AI Art Seething General

[Duke-Diggler]

Must be a day that ends in Y, Palmer is whining again
https://twitter.com/arvalis/status/1645922509739675648?s=19

Here, lemme play devil's advocate and actually refute some points.

"Wow! This looks very good!"

>From afar. But if you actually look closely, you see a lot of inconsistent shading, weirdly placed body parts, and jittery movement.

"This is a marked improvement over previous examples!"

>Using the same animation style isn't progress. All of these AI generators can only produce the most generic art styles because of these algorithms.

"Even if this tech isn't that well made, it will be in the future!"

>No one can predict this. We said the exact same thing when Cryptocurrency came along and that floundered once Sam Bankman Fried was involved. For all we know, this magical "AI" would flounder harder than crypto since Silicon Valley is really good at bullshitting normies with their glorified tech demos.

 

[Equal Rights for Androids]

Must be a day that ends in Y, Palmer is whining again
https://twitter.com/arvalis/status/1645922509739675648?s=19

Arvalis sucks as a person. He said that Pacific Rim designs were generic and uninspired when all of his designs copied straight from Pokemon and just recycled real world animal designs instead of putting any fucking thought into it like other realistic Pokemon artists did. He's a hack, and for some reason he feels threatened by this AI.

@Duke-Diggler Highly doubt AI will flounder. 1. It can create lots and lots of porn. The porn industry will dump so much money just to get your coom on. 2. It's not accurate to compare art AI to a non-visual object such as cryptocurrency. Eventually AI will improve, just like chat GPT. Cryptocurrency isn't a visual object that can be consumed. Art AI isn't something that can bankrupt you nor can you make a lot of money off of running servers. You're invested in creating a better product with art AI.

 

[Higgs Bonbon]

Here, lemme play devil's advocate and actually refute some points.

"Wow! This looks very good!"

>From afar. But if you actually look closely, you see a lot of inconsistent shading, weirdly placed body parts, and jittery movement.

"This is a marked improvement over previous examples!"

>Using the same animation style isn't progress. All of these AI generators can only produce the most generic art styles because of these algorithms.

"Even if this tech isn't that well made, it will be in the future!"

>No one can predict this. We said the exact same thing when Cryptocurrency came along and that floundered once Sam Bankman Fried was involved. For all we know, this magical "AI" would flounder harder than crypto since Silicon Valley is really good at bullshitting normies with their glorified tech demos.

why are you typing all that out when you can just say
>no
>nuh uh
>don't care
>I'm not coping

 

[Freezer Rat]

he'd be the type to say "I don't care" 50 times in a row over the course of an hour.

I wonder how hard he is crying while typing the same thing over and over again, knowing that soon most online artists will be out of work and flipping burgers.

 

[Duke-Diggler]

@Duke-Diggler Highly doubt AI will flounder. 1. It can create lots and lots of porn. The porn industry will dump so much money just to get your coom on. 2. It's not accurate to compare art AI to a non-visual object such as cryptocurrency. Eventually AI will improve, just like chat GPT. Cryptocurrency isn't a visual object that can be consumed. Art AI isn't something that can bankrupt you nor can you make a lot of money off of running servers. You're invested in creating a better product with art AI.

1. True, but with the porn industry, the more fetishistic the porn is, the more money would be made. A lot of these AI algorythms seem to only mimic a few art styles, which is the most popular. And since it is popular, it will be a generic art style by the end of the day.

2. The reason why I compared AI with Crypto is because we were advertised the same thing back when bitcoin was first created. We were advertised as the "future's currency" and "all venues will use crypto". It was huge and for a while, people thought it really would be the future of all currencies. That is, until Sam Bankman Fried, through his own greed and incompetance, revealed how grossly overinflated that value really was and how it was nothing more than just a massive pyramid scheme to sucker in techbros.

In short, we were promised a future, but in the end, we were scammed.

AI art could definitely improve art, in that it will point out the most generic art styles imaginable which artists could avoid in order to be unique and original with their works. Like I said before, we can never predict what the future would be, and for all we know, AI isn't the future. Some many think so, but given Silicon Valley's track record, I trust them as equally as I trust the government when they say they're "here to help".

 

[linchan]

Here, lemme play devil's advocate and actually refute some points.

"Wow! This looks very good!"

>From afar. But if you actually look closely, you see a lot of inconsistent shading, weirdly placed body parts, and jittery movement.

"This is a marked improvement over previous examples!"

>Using the same animation style isn't progress. All of these AI generators can only produce the most generic art styles because of these algorithms.

"Even if this tech isn't that well made, it will be in the future!"

>No one can predict this. We said the exact same thing when Cryptocurrency came along and that floundered once Sam Bankman Fried was involved. For all we know, this magical "AI" would flounder harder than crypto since Silicon Valley is really good at bullshitting normies with their glorified tech demos.

Retort to this retort

"From afar. But if you actually look closely, you see a lot of inconsistent shading, weirdly placed body parts, and jittery movement."

Keep in mind that, just a year ago there wasn't widespread animated AI image generation to this degree, to this quality. The fact that it manages to replicate rotoscoping animation is miraculous. At a certain point, we are just moving the goalpost.

"Using the same animation style isn't progress. All of these AI generators can only produce the most generic art styles because of these algorithms."

Being able to produce a pre-existing style algorithmically is tremendous progress. It's not up to AI to innovate stylistically, that's still up to the human. Again, this is moving the goalpost.

"No one can predict this. We said the exact same thing when Cryptocurrency came along and that floundered once Sam Bankman Fried was involved. For all we know, this magical 'AI' would flounder harder than crypto since Silicon Valley is really good at bullshitting normies with their glorified tech demos."

I don't think this even argues against AI, sounds like it is just asking for people to temper expectations. Fair enough, but you can say this to any kind of innovation in the past which became successful, this doesn't say anything about AI in general.

 

[linchan]

Arvalis sucks as a person. He said that Pacific Rim designs were generic and uninspired when all of his designs copied straight from Pokemon and just recycled real world animal designs instead of putting any fucking thought into it like other realistic Pokemon artists did. He's a hack, and for some reason he feels threatened by this AI.

@Duke-Diggler Highly doubt AI will flounder. 1. It can create lots and lots of porn. The porn industry will dump so much money just to get your coom on. 2. It's not accurate to compare art AI to a non-visual object such as cryptocurrency. Eventually AI will improve, just like chat GPT. Cryptocurrency isn't a visual object that can be consumed. Art AI isn't something that can bankrupt you nor can you make a lot of money off of running servers. You're invested in creating a better product with art AI.

Why the fuck are proponents of AI art often coomers. To be fair there are still coomer anime avatars defending the honor of artists as well, but there is an oddly prevalent argument people make which revolves around porn.

 

[Mikoyan]

Why the fuck are proponents of AI art often coomers. To be fair there are still coomer anime avatars defending the honor of artists as well, but there is an oddly prevalent argument people make which revolves around porn.

It's probably easier to try to get SD to do what you want rather than Google Translating to hire someone on Pixiv.

 

[Equal Rights for Androids]

Why the fuck are proponents of AI art often coomers. To be fair there are still coomer anime avatars defending the honor of artists as well, but there is an oddly prevalent argument people make which revolves around porn.

Sex rules the world. Whatever can produce more sex will be the victor. AI can produce more sex than artists. AI shall advance. Once AI has a humanoid body, more men will become single as they choose a sex robot over a difficult human female. Females would become useful only for procreation. AI wins.

 

[FBI-chan]

I've met people like this. They are extremely delusional. They think that if the copyright laws clamp down on "art thieves" (read; people with ideas vaguely like theirs) or Tech Bros they'll win big and be able to monopolize entire concepts. They drool over the idea of being able to copyright color pallets.

People like that barely seem to enjoy creating art as a hobby, they see only commercial value in it. I bet if they had all the power they desired, they would absolutely be on board with using AI to further their own means. But since they aren't, they seethe because it possibly samples their work and they do not "consent" to that possibility. Obsession with owning an idea is ironic for a group of people with a lot of self-described communists in it.

I don't feel good about making fun of people losing their jobs because people need to make money to survive, but that is happening in every industry through little fault of those affected by massive layoffs. It's happening to art, it will happen with coding, it will likely even happen to blue-collar jobs. Corporations nowadays do not buy the CEO a thousandth yacht by making great products, they buy the CEO a thousandth yacht by resting on their laurels and squeezing by with the bare minimum. Products and services are shittier and more inconvenient than before with everything online, operating on a subscription-based model, or deliberately designed to break within a few years yet every year companies are reporting "record breaking profits." Cutting people out of their payroll is just another part of that. Seniors and the best employees are being laid off.

AI is only a symptom of the problem. If it wasn't AI that was losing people their jobs, it would instead be the exploitation of cheap overseas labor, as it had been before AI started becoming more effective at its goals.

 

[Lord of the Large Pants]

Quick non-seethe question: My shitty GTX 2070 takes about 2-3 minutes to generate 8-10 images in SD 1.5 and variants. How much money would I have to spend to get substantial improvement? Would a 3070 do much? I've been thinking about selling a kidney to build a new computer anyway.

 

[Neurotypical Mantis]

you people are roleplaying having an ai debate is it really that slow of a news day

 

[Scavenger]

you people are roleplaying having an ai debate is it really that slow of a news day

Sounds like it.

Quick non-seethe question: My shitty GTX 2070 takes about 2-3 minutes to generate 8-10 images in SD 1.5 and variants. How much money would I have to spend to get substantial improvement? Would a 3070 do much? I've been thinking about selling a kidney to build a new computer anyway.

Just don't over do it.

 

[jje100010001]

1. True, but with the porn industry, the more fetishistic the porn is, the more money would be made. A lot of these AI algorythms seem to only mimic a few art styles, which is the most popular. And since it is popular, it will be a generic art style by the end of the day.

In short, we were promised a future, but in the end, we were scammed.

AI art could definitely improve art, in that it will point out the most generic art styles imaginable which artists could avoid in order to be unique and original with their works. Like I said before, we can never predict what the future would be, and for all we know, AI isn't the future. Some many think so, but given Silicon Valley's track record, I trust them as equally as I trust the government when they say they're "here to help".

The thing tho is that cumbrains usually demand new fetishistic themes within established conventional artstyles. They want their freaky fetish drawn out in a way that makes it look nice, not so much that in a way that pushes the realm of art.

So I think your point is slightly flipped around- AI could be more limited in its generation of new fetishes via limitations in its database (aka "How do you make a person do that??!").

For the normal minds seeking conventional b00ba tho, the sky is the limit.

 

[Monkey Pink]

Is anyone good at stylometry or alt account detection?

I've been suspicious for a while:

Trippy (u/Trippy-Worlds) - Reddit

u/Trippy-Worlds: I make trippy worlds. I hope you enjoy them. Get prints here - https://www.redbubble.com/people/Trippy-Worlds/shop

www.reddit.com

Present_Dimension464 (u/Present_Dimension464) - Reddit

u/Present_Dimension464:

www.reddit.com

 

[Roland TB-303]

Oh noooooo won’t somebody think of the billion dollar companies future profits.

 

[Linoone]

I stumbled upon this twitter user who uses stable diffusion and despite the weird human hands on a furry character, it actually looks pretty impressive. If the ai art hashtag wasn’t added, then the tards bitching in the thread wouldn’t have fucking noticed and moved on to the next furfag post.

https://mobile.twitter.com/yatoracat/status/1646327903976845315

 

[Da Grim Reaper]

AI isn't threatening at all because it can only replicate shiny high detailed art you see on PixIV, it cannot replicate something simple that your friend with 200 followers does. If you give "in the art style of fartingsparkles32" to an AI, it will ignore it because it does not know who "fartingsparkles32" is.
So, artists like fartingsparkles32 are safe, and their art will be more valuable since it's very unlikely for an AI to replicate what he does.

Unless, there's an AI that can clone art styles in the same way that ElevenLabs does with voice.

 

[Starved Artist]

AI isn't threatening at all because it can only replicate shiny high detailed art you see on PixIV, it cannot replicate something simple that your friend with 200 followers does. If you give "in the art style of fartingsparkles32" to an AI, it will ignore it because it does not know who "fartingsparkles32" is.
So, artists like fartingsparkles32 are safe, and their art will be more valuable since it's very unlikely for an AI to replicate what he does.

Unless, there's an AI that can clone art styles in the same way that ElevenLabs does with voice.

Yes. The only art that can't be cloned is highly detailed art. There's a difference between repeatable patterns and non-repeatable abstract deformations..

tl;dr complex indescribable things to humans are still indescribable to ai. I've programmed a lora to replicate my art, it can't. The ai sees my detail as mistakes and "adjusts" them to perfection. Which, ironically is great for me if I ever decide to redraw something, it highlights all the composition flaws I made lmao.

 

[DJ10]

I saw some more rational responses against these two (archive, archive) posts in particular. Would it reasonable or naïve to think these fearmongering reactionary types are starting to get public pushback for once or this just hopium?