AI Art Seething General

[CansOfCant]

[If this is the new norm, why draw any more just so your arts become fodder for AI before they're even done?]

Maybe you should learn to code.

 

[MAPK phosphatase]

Maybe you should learn to code.

Github copilot already exists. AI is coming for programmer's jobs too.

 

[Cloaca Rimjob]

View attachment 3730107

Can a nigger?

 

[white_socks]

This is sort of interesting.
View attachment 3733746

https://twitter.com/Haje714/status/1580150596380028928?t=QRqIwe6TisDWPshw4wDt8g&s=19

Spoiler: The pictures

AI:
View attachment 3733756
Human:
View attachment 3733759

I think this is a good thing. Gives us reference to use on how to determine if a piece of work is AI generated or not.

And of course, fuck that thievin' son of a bitch.

 

[naaaaiiiiillllll!!!]

I’m actually on board with AI generated art. It relies on formulas and pattern recognition, which I can see some artists using to their advantage. Like the AI finishing “generic anime woman from behind #6 gorillian” before they actually finished it themselves. The AI is trying a “best fit” pattern and a human artist can use this to “check” how formulaic their piece is and avoid more obvious tropes. Kind of like checking for plagiarism/originality when writing.

Besides, the real power will be in applications like AI-upscaling or in/out filling images to different resolutions (turn a fullscreen 3X4 piece into a wide or ultra wide screen resolution). Basically modifying/tweaking art to fit in different applications.

 

[frap]

I’m actually on board with AI generated art. It relies on formulas and pattern recognition, which I can see some artists using to their advantage. Like the AI finishing “generic anime woman from behind #6 gorillian” before they actually finished it themselves. The AI is trying a “best fit” pattern and a human artist can use this to “check” how formulaic their piece is and avoid more obvious tropes. Kind of like checking for plagiarism/originality when writing.

Hadn't even thought about this as a usage.

Most of the pro industry artists I follow are already seeing the opportunities AI potentially opens up. Most of the whining is coming from Twitter artists who do shit commissions for people.

Adapt or die.

 

[Bugged_NPC]

Here's my lukewarm take purely for the artistic side of things.

Spoiler: Rambling

In terms of moneymaking or a commercial perspective, as others have said, AI will more than likely get to the point where lower tier artists will be replaced in commissions, and computers will be used to automatically composition ads.

As a middling artist, I've never gotten into the scene of comissions or adoptables. I don't have the discipline to draw consistently enough to even attempt justifying it, nevermind learning the business side of things.

Not to say I haven't wanted to get into it. What artist doesn't enjoy the idea of making money off their art and getting a following?

But as said, never got into it, and at this rate, never will, because AI art already surpasses my skillset in many, many areas.

Also, the market is already saturated to the point there's mystery fluids pooling the corner of the room and throwing my hat in there would just get it dirty.

In terms of AI art with "Art (TM)" as a concept, I'm not upset or threatened. Humans have already ruined "Art (TM)" with things likely bodily fluids, literal unaltered garbage, mindless scribbles, pornography, and the torture/killing of animals, and that's just the "above board" stuff. What's a computer gonna come up with (and be physically capable of) that humans haven't already done?

And if AI art becomes mainstream, having "human made" art will become the novelty, whether it's good or bad, thus balancing itself out.

Now, regular art, ya know, the stuff that isnt lazy, for shock value, for fetishes, or for money, well, whether computers are better at it or not doesn't really matter.

There is only so many ways to make something pleasing to look at, taste, hear, feel. It's each person's take that is unique and rewarding, even if it accidently repeats.

Art is partially the finished piece, but it's mostly the process of making it that's the joy, isn't it? Being able to look at it and say "I made that," "I learned how to do this," being able to translate thoughts into a tangible medium.

Hell, even using AI to supplement your skillset doesn't truly take away it being "yours" as long as you are still putting in the effort to improve.

Kinda makes me wonder, if technology ever get to the point where there is true, sentient AI, if they might miss out on that joy because they won't have the same "growth" in their craft, and, in recognizing that, just won't bother with art at all.

TL;DR:
1. AI art will probably streamline commercial and commissioned art.

2. AI art is superior to "Art (TM)" because it's incapable of the more depraved "Art (TM)" humans make. At least, for now.

3. If AI art becomes mainstream, human art will become the niche "Art (TM)" lovers will want anyways.

And

4. If you're a regular joe schmoe who likes making things because it makes you happy, you'll be fine.

 

[Serbian Peacekeepers]

AI art is alot like NFTs in the way that they are both early in their infancy but people already have fully formed opinions on them and know exactlly what they will be and do, none of us know what ai art will lead to, i expect ai art will cause some people to lose alot of income but in general be a net positive for everyone, i expect it will eventually be seen as just another art tool, like how people were ass mad about digital art years ago.
I predict there will be about 5 common uses of ai art programs.
1: Joe blow who wants to make a passable image of something but lacks the time or skill to make it himself
2: Artists who use ai to upscale and enhance images for a better viewing experience
3: Animators using ai to fill in frames to make animation faster with minimal loss of detail
4: People who learned how to bend and break the ai to their will, being able to create stuff even the most traditional painter would call art
5: Coomers

 

[Involuntary Celebrity]

I think this is a good thing. Gives us reference to use on how to determine if a piece of work is AI generated or not.

I dunno, it's not like you couldn't get it looking like the second image. The guy just didn't spend half an hour tweaking prompts. See: https://docs.qq.com/doc/DWGh4QnZBVlJYRkly

 

[lolcow yoghurt]

I heard on deviant fart that AI will genocide all digital artists... I'm literally shaking and crying. How will we earn money from our generic art now?

 

[lolcow yoghurt]

Deviant Art releases local AI image generator, furries being seething in full power

 

[A skinny fat man]

AI art is alot like NFTs in the way that they are both early in their infancy but people already have fully formed opinions on them and know exactlly what they will be and do, none of us know what ai art will lead to, i expect ai art will cause some people to lose alot of income but in general be a net positive for everyone, i expect it will eventually be seen as just another art tool, like how people were ass mad about digital art years ago.
I predict there will be about 5 common uses of ai art programs.
1: Joe blow who wants to make a passable image of something but lacks the time or skill to make it himself
2: Artists who use ai to upscale and enhance images for a better viewing experience
3: Animators using ai to fill in frames to make animation faster with minimal loss of detail
4: People who learned how to bend and break the ai to their will, being able to create stuff even the most traditional painter would call art
5: Coomers

I think that learning to use AI to make good pictures and figuring out how to make the AI do what you want and having a pipeline for making art that looks legitimately good using AI and photoshop is a legitimate skill, especially if you want to do it in large quantities.

I've been talking to this guy https://www.deviantart.com/xeriaai (NSFW), and looking at his prompts on PromptHero and even using the exact same prompts, I'm lucky if I get something even a quarter as good as what he gets. But he has a whole process where he generates an image using a prompt that's a mile long, then he goes and regenerates the image and then he photoshops it to make it look like this. There's still going to be a whole ass process to going from mind to screen with this art and multiple skills that wind up being used along the way even if AI art becomes mainstream. This idea that "AI just pops out masterpieces" is ludicrous. Yeah, if all you want is gigantic titty anime waifus it can create decent stuff, but if you have a specific idea, or worse yet a specific character design you're gonna be putting in a ton of work finagling with the AI or wasting a ton of time rerolling the images.

Also, if someone would like to play around with Stable Diffusion, here's a video guide on how to install it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6MeJKnbv1ts

 

[jje100010001]

AI art is alot like NFTs in the way that they are both early in their infancy but people already have fully formed opinions on them and know exactlly what they will be and do, none of us know what ai art will lead to, i expect ai art will cause some people to lose alot of income but in general be a net positive for everyone, i expect it will eventually be seen as just another art tool, like how people were ass mad about digital art years ago.
I predict there will be about 5 common uses of ai art programs.
1: Joe blow who wants to make a passable image of something but lacks the time or skill to make it himself
2: Artists who use ai to upscale and enhance images for a better viewing experience
3: Animators using ai to fill in frames to make animation faster with minimal loss of detail
4: People who learned how to bend and break the ai to their will, being able to create stuff even the most traditional painter would call art
5: Coomers

My opinion as well:

1.) AI art's relationship within the framework of copyright will eventually be resolved. The fundamental issue is one of the source material, and I think that AI generators will either end up legalized through the argument that no-one 'owns' a style (how many artists with Kim-jung-ji-adjacent artstyles are out there?), or will develop their own internal databases using copyright-free/free domain artwork + artists selling their artwork to these generators. These will arise first in countries like China, IMO.
2.) It will become another tool for artists to iterate and enhance their work. Like what was mentioned, an artist could iterate from a quick sketch some additonal composition layouts, color options, etc., and could even improve linework quality if they decide to blow up a part of their art. You may see AI as mentoring tools offering critiques of things like composition and colors. In the future, you will see AI tools alongside the brush and liquify tools in Photoshop.
3.) AI art will eat its way up the value chain of the illustration and art industry. For instance, I very much see that UI artwork (icons, buttons, borders) and FX in video games, plus in-betweens for animation as mentioned- which are not exactly purely creative fields, will soon be on the chopping block. Same with thumbnail art and minor page illustrations, and some entry-level jobs will be reduced to fixing hands on AI artwork (lol). Pornography, being a lesser-protected and esteemed field, will quickly be eaten up by AI generators because no one will stand up for the porn artists. However, I do still see art directors and concept artists retaining their jobs for high-level concept art direction.
4.) AI will not be able to fully bridge the digital-meatspace divide in the near future, and traditional artists who can paint will still be more esteemed than any AI replicant.

 

[Serbian Peacekeepers]

My opinion as well:

1.) AI art's relationship within the framework of copyright will eventually be resolved.
3.) AI art will eat its way up the value chain of the illustration and art industry.

1) I think the fact AI art pulls from a giant database of art just to make one image will likely mean it can't infringe on any one artists work, even if the prompt directly mentioned said artist.
3) As it stands AI can't think, it can only pick from a batch of predefined ideas, ai can't really make educated guesses or imagine something, so AI will never be able to replace Concept artists.

I find it interesting how in the time since i wrote that post there was a convention where a AI booth was vandalized and then a chinese ai app came out and everyone but the most hardcore faggots Artists were having fun with it. Shocking that people will resort to violence and then remember they can just have fun with shit on the internet.

 

[Atatata]

Found this, apparently an anti-ai artist ended up getting his stuff used for an ai contest, with the results being sent to him.

https://twitter.com/gy_sup/status/1600720863825104896?t=-L2mDbna5m7T4F1LMdUyMQ&s=19

I've lost the tweet, but I remember reading that many in the illustration/game dev are against using AI because they don't trust anybody who uses it to have clear knowledge of fundamentals and how to draw on the fly.

(how many artists with Kim-jung-ji-adjacent artstyles are out there?), or will develop their own internal databases

There's many that were inspired, but as far as I know, nobody looked exactly like his work using his methods. He was one of a kind, a real genius.

 

[jje100010001]

There's many that were inspired, but as far as I know, nobody looked exactly like his work using his methods. He was one of a kind, a real genius.

I think the genius of Kim Jung Ji was his incredible ability to do multi-perspective composition and inking on the fly, which very few people can do in reality.

Like literally putting finished art directly from the mind to paper.

 

[YourFriendlyLurker 2.0]

This is how ArtStation currently looks like.

 

[74164978231]

This is how ArtStation currently looks like.

View attachment 4069437

Seething retards literally MATI. This is like people involved with horses protesting the arrival of the automobile in 1900.

Though I can somewhat sympathize with content hubs like this being absolutely flooded with retarded dog shit ai creations. Its one thing to upload genuinely interesting and quality content, entirely another for every 13 year old who installed stable diffusion to upload every low quality fever dream they generate.

 

[frap]

I think the ArtStation thing is at least partially in response to a bunch of AI images of sexualised children that appeared on the site sometime in the last 48 hours. I was very sleepy when I read that though, so I don't have sources.

 

[madethistocomment]

I feel like I'm kind of in the middle of the road on the issue- I see the points on both sides.

On one hand, I understand that artists feel threatened right now, but the sheer level of seething that I'm seeing is becoming borderline obnoxious. I didn't follow you, random but talented artist, on twitter to see you incessantly whine about AI art, I followed you to see the beautiful art peices that you create. If all you're doing is bitching, I'm going to get sick of it crossing my dash and I'll unfollow. I saw a tweet advocating for anyone that uses AI art to be repeatedly stabbed that had 60 thousand likes. The sheer level of hatred and seethe makes my head spin.

But like, I see the good and bad potential for AI art. For example, I'm a writer. I have a bunch of ideas rattling around in my head, especially setting concepts, but I do not have the skills to put that to pen and paper. People on twitter would tell me to pick up a pencil and start learning, but to get to the image that I have in my head, I'd need a solid ten years before I felt confident enough to be happy with my work. I also do not have the money to spare to get a commission artist to draw the settings. Using this art to actually materialize the ideas in my head and get them out there and able to use in my inspiration folder is a pretty neutral thing, morally. It's literally just for me. My own personal use. Nobody else. I'm not monetizing it, I'm not claiming that I drew it. I'm literally just using it for inspiration and reference. Sometimes a bitch just wants to look at pretty art and see her ideas get visualized, god damn.

I'll still always value the art made with human hands more than art made by AI, because holy shit, a person did that. That's impressive! AI won't ever replace the human-made stuff in my head or in my heart. When I get the money, I'll commission artists to draw my characters, because artists are able to grasp intricacies more than an AI ever will. I also think that the people who try to sell the AI art that they generate or claim that they actually made it by hand are absolute hacks and should be mocked. I think that people who train AI exculsively to copy people's art styles are slimy and should also be mocked, but I also don't think that advocating for the copyrighting of art styles is even a remotely good solution to that problem since corporations would 100% abuse the everloving fuck out of that and absolutely throttle the art community as a whole.

At the end of the day, AI art is just a tool. It's not inherently good or evil- it can be used for really cool stuff just as it can be used for really shitty unethical stuff. It's not a gift from God above and the greatest creation of mankind, but it's also not the Great Satan like the fearmongers on twitter and tumblr are making it out to be.