How do I make a book cover bros?
>>23818908Learn photoshop or illustrator
>>23818957Ignore this faggot OP, just make something in bing image creator.
>>23819189I'm not one of those people who whines about AI image generators like the worthless twitter "artists" who all draw the exact same flavor of the month anime girls and meme art trends and know that their work can easily be replaced by a machine because it contains no soul to begin with, but when I see a book or music album with an AI generated cover, I automatically assume the contents are low effort and/or AI generated as well.
>>23819311Your view is becoming outdated.
>>23819334Name one work of media with actual artistic value which uses an AI generated cover.
>>23818908You can watch some tutorial videos to learn how, especially nowadays with A.I simplifying the process. Personally, I didn't want to invest the time it would take and just hired someone on fiverr since I plan to do a physical release as well.>>23819311We're getting to the point where most people and even art critics can't differentiate A.I from real art, but I agree when it comes to obvious or badly done A.I.
>>23819189kys but unironically
>>23819420kys, but literally, do it now, and kill your entire family first
>>23819311>>23819377AI has come a long way since 2 years ago.
I actually paid $250 for a book cover for a story that I’ve only written three chapters of. On the bright side I’ve made it my iPhone background and it inspires me to keep at it
>>23819509This AI is fine with me. But bingslop like >>23819189 is so unbearably low effort.
>>23819514>bing slopThis was made with bing.
>>23819510Chargeback
>>23819535>axe is fucked up>basket handle is fucked up>he isn’t even holding the basket>half a dozen pouches of meaninglessness and a scabbard >fence is fucked upBingslop falls apart when you open up the thumbnail, and I say this as a much better bingslopper than yourself
>>23819509Only problem with this is that it's low res. Otherwise a masterpiece. I can't wait to see AI in another two years.
>>23819611>much better bingslopperAre you really pretending that there's some skill to generating images over and over until you luck out and get one that isn't complete trash?
>>23819637Let's have a contest. I'll list a simple scene, and you "bingsloppers" see who can produce the best depiction.We'll use the Garden of Eden from Milton's Paradise Lost.Scene: A serene, idyllic landscape bathed in golden sunlight. Lush, vibrant trees sway gently in a gentle breeze. A winding river meanders through the garden, its crystal-clear waters reflecting the sky. At the center of the scene, Adam and Eve stand hand-in-hand, their faces radiant with innocence and harmony. A serpent, disguised as a harmless creature, slithers nearby, its eyes filled with cunning and temptation. The scene captures the moment before the Fall, a perfect world untouched by sin or sorrow.
>>23819509None of you guys have good taste. I'm not even a painter, and I can notice so many details that make this a pathetic mess
>>23819637>>23819649I was saying that bingslop isn’t art, you guys didn’t even read my postOnce you get past prompting giant tits, you realize fast that AI has no artistic merit
Literally every AI image I see is kitsch. How do people not notice this? Is it Indians? They look like art for Warhammer or some shit
>>23819669This is something that bugs me a lot as well. If it generated a simple image with less retarded nonsensical details, it would look a hundred times better. But even when you tell it to, it still creates a hundred little gadgets that look like nothing and serve no purpose.
>>23818908>if you're a manClose up of the naked back of a woman.>if you're a womanCloseup of a bare male chest. Now add some tribal tattoo-like lines and some mist, grade the entire thing in a single color, use the Morrowind font for your cover text, and e voilà, you're done.
>>23819509Go on, name it.
>>23818908Just hire a graphic designer
>>23819520sexoo
>>23819669Some of it is kino honestly but even then it's in a derivative sticking to a genre way. AI art is by inherently derivative so any artist complaining about it is outing themselves as an unoriginal pseud desu.
>>23819659>>23819669Screw your good taste.
>>23822869It's really only as derivative as the pleb using it. Latent diffusion can be remarkably original.
>>23822877four fingers left hand, fucked up vertical ruby placement, nonsensical weird eye glint, blurry Arabic curtain that looks like crap, misplaced rubies on the collar that are different sizes, right side of the frog is unfocused for no reason, cap has awful gem placement, brown gem left side of the hed, and a solid white dot that doesn't look a white diamondJust like ai, you lack a soul
>>23819659>>23819669>>23819950Please post an unironic example of what you consider to be "good" art. Please note, if you post anything by Van Gogh or Picasso, I'm going to laugh in your face as hard as possible.
>>23819611The only thing you accurately pointed out is that he isn't technically holding the basket. All your other criticisms are exaggerated or just wrong.>and I say this as a much better bingslopper than yourselfNot on your life, champ, especially not with that garbage pic.
>>23819669Most of the AI images posted ITT look better than every single modern cover for a book I've witnessed.
>>23822910This is something good, but overall basic. If I post something I love that's also challenging, you'll just chud out
>>23822914Bad axeBad bear handsTerrible logsRot, bingshitter
>>23822914>>23822949You guys both have equally bad taste. Art museums are usually free or cheap. How about you live in one for hundreds of years so you can get some decent taste
>>23822949holy sexooooo
>>23822940That's very mediocre.>>23822966That's very absolute dogshit.If you're going to try and pretend to have taste, at least post great genuine art instead of tepidly dipping your toe into the pool.>>23822949Dogshit bat wings, retarded proportions, broken kneecaps, and absolute vomit-inducing art style. Get some fucking taste, holy god damn cunt-muffined fuck-shit. What are you trying to do, make me go fucking blind here? Christ almighty.
>>23822914this pic isn't great. however, if you put it one a penguin classics book you get a better cover than what they usually shit out.
>>23823728ugh. Fine ig I'll post stuff that actually appeals to me
>>23818908>open bing generator>type prompt, get image>open photoshop with this image>create invisible layer>pic up pen tool, outline figure>delete original layer>color as you please using the brush tool>no one will realize it was prompt generated>will seem legit>you can even credit yourself
>>23824150Penguin Classics most of the time just take random classical paintings and plaster it on the cover, having little to nothing to do with the book.
>>23819514>>23819611Go ahead. Find the flaw.
>>23818908Look at houellebecq aneantir french cover and take some inspo from there
>>238262443 fingers right hand, backwards left knee, stems that don't connect to the rest of the plant, left side of trees lack detail while the right side has it, shadows make no sense at all, way too small handle, big sword guard while the blade is extremely thin, sword in the end has the thickness of a toothpick, the scattered snow is dropped randomly like seeds, weird piece of skin near the woman's ear, shoes are backwordsThis is really fun. I get to flex my skills, and I get to humiliate an ai chud with no taste!
>>23826244That's a great one. I believe in prompt engineering now.
>>23826612>3 fingersWrong, that's just the shading obscuring it.>backwards left kneeWrong, she's in-flexing her knee as she props more of her weight on her opposite leg.>stems that don't connect to the rest of the plantThere are some rogue stems piercing out of the ground, but I don't see a single example of a flower-head not connecting.>left side of the trees lack detailThe distance is hard to gauge, but those are more likely bushes.>shadows make no sense at allWrong, they all follow the same shadow pattern from the same source of light in the sky. >way too small handleCould very easily be a spada da lato, without the guard, which makes sense given she has a shield.>big sword while the blade is extremely thinSpada da lato's can measure up to 36 inches just in blade length alone, and that's about average, meaning it could be a few inches longer or shorter, easily measuring up to 40 inches, which would be around 3 and a half feet. Her wearing gauntlets would easily allow her to halfsword it without a problem.>scattered snow dropped randomly like seedsEver heard of snow patches? My guess is you live somewhere tropical and don't understand how snow works.>weird piece of skin near the woman's earZooming in, it could easily be interpeted as a tendon from her neck, you know, those things that connect your skull to your body?>shoes are backwardsJust flatout stupid-wrong.This was really fun, I get to embarrass a pseud-tard who doesn't know anything and likes to act pretentious online!
>>23818908this was in my dreams
>>23819509This.AI sure has advanced a lot.
>>23827797This is such a cope, lol. Literally, the only thing you're right about is the scattered snow and the sword being thin>StemsThere's two stems that don't connect. One of them is almost a right angle. left side>swordI didn't know what sword it was supposed to be, so thanks for telling me. After a little bit of research, the sword is even worse. The guard is super thick. It doesn't make sense for a proto-rapier to have one. Also, you're right. The sword is trying to be a Spada da lata. You can see the guard next to the finger that has the thickness of the r middle finger and r ring finger. >three fingersIt makes zero sense to hide a finger through shading. I would say it's a tossup between there being a finger or not. The hand is so poorly made, it's anyone's guess. >lightingThere should be more lighting on the right leg>backwards left kneethe calve is backwards. It's not a perspective issue>treesIt's honestly anyone's guess if it's a tree or not. There seems to be one on the right but that could just be a fucked up cliff side. There's still a detail problem regardless. Why show random sections having leaves and then leave the rest as blackness? Oh wait it's retarded ai>weird piece of skinThat's not a tendon. Look how fair it portubes and the fact that it looks like a rectangle
>>23828844>there's two stems that don't connectYea, they don't have flower heads, so there's nothing actually for them to connect to, so it's easily arguable that it's just a case of artistic choice, since there are no flagrant violations that contrast with the realism of the image.>the sword is even worse>The guard is super thick.No, it isn't. In fact, it's extremely narrow and thin.>it makes zero sense to hide a finger through shadingIf you zoom in, you can see that, where it looks like the middle finger is, there is actually a darkened area between the index finger and that finger, and a small hue of armor just barely visible, probably additionally obscured by the heavy film grain. >The hand is so poorly made, it's anyone's guess.It's too heavily shaded and obscured through film grain to determine that, but from what can be determined with a very simple analysis in photo editing software, the AI did get the general shape and form completely correct.>lighting>there should be more lighting on the right legThere's actually the perfect amount of lighting. If you look at her legs, the sun is hitting the entire outer side of her left leg, which is bending slightly forward, and also placed very slightly ahead of her right leg, so you get the top half of her knee and thigh on her right leg obscured by shadow, while the lower half is illuminated by the light not obscured by her left leg.>the calve is backwards. It's not a perspective issueImpossible to determine that, and the hard line shadowing points to a shin bone being there, discounting that.>there's still a detail problem regardlessAs much of a detail problem as in literally any other realism painting in the same vein as that, lmao.>look how far it protrudesI looked at it close up. It aligns properly with what one could assume to see on a very thin and slender framed woman. I even did you the honor of drawing up a rough outline for emphasis.
>>23828917Most of our disagreements are just you wanting the ai flaws to be "artistic" choices. I can't dissuade you because you're incapable of believing that ai is worse than a capable artist. What I won't stand is you thinking this is a fully anatomical body part that reflects reality. That body part should not be there. It looks like excess skin from a fat person that's somehow being pushed outward. If the bottom line (bottom circle) wasn't there. Then yeah, it makes sense. But, the fact that there is another white line above (top circle) proves what I mean. The ai made an anatomical mistake purposefully
>>23822910I lost my art folder but I like this type of shit. Also anime shit but ya know.
>>23829325You can sense just how wet her unfucked quim is from the way she's seated.
