our art education and culture got Old Yeller'd by the fine art establishment with their conceptual and abstract bullshit, among other things. About the only place that's even remotely good for illustrators and artists is Japan, or Korea. Maybe Russia in the fine arts scene. What a world, man. Every year a little more of the good and the beautiful bleeds out of the world.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            The saturation of AI art has and will expose more and more people to art making us appreciate aesthetics more. The world is in fact becoming more beautiful because of it.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >strawman strawman strawman
      What is this delirious, rabid rageposting lol
      The problem with art being in the state it is economically isn't even remotely artists' fault. Blame it on our dipshit governments and companies that shit on artists because they're either moronic reactionaries (see the comics code which is one of the major reasons american comics are complete and utter fricking garbage) or are literally too stupid and focused on short term profit to innovate. The reason why music is successful is because those greedy fricks learned how to get the normies hooked on their generic bullshit and milk their manufactured music stars until they prolapse themselves out of their own nipples

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Yes people tend to make a career out of something both because they can earn a living and because they enjoy it

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        but the vast majority of artgays never make a living through their art, you never made any money to lose, don't worry about it

  38. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    >or is it saturating the internet art scene with a lot of mediocre or repetitious content?
    THIS ALREADY HAPPENED, YOU DUMB FRICKS. LITERALLY ALL YOU moronS DO IS DRAW GENERIC ANIME GARBAGE. AI ART FINALLY BROUGHT SOME GOOD PORN TO THE TABLE THAT INS'T MADE OF FLAT FACES WITH POINTY CHINS.

    FRICK YOU, DO BETTER NEXT TIME.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >LITERALLY ALL YOU moronS DO IS DRAW GENERIC ANIME GARBAGE
      What circles do you follow lmao. Branch out moron.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >generic anime garbage
      >unironically shills for ai art
      Do you guys even see yourselves, what the frick am I reading

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        post art you enjoy, pls
        no judgement, ppl have different tastes, what kind of art do you like?

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          Mein neger, the point that I'm trying to make is that generic anime shit is a large part of what ai art gays do
          even the fricking picture anon posted was anime adjacent
          it doesn't make any damn *sense*

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            so what would you prefer over anime then?

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              does you can even into the reading comprehension?

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                yes, yes, but my question still stands, or do you like all the anime art?

  39. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    enforcing watermarks and keeping it separate is fair

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      completely agree, I want my ai shit to be recognized on it's own merits, photoreal dicky, messed up hands, and not be confused for a subpar artgay

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Nah, ai art will crush all yer homosexual galleries 900 to 1.
      You can't stop it.
      You will have to make your own flesh-bag art only sites that need live streaming drawing demo as proof, lmao.

  40. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    After some degenerate posted ai created child porn here last night it’s clear anyone developing using or defending this garbage should be put against the wall and shot

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      This. I also saw someone use a hammer to hit another person in the head once. Carpentry tools are clearly for murderers and also need to be banned.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        Keep making excuses pedo

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        That's a terrible analogy.
        Food analogy tier bad, kys.

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          You're moronic. Like, not even as a random insult. I truly and honestly believe that you are mentally handicapped to a significant degree.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      morality is a spook and AI will prove that. and your pedantry is also proof that the only people who are afraid of AI are just afraid about losing their social control. open source AI will literally eliminate any attempts of creative censorship

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        You sound autistic.

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          not an argument

  41. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    >is it saturating the internet art scene with a lot of mediocre or repetitious content?
    A lot "artist" work is taking pictures of models, products or landscapes from pinterest, Google Images or some Stock images website and cut and paste on photoshop as """references""" and then use filters and/or paint over it.

    AI for artists is like begin creative directors or just need sketching.
    For PhotoShop wizards is over.

  42. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Daily reminder that ai-gays are pedos too.

  43. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    name a single luddite movement that worked.

  44. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    I don't feel anything about it. I just see sexy lines and bust a nut.

  45. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    >is it saturating the internet art scene with a lot of mediocre or repetitious content?
    Wait are we still talking about AI?

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Humans hand created that art.
      Meat bags explain yourselves.

  46. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    ai art is disgusting, look at this shit:

    [...]

  47. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Just make an ai-artstation and call it a day.

    People that want to see ai art will go there instead.

    No need to get your panties in a twist.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      nah
      see

      https://i.imgur.com/mrOH9Qz.png

      Nah, ai art will crush all yer homosexual galleries 900 to 1.
      You can't stop it.
      You will have to make your own flesh-bag art only sites that need live streaming drawing demo as proof, lmao.

      prompting will continue until moral improves

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        >i am a human parasite and I'm proud of it
        weird flex, but okay

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        Panties twisted.

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          >i am a human parasite and I'm proud of it
          weird flex, but okay

          [...]
          Axe wound: dilated.

          PROMPTING WILL CONTINUE UNTIL MORALE IMPROVES 😉

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        Panties twisted.

        Axe wound: dilated.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      ai art galleris exists, many of them

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Unless you live in China, it will be voluntary, not mandatory.

      2022 is the pivotal year, all digital images (not just art) going forward will be suspect.
      As more and more ai images are generated, the vast majority will end up synthetic.
      This is a problem far larger than some art egos.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        Wait so, Biden and Epstein were not close friends?
        EVERYTHING IS A LIE!

  48. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    This is fricking hilarious, and proves how schizo artists are in fact tied into the "identity" of being an artist. It has nothing to do with copyright, income, careers of revenue.
    /ic/ and the twittertroon art community was shit long before AI.

    Man AI doing Artwork what a fricking time to be alive amiright?
    The prompting will continue until artist moral improves.
    Also someone take my AI gigachad as an exploitable meme.

  49. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    I think AI images are not art. I think the AI can create beauty, but not art. Beauty is something that occurs, but I think art reflects intention. AI create art without any intention.
    >inb4 muh prompt
    Yes you are giving it a target image, but you are just describing a scene. The intent to produce a specific scene is not the same as the intent to reflect a certain emotion or thought.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >. AI create art without any intention.
      false. the intention comes from the forces of chaos particularly influenced from ethereal world thought-beings. (thought-beings which are created by human spirits themselves)
      just like how beautiful clouds are art from the divine godhead

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        Praise the omnissiah I guess. The machine spirits are strong with this one.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        slow down moorwiener servitors aren't real

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >think the AI can create beauty, but not art.
      okay

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        >*fixes the issues with photoshop*
        wow that was easy

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          was it? fix all the issues easily. you wont. nobody does.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            he can, if he doesn't, it make him the shitty ai """""""""""""""artist"""""""""""""
            a poor craftsman blames his tools, anon

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            You don't think anyone does because you can't tell the ones people fixed were made by ai.

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              Nah. unless you paint every detail over, covering everything but the gradients, I can tell. I've been playing with Gan stuff for years, My brain is wired to pick up on even the most subtle stuff.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >reflects intention
      It's more accurate to say that the artwork reflects the viewer's interpretation rather than the artist's intention.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      i don't care what you think

  50. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    As an artist with almost 10 years experience i'm glad that some of you have fun with this technology.
    However i will not accept posting it anywere. Its look like shit, its stealing parts from people artworks and even their signatures.
    Keep it to yourself and jerk off or whatever you desire. This should make everyone happy.
    If its not make you happy and you need posting it to take credit or prestige then remember. You are not an artist, you are a fraud.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Okay.
      I keep myself to the chans, so you need not worry about me, can't say much about everyone else though.
      But if I were you, I'd create a human only gallery as soon as possible, who knows, it'll might blow up, this ai shit will.
      It'll be everywhere soon, if not already.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      pyw, furry

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      post your art so I can steal it, you better be good enough tho!

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Do you actually believe this or are you just farming rebuttals to post elsewhere?

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        if he's telling the truth, he is almost certainly a furry artgay, and what's so hard to believe, ai art does nothing for artists, doesn't give them more business, just threaten to take it away and take their styles too

  51. 2 years ago
    Anonymous
    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      neat, I can imagine an "ai filter" render that renders 2D style over plain 3D models in real time, wonder if the tech will improve enough for that...

  52. 2 years ago
    Anonymous
    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      samdoesarts their asses

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      "NOOO AI isn't creative it just pulls a massive dataset of things that actually creative people made!" Next time you write something please make sure to eliminate any memory you have of language, history of literature, history of styles and genres, etc otherwise you're simply drawing from other peoples work.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous
        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          both are shit

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            lmao
            "artist," what a sad existence

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous
              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                werks on my machine, did you git pull?

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >import picture and run through img-to-img
                >prompt painting

                Here you are m'lady

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >Wow anon... did you draw that or did the computer do it for you?
                >I did it... it's not like there's a "make art" button on a computer...
                >draw something cool in my notebook
                >I have to go! I..I..I've got diarrhea!

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >ai weebs ever going bear females in the first place
                It was never a problem, no worries 😉

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >lol virgin
                lmao, art-gays are really female tier, aren't they?

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          >Anon accidentally touches on why AI art was allowed to happen in the first place
          Kinda ironic ngl

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        So are you saying if you feed AI loomis book they will able to draw hand right? AI is heckin just like human dude

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          >Are you saying this brand new technology isn't flawless?!

          Wow dude you got me, even though there's already thousands of examples of the contrary, there's no way AI art is EVER going to be able to generate hands.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            post hands

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              https://i.imgur.com/FN509gD.jpg

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Why don't they protest something that actually matters?

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        it matters to them 😉

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        Sad thing is it might work. The world went mad and burned cities for some overdosing Black person while governments bent over in support.
        CSP bent over for them already so art focused websites aren't out of the question.
        At the very least the EU is likely to follow in China's footsteps.

        We need to post more of our superior AI art to cleanse their palates and target more art Black folk.

        PROMPTING WILL CONTINUE UNTIL MORAL IMPROVES

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          Clip studio makes money from artists, I don't know what they were thinking.
          And labeling ai art as ai art is just sensible, nothing burger.

  53. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    I don't care what people think about it. I enjoy making cute images of my cute wife in various landscapes.

  54. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    >Can a machine draw hands?
    Can you?
    Its well known most artists suck at drawing hands and avoid it when possible.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Just a meme. beginner artists, sure.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      yes, one of the qualifying skills of calling yourself an artist is ability to draw hands (modern art excepted, lmao)

  55. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    The artists have become luddites because they were promised an ivory tower in the age of automation. No one, even as soon as ten years ago, was seriously predicting ai would be capable of drawing incredible works of art. And it can produce incredible works of art despite the nitpicking. Most media that we grew up watching outright predicted art being the one and only thing robots can't do at all, let alone better than humans. So I'm sorry art friends, you'll lose your jobs to robots like all of us will. I will shed many tears on your behalf.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Seems like the sudden shock that computers really can do art at all that is driving the backlash. The tech was dumped onto the public very suddenly. And I know it has been around for a while but it all the public image generators were laughably crude and to the uninformed it seemed like a galactic leap in technology happened in the past few months.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        >computers really can do art
        never happened
        it's not art

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous
          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            see that gif, that dog, that smile, more art than any your gamer pc ever pooped out

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              the dog is more art than you'll ever make with your hands

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                the dog is alive with a soul, can't say the same for you though

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                Funny because Communist Discord trannies definitely don't have souls.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >/misc/ memes
                I accept your concession

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >admits he's (she's) a discord troony

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                Animals don't have rational souls you Pr*testant filth.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                reason has nothing to do with souls, papist scum

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >dog fricking discord troony
                You being a furgay makes sense why you're so mad

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >admits he's (she's) a discord troony

                >almost 300 posts later
                >troony TIME
                yes, yes, everyone you disagree with is a troony

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                Yes in your case you're definitely a homosexual wanting to be a woman

  56. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    >How do you feel about the AI art debate?
    ultimately meaningless.

    What do you think is more fun?
    Playing a physically modeled virtual saxophone with a keyboard or even an electric sax and breath controller (which few actually do, they use piano keys or just the mouse)

    Versus blowing into one and feeling the soundwaves vibrating through your skull and hands, even if the playing itself might not be as perfect as the modeled one.

    For me, it's the latter.

    Same with drawing.
    It's meditative to draw.
    I don't care if you generate a painterly masterpiece with the push of a button.
    And I will NEVER value you for doing it, code monkey.
    >ah, the cope has shown
    No, you truly are not special for writing " masterpiece, e-girl" into a textbox.
    You will be the one on copium if you think that just because you went to the BOT college of promptology that you're some sort of asset to the art world or something.

    That'd be the real artists who provided the corpus data.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >No, you truly are not special for writing " masterpiece, e-girl" into a textbox.
      >but you are special for drawing
      heh

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        Yeah, can YOU draw?
        >no
        Even cavemen could do that.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      No one says you can't make your crayon drawings.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >No, you truly are not special for writing " masterpiece, e-girl" into a textbox.
      But i don't wan to be special, or an artist I just want the e-girl.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        if you aren't an artist then what you created isn't art.

        and thus irrelevant to the topic of art.

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          >art is in the eye of the beholder
          >but not like that!
          lol
          lmao even

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          that's fine
          but I will call them ai art, because it would be silly and cumbersome to do otherwise, and avoid certain words just to not trigger some snowflakes(damn you sound like trannies)

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          it's unintentional art
          call it an instillation, a e-girl happening, if you will

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >Same with drawing.
      >It's meditative to draw.
      >No, you truly are not special for taking a picture
      >You will be the one on copium if you think that just because you went to the BOT college of photography that you're some sort of asset to the art world or something.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        not gonna argue that photography is not art.
        unless you photograph art.

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          >photography is not art.
          true
          pointing at buildings and bawds you pay for and clicking a button isn't art
          no amount of gear or pornographic coffee table books will change that

  57. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    Based and agreed
    We should do what we can so people accept AI as another art medium, should we group up with r/stablediffusion and mass train the model of protester? someone already did with samdoesart so surely it's possible. SD can be used as weapon against artist and protester if used right. We should at least minimize the damage

  58. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Artists 5 years ago:
    >Ultimately, the definition of art is subjective and can vary depending on the individual's perspective and experiences.
    Artists today:
    >NOOOO there's no way AI art could be considered aesthetically pleasing or thought-provoking because it entirely depends on how and WHO creates it!

  59. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Hopefully troons get AI banned and set it back another 10 years

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >and also somehow delete it off of everyone's computers
      You realize that it's not possible to put this away right? You may as well cope now before you stroke out. Or do. Idc

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        >SD hasn't been neutered already right out of the gate
        lmao, enjoy your shit hands forever

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        trying making porn with sd 2.1 or any other a.i. lmoa

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          >ai can't be trained

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            It's been crippled and hindered, and it can happen again until 3rd parties give up and decide it's mot worth the hassle.
            Now imagine if SD has no push back, I could be generating glorious 768x768 base dicky RIGHT NOW!

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      How will they get it banned, call ai art racist and trans-phobic???

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        yes, that always work

  60. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Friendly reminder to use proper terminology. It's not "human art", it's "obsolete art" or "archaic art". Since "AI art" has proven time and time to be clearly superior to obsolete art, it should just be referred to as "art" from now on.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      ai gods are generous, for she give us extra hands, cheap artpoors would never do that

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >Friendly reminder to use proper terminology. It's not "women", it's "breeder" or "ovary haver". Since "trans women" have proven time and time to be clearly superior to obsolete women, they should just be referred to as "women" from now on.

  61. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Pretty good. It lets people be more creative and "artists" are coping because they never had any creativity in the first place. It's not even about money - AI hasn't come for the furry art yet.

    Now anyone can just pull images out of a computer. They will never be without faults, but then neither are human-made images, and the technology is improving. It's already better than a human in most ways that matter. It's almost free, it can replicate any style (which is important because cheap deviantartists usually have this shitty style with very thick lines, disgusting), I can iterate on the art and get exactly what I want very quickly.

    Onions artists don't have to worry, companies will always come up with an excuse to hire some wienersuckers. Be it AI ethics wienersuckers, manager wienersuckers or whatever else.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Take this specimen of HUMAN ART. It's competently made, but is there a single creative thing here? I don't think so. Modern AI models can come up with a character like this and draw like this. The missing parts are making promts for the individual images and putting them together. I don't think that's the SOVL, and it's just a matter of time before another AI model can do it anyway. And most "artists" are like this. They won't produce a single interesting or unique thing, no matter how much you try.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        >Modern AI models can come up with a character like this and draw like this
        but only if you put the parts it assembles its from in the right slot for its fancy indices to look them up from

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        >she has cancer
        my condolences 🙁

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          AI will cure all cancers one day. It will be worth the loss of artists and programmers.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            Anyone who thinks they're position is safe from automation tech is downright delusional. It has been the story of humans to progressively use technology to have to do less labor. We're just seeing that approaching at high speeds like it came out of nowhere and not like it has been an exponential progression for all of history.

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              Weww, I don't think anyone is saying that theiwe position is compwetely safe from automation, but it's awso impowtant to weawize that technology has awways been a double-edged sword. It can make our wives easiew and more efficient, but it can awso take away jobs and make it harder for some peopwe to find work. So I think it's important to be weawistic about the potential impacts of automation, and to make sure that we're awso taking steps to hewp peopwe who may be negatively affected by it.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            I glad I will have a few more decades in the UBI pod, Elon bless you, sirs.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        >creative thing
        she is not wearing a skirt made of bees while cooking deep-fried lego. AI will replace this, and that's a good thing.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        >ai can never do XXX
        >ok, but ai will never YYY
        >sure, but ai can never ever do ZZZ
        is this the "God of the gaps" but for ai?

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        https://i.imgur.com/kRljdRu.png

        Pretty good. It lets people be more creative and "artists" are coping because they never had any creativity in the first place. It's not even about money - AI hasn't come for the furry art yet.

        Now anyone can just pull images out of a computer. They will never be without faults, but then neither are human-made images, and the technology is improving. It's already better than a human in most ways that matter. It's almost free, it can replicate any style (which is important because cheap deviantartists usually have this shitty style with very thick lines, disgusting), I can iterate on the art and get exactly what I want very quickly.

        Onions artists don't have to worry, companies will always come up with an excuse to hire some wienersuckers. Be it AI ethics wienersuckers, manager wienersuckers or whatever else.

        It's scientific fact that AI can create more interesting outputs than humans consistently, at least when it comes to modern text models. Here's a paper:
        https://arxiv.org/pdf/2201.08239.pdf

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        I suppose you can write the flavor text and render individual components with ai.
        Unless you mean the text too, idk about that, but I hear chatGPT are getting pretty advanced these days.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        Moot point because I am a human prompting the AI for art. We are partners and we both share equal credit. In fact I am a SUPERIOR HUMAN for using new tools while they kick and scream at the mere thought of becoming OBSOLETE!

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          Moo point because like a cows opinion, it doesn't matter. milk me.

  62. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    I want my own AI drawing computing server, that's all I care.

    >Is it a valid form of creative expression coupled with impressive tech showcasing, or is it saturating the internet art scene with a lot of mediocre or repetitious content?
    I am not qualified to answer but my opinion is yes, no, maybe, case basis.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      kek I built one from my decommissioned mining rigs. printing endless anime Booba is sure fun

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        lucky blessed anime booba enjoyer, godspeed anon

  63. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Keep posting your ignorant protest FLESHIES
    Just like santa I'm making a list and checking it twice
    Thanks for all the free obsolete art and no we wont be nice LOL

  64. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    It’s an entirely moot debate as the genie is out of the lamp and you cannot put it back in.
    Almost no one will be able to distinguish AI art from “real” art and practically no one will even care.

    The real discussion in the art space should be that the reception of art is now the art, i.e. how you interpret it, not the creator’s intent.

  65. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Everything is going to be ok!

  66. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *