If you think AI generated pictures are "art" then you fundamentally misunderstand what art is. You're a retarded vantablack nigger who thinks art is something that's supposed to look "good" or look "real".It's also not a leftist redditor drawtroon vs le based maga fight like some of you retards think it is.Art is not about how it looks, it's about the human experience behind it. Art is a means of human expression reflecting a human experience. The only human experience behind AI generated pictures is some filthy brown jeet typing a prompt on a keyboard. It's just copying things and making them average, believable, but there's no human behind it, no message shown, no little details placed on purpose, no composure.
Art is just expressing your thoughts and ideas visually and ai is just another tool for doing that.
>>523880172Van Gough wasn't really art either to be fair
art is SLOP
>>523880323You're not expressing any thoughts, you're asking the Goy Algorithm™ to speak for you instead of using your own voice. You're the pinnacle of goycattle, basically.
>>523880172You talk like a faggot and your shit's all retard.But in all seriousness,yeah ai is mostly used as a to generate cheap crap. Though it's also used by some people to create a visual image that they couldn't otherwise, which is useful for writers and such. Also the modern tools for ai genning can allow for the adding of little details, it's just way eaiser to hit gen on the goon machine.
>>523880822>Though it's also used by some people to create a visual image that they couldn't otherwiseVantablack 5 nigger spotted.
>>523880909Nigger I can taste the apple, I and 99% don't have steady enough hands for drawing. How about you post some of your work, share with the thread if you wish to speak so lowly of others.
>>523881002>I and 99% don't have steady enough hands for drawingWho said anything about drawing? There are a gazillion ways to make images that don't involve asking the RightThink™ goymachine to do it in your place.You're like a kid who thinks calculus is useless because you have a calculator. The point isn't to make you calculate things off your head, because obviously the calculator is here for that. Calculus is taught so you can train your brain to recognize and identify methods and patterns.
>>523881002The shittiest scribble from a child is absolutely more worthy of being called art than anything your slop machine can shit out. For something to be declared 'art' it needs to be made by a being with sentience and a soul. Even animals can make art. Have you seen those elephants that can paint? This video is 16 goddamn years old. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=foahTqz7On4Pick up a fucking pencil, bolt-picker ball gargler. Figure it out you lazy fuck.
>swarthy liberal arts froggot trying to sell me his idea of art in a shitposting sitei hate these times.
>>523881544>elephantSLOP
>>523880172Art is obsolete. AI mogs "art". You are an idolatrous idiot
>>523880172Someones mad they are being 100 percent replaced. All you hoped to do in your life……. Ai fucked you
>>523881544Nope. Your Patreon will never recover and I continue to put artists out of business. Cope. Seethe. Dilate. Commit suicide.
>>523881544Elephants are just soulless tusks.
>>523881615elephant slop implies existence of elephant gem
>>523881615Still has more sovl and is better than anything the slop machine can make.>>523881634You're just mad because your IQ is really low and having to put forth serious effort on a learned skill frustrates you because you don't get instant results. Pick up a pencil.>>523881674I don't have a patreon. I just hate AI slop. Why do you love wirebacks so much? Are you gay and retarded?>>523881679More sovl than the slop machine still. Cope.
>>523881698few will understand
>>523880172Art SHOULD look beautiful/good/nice.Post-modernism is a shitload of fuck. There are objective rights and wrongs. Beautiful things are good and ugly things are bad.>The only human experience behind AI generated pictures is some filthy brown jeet typing a prompt on a keyboard.Wrong. I read this as>I don't know what Controlnet is and am speaking out of my ass about a subject I don't understand.AI is a tool with which art can be made.Controlnet and inpainting allow their users to control all seven elements of art when producing AI images.Do most people posting AI images on the internet just type a prompt then post the dogshit the model spits out? Absolutely. But the point remains that, with the use of Controlnet, inpainting and image editors, people absolutely have control over all seven elements of art when using AI to produce images, and thus can produce legitimate art using AI as a tool.
>>523880323You don't express anything that goes beyond the prompt and this alone is pathetic. It's not remotely comparable to the experience of creating a work of art with your own hands, skills, senses, emotions, intuition etc.
>>523881725>Still has more sovl and is better than anything the slop machine can make.nigger that is DALL-e 3
>>523881733
>>523880455But it is, if y you are in architecture you know the name of that exact column you know exact name of that moulding patternt and you know that you rip the balls or tits off retards who not just puts metal frame glass windows on top of this structure, and no only he doesnt space those windows right, he manages to put masonic floor into classical ancient Greek architectureits slop
For six hundred years now Art has been the most bourgeoise of guilds. Bloody aristocrats used it to buy legitimacy and the aspirational class to signal membership. Now they're salty because their technical skills are machine-replicable.Your worthless scrawls are worthless. Cry some more. Hyperventilate about how your piss christ monstrosity is """real art""".
>>523881560It's not my idea of art, it's the definition of art. I'm not even an artist. Obviously your wetback brain can't understand that.>>523881634>>523881674Good morning sirs. Hope you kindly redeemed the Google Play cards.>>523881783high IQ
>>523880172That's what they tell people with art degrees so they can feel important and like the degree wasnt a waste of time
>>523881739It's still not worthy of being declared art. Do you actually open up an art program and then make a line appear on your screen with your actual hand on the actual image file, or do you just say what you want it to do? Am I a chef because I told the waiter what I want to eat? If I pay someone (a human, not a machine) to draw a picture for me and then I describe how I want it to look and then they draw what i asked for, am I the artist who made that picture? Will the light of hope ever return to your mother's eyes?
>>523881725>wirebacksWtf is a wireback?Is that like wetback, but for generative AI?
>>523880172AI can do this.
>>523881860It's not about art degrees you moron. Obviously the drawtroons with art degrees making degenerate handmade slop are useless lumpenproletariat. Would you say the same about the artists who designed things you use everyday?
>>523880561Is photography art?
>>523881782No I know. I meant the art the elephant in the video made. What that elephant painted is better and more worthy of being considered ART than anything the slop machine shits out. There are absolutely no exceptions.>>523881934Yes. Wireback, bolt-picker, clanker, and slop gobbler are my favorite slurs for retards dependent on AI.
>>523881901>Do you actually open up an art program and then make a line appear on your screen with your actual hand on the actual image fileYes, actually, that's exactly what you do when you sketch a reference image that you feed a Controlnet model such as Canny or Anytest.You, too, are demonstrating your extreme ignorance on this subject.
>>523881939Real whores can do that as well. Whores aren't art, duh.
>>523881986Yes it is. If you think photography is just clicking a button on a machine then you're retarded.
>>523882018This is not the same at all holy shit you're really fucking dumb. When I draw from a reference, I use my own eyes and my own brain to control my own hand holding a pen to draw a line which then becomes an image. I MADE the image. AI Prompters have a thought, try to put it into words, then hope for the best. If anything, an AI prompter can say they're good at communicating and putting their thoughts into a description. That's it though.
>>523882090Right. Do what is it that differentiates what a photographer does from what a user of an AI model does?
>>523881802ionic colums and dentillation under a glass gable roof, nigger. it's always been SLOP.>>523881986no
>>523882146When I draw a reference image that I feed a Controlnet model, I use my own eyes and my own brain to control my own hand holding a tablet pen or mouse to draw lines which then becomes an image that I feed Controlnet.I don't think you understand what Controlnet is so you continue to spew ignorant bullshit out of your ass.
>>523882017>i have no standards, as long as something living shits out a scribble o algo
>>523882090One can utilize Controlnet to control the composition of a gen just like a photographer uses angle, distance, etc. to control the composition of a photograph.
>>523881762It really is just another level of abstraction, similar to how doing art digitally is an abstraction from crafting it physically. Right now ai is trash and young so we are in the same kind of slop phase that digital art when through in the 90s.
>>523882224The controlnet literally just completes the image for you. You did NOTHING. Pick up the pencil. Learn to draw. Then you won't need this bullshit and we won't have to fight about it. Why are you such a pathetic flake who gives up so easy? It's really sad.>>523882259A scribble can be art because it was made by a living being with sentience and a soul. I don't make the rules. Figure it out.
>>523882313>You did NOTHING...except draw literally all of the lineart, dictating the composition of the image in the process.That's nothing?
>>523882313>I don't make the rules. You're literally making them up as you go.
>>523882174The picture I've shown you is actually a combination of forty photos showing the ISS passing over Mont-Saint-Michel. The photograph calculated the trajectory of the ISS and planned his trip to catch the best windows with the best lights possible at dawn and had to try several times due to bad weather. It was taken as a response to French astronaut Pesquet onboard the ISS taking pictures of France from the station, the photography wanted to do the same.>>523882276Unlike your carefully crafted slop, this picture has a story and a meaning. That's what you fail to understand. The human experience that pushed it to exist.
>>523882313AI is the SOVL.
>>523880172I don't really care whether they're "art". However they are of very little interest to me personally.
>>523882017You talk like a bot and your shit's all retarded.
>>523882366>implying an image created with the help of Controlnet cannot possibly tell a story or imply a meaningYou seriously lack imagination if you believe this to be true.
>>523882017Ok, so you're ascribing some sort of personhood to AI, then depersonalisung it with a slur because the derision makes you feel better?That's cool. I'm in my early forties and I've been writing pretty consistently since I was a teenager. I have filled so many notebooks in my life; so many notebooks just lost and scattered around. Unfortunately, I really fell into poetry. I wish I'd stuck with prose.I use AI sometimes to turn my poetry into songs.I don't consider those songs to be art, but I do consider my poetry to be art - because it had better be something that means anything. Otherwise I've really pissed my fucking life away.I don't think AI will ever replace human artists. At least, I don't think it will replace real human talent. But it is still something. And I'm not afraid of it in this regard. It's fun to use. You can even combine lots of different generations, from totally different AIs, to create something greater than the sum of its parts, in that the way those parts have been arranged is an attempt to express something. I'm not saying that's art - but, as an artist, I do think that's also what art is about.If AI "art" threatens you, then it's probably a skill issue.
>>523882351I've seen that bullshit in action. Yeah dawg, you did fucking nothing. You can put a stick figure in it and it'll shit out an anime girl. You can't re-open the image in an art program and edit a specific layer because it's not anything you made. You just gave it a guideline to shit its slop on. You could stop with the stick figure and it'd be more worthy of being considered art.
>>523881544>elephants that can paintthey're trained to do this through torture by jeets, that's why one occasionally goes apeshit and stomps as many dotheads to death as it can
>>523882286>produce an overly complex 3D model to 2D renderer>call it AI>never consider actually creating such a thingI am continuously offended by the people that fail to recognize the inherent function the bloatware is approximating.
Sorry chud but anything can be art. That's what all the lefties say. :)
>>523880172nigger, you don't get to define what art is to every other person in the world.
>>523882366So you are saying it's impressive due to the effort they put in.
>>523882440The only story it tells is your stinky vantablack jeet hands typing on a keyboard telling the magic machine to think for you.
Please generate a series called "fartist salt" which shows a worthless art student getting shit on by a robot. Make the student have salty tears flowing and mixing with the robot shit and piss into a new masterpiece of modern art.
>>523880172Don't care, didn't ask, just made some pictures using AI art an hour or so ago and I'll do it again soon. Cry more faggot.
>>523882366You have not answered the question.So that particular composite photograph had a lot of work put into it.There's AI artists that take several AI generated images and take portions of each to manually stitch together a seamless composite that looks nothing like the initial images generated. Are those people "true artists" in your eyes?
So, hypothetically, I draw some lines with a tablet, then run what I drew through Controlnet's Canny and the AI model completes the image for me from there.What elements of art was it possible for me to control by doing so? These:>line>shape>form>space>textureThat leaves just color and value. But guess what? I can control those by crafting another image in an image editor and passing that image through Controlnet's Blur.So that's all seven elements of art that I, the human, controlled.I dictated all seven elements of art to the model which then produced an image following my human guidance regarding all seven elements of art.AI is a tool with which art can be produced.
>>523881679aaand Austria takes the lead1-0
artfags are the absolute worst >im so important! I am literally an artist! Shut up you are derivative and trite. You are no more an artist than AI, you just copy copy copy.
>>523881939>AI can help me stay pacified while I turn into a genetic dead end gooning all day and flushing my genes down the toilet
>>523882563It's impressive because it's beautiful, because it has a story and a meaning. Even if there was very little effort put in it, it would still be art, because it was done for a reason by a human being with thoughts and will.>>523882620The process of stitching things together is art, but you're basically painting with your own shit in the first place. And the composite is the last layer of shit, since you're using yet another magic machine to do it for you.
>>523882366you are spiritually a redditoralso, you're French
>>523882458People who rely on AI deserve to be insulted and outcasted. They should be ashamed of themselves. How embarrassing. They are literally making the entire species more stupid by not working things out and learning how to do it themselves.Your "poetry" is no longer YOUR poetry at that point because you fed it to the slop machine and it just shits out an amalgamation of other peoples stuff in the shape of what you asked for. How could you ever call that something you did?No. If you actually care about something, you'll make it yourself rather than depending on AI to make it instantly and artificially. Developing a skill takes work and practice. I'd consider writing a good and clear prompt to be a skill, but it's not art, it's just good communication.>>523882480Yeah man that's what they do to you in art school.
>>523882707Dont act like anyone here would be any different
AI is what it is, labeling it doesn't make much difference. It's a fun thing to play with but it's obviously manifestly degenerate as an actual substitute for a human doing the same thing with their own mind/hand (coding, drawing, writing, etc). This should be clear to anyone who is in touch with their humanity and ancestral culture.
>>523882645Fundamentally, we are dealing with idiots that think "that isn't art" means the same thing as "that is trash."Considering the amount of art that is most assuredly art and is yet abhorrent garbage...
>>523882645Controlling something with settings isn't the same thing as doing it yourself. If you're so capable, just fucking do it yourself.
>>523880172Cry more.
>>523882709>The process of stitching things together is artSo you argree that those AI artist are artists?>And the composite is the last layer of shit, since you're using yet another magic machine to do it for you.I'm not even sure what you mean by this. Are you describing photoshop as a "magic machine that does it for you?"
>>523882645Comparatively, photographers often have far less control.Take, for example, a nature photographer like Ansel Adams.A nature photographer can control space, color and value.A nature photographer does not control line, shape, form or texture. Nature controls those.In this case, the general consensus in the art world is still that the photographer, in this case, is an artist by virtue of controlling space, color and value.So if a photographer is an artist by virtue of controlling three of the seven elements of art, someone controlling all seven elements of art to produce an image with the assistance of AI, instead of controlling three elements of art to produce an image with the assistance of a camera, is obviously an artist.I am right and Luddites are wrong, retarded and mentally ill.
>>523882090this is just like my favorite arthouse cinema
>>523882845This, and it has nothing to do with art for the sake of art. These people like I said are no more artists than AI, its all derivative and stolen ideas anyways, they just pretend its their own. Also they are upset because they can get money for it anymore. Thats the real issue for them, the money.
>>523882826>If you're so capable, just draw or paint it yourself instead of photographing it.Hurrdurr
>>523882954You didn't do anything. Make it yourself 100% or it's never going to be art. It will be nothing but wasteful slop forever. I don't make these rules.
>>523883035So you're arguing that photography is not art?
>>523882898>So you argree that those AI artist are artists?No, you're solely doing a drop of art in an ocean of slop, so in the end it doesn't change much. It's wasted effort, at best.>Are you describing photoshop as a "magic machine that does it for you?"No, since Photoshop doesn't do anything for you. It doesn't think for you. You don't understand the difference, or pretend not to. >>523882941Have you considered the abbey on the picture predates Disney by several centuries?
>>523882953>artists don’t ever come up with their own ideasSo you’re saying for instance the simpsons style existed before the show and the artist just copied it from someone else? Where did that artist copy the style from then? At some point there must have been somebody who came up with the original idea for what the style would look like. If artists did nothing but copy each other then art would have never progressed beyond cave painting or rather would have never been a thing at all.
>>523883084Photography wouldn't be art if you told the camera to magically move and set itself up at the right time with the right lighting and the right scene, yeah. Unfortunately, the camera does not do that.
>>523883035>make it yourselfArt is to be consumed by the creator. Stop sharing art. Stop looking at other people's art. That isn't art. Create and consume it 100% yourself or fuck the hell off.
>>523883125>No, since Photoshop doesn't do anything for you.Once again, you are proving yourself incredibly ignorant regarding the tools you're trying to discuss.>this cheese-eating surrender monkey doesn't even know about content-aware fill in Photoshopkek
>>523883145You're arguing with people who enjoy art in different form every single day of their lives and who believe "art" is solely comprised of deviantart trannies drawing anime characters.
>>523883125Is the Abbey the art? or is it your NASA/DIsney reddit fanfic pic
>>523880323>>523882645It's not just a tool it's an agent. It generates output by itself without your input. Then you promptard until it fits what you want. Let's say music, it's not the same as the transition to digital music, people got mad it's just a guy pressing buttons, but music theory, creative process remained as inputs by you. The more you use AI, the more you skip the process, the more it does work for you not in the sense that you use it to make things easy, but for it to make things for you. It's technological shortcut x100 and attacks specifically the process. There is ai art that sure it looks good, but it lacks the beauty of the imperfections in real art. No amount of "hey but make it less perfect" will fix it because these imperfections are themselves expressions of the human form
>>523883182>content-aware fill in PhotoshopThat's AI bullshit that was only recently added, retard.
>>523883084>ERM, UHM, ACKSHUALLY I GOTCHAIt is. Photography requires skills and technical knowledge to know what's going to make a good photo. A photographer has an eye and intent to make something worthwhile rather than just describing it and hoping for the best. AI has no intent. AI has no ideas.You deserve to lose your right to any human intelligence in this world at this point. You DESERVE what this world is going to turn into. You DESERVE worthless dipshit doctors who wrote their papers with AI, just so you can see how bad it's going to get.
>>523883169OK, but if I'm controlling all seven elements of art as described by >>523882645 the AI model is not magically dictating the seven elements of art. It isn't magically dictating "the right lighting" and "the right scene." I dictated those for it. I dictated the composition. I dictated the pose of the figure, where in the image the figure is located, the amount of space around the figure, etc. The AI model did not "magically" dictate these things by itself. I did.
>>523883125>you're solely doing a drop of artSo it is art and you're coping. Got it.Tou can't be "a little pregnant." You euther are or you aren't. In the same way, what you're doing is either art or it is not.>Photoshop doesn't do anything for you.What I'm describing are people who take AI output and create composites in photoshop. That's how 90% of "professional" AI art is created. So your statement was irrelevant.
this is art
>>523882901>muh seven elementsShove your text book bullshit up your fat ass faggot
>>523880172Make your peace with AI becoming the main driver of art and culture or seethe about it for the rest of your days. Normies do not give a fuck they will take the slop every single time if it is cheaper/faster.
>>523883342Stfu AUS
>>523883233>I can't consider things as a whole>>523883301You didn't dictate shit. The truth is, you prooompted until you were mildly satisfied with the random result. You told the magic machine to do it over and over again until it roughly matched what your pea brain had managed to imagine.>>523883243This. It's exactly the same with drawing software. You're not just filling pixels on a screen, you're filling them exactly where you want them to be to express yourself.
>>523881560>he thinks artists go to college to get liberal arts degrees.The state of retardation is bewildering.
>>523883243>It generates output by itself without your input. Then you promptard until it fits what you wantYour reading comprehension is sorely lacking if you do not realize that I have described providing far more input than simply prompting as a possibility.>but it lacks the beauty of the imperfections in real artOh fuck off.Again, post-modernism is a shitload of fuck. Flaws are not a good thing. Flaws are flaws. They are bad by definition.Go masturbate to Gehry buildings, faggot.>>523883294>Photography requires skills and technical knowledgeUtilizing a combination of Controlnet, inpainting and image editor use in conjunction with the use of an AI model also requires skills and technical knowledge.
>>523880172If you think humans have free will and that art is "expression" of chaotic genius, you are an idiot.
>>523883317>So it is art and you're coping.No, you're coping because you have zero skills and zero patience to train any, so you think hitting the AI slot machine until you get "lucky" like a boomer in a casino makes you an artist.
>>523882727Yeah, I get annoyed by users who generate songs that are entirely composed by AI, lyrics and all. But, no, although I have final say on the music - the lyrics and their arrangement are entirely mine.Is a director an artist? Even if he isn't playing every character himself, while also operating all the cameras? I mean, he makes all the costumes and props himself, doesn't he?Again, I'm not even calling the AI stuff I do art, but it is work. If I'm writing a storyline, or two, to be conveyed using AI video, it is a thing of time and effort. I need to plot out each five second clip, write the prompts for these clips, including camera movement, angle, lighting- then there's the fucking hours of prompting. That means revision. And that means QA. AI is shitty. It constantly spits failure at you, and you need to select the most usable slop you can afford without exceeding the credit limit of your monthly subscription. Then you need to edit it all together. Anyways... despite the existence of generative AI, there's still no reason not to pick up a pen. Most of my AI bullshit comes from a pen. Most of what I create come from a pen.Most of what I write remains destined to have nothing to do with AI.I'm just not afraid of AI "art". I think it's fun to play with.AI is no reason not to express yourself in other ways, and to develop your talents into skills.I think people are more afraid of it because it allows people who don't have access to a lot of resources to make propaganda that will be able to capture people's interests because it can have the appearance of having high production value.
>>523883432>You didn't dictate shit.At this point you are clearly either arguing in bad faith or a complete retard who cannot comprehend the opposing argument.
>>523883473>incompetent coward insists he has no control
>>523880172>Art is a means of human expression reflecting a human experience.>it's about the human experience behind it.I know you think that sounds profound or whatever, but the problem is that it is impossible for you to ever truly know the human experience (if any) behind any particular piece of art.You are giving the benefit of the doubt to any non-AI art, that regardless of what it looks like (art isn't about how it looks, remember) that it must reflect human experience. And at the same time, you assume that all AI art is just jeetslop with no human experience behind it.But you have no real way of knowing for sure what kind of human experience was behind it. All you can really know is what (You) experience when you look at the art.And that experience just ends up being based on what it looks like.This relates to the idea of whether the meaning of a work of art is determined by the artist or the audience. An artist can *try* to put some specific meaning or symbols or whatever into their work, but in the end the best they can hope for is that the audience interprets it in the same way.
>>523883550>it can have the appearance of having high production value.It can't. Even if AI gets "better" at mimicking human arts, then it puts everyone on the same pedestal and acts as a great slop equalizer.
>>523883468You have technical knowledge of writing a PROMPT which is not art. You will never be considered an artist in my eyes unless you make it yourself. I will reject this bullshit at every possible opportunity and there's nothing anyone can do to make me accept it. I would demolish and burn every AI data center on the planet and hang every dev who tries to recreate it if I was king of the world. Ditch the slop machine. Make yourself smarter and actually learn a fucking skill. Pick up a fucking pencil and make it yourself, beginning to end. Everything you make is worthless if AI plays any part in it.
>>523880172Art is anything that evokes emotion in (you). In which case the AI slop spam destroying the internet that is causing immense anger in me is definitely art.bonus picrel, enjoy a little sketch by me
>>523883650>that it must reflect human experience.Because it intrinsically does. Maybe that object on the painting was there to correct a mistake, or maybe that was completely intentional and hides some private joke from 300 years ago. Maybe it was never meant to be there on the original and the artist added it later.Regardless of whether you know, whether it meant something or not, it still reflects a human experience.
>>523883539I never called myself an artist in any capacity. Nor do I have desire to become one. I just recognize the artistic value in a tool you are naively rejecting.
>>523883704>You have technical knowledge of writing a PROMPTAgain, I read this as>I don't know what Controlnet is or how it worksYou're embarrassing yourself by arguing from a position of ignorance.There are an absolute shitload of human skills that have nothing at all to do with prompting which can go into generating an image with the assistance of AI, using AI as just one of multiple tools to produce the image.
>>523883813>my SLOP is DIFFERENT because I have more CONTROL over it (I have only a 80% chance of generating complete nonsensical garbage that i'll have to reroll instead of 95%)
>>523883267Content aware fill was added in 2010, anon.You are speaking with arrogance from a position of ignorance. Absolutely embarrassing.
>>523880172>You're a retarded vantablack nigger who thinks art is something that's supposed to look "good"This is unironically true - Anything else is kike pilpul to justify their own lack of skill in doing art in an attempt to reframe "art" as doing unskilled shit a toddler can do as long as there is a way for the "artist" to reframe the shit he did in ambiguous pilpul or the "art" shows contempt toward the goyim scoiety somehow.
>>523883800See the bright side of things, maybe it'll completely annihilate social media for good and force people to talk to each other again.Cool sketch.
>>523883704AI jeetslop is low value trash because it is jeetslop, not because they used AI to create it.Jeets can create equally low value trash slop by using Photoshop or a camera or paint or clay or smearing elephant shit on a wall. It's garbage because a talentless jeet without any artistic skill or talent created worthless slop and tried to pass it off as "art" because they are too talentless and retarded to tell the difference between jeetslop garbage and actual high quality art. Not because of whatever tool they chose to make it with.
>>523882174Photography documents things that were either made by man or God, AI is a slurry of code.
>>523884008AI was made by man.
>>523883650>This relates to the idea of whether the meaning of a work of art is determined by the artist or the audience.It should be the audience because you are producing it for them. That's the case in most profession, your skill is determined by how well you serve your client.
>>523884008So if it's a "slurry of code" it is not art? Is that your line in the sand?
>AI ISN'T ART! IT'S JUST TYPING WORDS INTO A PROMPT BOX, HITTING A BUTTON AND SAVING AN IMAGE! THAT'S IT! THAT'S NOT ART!>actually, yes, that's how most people use it, but people actually have the option to use things like image editors and Controlnet models to control all seven elements of art while using an AI checkpoint as just one of many tools to produce an image>IT'S STILL SLOP AND NOT ART BECAUSE... BECAUSE I SAY IT'S NOT ARTLuddites, everyone.
>>523883550The director is an artist because he has intent, vision, desires, humanity, and his own ideas. He is able to create something original from his own mind. The actors he directs are also artists, as well as the medium, because they are also sentient living beings who have ideas, behaviors, emotions, and humanity. The cinematographer controls the cameras, and he is also an artist because he has technical know-how and skills for framing and lighting shots in such a way that makes them look how he wants them to. AI at best could be considered a toy. It can be amusing, but it's not making anything that could be considered art or unique. Everything it shits out looks and sounds the same. I hope you spend more time expressing things from your own mind than you do trying to get an AI to smash other peoples thoughts together for you.AI immediately cheapens anything it touches as well. I refuse to use any products that use AI in advertising and logos. It tells me that you're willing to cheap out on how you represent yourself, so why wouldn't you cheap out on everything else you do too? It displays a lack of quality and care in your brand. Progressive (auto insurance) had the nerve to put an AI ad in my feed. I cancelled my policy with them that same day and switched to a competitor. I told them this in the comment section of that ad, and then they deleted it. I will reject it at every opportunity I get.There are too many dangers with it. It's already being used to manipulate politics. I mourn for my senior father now. He's been fooled by this manipulative bullshit many times. He's gotten to the point where he asks me about almost every video he sees and I hate that for him.
>>523880323You are Indian
>>523880172>taking pictures super seriousWANNA KNOW HOW I CAN TELL YOU ARE A MENTALLY ILL RETARD?You look at a picture of your death and go "OMG THIS IS REAL! THIS IS A REAL THING" instead of like anyone else who glances and goes "wow. That is pretty grim. anyway..."Kill yourself for the good of mankind, paint a picture of your woe too before you do. Or are you one of these people screaming "PICK UP A PENCIL" but never do it yourself?
>>523883813You write a prompt and then you maybe draw a circle or a stick figure. I've seen how it works. You still did nothing. This shit just gives you asspats and makes you feel like you did something. You did not. You still know nothing and you gained nothing.
>>523883933Photoshop was released in 1990 tardo>>523884199Why are you so autistically obsessed with your heckin controlnet? Haven't you realized that nobody cares whether you slightly change the odds in your favor on your slot machine? The only difference you're making is you're typing fewer prompts to get something acceptable in your eyes.
Most art is commercial slop, no one looks at a bubblegum wrapper and goes “ this is amazing!” But it still took some guy a few hours of photoshop or illustrator work to do. All AI will do is speed up creating already commercialized slop.
>>523881002> Pajeet is untalented and dysgenic> Can’t even draw an apple> AI lets him pretend he’s not quite so dysgenic and inferior so he can larp as a White man> Saaaaar we are top talent saaaaar I am promisingMany such cases
>>523884290Wow, what's going on in Morocco?
>>523884329>no one looks at a bubblegum wrapper and goes “ this is amazing!”WRONG
>>523884329You still recognize it though. It's still very much art. You're right. You could point it out. It doesn't have to be good to be art. If I see AI in packaging, that tells me you cut corners on your product and I will not buy it.
>>523883704>Everything you make is worthless if AI plays any part in it.>>523884248>AI immediately cheapens anything it touches as well.Let's say I spend a whole year crafting a single image entirely by hand. A 10,000x10,000 pixel image. I use every artistic technique I've learned over a period of decades studying and working as a legitimate artist. It's my magnum opus, my masterpiece.I then fill 10x10 pixels of this 10,000x10,000 pixel image with AI-generated pixels.Are you seriously going to argue that this now invalidates the image as art, that the image is no longer art?
>>523884307This is why pajeets love AI slop so much. It helps them avoid facing the reality that they are dumber and uglier and less talented than Whites.
>>523884391Low IQ, dysgenics, lots of brown people and scammers and mudslimes.
>>523884423Doesn't come to mind that Coca Cola and McDonald's released AI slop ads that instantly got everyone flabbergasted at how companies that shit so much cash could even fathom releasing this.
>>523884321You are repeatedly demonstrating that you have zero idea how AI art even operates and yet you continue to hold an opinion on whether it's "art."Fascinating, really.
>>523884437I'd say it cheapens the fuck out of it and makes it worse. Everything except that small section is still art. The AI portion is not. I'd still say you ruined your work.
>>523884307>hen you maybe draw a circle or a stick figure. I've seen how it works.You clearly haven't seen enough of how it works.You can draw very detailed lineart and preserve that detail by using the Controlnet model at a high strength value.
>>523884437Shut the fuck up pajeet
>>523884517That's not what I asked.Is the image, as a whole, art? Yes or no?>>523884528Not an argument. Also wrong.
>>523884321All good art is gambling; the composition falls into place with accident after accident as you said yourself here >>523883802Unless you're a fag redditor who takes your digital camera out to disneyland after doing some math to track the space station.
>>523884521An artist capable of making detailed lineart wouldn't use that, so no. It's not. I do know how it works. This bullshit is forced on me every single day. I've seen retards like you drawing shitty figures into it that could pass for art on their own, and then the AI spews its slop all over it, ruining it and making it look like AI. >>523884588No. It's no longer your art. You ruined it with AI slop and now it should be burned.
>>523881674Actual porn doodler here, I actually make more money now than I did before the slop flood. Also I play around with the slop machine as well and my shit is better than 99% of the slop out there because most people don't know anything about proper terminology and can't prompt for shit. Anyway it makes me laugh to see these posts because they obviously come from kissless artists or shit eating indians, but really where's the difference.
A camera is completely viable tool for making art.An algorithm is a completely viable tool for making art.An AI model is a completely viable tool for making art.Not every photo is art.Not every algorithm produces art.But is every picture from an AI model art? This is what you're debating. I guess it's a good thought exercise, but not a very meaningful debate.
>>523884423I was a graphic designer for 20 years. But I was never a good illustrator, I’d usually go grab a stock image. If I was working in it now there’d still be a human element of me setting the typeface and layout but I’d just generate an image exactly as how I want it versus spending hours trolling istock. I’d make sure you wouldn’t notice it’s AI even if I have to edit the sixth finger out myself.
>>523884503Absolutely yes. And then they bragged about how many "hours" it took them to get it right. Like. You had someone sit there typing "make christmas coke train in snow" over and over??? And it STILL looked like inconsistent shit. The train looked different in every shot. And they're STILL proud of that? Mind boggling.
>>523884640>An artist capable of making detailed lineart wouldn't use thatI have produced images, with the assistance of AI, by passing my own detailed lineart onto Controlnet, so you are literally, factually and objectively wrong.>No.OK, thanks for conclusively proving you're a fucking moron. You just proved my point for me, that point being that you are retarded and mentally ill.
>>523884663Autists*Funny autocorrect though.>>523884672
>>523884611>the composition falls into place with accident after accidentNo. It contains accidents, it doesn't fall into place accident by accident. Besides, that's not the point, because you're not composing anything while repeatedly proompting, you're just trying again and slightly modifying the prompt because the jew machine didn't give you a result you liked. You're just picking something in an endless gallery of slop. Maybe the next prompt would've been better, but you'll never know because you stopped proompting at some point. You ran out of credits on the slot machine.
>>523884692Using a stock image still requires your human mind to make a decision and you'd need skills to utilize it. I can always tell when something is AI but it's getting harder and I don't like that. I'd still rather you do it the hard way because you care about your work.
AI is based only insofar as its ability to make furry porn commission “artists” with that autistic middle schooler sonichu style keep themselves safe
>>523880172art was going nowhere anyway, and we haven't been producing any great artists lately, so ...https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OHQRo3Uz_VQ
>>523884804>you're not composing anything while repeatedly proomptingOnce again demonstrating your lack of understanding of how AI artist operate.You won't reply to this either because whenever an anon BTFO's you you just stop replying so you can pretend you haven't been conclusively shown to be incorrect.You're just wrong, dude.
>>523884741LMAO you have nothing. Not once have you justified why it's art. All you've done is reveal how lazy you are and how much you wish you could draw, and how much you really don't. It's sad. Hope whatever company using AI slop for advertising doesn't accidentally poison you with lead or something because they're clearly okay with cutting corners.
>>523884841Yeah I'm glad it makes them seethe but the problem is every other retard on here thinks artists are solely this type. Yet everyday they watch movies, look at paintings, TV series, architectures, play video games...etc.
>>523884663You sound fat
>>523884930At this point I think he's arguing in bad faith to keep his own thread alive.
>>523884835Also look at it from our perspective. I once got bored and spent hours all night doodling a Santa Clause on my iPad for a chocolate box design at work. Off hours on my own time, because I felt inspired. My boss thought it was cute but said “nah it’s not right”. Big waste of time, might as well just go play with prompts.
>>523884804>You ran out of credits on the slot machine.Truly, SLOP! is the most Human experience of all.
>>523884958>Not once have you justified why it's art.What part of human control over all seven elements of art did you not understand?
>>523884930>how AI artist operate.
saars the AI is greatest equalizer. with the AI i now am getting to be skills so that i can geting the visa.
>>523880172>t.FARTist
>>523885009It's THAT easy to make you give up and lose faith? That sounds like a personal problem, not mine.>>523885026You still didn't make anything. You still had to write a prompt to tell it what you want the end result to look like rather than doing it yourself. I understand you have to draw a stick figure, but you could just do that and it'd be better art than the slop you appear to be proud of.
>>523884248Your boomer father has been manipulated by all kinds of shit way before AI. We all have. The actual political ecosystem is a fucking jungle - there were already all kinds of influence and manipulation coming from and going all kinds of interesting and wicked directions. AI can be a bit scary, in this regard, absolutely. But there's a glimmer of why I like it in that scariness...AI can capture people's attention better than a lot of other resource-poor media can. That makes it a neat tool for dissident propaganda. That's cool. I like that.AI "art" is very much a toy, though. A fun toy, and I do enjoy playing with it a few times a month.>>523883671Yeah, production value isn't really what I meant- but compared to a lot of other media made with ghetto equipment, there's something about it (perhaps the uncanny quality?) that's able to grab some attention. Not going to lie, I'm looking forward to better character consistency between prompts. I want to make a movie. I have the story plotted out. I've tackled how to write a prmpts-based script for it in the philosophical sense - but the technology just isn't there yet. Not where I need it to be to make such a big time investment on one thing. I've fucked around making skits on veo 3 a bit. Was fun. Cheap, ywah. For sure. Still able to convey things visually in a way I would absolutely never be able to do in any other way on my own without having crazy funds.
>>523880172>art is not about how it looks That right there is both stupid and wrong.I own a lot more art than you ever will and I can assure you it was all selected because of how it looked,you fucking retard There are other considerations, but fuck you, you poorfag wannabe snob, kys.
>>523885165>Not going to lie, I'm looking forward to better character consistency between prompts. I want to make a movie. I have the story plotted out. I've tackled how to write a prmpts-based script for it in the philosophical sense - but the technology just isn't there yet. Not where I need it to be to make such a big time investment on one thing.lol your movie is going to be unwatchable slop made up of stitched together 30 second clips just like the coca cola and mcdonald's ads
>>523884588You are Indian though
>>523885165>there's something about it (perhaps the uncanny quality?) that's able to grab some attention.I disagree. The moment anything feels AI generated, it makes anyone sane leave immediately because deep down you know it has no value whatsoever. Reading Chatgpt slop is an insult in itself, because you're spending your human thoughts on reading something that fundamentally means nothing. >>523885187gypsy moment
>You didn't actually draw detailed lineart, you drew a stick figure. How do I know? Because I said so.>You're actually Indian. How do I know? Because I said so.Luddites, everyone. Masters of high-quality rhetoric.
>>523885079Utterly delusional, as frogs tend to be.
>>523885165Sure we all have been manipulated, but it makes me really sad that he has to constantly question something he used to find a lot of joy in. Same for me. I hate seeing a video or art, starting to think I like it, and then immediately having to stop my enjoyment to look for clues to make sure it's not AI trash. I don't want to support it because it's going to ruin the planet's human intelligence. I don't want the things I enjoy to be poisoned and artificial, I want to enjoy things made my human hands and minds.Outside of the image and video generation, we're all going to be old and deteriorating soon and I'd rather not have to see a doctor who skated through college by having AI do all the work.
>>523884972You’d think artists with actual talent would make a killing live-streaming their work to prove its genuine while pontificating to the anti AI crowd, but you go on the art twitch directory right now and what do you know, it’s hundreds of the same exact copy paste anime gooner shit with 10 viewers each. The real problem here is that we didn’t nuke Japan enough, and now we have to shut down the internet as a consequence.
>>523885421>YOU ARE LUDDITE SAAAAARRR
>>523885313Yeah, maybe. I still want to do it. As I said, I'm not ready to commit to it yet. At the current stage, that time is better spent people-watching and writing on an actual page. But I am going to do it. And it is going to take an actual assload of effort and time.
>>523885501Irony.
>>523880172>the last picture looks betterdeal with it artsy faggot
>>523880172>death of the author>until the author is AI then suddenly it matterslol
>>523885187Exactly. You make art to please your audience. If you just make art for yourself, you can't complain about artists not being employable.
It's ironic how OP regurgitates cliches, pushes stereotypes, and repeats surface level mantras – basically operates like his ignorant perception of "AI".You can easily spot that he is some bydlo out of his depth simply because of this brainfart>it's the definition of artThere is no single commonly accepted definition of this concept. Any person who actually tried to study any form of creative expression knows that.
>>523880172The people who make fun of artists are just contrarians who delight in seeing you suffer. Nobody actually thinks ai art is replacing real artists. In certain areas, yes.
>>523885358Chatgpt slop is total fucking garbage, I agree. Why would I want to make songs with AI at all unless it was with MY lyrics?When I write skits, I want to use MY jokes and ideas, or why else would I do it.I have a friend who was writing skits with chatgpt and posting them to YT.They fucking sucked.Worse than mine. Like fuck, I'm laughing at the shit I'm writing down, imagining it my head - and I get a shitty version of tgat with the AI.Is chatgpt laughing while it's formulating it's output? No. You can tell because no one is laughing at what it returned to you either.You can tell a fag has been using chatgpt because it's got this snarky, dumbass little accent when it's speaking. I'll still use chatgpt to suggest baking time and temp when I make experimental cookies, though.
>>523885313Modern Hollywood films are 15 5 second jump cuts with 2 minutes of a unique artistic vantage point and 6 minutes of eye level shots, repeated.Editing AI slop may well approach the same value, and most films are filmed entirely to add to the producing studio’s film sample catalog for further AI usage.Next time you see some washed up actor in a new film that blows, remember the only reason he is there is to farm his likeness with modern methods.>>523885358There’s an uncanny valley that is off putting, like with the Alita live action cg movie a decade ago. I guarantee you have seen a ridiculous amount of cg AI slop recently in a modern film and had no idea it was synthetic>>523885464Lol you wouldn’t know the clues or filming methods if they were the entire joke of the movie.Do you like Minotaurs or labyrinths?>>523885643Lmao, even((A fat tranny with male pattern baldness sits at his computer desk typing frantically on his keyboard. On his face is a look of frustration and anger. He has tears running down his face, ruining his poorly applied makeup and making mascara run down his cheeks. He is obese, he wears thin rimmed glasses, he wears long pink and teal striped thighhighs that go up his skinny legs towards his pot belly. He will never be a woman))RefineTranny:1.05, stubble, sweat:0.67, man, fat, ugly, glasses, crying, sad:1.11, angry:1.07, typing, dark lighting, clutter, grimy, dirty, fat_man:0.77, computer_keyboard, computer_desk, computer:0.85, BREAK, background_gooncave, posters on walls, dark lighting, pink hue, teal hue, faggy ambienceNegativeWoman:1.44, life, happy:1.22, friends, clean, sanity, valueWorking title: You Will Never Be A Woman
>>523885464>starting to think I like itThere were go.Just relax, guy. It's Its own thing. I don't look at AI as a monolithic entity. I do think that as long as doctors are properly trained,that a very good chatbot might be able to give a competent second opinion. Unfortunately, doctors are already often suck - and it's going to get a lot worse. That's partially, though not entirely because of AI, yeah... and that means we're probably better off hoping the AI becomes more competent than the doctors. Shit sucks.
>>523885643I was about to shit on you, but you're right, actually. Death of the author is just incorrect if one can't analyze AI art as if it's art made by a human. On the other hand, one could reasonably make the case that AI made death of the author outdated. The idea is radically changed.But, further, all AI art is clearly subject to the death of the author more so than any text written by a human. The author truly has no ownership over the text in comparison to the reader interpreting it. The author is truly dead.
To all the "AI isn't real art" fags here:I alluded to this earlier, but would you consider fractal art "real art?"
>>523885108> It's THAT easy to make you give up and lose faith? No, 20 years of working for women who don’t know what they want made me give up. At least AI would have made the job easier.
>>523880323So PowerPoint presentations are art now? Don't be fucking retarded.There are 4 elements that are necessary for defining something as art:>1. message / truth about reality>2. beauty / visual appeal >3. technical skill>4. novelty / creativityIf one of these is missing, then it's not art.
>>523881634There is no such thing as artificial intelligence. What you're referring to are computer generated images and visuals. That's all just computing. Computers cannot create art and art cannot be created digitally. Art is objective with a set criteria, not subjective or contextual. This goes back to the beginning of man, mark making and assemblage. >>523881739No, it stops at consideration of beauty, you can either move towards that or away, consciously for effect. What are you going to do, print out the crap you made while staring into a screen?No physicality, no real scale, no real lighting, no texture/depth, images can be used as brushes, things can be lifted, altered, copied and pasted without consequence, process limited. What you and other anons advocate for, promote and even go as far to believe in renders everything meaningless. It is completely anti-human. Nearly everyone here is proving themselves to be a subhuman that has lost sight of the practice and what it means to be alive. Most don't mark make or go to museums, can't function creatively off screen. This is a lost cause. You people are truly lost and have cut ties with your ancestors.
>>523886868>PowerPoint presentations are artBy most definitions, including your own made up one, yes.
>>523886527No, because while it might be visually appealing and some of its patterns can be considered novel, it is also meaningless and computer generated.>>523886868
>>523885358is it true that modern art was invented by the CIA and is not real art but really propaganda trying to fool the USSR into thinking we discovered a new form of art
>>523881379Anon, we are talking about imagen. Yes a person could sculpt a sculpture to convoy a mental image, but that ends up as a 3d object. We are refering to 2d images, which are created traditional via pen/brush or a camera. The latter of the two has never been taken seriously beyond journalism. So yes the average ability to draw as a factor in this discussion.
>>523887016>art cannot be created digitallyA very high bar has already been set in this thread for the thread's most retarded poster.You just cleared it by miles. Congratulations.
>>523886868This isn't concrete enough. These points can be misinterpreted and exploited.
>>523887026No, because they are not beautiful, not hard to make and not creative. Their message is also as direct as it can possibly be.
SLOP: Soulless, Low-efforr, Over Processed.
>>523887047Meaning can be construed from the equations and algorithms used to produce them. There's an entire subculture of people who go on about some spiritualistic truth behind math or whatever the fuck.There is also an argument to be made that there is skill required in setting the correct parameters in the same way that a photographer needs to know the right settings for his camera and lighting for the subject he's photographing.
>>523880172>rt is something that's supposed to look "good"Yes, that is what art is; If your art looks bad, it is not art, it is barf. No, I don't care what some contemporary cosmopolitan retards define what art is.>y-you are le niggerDon't care, your ugly slop isn't art. Whether it was done by hand or some compiter algorithm generated it, ugly is bad and beautiful is good.
>>523887201nothing digital is hard to make. you cede photography isn't art, correct?
>>523887201>they are not beautifulThey can be. That's subjective and up to the skill of the presenter.>not hard to makeThe output is about as good as your effort and skill. PowerPoint is a versatile tool.>Their message is also as direct as it can possibly be.Relevance?
>>523880172Only leftists are against AI.
>>523887115If someone asked to see your art and you showed them your screen they'd laugh at you. Any rational person would mock you and be right to do so. We all understand art cannot be created digitally. Print it out or perform with it next to any painting or assemblage and it'd be laughable. This is a slap to the face of humanity, everyone that's come before us. Even photographs and film are living mutable artifacts that require cogent thought, taste and, lighting and processing. What a fool.
>>523881939Do you have any more proof to back that up?
>>523881739>Some troons tape bananas to the walls for jewish money laundering>Hence we have to subvert all art and the creative spirit of White People, the only actual true artists>And water it down so pajeets can churn out more shitty slop>While giving more power to the technofeudalists and jewsThis is just white genocide on an artistic and spiritual sphere, the usual suspects cannot create and look to undermine beauty everywhere. All with a nice veneer of 'owning le libs' so you welcome the transgression until the damage becomes terminal.
>>523887462nice try tranny
>>523880172>Art is not about how it looks, it's about the human experience behind it.that's not why ai art is badit's bad cause it's just bad art (details etc)>>523881544>Have you seen those elephants that can paint?Those elephants are abused by third-worlders to be taught to do that, genius.
>>523887138I don't think they can be if you put them in the right frame. The Cambridge dictionary defines art as:>the making or doing of something whose purpose is to bring pleasure to people through their enjoyment of what is beautiful and interesting.What do people find universally beautiful and interesting? Life, truth and freedom. Beauty, talent and skill are an expression of life. Indirect messaging and the human experience are an expression of life. Novelty and creativity are an expression of freedom. Only works that can fully express all these higher values can be called art.>>523887355Photography might be a lower form of art along with digital art, but if you think it is simple to be an excellent photographer, you are sorely mistaken. You need excellent knowledge of perspective, lighting, coloring, composition, framing, styles, cameras, lenses, etc.
>>523887728*Indirect messaging and the human experience are an expression of truth
>>523886868I think the best definitions of art I've heard include the idea that it's something that transcends something banal into an experience that's infused with meaning or sensuality greater than the mere banality. In other words, it has an emergent quality to it. I feel like that's a key factor here.AI art is rather banal, but not completely. It's slop. And it's certainly not intentionally transcendental. That's why this discussion is so difficult. It's close to art, but it's also somewhat banal.
>>523887077Modern art is art. Abstraction goes back thousands of years as decoration and revelation. It was not created by the CIA, but it was at times co-opted by the government. The only way you can see art is in person, and if you've never stood in front of a Modern art piece you have no place to speak on such a matter. If you only view images onscreen, no natural lighting, no scale, no depth, no texture, miscolored, pixelated then you cannot have an opinion on this. No anon can. Like I've said, it'd be difficult to consider you a human being. I consider you a subhuman, possibly a parasite.
Remember the AI slop threads where jeets were just posting images with no one replying to anything? Lol.
>>523880172pendatic bullshit. Businesses don't need art. They need graphics and AI can generate that just fine.
>>523887923Good way to put it. That's the practical view. Hard to argue.
>>523887728where do all the beautiful, insightful powerpoints fall on this new low-high art tier list>>523887817>sees a rothko once
I am noticing a massive uptick of AI art shilling in normie places and in some of the boards in here. I guess all that AI money is being put to use by their marketing department.
>>523887923>Businesses don't need artWrong, they need it for advertising. The most effective ads, the ones that stick in people's minds and make them want to buy products, are the ones that provoke positive emotions in people, and art is the best way to achieve that. Why do you think everyone hates the new AI-generated ads of Coca-Cola and McDonald's so much? Because they're slop, not art.
>>523880172>muh art>muh the "word" art>muh soul>muh the meaning of beauty>muh label of "artist" and his ego>muh fefesnobody cares.you left hippopotamus hammer a slab of cheese with a sling-hammer, call themselves artists. You did not go o,n a warpath to shame those fat faggots into the oblivion of a hole. but now you care what art is.marxists have raped no word more than they have raped the word art. hence, produce titty anime image on request. and find customers willing to pay. or do not make money out of your hobby. TLDR: here another nut little monky, do another dancie.
>>523880172>The crying artfag is humiliated by the sunrise for the 1-infinity-eth time
>>523887475Is music art?
>>523887968>where do all the beautiful, insightful powerpoints fall on this new low-high art tier listRight above AI art probably. They don't have exactly ZERO artistic value, but zero is still a fair approximation.
>>523880561When you got 30 results or so you select something decent out of them. Your taste in what you had selected is your experience as a human.
>>523888255Imagine unironically posting that image and feeling proud of yourself
>>523883145Holy fuck bro are you a retarded fuck?? no thats not what I am sayingI am saying 99% or artists think they are Matt Groening and copy his style and think they are unique. You are not a Matt Groening. You are not the impetus, you as i said are trite and derivative Fucking artfags man you are not special at all, you need to understand that.
artists itt really think they are Andy Warhol and Rembrandt Embarrassing, I know that your art styles are nothing and every single art school has at least one “artist” doing exactly what you do.
>>523888520>Your taste in what you had selected is your experience as a humanYou could have a dog select something it prefers out of 30 results too. Would that be much different? There are 8+ billion people on Earth. If you want anyone to care about your human experience, you'll need a little more than that.
>>523880172>about the human experience behind itFuck you, you piece of shitty shit, i hate you and i do not care about yours experience or feelings. Fuck you.I want pictures of PsiderMan fucking Black Cannary - i get those.
>>523888371You ignored my last couple responses to you, I'm gonna try my best to level with you:We can both agree that PowerPoint presentations *can* be art I think. There's nothing stopping someone from using PowerPoint as a platform to give an observer a stunning experience that tells a fantastic story through a series of sounds and visuals. This is all true, I believe, despite the fact that most PPTs are boring and low effort outlines of some sales pitch or the like.In the same way: you no doubt agree a fantasy novel is art while your Calculus I textbook might not be. My argument is that there is a difference between "people using AI as a rough visual representation of whatever bullshit they felt like typing into a prompt" and "people who use AI as a platform and a tool to assist in creating an experience for the public."Now I would usually apply the term "art" more broadly than you as I'm more clinically minded and less of a romanticist than you. But I think we can at least find common ground here in saying AI *can* be art.
>>523888520By the way, your experience as a human must be pretty awful if the best you could select was a tree in the middle of a road and a badly proportioned car that is merged with the asphalt.
>>523888814Do i really care what someone thinks about me? That's not the point at all. AI slop is what your brain doing on psycholdelics anyway - just broken math graph plotting, thats what visual processing is. AI art is legit because it demonstrates how human perception works and how easy to decept it. Remember snail dogs early AI? Literally best description of what people seeing on shrooms.>>523889071Yes my experience is awful.Water don't have to be blue and grass if it can tell emotion trough color and still recognizable.And I'm not huge of a AI art after all, I just think its tool which be heavily utilized in the future generating your wagie cagie matrix heaven.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQNUZY_pVZE
>>523888950The originally post I replied to said:>Art is just expressing your thoughts and ideas visuallyWhich is false.Can PowerPoint presentations BE art? I guess so, if you really try hard enough. The same could technically be said for AI... HOWEVER, what makes AI different is that almost every artistic aspect is inherently stripped away from it.The message is limited to a couple key words in a prompt box.The visual appeal is uncanny and artificially optimized, following styles and coloring schemes that have been overused to death.The skill aspect is annihilated, reduced to the selection of one result among a bunch of automatically generated ones.There is essentially zero novelty or creativity, as the AI can only generate things by mimicking what humans have already created.I'll say AI can be art only when I'll see at least one instance of AI art. Hasn't happened yet.
>>523880172>you fundamentally misunderstand what art isart is an expression of creativity. you are talking about artwork.
>>523889789>The message is limited to a couple key words in a prompt box.This is wrong and shows you do not have enough experience with AI imagegen to speak knowledgeably on the subject. It is curious that you believe your opinion to be worth posting since you are unbelievably ignorant.>The visual appeal is uncanny and artificially optimized, following styles and coloring schemes that have been overused to death.This is a skill issue on the part of the genner.>The skill aspect is annihilated, reduced to the selection of one result among a bunch of automatically generated ones.Again, this is wrong and shows your ignorance as to the tools available to the genner.
>>523889789>uncanny and artificially optimizedThats the point what makes it special.>following styles and coloring schemes that have been overused to deathUntil you learn to properly train it which is craft on its own and not many bother to do it with their hands.I don't even like wasting my time at AI images anymore but it surely can make artists suffer more by mocking their "uniqueness".AND if it makes you feel feels its art by definition, no matter how horrific it is.
>>523889789My internet is being fucky so probably new IP again.I am this guy:>>523888950>>523887410>>523887276That out of the way: it could be argued that the use of AI is part of the message. Art can illicit negative emotions as well and part of your experience of the finished product is the knowledge that AI had a hand in creating it. The medium is part of the message.Visual appeal is literally subjective so any attempt you make at making a claim here is just naive realism on your part.Skill depends on what you're doing with it. As discussed earlier ITT, "professional" AI artists put a lot of effort in photoshopping and reworking the initial output. So while your statement applies, in a sense, to rando's reposting whatever stable output they're handed, this just isnt true for the people who actually fancy themselves "AI artists."And novelty? All human art has been inspired by either prior art or the natural world around them. AI training data is no different.
>>523890077>make artists suffer more>by mocking (read: copying) their "uniqueness"You envy them and desperately want to be like them, but they're the ones suffering? I don't get it.>>523889912Okay tell me what I'm missing then. The message of every AI image I've seen so far has been extremely on the nose. Over 90% of the times it's just "cute/hot anime girl".
>>523890367No thats just side effect of progress."No you can't do computer art on a tablet its not real until you brush it with paint and feel the smell of it"... etc Bullying "professional artists" when you're able to utilize new tools had always been a part of the experience. I'm just curious about new tech and what can it produce. I don't consider myself artist. But i can make you feel something, I bet.I liked to stop stable diffusion process in the middle of it and see what im getting, too. Understanding relationship between reality and underlying math had never been so profound.
>>523890367>Okay tell me what I'm missing then.Search for posts by my ID in this thread. They contain the info you seek.The tl;dr is that tools are available which allow people to do much more than simply prompt AI models with text.
>>523890244>AI is part of the messageSounds like a cope, desu.>Visual appeal is literally subjectiveThen explain how men can rate women's attractiveness to a frighteningly similar degree. Visual appeal is not 100% objective, but it's not 100% subjective either. Most humans can tell when something is "uncanny". And the fact AI visuals are optimized artificially to have the ideal balancing of colors and lighting is just that, a fact.>skillDigital art typically requires less skill than painting, I think everyone knows that.>All human art has been inspired by either prior art or the natural world around them. AI training data is no different.Humans don't make a perfect copy of someone else's work in their mind, train themselves to mimic it to perfection, then modify the copy slightly by merging it with other copies so that they can pretend they made something original.
>>523880323You genuinely have no soul if you think putting words into a black box that you don't even comprehend and having it generate pixels on a screen is art.
>>523887475Is cinematography an art?
>>523880423His stuff is pretty comfy though
>>523880172I honestly cannot give a fuckIt makes leftist liberal art fags seethe so therefore I like it.
>>523890367You want message? Its perfect for conveying uncanny valley unspeakable cosmic horror genre.
>>523891022For the record, the pic is Mary Cassat, an American woman. not VG, who was not an American
>>523880172Bad take anon. Art is a way to transmit or convey a feeling from one person to another.
>>523890947Aesthetics are objective. Artfags have been trying to pretend to be more important than they are forever.You render images. You're a stamp.
the rich didn't expect that the robot revolution would come for their hobbies first and its actually hilarious to see. Art is for the masses now
>>523880423shut up retard and excise yourself from the gene pool
>>523890367> Over 90% of the times it's just "cute/hot anime girl".And anime girl is pinnacle of art expression in this century, haven't you been aware of it? Or in denial?Big eyes = sees more, whole world in it.Every anime picture analogous to byzantine religious icon.
>>523891060I think that's just AI being the cosmic horror itself.
>>523880172You're wasting your time. Pro AI niggers are literal plebs and they will never understand. And for some absurd retarded reason it became left wing to be against AI (probably because of banana tape wall "artists"), so every drooling troglodyte that considers itself "right wing" is now constantly targeting those against slop slurping. They're by definition a bunch of kool-aid drinking faggots.
>>523886868You don't think you can use AI - at any level - and still achieve all of these?
>>523880172Trying to explain what art is to right wingers is like trying to explain calculus to a 5 year old. It’s impossible for them to understand
>>523886868Actually the seven elements of art are universally accepted as line, shape, form, color, value, texture, and space.But that was cute of you to try to pretend that your own, arbitrary elements define art.
>>523891254Its too late to be scared. watch?v=JBX09XStGQU
>>523890843>Sounds like a cope, desu.It's certainly not a new cope.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_medium_is_the_message>Then explain how men can rate women's attractiveness to a frighteningly similar degreeFitness for breeding.But I get your point. The thing is, AI art really doesn't look universally bad. It's your knowledge of it being AI that is tainting your perception of it. See the above point.>Digital art typically requires less skill than paintingThat wasn't the argument, though, was it?You already agreed photography is art.>Humans don't make a perfect copy of someone else's work in their mind, train themselves to mimic it to perfection, then modify the copy slightly by merging it with other copiesThat's not how AI works either. Like not even close.
i wouldn't care so much about ai art if 99% of ai art didn't look like utter fucking shit slop with the most indian pajeet engagement bait prompting or degenerate fucking kike gooner fetish art
>>523880172>art is something that's supposed to look "good" or look "real"It is. AI slop is neither of that though.
>>523887685So are art students in general.
>>523891059Sell your ass to literal homosexual Jews to own the libs [*], chud![*] Allegedly, we only know this from Jewish media.
>>523891776Most people have no taste and happy to reproduce bad, ugly, meaningless and generic pieces, which feeds into feedback loop of human perception, and then, into feedback loop of ai slop. Its our responsibility to select and repost and reproduce good enough pieces, or just classify them by lots of different metrics, we haven't invented or discovered yet. Visual AI can help us explore our perception and uncover what are these parameters we have intuition for but have no name for it.
>>523891896Bad art is still art. AI generated images are bad and still not art.
>>523890697You can make something in the same vein that shit can look like different shapes if you stare long enough.
ai has no soul, thats the problem
>>523881698still a better lovestory than twilight
>>523893137And its good that its apparent it has no "soul" or conscience. Its like engineers made part of brain that does visual perception but can't conceptualize it yet. There still work to do.
>>523882313>I don't make the rulesdefine the meaning of the word "living"
So are you guys really trying to saythis isn't art?
>>523893314And there are already some good ideas how to add to it, like perception of depth, skeleton models and photogrammetry on the flight. Future comes faster than we can expect.Its not about art, its about globohomo funding it in their attempts to get to the goudhood - create life.
>>523893404I’m trying to say you will never be American and should go back to India
>>523891776i wouldn't care so much about it if they literally didn't insist on spamming it everywhereas if any moment someone isn't seeing ai means that its failing
>>523893454>b... but you're a curry nigger!Not an argument. I was born here and probably whiter than you. Anything you could say about art applies to that image other than the lack of human hands involved.
>>523886868whose to say you can't make a fascinating power point presentation?
>>523880172Enjoy being even more out of work than you already are, sandnigger.
>>523891254Demons, golems made from silicon sand and a bit of divine spark - structure of information. Or are we just biorobots ourselves after all?
>>523891178you didn't need ai to be an artistyou just needed effort
>>523880172>Blog post I don't care if you call it art or not. I will continue to use for my AI slop.
>>523893831And i think its time to show you some fucking ((("real art"))) examples, poltards deserve that.
>art is expression and experience and other buzz words i heard on pinterestBEHOLD!I EXPRESSED MYSELF!I CREATED ART!
Worthy to be hanging on Epstein's wall.Real evocative art made by real human beings.
>>523891973I can't tell if you're trying to say your image is good. I can never believe it when wireback enjoyers are serious. This image is utter fucking shit slop. Her hair is all fucked up and you can't tell where it's coming from and it's sticking out of pieces of the space suit and there's another piece coming out of that unidentifiable blue symbol on the wall, her hair can't decide if it's hair or part of the gold collar on her suit, why would hair be poking out of a space helmet???,for that matter wtf is that helmet?? is it for pod-racing?? Is she outside of the spaceship? If she is, she would be dead with that helmet, her eyes aren't going in the same direction, her left iris is lopsided, you can't identify anything that's supposed to look like a flag, wtf is the image on the front of her suit supposed to be?, her "backpack" or whatever can't decide if it's a backpack or part of the spaceship, wtf is that on the side of it, her neck is skewed to the side, her arm in the foreground can't decide which way it's bending, you can tell the AI wanted to say NASA on that tag on the front but obviously can't because that would be STEALING.Please tell me this isn't supposed to be your proper example of something good and worth posting. RAM costs $800 now because of ugly bullshit like this.>>523893328Go fuck yourself.
>>523880172Art is the experience the viewer has, thus you can have a human experience with ai involved
Janus made this for me with chataGPT descriptions of stock images of clown Google images.
>>523894299Thats lotsa words analysis is so retarded tl;drWhich proves how stupid you are by totally missing my point.Did you got hysterical or something?You clearly do not understand what art is if you be overanalyzing every anime picture you see with your literal shit like this anyway.No thats just slop i been producing and it isn't supposed to be art piece in a slightest. Just admit it you got butthurt over mathematical noise. Is mathematical noise with a bit of structure be considered art?
>>523880172The ONLY thing that matters about art is that it looks good. I don't care if it was made by a man, a woman, an alien, an AI, or if it was shat out of an Indian's asshole. So long as it looks good, that's all that matters. Nobody gives a shit about the artist or the "human expression" bullshit.
>>523894493If I'm mad, I'm only mad because RAM is really expensive now and retards like you are the reason why.
>>523885097>le badWhy is she talking like a 4channer?
>>523894634I'm a poorfag with 1060gtx graphics bruh.
ai shills are the kind of people who see a person bench pressing and wonder why they'd even do that when hydraulics exist
>>523894906That's nice. RAM is expensive.
>>523885920I meet "artists" in my dive bar every day. They always have a super amazing project going, until after a few weeks and months you realize that it's always the same and they never make any progress with it because they never actually sit down and put in the 500 or so hours that it would take to finish the thing and move on to the next. The ell me of imposter syndrome and ADHD and 1000 other excuses why they cannot sit down and do the work. They do anything but sit down and do the work. They're misunderstood, oppressed artists and they will never be more than that because they never do their work. They scoff at anything in the material plane, they look down on anyone who makes money with his work, they never pass an opportunity to express their disgust at money and making money, and yet nobody else talks about money as much as they do. Mostly in the three weeks before welfare payment day, about not having any money and how unfair it all is and why capitalist society is inhumane and why they should be in charge as philosopher kings of a communist temple economy. Arrogant and self-entitled losers who think they are better than everyone else. Of course people like to see them suffer. But it doesn't even matter if anyone likes to see them suffer. Suffering is their default state anyway, because they're too retarded to get their shit together, do their work, make some money and live a decent life. They were useless bums before AI and they will be useless bums after AI.
>>523880172>Art is not about how it looks, it's about the human experience behind it. When I used to be young I used to throw stones at the lake and it would make nice sounds.Buy my stuff for 30000 dollars.
>>523880822>picI literally reverse image searched that on multiple sites until I checked the filename and resolution. Do you know what artist(s) it was based on?
>>523882366That's a pretty fucking gay back story to that photo. If anything that makes it seem so try hard that it is now slop. Not that it was anything special to begin with pretty mundane photo. I did a 1200km hike along the peaks of the Rockies. Near the summit of some random mountain that no trail takes you to, I stumbled upon a HUGE shit foot and a half long thick as my wrist, with a neat pile of TP next to it. I took a picture. Now does the effort of both the person and I needed to get to that point combined with the luck of me finding the behemoth turd mean my picture is art. It is a story of human struggle and triumph after all.
>>5238856261st 3rd are good 2nd 4th trashAlso I stole your 1st edition pepe Deal with it faggot.
>>523880172I enjoy seeing artists suffer and I'm not going to apologize for it.
>>523895909Street fighter leaks
>>523893314i heard ai is really just hundreds of brainchipped indians working under the syncronized and coordinated direction of an actual ai, who thinks itself jewish
>>523880172The artists who are worried about being replaced by AI are churned out by schools and universities by the tens of thousands every year.Making an advert, movie or television show that looks like a million other adverts, movies or television shows doesn't make you an artist, it makes you a replaceable cog in the machine like every other cog. Most "artists" are as replaceable as shelf stackers.
>>523880172Yeah art is about conveying unic human émotions.Esthetics is just a way of conveying émotions. Ai can générate esthétics, but for now nothing matches the depth of storytelling, scénography and finesse humans have.AI is only a new tool for créating Art.
