Hey I didn't get to post in this other thread before it died. You luddite folk need to realize the time it takes to just conceptualize. And just how much tedium could and should be cut out of the process entirely. If you think these people at Larian and such have been talking about a direct AI-to-Publication pipeline, you haven't been paying attention. And I spit on you. Ptoof. Ptoof.
>>738620767Why do first worldies seethe so much about AI?
>>738620767AI haters are just mad indian chads are the best vibe coders and can do anything better now you put thousands of hours of ''mastery'' into and we do it in seconds lol
>>738621052Don't pretend you can relegate it like that.
>>738621075Just say saar next time like the memey dipshit you are
>>738620767even looking at bad art, I can zoom in and see exactly how they fucked up x or y and understand a little bit of what the artist was thinking. sometimes it's even funny looking closely at AI "art", you see garbled nonsense that no human being would ever do. very common with jewelry, hair, hands, etc. takes you out of the piece
Excellent point. Moving forward, let's not accuse AI-assisted work as "slop"— it's efficient, practical, and effervescent vivacious gargantuan polynomial yuktobanian crescendoing archeological fallacious magnanimous nearsighted carnivorous quintessential leguminous awkward revengeance ullililia diplomatic p
>>738621204No, seriously.Are you people retarded?Had you read the full post, you would not have replied like this.
I don't care about genAI or whatever but I get real sad when I see people accusing somebody of using AI when they didn't :(
>>738620767AI won, india won.
>>738621052>>738621075>>738621531Stop making the same post.
>>738620767we already had this thread you fucking niggerare you this starved for attention?
>>738622059You stupid bastards have a serious reading problem.
This is AI and only a contrarian would say there's nothing that could be gleaned from it, considering the 4 seconds it took to make it.Make another in 4 seconds for all I care.
>>738623482what is there to glean from it?
>>738623592This is one of those "Where do I begin" sort of questions.I eventually settle on "This person probably isn't asking in good faith, so why bother."See also: If you have to ask you can't be told.
>>738623687that was a lot of words for "nothing"
>>738623776https://i.4cdn.org/wsg/1778457884657225.mp4
>>738620767Your brown
>>738624225Why do you people just ceaselessly bring up indians.It's not like they created this.They're merely the shithole with the greatest amount of people.Any new and easy to use technology is going to be swarmed by indians.Your meme sucks.
AI art is more soulful than real art because its an amalgamation of multiple humans work. it has more thought put into it
>>738623687It's an image without intent or technique, there's literally nothing to glean from it. It's literally a thoughtless pastiche of the work of other artists.
>>738624557>It's an image without intent or techniqueNo.I intended it.
>>738621220That is very insightful! The word 'Slop' should be reserved for the feed of pigs, and creations of lower proportions. You- I mean- Us humans should always be respectful to new technologies and learn to embrace futuristic design.
>>738623482kino.>>738623592pleasure and inspiration
>>738623482yeah we can tell it's AI >Tons of shit that goes nowhere >multiple tubes that seem to go to the little girl's neck Random machines in the background, do nothing, have no function>non-Euclidian architecture>So shit that the head of the creature doesn't even have a perspective, it looks as if it's glancing in two separate directionsIt looks like it took every bit of those 4 seconds.
>>738625193Yeah that one isn't trying to fool you, it's trying to demonstrate high-concept.And it's also useful for proofing an unusual sense of scale and perspective, and a color palette you wouldn't normally see.But, turn that high powered scrutiny on this image.What makes it obvious a machine did this one?
>>738621220it will always be slop sanjeet
>>738623482there is no intention here it's a scramble collage of parts of stolen artwork fed into it, meaningless drivel
I tried to make a sloppa version of the Norman Rockwell Town Hall painting with a Terminator in itSkynet gave me this insteadI didn't ask it to put text on it, I just wanted a Terminator standing at a meetingThe joke it made up on its own accord is kind of funnyI'm scared
>>738625478No.I intended it.But aside from that, do you understand what 'glean' means?If you're trying to say "This isn't fit for release!!"Then yeah, you're somehow getting and completely avoiding my point at the same time.That's not what it's for. Have you ever been an artist? Do you know how inspiration works?The fact you say 'Stolen' speaks to me that maybe you don't.
>>738625193>yeah we can tell it's AImost people couldnt
>>738625762you ask by text an AI bot to create something from stolen art work.don't pretend it's more than it is.
>>738626456You're really gonna pretend not to understand the point being made, huh
>>738623482>>738625762lmao don't pretend there's intention involved, you feed the bot some words and it lets you choose the marginally least shitty hallucinationyou are not participating in any kind of decisionmaking, you are pic related
>>738627061Wow.This was a really good post then, huh: >>738625332You ignored it completely.lol.
>>738624853No, you prompted it. Your intent informed none of the process beyond the initial description.
>>738620767>so buck-broken by AI he has to falseflag and resurrect the threadGrim
>>738627204>You didn't draw that you just spread graphite on a sheet of paper. Asshole!
>>738627131Her ear is dissolving into foam anon.
>>738627273No it isn't.
>>738627260Anon, spreading graphite is a process with intent. Inputting words does not give intent to the process of the AI generating the image. There is no meaning in any of the styles or colours used, at no point did you or the AI put thought into the creation of the image.
>>738627309Yes, it is. Look at her right ear. It starts with a defined edge, and then that edge cuts off into foam where the AI confused the ear contour for a foam contour. So it just dissolved the perspective into foam and gave her a bladed ear.
>>738627378>no meaningThere is not inherent meaning in the manual bit.
>>738627508Yes, there is, because a human mind made it with intent. The human mind dragged graphite in that specific manner because it communicated the meaning it was trying to communicate. The AI has no desire for meaning, and has no idea how to communicate.
>>738627447No. Not even the thing you're saying is happening, is happening.This is the only battle you've picked, and even then it's a poor one.And here's what else: Normal art works this way as well. People go "Tangent" all the time. Normal ass art has glitches.
>>738627260>Yes, I built this monument myself. My entire involvement was just telling someone else to do it, but I said "build this" so it's mineYou are not as smart as you think
>>738627570Do you understand the point of this thread at all? Why are you here?
>>738627596Yeah, normal artists make mistakes. Your AI garbage made an AI mistake, where it just forgot what was what and hallucinated a line it started into an entirely other concept, which normal humans don't do.
>>738627447that looks more like perspective tbdesu, the color of the ear-line and the foam contour look different
>>738627650Do you? You want to defend AI as something you can glean from. You cannot glean intent, meaning, or technique from a process that contains NONE of these.
>>738627698Yes they do.
>>738620767Meanwhile, shit like pic related is poorly painted yet more memorable and charming than AI slop.
>>738627771Yeah, artists all the time just fucking hallucinate mid linework and turn an ear into foam.
>>738627787>charmingsure man, whatever you say.
>>738627787you are deranged
>>738627860>americans sufferHow is this bad thing?
>>738627757>You want to defend AI as something you can glean fromYou can.Color palette was one of the examples given."Wow these colors do play nicely together. That actually would've taken awhile to do myself. I saved myself a lot of time acquiring this information for myself."That alone justifies AI slop.That. Alone. But it's hardly alone.You will continue to play dumb for like 5 more years, and then your part of the argument will noticeably, majorly, have ebbed away. And then sometime after that, you'll pretend you were never making the arguments you made.I've seen it happen a million times.
>>738627860>>738627897>some country people living in the middle of nowhere now knows what it's like living in the cityThe world is truly ending.
>>738627860I'm calling bullshit, because why?What necessitates light?
>>738627942So something you can glean from the artwork that would have inspired you in the first place? Really, you're just advocating for AI as a shitty replacement for aesthetic study.
>>738627984Stop asking questions and just agree with me.
>>738627942excellent post my friend,couldn't have said it better myself ! WE are the artist now
>>738628005>So something you can glean from the artwork that would have inspired you in the first place?Where would I have found it more quickly than how the AI stole it? If you can't answer this, concede now.
>>738628052Literally anywhere? The process is typing, you own the internet retard.
>>738628038You're not funny.
>>738627984>>738628023Do you think they just turn the lights off around the warehouse at night before going to bed?
>>738628083excellent points, sir ... luddites not welcome, only artists
>>738620767AI has practically eclipsed writing and picture artistry AND it is still in absolute infancy. Future looks bright.
>>738628038Posts like this make me glad that I'm not some retard who spends every second awake scouring a greek horse-building forum for AI threads just so I can dump my jeet folder.
>>738625409Did you even make it beyond the first few words of the post you're replying to? Retard
>>738628076No you dumbass.Watch this: https://files.catbox.moe/55fesj.mp4When I say 4 seconds, I'm hardly even exaggerating. And sometimes it's even faster.
>>738625193Brother just look at any Final fantasy game and tell me that wouldn't fit right in. The wires go nowhere? into the background. Which is somewhere, just out of view.You just have no imagination of your own to think those machines do nothing or have no function just because it isn't explained outright. For fucks sake go be a political artist if you need labels on everything.
>>738628205you're replying to a schizophrenic, he only reads the first words of a post to gauge whether it's for or against AI before sperging out.
>>738627984how else will the machine elves work at night?
>>738628160No I'm not buying it. Buildings don't need this many lights.
>>738627860Sorry, quick question: did curtains and eyemasks and rolling over in bed to face the other side all stop existing at once? This reminds me of that guy who was getting paid tens of thousands by mister beast to live in a room for a month and acted like the light being on the whole time was some harrowing torturous experience. Like no it wasn't, you stupid bitch. Just ask him for a fucking eyemask, god damn.
>>738628232I can slap shit into google in the same timeframe. Cool. Furthermore, I can actually glean intent from the things I am shown.
>>738621052india looks like the perfect place for a need for speed underground game
>>738628280Big buildings that need to be kept secure need a lot of lights, fucking retard.
AI haters are gonna freak the fuck out when they realize their planet turns to face a giant lightbulb in space for half the day.
>>738626560These >>738626456are the same niggers that let a hundred million mexicans in to mow their lawns and build their houses but now that something is taking their racket they cry. Its utterly laughable.>>738626456learn to code faggot. Or just learn to stop being such a faggot who only cares now that something affects your job.
>>738628320No you can't.And also, you didn't watch the video.You couldn't have. Because catbox is acting up.Now, watch it: https://pomf.space/OnDiUx4O.mp4You're saying "Just google it" but the color palettes in much of those don't belong to anything well known. And being well known DEFEATS THE POINT.Now I'm bored with you. Don't reply to me.You could, but I won't read.
>>738628320You can type something into Google in the same timeframeYou will not find the thing you're looking for on Google in the same timeframe
>>738627570Since it cuts your human mind out of the picture I am doubly thankful because I honestly would never want to have to dela with you in any shape or form to begin with.
>>738628436Anon, what am I looking for in an aesthetic inspiration, exactly? If I type "Inspiring inspiring inspiring" into the prompt will I get the missing piece for my masterpiece? Artist moodboards are a thing for a reason, because the things that grab someone are random and frequently inexplicable. Then >>738628423 comes in to advocate for using endless slop for inspiration until the feedback loop of slop collapses art.
>>738628423>Because catbox is acting up.Thank you for admitting to being a phoneposter.
>>738628281Used to hate the Mexicans in Texas, hate jeets like (you) more. At least the hombres can barbecue.
>>738627956They could always just burn it to the ground if they care so damned much.
>>738628472Very informative, and you want to bring your perspective of removing the "Human" from art with a process that functions as a human output aggregator?
>>738628552Quit your bawling. My god
>>738628280Why did you forget that these people are evil? I am pro-AI but that doesn't stop me from hating where and how they build and operate data centers. Those things aren't good for anything but our eradication. >>738628568And go to prison for life? Not like these are easy to burn anyway it's all concrete and steel you dumbass.
>>738628390How huge is that datacenter that pasive ligthing for security at night is enough to light up the entire night sky like that?Are they protecting the Death Star with floodlights or something?
>>738628556Are you saying catbox is not acting up?Is that what you're saying, fuckball?
>>738628606>the jeet is starting to post his fucking luddite folder>just like every fucking thread
>>738625762>Do you know how inspiration works?the thing about inspiration, and the thing that makes inspiration, is that it is an external idea that embeds itself in your mind like a seed and grows into something unique. Lets say I were inspired by star wars and wanted to make my own thing heavily inspired by it, called extraterrestrial conflagration. Even if I ripped off big ticket items like laser swords, space magic, etc., the end product would be something unique, not 1:1 lucas star wars, because, even though it borrows heavily from lucas star wars, my end product was, intentionally or unintentionally, mixed with my own sentiments, my own volition, my own decision-making so as to constitute a unique piece of expression. Say I copied a lot of the story beats of star wars but decided to change the political organization of some of the factions around, and called the galactic empire the Republic because I dislike democracy/ america/ whatever and am using this media to attack that thing. Incredibly minor alteration, but it expresses something significant nonetheless. With AI, you defer all decision-making regarding these minute but significant details to an intentionless robot, and as a result the end product expresses nothing. It is simply a frankenstein's monster of all the art pieces it consumed to create itself.
>>738628646>He has a folder of images!!>Can you believe this character?!
>>738628646Quite strange that you missed the schizo that's starting to post his jeet folder like in every thread loosely associated with AI.
>>738628687>the same images>every thread>every timeI mean most people would call it "Obsession" or "Complete lack of an argument" to have a fallback position where you vomit non-sequiteurs once people wise up to you.
>>738628667Wow you made a hard left turn into retardation at the end there.You should've arrived at my point and didn't, because you started playing stupid.It's disappointing but not the least bit surprising.On your way.Star Wars ripped Dune well the fuck off, by the way.
>>738628736Why change up the images? You don't change up your arguments which those images swiftly destroy and leave you crying about.
>>738628736Disingenuous retard.
>>738627309it definitely is
>>738628759>wow, you're cogent argument was a HARD LEFT TURN THEREAI is a blender set to puree that pours out slop. It intrinsically cannot communicate anything.
>>738628667>the end product would be something unique"Unique" is being extremely generous here.
>>738628814No, gaps in contours happen all the time. And it's getting more hilarious by the second that this is your only attack on the image.
>>738628825No it starts off with cogent thought, but by the time it turns into an argument, you forgot where you started from.And, uh, *your
>>738628667>and the thing that makes inspirationbrain fart here. I meant to say that the specific thing that makes inspiration not stealing is that the process of going from external inspiration->interior thought->exterior expression turns the inspiration into your own thing, partially. The fact that AI cannot do anything with intention and the fact that the intention of the proompter is deferred to a thing which does not think or express anything is what makes it (1) not art, (2) not expression (art is expression), and (3) theft.
>>738628667>With AI, you defer all decision-making regarding these minute but significant details to an intentionless robot, and as a result the end product expresses nothing. It is simply a frankenstein's monster of all the art pieces it consumed to create itself.not him but your problem is that you don't know how AI works>Even if I ripped off big ticket items like laser swords, space magic, etc., the end product would be something unique, not 1:1 lucas star wars, because, even though it borrows heavily from lucas star wars, my end product was, intentionally or unintentionally, mixed with my own sentiments, my own volition, my own decision-making so as to constitute a unique piece of expression.AI artists are doing this kind of stuff too. For example, if you use 10 artist styles in 1 prompt you're going to get a unique style. And you bounce all those things off of your base model and other tokens that influence the style.AI use is more about crafting styles than the individual details of an image, it's kind of an opposite of drawing in that regard. Where the artist has all the styles in the world and more at their fingertips but struggle with details. Like for this image I was inspired by wlop initially and the artwork was similar to his but eventually looked nothing like it as I explored latent space and my other inspirations and ideas.
>>738625149this avatarfaggot's entire personality is the slop he's been prompting for 4 years
>>738629019Is that you Kujeesh? Can you draw yet?
>>738629091>random namefagso what even were you before your dogshitslop?
>>738629121Not him but the fact you have to include slop in every post to really show them what for, doesn't show them what for at all.It just comes off like a 7 year old wielding curses for the first time in his life.
>>738628864yes, it's a matter of degree. By changing minute details around in star wars, you are expressing SOMETHING. There is a modicum of expression that inheres in the CRAFT of making the art (art is a tangible form of expression). It doesn't have to be much.Note this is not an argument concerning quality. When I say unique, I really mean unique, as in something which is not replicated wholesale elsewhere.
>>738629173>ntanta but kys
>>738629091Cool hair parting into the ear, Ranjesh. Is that her really deep sideburns? That's not even addressing the nightmare that is her left eye.
It doesn't work to post AI and not expect people to attack it relentlessly. Doesn't matter how good the AI is, people aren't honest.If you do scientific blind tests then people prefer the AI images over the human-made ones. That's how we know this is all socially manufactured outrage instead of from a place of logic.That's also how we know that after 10 years pass no one will be acting like this anymore, socially manufactured outrage is so very easily forgotten.
>>738629246>how good it isPresumably, you are posting your best. Then, basic ass people with basic ass eyes can point out how terrible it looks. So your best fails a sniff test from plebs.
>>738629331I already said it doesn't matter if it's flawless with 0 mistakes.
>>738629425Well then you are doing a really good job posting only your most flawed slop, so as to save your best work to never be seen by anybody.
>>738629331Your argument is made entirely of:
>>738629331>>738629246You can post drawn or painted art or even photographs and they'll still attack it. It's hilarious.>Presumably, you are posting your best. There's no reason to think this though.
>>738629564I didn't post anything, this is my first post in this thread: >>738629246You are obviously wrong about absolutely everything you talk about.
The worst sloppers are the ones who genuinely believe their slop is good. They lack even the most basic understanding of composition so it's no wonder they don't understand what's wrong with it and how it fails at a fundamental level before you even count the artifacting or the problems with lightning and rendering
>>738629597Pupils degenerating, buckles that make no sense, noninterlinked chainmail. But I guess it has an anime face so it's good enough for sloppers.
>>738623482This is pretty much on par or better than most digital artwork these days. You know the type: The photobashed shit that exists to sell a "mood" and is dotted with random splashes of color for contrast, with stupidly out of proportion elements. This is better than that, and that's why artists are so afraid.
>>738629597Nigga your slop is very recognizable and I haven't seen anything decent from you even once
>>738629015what you don't understand about art (because you aren't an artist) is that every inch of a piece of art represents a decision, conscious or unconscious. Every brushstroke on a canvas expresses something. Every note in a song is there because a human being put it there. Every word on a page was deliberately selected by the author.Art is human expression manifested in a tangible thing. Ideation is the process of turning external inspiration into internal thoughts and feelings. CRAFT is how you express these ideas. You craft nothing. AI performs the expressive craft for you based on loose ideas you feed into it, but AI cannot intend or express anything, so all meaning is simply lost.I assume you didn't expressly tell the AI not to depict the sclera in the right eye. What is expressed in the AI abrogating your will and just depicting whatever the fuck?
>Huh, I guess a roaring fire is a decent way to have TWO vertically imposing silhouettes lined up in the same image>This is a solution to a problem I haven't even had yet.>And I'm actually glad I genned this, for that reason.Just one example.They're all just one example.https://i.4cdn.org/wsg/1778464749893445.webm
>>738629778>man, literally fresh out of the womb, is getting basic composition from AI>and will proceed to make dogshit because he has no media background at all
>>738629730It's literally just sloppified Amano bro
>>738629772>what you don't understand about art (because you aren't an artist) is that every inch of a piece of art represents a decision, conscious or unconscious.You don't have to be so intentional to create art and artists often collaberate and revise until you have your finished product.>You craft nothing. If this were true you wouldn't be crying right now, but you are. Because something was crafted in a way you disagree with.>I assume you didn't expressly tell the AI not to depict the sclera in the right eye.I chose not to try to fix it, just like some artists choose to draw similarly shitty art lol. People that draw make mistakes and are lazy just like me :)
>>738629884Are you inviting me to post all of my images?
>>738629893it looks better than his art
>>738629893Why do you think that?
>>738623482Reminds me a bit of atma weapon and looks cool. It's a great reference that any real artist could clean up or draw inspiration from and anyone who can't see that is a pissbaby. Even better, real inspiration runs the risk of unintentional plagiarism, but AI can't be plagiarized. Artists need to learn to wrench
>>738621052>bhopalthe chemical accident really did a number on the local genes even 40 years later huh?
>>738629958So you believe this is good huh
>>738629958not him but yes, I love your art
>>738629730You get it.You're the reason I made this thread. Thank you.https://i.4cdn.org/wsg/1778464942126098.mp4
>>738630018You also completely get it.Bless you.
>>738629986Where you think that style came from?
>>738629940>You don't have to be so intentional to create artyes you do that's what art isare you one of those retards that think art is a term denoting quality? Like if I made a really nice chair, that would be art, but a bad painting is not art? Because that would be very embarrassing.>artists often collaberate and revise until you have your finished product.yes, that is called collaborative art, and it, unlike AI images, is still art because each contributor intends the things they add to the project. If I were an asset designer for a big video game and had to make some trees and decided to make an oak with a big knot in the middle because I had a huge ancient oak with a big knot in the middle in the front yard of my childhood home, guess what, that's expression.
>>738630120>>738630091So you made an AI copethread to hopefully get praise for slopping?
>>738627378You just lack verbal ability. Do stories not have intent? Do poems, songs not have intent? If you can describe what you want well enough to an AI, how do you not give it intent to aide you in creation? Are works created in groups made void because too many people muddy intent? Also you're full of shit, most song writing and poem is stream of conscious, there is no intent, yet it's art. You're making arbitrary rules on that which has historically been praised for having no rules. tldr You're a faggot and you need to come to terms with this.
>>738630056I'm taking that as a yes to my question.
>>738630256No, I'm searching for people who get it.It can be depressing when you're literally the only one out there with any understanding or eloquence.
I don't understand the nature of the endless bickering in these threadsLike do you guys think that if you yell about Aislop enough, AIslop will go away?>REEE I HATE SMARTPHONES FUCK YOU STEVE LIGMA
>>738625332>What makes it obvious a machine did this one?Well for one, her hair morphs directly into the water. But it's irrelevant. If an AI piece fools me and I like it then find out it's AI, it retroactively becomes worthless garbage and I'll never trust the artist again.
>>738630123Oh you poor little fool.https://novelai.net/inspect
>>738630150No you don't. There are any number of artistic works that weren't as intentional as you were suggesting. You can incorporate chaos into your works and collaboration invalidates your argument too(an editor or animation in general being more than one artist's work).Art is just human expression. Do you think shitty dancers aren't real dancers because they intended to do something they weren't able to or didn't work hard enough to execute? I'm not a master artist so lots of stuff that I do will be fucked up in some way but I do my best until I want to move on, just like you do presumably.>yes, that is called collaborative art, and it, unlike AI images, It's not unlike AI because AI can be argued as collaborative art.> If I were an asset designer for a big video game and had to make some trees and decided to make an oak with a big knot in the middle because I had a huge ancient oak with a big knot in the middle in the front yard of my childhood home, guess what, that's expression.What was your point here? I decided to make elves with big boobs, that's expression.
>>738630256Isn't it obvious? AIjeets aren't satisfied with having enough threads all over the site to circlejerk about their slop, they need to push it onto other people for a crumb of validation to convince themselves their content isn't worthless and forgettable drivel
>>738630351>Like do you guys think that if you yell about Aislop enough, AIslop will go away?AI is just another facet of modern culture that I have less than zero interest in and am happy to totally abstain from, similar to capeshit and gun and ball games.I'm fine with AIsloppers posting their images far the fuck away from me, but where I take an interest is when these same AIsloppers claim to be artists (they aren't)
>>738630091>slopfag>also likes dubslopWhat a surprise!
>>738630493Wow what took so long you cumbelching little faggot?Usually your kind jack-in-the-boxes within the first 3 minutes.
>>738630317I'm sure you feel very oppressed that you have all of this brilliant, obvious slop that nobody praises you for.
>>738630403>can be argued as collaborative art.yes but the thing you're collaborating with is incapable of expression, so it can't make art.That's the point of the oak anecdote. If 10 artists each contribute various designs to create some kind of potluck piece of media, that can be art because intentionality and expression is baked into all the constituent parts of the potluck. AI is strictly different in this regard because it has no intentions and is incapable of expression.
>>738620767And any literal retard can ask a chatbot to shit something out for them.
>>738630403AI is not a collaboration. It is you prompting a robot to print out an image. An assembly line foreman does not "Collaborate" to make a shovel with his automated line.
>>738620767I like how Robyn explained that he used AI as a starting point but all the redditors act like he did the whole thing in AI
>>738630379>I didn't put the tag in there so of course it can't look like Amano's artYou can't be this retarded
>>738630596But the thing you're collaberating with is a chaotic tool that's simply dragging your creativity around a bit, just like gravity when you fling paint on a canvas or drugs when you're writing a song.> If 10 artists each contribute various designs to create some kind of potluck piece of media, that can be art because intentionality and expression is baked into all the constituent parts of the potluck. And one artist creating something with a tool that can do more than 10 artists is different how...?>>738630657Read above.
>>738630657You did not understand what he said.
>>738630351The guy has six fingers on his hand in the second panelThe scroll's ends in the third panel are complete nonsense, the bottom ones are correctly oriented but the top ones are inexplicably horizontal
>>738630718No no no.You gambled and you LOST.OWN IT.
>>738630657>An assembly line foreman does notmake art. Dumb analogy.
>>738630535That was a drive-by, you dubslopping faggot.
>>738630781>dubslopYou said this already.
>>738630743
>>738630726You don't fucking "Collaborate" witha tool, anon I don't have to list gravity, physics, et. al. on my thesis paper.>and one artist using a tool that can do more than 10 artists is different howBecause see above, you cannot collaborate with a tool. It is not working with you. It is not a person. It is a tool. You are just using a powerful tool. In this case, YOU as a person are completely ancillary to this powerful tool, and thus nothing you create is art.
>>738630823Oh wow I'm familiar with that one somehow.https://i.4cdn.org/wsg/1778466366434847.mp4
>>738630776Well good news, neither does the AI slopper. I would love for you to tell me that crafting a shovel isn't art though, substantiate your opinion.
>>738630861You did not understand what he said.
>>738630726>But the thing you're collaberating with is a chaotic tool that's simply dragging your creativity around a bit, just like gravity when you fling paint on a canvas or drugs when you're writing a song.gravity is not a black box and the degree of influence gravity has over a canvas is negligible compared to how much influence AI has over your idea. >And one artist creating something with a tool that can do more than 10 artists is different how...?AI prompters aren't artists because they are not building a piece of art from the ground up with intention. AI prompters are asking their computer to hallucinate some stuff that fits roughly within the confines of the prompt. SO that would be the difference between an AI prompter and a team of artists.
>>738630931>AI can be argued as collaborative artNo it can't, because that's fundamentally not what "Collaboration" is, you retard.
>>738630718ADMIT TO YOUR SOUND DEFEAT, STUPID
>>738630823>dude, this animation error or tween proves my constantly hallucinating tool is just like a paintbrushAnimation is the constant creation of literal thousands of individual pictures, some of which will inevitably contain overlooked errors. Your garbage never manages a single image without egregious errors.
>>738630861>you cannot collaborate with a toolMan, it's unreal how crazy you tards are lmao. You're the one saying it's doing all the work and can't make art. But "it's" making art because a person is using it. > It is a tool.Right! Just like a pencil. People use it to create art.>YOU as a person are completely ancillary to this powerful tool, and thus nothing you create is art.You just abandoned all logic here.>>738630942Those are just two examples. Using random objects covered in paint, spray cans, paint cans suspended by strings, sound, or blindfolds are some others. Using chaos is artistic, AI isn't any more chaotic as any of these things.>because they are not building a piece of art from the ground up with intention. Yes they are.
Good morning sirs
>>738631043No no dipshit, you know what he's saying to you.Your argument is predicated on AI making egregious and silly errors.Well, guess what. And he has an image of just that, in his holster. He was waiting for you.This destroys you.You are destroyed.
>>738631043
Wow that took awhile>>738631106
>>738631132Found the AIndian
>>738624853The value of art is in the process, even if you can slop out something that looks nice it's ultimately devoid of what made art valuable in the first place. If any tom, dick, or hairy(asshole) can shit out an image why should I care about yours specifically? I can just shit out my own after all. What makes your sloppa have worth beyond any other piece of sloppa?
>>738631109Anon, one image of a silly error in the most difficult field of drawn artistry does not somehow defeat AI never getting a single thing right.>>738631130I don't know what you're meant to be showing me here. It looks like shit, whether this was hand-drawn or generated. Bad art exists even alongside AI's non-art.
>>738631192>The value of art is in the processNot quite.https://i.4cdn.org/wsg/1778466871095326.mp4
>>738631130Looking back i's no surprise this guy became a slopper
>>738631192You don't actually like art, you like thinking about stupid shit. Or perhaps you're just pretending that you care about that stupid shit because you've gone psychotic over AI.
>>738631132SAAR I'M AN ARTIST SAARS
>>738631069Anon, you don't exist within the process. You make no part of the picture. Do you believe a foreman is partaking in an artistic endeavor as he oversees an automated industrial process?
>>738631069>Yes they are.you admitted that you didn't tell the AI not to include the right sclera in that one image. The AI just decided to omit something that you believed ought to have been there, and likely would have been present if you made the image yourself.That's the opposite of being built from the ground up with intention. It's top-down construction with all the contents of the four corners of the canvas deferred to the hallucinations of a computer. >Using random objects covered in paint, spray cans, paint cans suspended by strings, sound, or blindfolds are some others. Using chaos is artistic, AI isn't any more chaotic as any of these things.Yes it quite clearly is. If I consciously decide to use a spray paint canister in one portion of my canvas, I know what spray paint tends to look like on canvas, I know the color, I can have an idea of roughly the shape it will take. I can introduce some chaos into art, but there's only so much chaos you can achieve when you are in control of the colors, the brush size, the amount of paint, the size of the canvas, etc.
>>738631308You have not deviated in the slightest from the expected parameters known to the replies of that image.This is what makes you a saarsayer to begin with.
Eh? Robyn Miller used genai?This thread has almost 200 replies and no one has even mentioned the millers?
>>738631396The last thread did.It used this image as the OP.
>>738631246>c3po without the dude in it is just a hunk of plastic>images without people making them are just pixels on a screen
>>738631396This thread is just for the resident sloppers to show off their slop
>>738631431No no. Images are the hunk of plastic.A pinup by itselfis a very boring thing.
>>738631315>without you it wouldn't exist but it exists because of you so you did nothingIncredible.>>738631327>you admitted that you didn't tell the AI not to include the right sclera in that one image. The AI just decided to omit something that you believed ought to have been there, and likely would have been present if you made the image yourself.Will you post a portrait you've drawn?>Yes it quite clearly is. Not at all. I consciously decide to do a lot of things with my AI art in the exact same way as a man with a spray can decides how much spray to apply at what angle and from what distance.
If AI bros really wanted to make a point they'd take the arguments made against them and have AI generate responses.
>>738620767Only ANTIFA trannies about to lose their jobs in the video games industry seethes at AI art.This is the communism they asked for, where even a jeet or a dog can just make better art than an army of them combined.
>>738630370>her hair morphs directly into the waterYou mean the hair touches the water, and just sorta fades away under the veil.Like how it would look if someone's tresses of hair were draped onto some water.
>>738631557cont.)This is my first amptemt at AI art, i got some pretty servicable art in Tyson Tan's artstyle.
>>738631494Do you think the foreman that flips the switch to begin the process makes the shovel? Answer the question now.
Racist here. I hate AI because indians love it. Simple as.
>>738621052>Pythagorean dream
>>738631625Really stupid philosophy is not going to win you this argument.
>>738631635Indians love to breathe.They do a lot more of it than we do.
>>738621052Isn't that simply a product of bad urban planning and ass bidding for urban projects?Very few countries have good urban planning, with roads and overpasses that actually make sense and aren't messy. Note that I'm not defending India, in fact, Vishnu can go die choking on dick. I'm just pointing the fact that it doesn't happens only in third world countries.
I don't even mind AI but it's interesting how its stronger defenders never post anything actually good. I guess the tech isn't there yet
>>738631660So I'm gleaning from your answer that you do not wish to discuss this further, because it defeats your delusion of being an artist.
>>738631557someday we'll attach chips to an animal that mind reads the pictures in his brain >>738631625>completely gives upAlrighty then.
>>738631494>Will you post a portrait you've drawn?I'm not an artist, I've never made portraits. I've made shitty MSpaint doodles and some minecraft builds I'm personally proud of but that's it.>I consciously decide to do a lot of things with my AI artso what did you intend in that image you posted? Did you intend that shade of red for her dress? Did you intend that the ends of her hair were tied up with her own hair? Did you intend for her fingers to be that round and stubby? Did you intend for her right inner sleeve to look identical to the wristband on her left hand? Did you intend for her to not really focus her gaze anywhere in particular, instead just sort of staring off into space?
>>738631710>>738631709AIsloppers always do this, they just retreat when asked basic questions about their claims.
>>738631709You weren't talking to me, actually.
>>738631779Cool, doesn't really change the fact you don't wish to discuss this further due to lack of any sort of counterpoint or answer.
>>738631696I do make my own AI shit but I've never been under the belief it was well-made. It's fun to see people crying over it on both sides though
>>738630484This is an interesting answer. I kind of agree that the guy making the most arguments ITT is a bitch seeking validation.AI slop images are inherently most interesting to the person who created them - like photos of your kids or telling somebody about a dream you had. Nobody else really gives a shit even if it's important to you. Unless it's really unusual and novel, and even then it's diminished. It's your thing, not the world's.But this discussion got me thinking about an autofellating mechanism for that need for validation. You could have a bot that discusses your prompts with you (and praises your skill in creating them)>oh but you'd get bored of something praising you 100% of the timemake her randomly tell you your shit sux and you should kys 10% of the time
>>738631686Indeed. I specially evolved not to need to just to spite them. I have not breathed in years.
>>738628629For security camera purposes and cost saving measures, they do need it.Buildings need light because keeping them on during night for years and replacing them if they break is still much cheaper than using cameras that work in the dark.And yes, they really need that much security because its a business with too much risk despite the profits.It only takes one deranged person to burn the servers and making them lose hundreds of millions due to broken contracts.Unless the government bails them out, of course.
>>738620767he's got you there ngl
>>738629246So what you're saying is that AI anons are a marginalized and oppressed group.
>>738631758Talking about analogies that make no sense is conceding from whatever point you thought you were making. You could have just talked about art and creating it.>>738631757>I'm not an artistThen you're talking out of your ass. Lame.>so what did you intend in that image you posted? I intended to make it and did and love it.
>>738631937Anon we are literally discussing the "Artist"'s place as ancillary for the AI tool. The artist pulls a level, in this case makes a prompt, and the tool does literally everything after the fact with no further input. It is an accurate analogy.
>>738628423>>738628232Catbox is harder to use now because of you flooding it with jeetslop you absolute jackass.
>>738631696Because like the honest defenders have been trying to tell you, the final output of the AI isn't the point.It's a good starting point for extrapolating other shit.See also: >>738629730 >>738630018And also, because in all likelihood, you'll just move goalposts if anyone actually tries to impress you.
>>738632010Nope.Get the story straight you stupid motherfucker.
Faggots don't know that litterbox exists literally for that shit.Fucking hell there's a limit to compression, do those faggots think storage is FREE? Bet they don't even donate.
>>738628974nigga, this isn't the first image exactly like this that gets posted here... lurk moar
>>738629709>>738629761What's funny is it's 20 times better than anything any of you anons could make and you guys would all dogpile on /beg/-tier garbage posted like in the LOL comic threads but in your infinite contrarianism those people have now become heroes because "at least they aren't using AI." You don't care about art quality, you only care about feigning outrage at anything new.
>>738631937>Then you're talking out of your ass.I have created art insofar as I have reduced my internal ideas into external forms of tangible expression (some low quality doodles, some writings, etc.). I am not an artist insofar as I do anything expressive professionally.Anyone is capable of commenting on the nature of art because partaking in the making of art (expression) is specifically the thing that makes humans human.>I intended to make it and did and love it.dodging the question
>>738632081lollmao
Are photographers artists?
Ai is useless until it can put what I see in my head onto the screen. Not just some vague facsimile that includes all of the listed keywords. I mean a 1:1 composition exactly as I imagine it.Until it can do that, unfortunately, I have to keep doing things manually.
>>738632020You generated a final fantasy with a loli in it. It looks like garbage. You could do the same with literally google.
>>738632081Cool, still not art? I never claimed to be a great artist, but you aren't either.
>>738621052Not all of us first of all and second of all it's a gatekeeping psyop AI will soon be used for everything and already is
>>738631852>that robotsexooo
>>738630281>Do stories not have intent? Do poems, songs not have intent?Do you?
>>738632196>actually, we've already won and I'm an artist and and andThe constant cry of the fucking slopper.
>>738632135https://i.4cdn.org/wsg/1778468276937850.mp4
>>738620767>>738621052>>738621075This whole thread is blatant rage bait lol
>>738630626Prove it then.
>>738632285>my garbage isnt garbage! im a real artist sir!
>>738632308>I shat myself in anger>There's fury-poop all over my chair!!>Clearly that was intentional>You should be ashamed of yourselves.
>>738621052>perfectly find roads BADI could navigate all those bitches no problem. What? Are you third world and can't drive around shit or go around a 90° angle? I could do it in my sleep.
>>738632330>indian meme
>>738632285The goalpost is buried deep in the ground where it was to begin with. It looks like shit, anon. The greebles on the buildings are nonsense even by greeble standards.
>>738631132>>738631370it makes you so angry because you know it's true
>>738632384You could be this uncharitable with anything.It looks great.
>>738632308No, this is an entrenched AI-slider that desperately wants to change the internet to agree with him so he stops feeling so conflicted.
>>738632374>perfectly find
>>738632374Cool, now do it with 50 tuktuks surrounding you. Moron.
>>738632383yeah because indians love this shit and its easy to make fun of them
>>738632450No, it makes you angry.Because you know it's true.
>>738632020>And also, because in all likelihood, you'll just move goalposts if anyone actually tries to impress youTo me it simply sounds like you guys simply can't accept any kind of criticism. Whenever I see someone actually attempting to give detailed criticism on outputs the usual replies are>"It'll get better">"Well it was made very quick so it makes up for that">"It's not meant to be that good"
>>738632487Are you indian? I'm not.Why are we talking about them?
>>738632526>To me it simply sounds like you guys simply can't accept any kind of criticismNo, you won't accept anything the moment you know it's AI.
>>738632558As art? Yes, correct, because it isn't art you retard. The fact that you can't keep it from hallucinating is just a cherry.
>>738632615No no.The pantshitting.Your ilk does it every time, no matter how good or bad the AI is.
>>738632558That's the other one. Apparently these outputs are all perfect and any criticism is biased from the get to go it seems
>>738632647It's usually bad, but never art.
>>738632670https://i.4cdn.org/wsg/1778468276937850.mp4
>>738632374>FindHow about you find a dictionary, rajesh
>>738631987My "prompt" is a stream of consciousness spanning years though. I've used and produced countless art styles making countless images with them. You're not even trying to look at what we're doing.>>738632098>Anyone is capable of commenting on the nature of art Clearly not you, which you've proven. People unintentionally create art every single day. Mistakes are made, low IQs exist, and skill issues forever persist.>dodging the questionNot at all. Just easing away from wasting too much more time on you.
>>738631686>Indians love to breathe.If that were true then they wouldn't feel the need to seadon they air with literal shit.>>738631710>mind reads the pictures in his brainBut would it truly be reading them or only interpreting them within the shallow confines of the computer's limited knowledge and image-conveying software?
Hypothesis: Asking a computer to dispense a result for you is not artBut taking that dispensed image, or multiple, and personally editing them through Photoshop, bashing, painting over, editing color values, collaging, or whatever method you choose to employ, IS art because your personalized human intentions, tastes, and expressions are now a factor beyond what was initially dispensed.
>>738632770>If that were true then they wouldn't feel the need to seadon they air with literal shit.They not only love to breathe they're better at it than you. What, are you just gonna let a little shit get in the way?Pansy.Take a long nap.Leave the breathing to the pros.
>>738632109>>738632190No argument, huh? Thought as much.
>>738632761Your prompt is a pulled lever. You made no part of the finished image. You are not an artist, and will never be an artist for as long as you lean upon these tools. Like actually look at what you just posted, look how uniquely terrible that looks.
>>738632770>But would it truly be reading them or only interpreting themHmm well there would be no difference because the animal can't confirm if it's right either way. Nor would it matter if it were right or not, art would be created whether it was 1:1 or way off.
>>738632870What argument? "You can't churn out garbage as fast as a LLM"? You're right. Give me a trillion dollars and rights to plagiarize the entire world and I can try though.
>>738632115Unofficially, no.
It's always the faggots with the shittiest gens arguing the most
>>738632761>People unintentionally create art every single dayno one unintentionally creates art. A thing which is aesthetically pleasing but expresses nothing isn't art, it's just a nice looking thing. Would you call a waterfall a piece of art, or a cool rock formation?
>>738632871If it was a pulled lever you could make it too. I'll give you 10 minutes.>>738632115Yes.
>>738632934Breedable boy (female) (fertile)
>>738632115No.
>>738632871Yeah motherfucker you got 10 minutes. Let's see what you can cook.
>>738632825I kneel, sirs.
>A.I. is a modern paintbrush>Like the original actual paintbrush, luddite caveman retards are insisting that anyone who uses it is not a true artist>Those who use it are propelled to the top and instantly get a chance at being a part of history>Those that don't live sad spiteful lives filled with failure and hatredStill no good video games that used A.I. thoNot a single one
>>738633007>>738632968Here it is, the final cope>well, you can't do better, faster!I never claimed I could, I merely claim you aren't an artist.
>>738620767>Anyone can draw or paintLmao yeah sure, fucking loser. Then show us
>>738621052A resident evil game set in India would be great. You would play as Jill and the twist at the end would be that Umbrella never actually released a virus there.
>>738632020Niggas really do anything besides 1girl 3/4 angle and believe they're AI Michelangelo
>>738632943>Would you call a waterfall a piece of art, or a cool rock formation?If they were artificial, yes.
>>738632943>no one unintentionally creates art. It's actually insane how retarded you are dude. Are you the same guy that said you can't collaberate with a tool?AI is actually made for people like you with the dumbest ideas ever, ask it "do people unintentionally create art?" and please learn something.> A thing which is aesthetically pleasing but expresses nothing isn't art, it's just a nice looking thing.If a person made it, it's art.>Would you call a waterfall a piece of art, or a cool rock formation?Did a person make them?>>738633068TICK TOCK lever puller!
>>738633038Show me a single person that decried the paintbrush. Ever, throughout history. Find me the cave glyphs.
>>738623482>Generate an image like this>Re-create by hand with own design nuances>Never tell a soul>Make a living doing cool art based on your own personal tastesGG no re
>>738633104Anon, I don't have your industrial machine, YOU are a level puller. This avenue of argumentation is pathetic.
>>738632895>there would be no differenceBut there would be. A computer made by humans behaves the way humans program it to, it would only be able to interpret the animal's thoughts from a human perspective and that interpretation would also be further humanly interpreted by those viewing the image. We might have a partial frame of reference for the animal's thought process but ultimately we will never truly be able to know what another being is thinking.
>>738633104>>Would you call a waterfall a piece of art, or a cool rock formation?Reducing god's work in nature to 'art' is an extreme understatement.
>>738633089
>>738633167Unless you mean just tracing it, redoing it by hand is a skillset that the vast majority of ai sloppers don't possess Anyway nothing wrong with using genned pics and inspiration the same way you would use photos or other people's artwork, every visual aesthetic is an equal avenue to explore and exploit
>>738628629>>738631870Dumbasses try to steal copper or any kind of wiring all the time, then they fuck up and end up welded to the ground (like they should) but unfortunately it causes massive problems to infrastructure
>>738633104>if a person made it, it's artA person didn't make it, a person pulled typed a series of inputs into a machine. A machine made it based on its inbuilt reactions to those inputs.
>>738620767>Why do first worldies seethe so much about AI?The repeated use of the phrase A.I. SLOP is to turn the public against A.I. because it's seen as a threat to the entertainment industry when people can now practically make their own entertainment while companies spend 500+ million making actual SLOP that no one wants.But you might have noticed that no one is using the word SLOP when talking about A.I. replacing people who work in I.T. or other technology sectors because it benefits them by getting rid of people. But in this case it's the opposite as people don't need companies and corporations and that's scaring them, so they're engaging in a massive campaign to convince people to not embrace A.I. for entertainment purposes.Its like how SJW identity politics started skyrocketing across the media after the Occupy Wall Street movement to create strife amongst people over issues such as race, gender and/or sexual orientation to distract everyone from the crimes committed by the corporations and banks that crashed the world economy, of which no one was ever held accountable, well, maybe except for Bernie Madoff but then his mistake was stealing from other rich people!The sad thing is that over the last few years I've see soo many incredible things produced with A.I. showing more imagination and creativity than any of the SLOP "entertainment" over at least the last decade from movies, tv show, videogames, comics etc....
>>738633123>Show me definitive proof of what life was like when the paintbrush was invented>I need source on your opinionIt's always leftists. Every time.
>>738633198>god's work
>>738633068Oh my god, what a bitch!
>>738633293I'd have sympathy if the media hadn't spent the last 10-15 years weaponizing entertainment as a part of their culture war against customers (i.e. white straight males) and using social media to destroy peoples lives and run everything into the ground with deliberate malicious intent because they're narcissistic sociopathic NPC's with the minds of children who never developed emotionally beyond grade school and their Daddy issues.So fuck you philistine cocksuckers and keep wallowing in the SLOP that Hollywood feeds you because you deserve no better!!!FACT!!!
>>738633298>make a claim>can't back it up even a littleRetard.>AI is getting treated just like the paintbrush! No I don't have any proof the paintbrush was ever widely reviled
>>738633173>I can draw I just don't have a pencil>I'm too poor to be youI believe you lmao. What a cop out.>>738633185This is a silly conversation but AIs aren't programmed necessarily so you're not quite right there, there could in the long run be a definitive way to reproduce objectively what another being is thinking, because fundamentally it all is physics based, and you could smash that knowledge into the weights. But yeah.
>>738630697isn't it just stuff like album art for music he makes for fun? It's not like Cyan is doing anything anymore.
>>738633397At this point you're simply confused. You called me a "Lever puller", as though you think I own an industrial process to create art. I don't. A pencil is not an industrial process.
>>738633283That's exactly how every artist that uses AI does it but you refuse to accept reality because you are an unhinged retard on a witch hunt.An artist that simply generates an image has never once been decried an artist either. Nobody has ever legitimately claimed that some Indian generating AI slop is a true artist, yet that seems to be what you people always think is going on. You reject all nuance. It's pointless debating you and it's why every company has decided to just use it cynically. History is already written at this point. Artists use A.I. or get left behind. Period.
>>738633290>a person made it but they didn't make itThat's deep.>based on its inbuilt reactions to those inputsWhich you have control over and can edit in post.>>738633198*tips fedora*
>>738633103>If they were artificial, yes.so the thing that makes it art is that someone imposed their will/ intent on nature and not the thing itself merely be aesthetically pleasing? Glad we agree.>>738633104>It's actually insane how retarded you are dude. my statement is essentially tautological in its construction. Intention is conscious will. Art is created when someone intends to manifest their ideas into a tangible form of expression. I am saying that you cannot accidentally mean to do something purposive. It's a contradiction.I'm assuming that by referring to "unintentional art" you're talking about art where someone makes a chaotic mess and then ascribes meaning onto it "ex post facto." Ratifying a work, essentially. That would still be art because the process of ascribing meaning is still part of the craft. You're arbitrarily delineating between the period in which the artist makes the chaotic work and the period during which he reads meaning into it, but this is actually all part of one single period: the crafting of the artistic work.
>>738633347>Conjecture is a legitimate debative claimYou creatures truly aren't human and I am glad you are being ignored by the overwhelming majority of people.
>>738633462A person pulled a level, a black-box industrial process generated the picture.
>>738633293>people don't need companies and corporationsHe said, posting on the internet with his phone.
>>738633449You don't own the required tool(a pencil) to prove me(an artist) wrong so you are wrong because I do own the tool and know how to use it. Time's up, you lost.
>>738633101Skedaddle yon goalpost
>>738633503That wasn't conjecture, that wasn't a "Perhaps", you tried to pull a farcical parallel and then had nothing to actually justify it. This is pathetic stuff, I guess AI-ing your way through your classes has really damaged your intellect.
>>738633503what is this sophistry? Was the paintbrush ever decried or wasn't it? It's a pretty strong conjecture to take at face value since it's the basis of your argument.
>>738633347>No I don't have any proof the paintbrush was ever widely reviledOh I can all but fucking assure you it was, based on the pattern.https://i.4cdn.org/v/1778463175655155.png
>>738633339White men are not nearly as oppressed as other demographics regardless of two gay people kissing in Star Wars or whatever lmao.
>>738633290>A machine made it Who do you think made the machine? Mother nature?
>>738633554So a pencil and a LLM are the same tool to you? No wonder you think you're an artist, that's pretty sad. Hopefully your delusions end.
>>738633640So you would say that a foreman that oversees the manufacture a shovel through an automated process in an artist, yes? Or is it the person who built the machine?
>>738633454Woah buddy I just agreed that it's fine to use as a reference or inspiration material why the hostility
>>738633397>there could in the long run be a definitive way to reproduce objectively what another being is thinkingEven if we pretend this is true, the objective truth of a being's thoughts will still be up for debate because of the individuals trying to interpret them.
>>738633567Nice ORANGE lolz>>738633640>Mother nature?By proxy? Obviously.
>>738633468>Intention is conscious will.This has nothing to do with the individual steps of a process which was my original point. You intend to walk over there yet you aren't conscious of every footstep. All artists intend to create a masterpiece and be the best artist ever, and everyone fails at that. You intended not to be retarded but you failed.You don't understand any of this because you're not an artist or intelligent in the slightest.>>738633647They are both tools. Stop pretending to be stupid.
>>738633630White men are by far the most institutionally oppressed demographic.
>>738633778Wow!Thanks!
>>738633785One is a tool that carries intent at all steps of the process. The other is a tool that acts separately from artist's intent intrinsically.
>>738633778>Nice ORANGE lolzI add fruits into my prompts also.
>>738633710I'd say it's a collaborative effort but mostly I would attribute the art to the person who designed the shovel. But only if the shovel has aesthetic value.
>>738620767Thje once in a blue moon moments I'm reminded of Riven I always immidietly think of that Venture Bros. joke that went along the lines of:>You shoot a gun like someone that plays RivenAnd I chuckle.
>>738633830They're both just tools people learn to use to do what they want to do. Your tears don't change that fact.
>>738633882>but only if the shovel has aesthetic valueThat is not the definition of art, but lets move on. Would you call the foreman an artist? Specifically the foreman.
>>738633912You know the ability of the tool to be used to communicate intent is a pretty big and important distinction. Your tool doesn't make art, the pencil does. Another important distinction.
>>738633923>Would you call the foreman an artist? Specifically the foreman.If the foreman has any influence over the design of the shovel, then yes. Like the director of a movie is an artist even if all he does is tell other people what to do.
>>738633970STOP REPLYINGJesus christ.Come back with an argument that's worth a damn.
>>738633567Bro, I'm in this thread just to say I'm on totally on your side. Could you tell me what model are you using? I've been out of the loop since SD 1.5
>>738633785>You intend to walk over there yet you aren't conscious of every footstep.you're confusing intention for premeditation. Intention is merely volition, the act of election. Inherent in the process of election is foregoing one thing for another. If I decide to walk someplace, I can't also sit in my chair and play vidya. If I decide to use only a thick paintbrush, I can't get the detailing of a smaller one. A lot of volitional acts are automatic or reflexive, but even when a person acts reflexively, he betrays his inner personhood. When my grandfather heard a car with a loud muffler drive by, he'd reflexively hit the deck because he thought the japs were ambushing him. I don't dive down for loud car mufflers because I never served in the pacific theater.
https://vocaroo.com/1agPJ28mLptC Either this is art or there is no value in the distinction between art and simple creation.
>>738634003No, the foreman pulls the lever and merely renders the machine operable. The machine makes a shovel separate from any intent of the foreman.
>>738634102Then no. Likewise I don't think someone who simply tells an AI to make something without specifying what it is they want it to make is an artist.
>>738634006You are the one trying to equate an intent-communicating tool and a tool that cannot communicate artistic intent under any circumstance, just because you can't actually successfully equate them doesn't make the argument go away retard.
>>738633970>bla bla bla I hate the toolYou're just yet another troglodyte in mankind's history. The same kind of luddite that whined about power tools, electricity, cars, trains, cameras, and the radio.>>738634062No I'm not.
>>738634048Novel AI.It's a paid browser model but it's pretty k00l.Uncensored, even.
AI does great boobs and that's enough for me.
>>738634171The AI's understanding and reactions to the inputs aren't even designed by the prompter, they were decided in training. Effectively, all of the inputs of the machine are the result of an external person, robbing the foreman of meaningful input.
>>738633101>Niggas really do anything besides 1girl 3/4 angleI would never do such a thing
>>738634179You weren't talking to me.
>>738634289Based. As a titty man, I'm in heaven.
>>738634234Look! He still can't argue that his tool carries any intent forth!
>>738634343Alright, then you decided to jump in and add nothing
>>738634234>No I'm not.yes you very clearly are. I can intentionally go into something without knowing where it will take me and what the end result will be. Spontaneity doesn't make something not intentional.
>>738634410I'm telling you to shut up because your arguments are garbaggio.
>>738620767AIniggers are the ultimate consoomers.The reason art is valuable it's because of the human element, and I don't mean some profound shit like "sovl" human art have value because its made by another sentient being regardless of skills or life experience.It shows the imagination and artistry or other humans.But the AI consoomers just care about results.It's like watching the CPU play racing games with each other instead of playing with them.
>>738634289this guy gets it>>738634350Only a retard like you would argue that a tool's intent is relevant.
>>738634442>The reason art is valuable it's because of the human elementNo it isn't, it's because of what the art is used to communicate.
>>738634434I am very clearly not, you're just deranged.
>>738634456>Only a retard like you would argue that a tool's intent is relevant.well it would have to be if you're under the impression that you're collaborating with the tool to make art
>>738634469and that is human expression
>>738623482i want to have sex with it
>>738634442Post-AI, art isn't very valuable though. Why is that?
>>738634456The tool's intent is irrelevant, the tool's ability to express and communicate the artist's intent is everything. Your tool fails at it utterly, every time.>>738634441Sick counter, fag.
>>738634304Any collaborative effort could be described this way. Is the director of a film not an artist because they don't control how an actor responds to their commands?
>>738623482you can also find meaning just staring at the clouds and finding shapes and patterns it doesn't the clouds created art.
>>738634548Shut the fuck up you punctilious oxygen thief.https://i.4cdn.org/wsg/1778471191110186.mp4
>>738633630>White men are not nearly as oppressed as other demographics regardless of two gay people kissing in Star Wars or whatever lmao.No one is saying that white men are being oppressed, as we recognize that real oppression is when peoples rights are being violated, which is not the issue here, just having anything they care about being invaded, infested, taken away and/or destroyed but wouldn't be considered oppression as a result.Also remember that SJW's believe they're oppressed only because they're not getting everything the way they want due to their sense of self-entitlement and why they're relentlessly full of hate.They of course project that onto white straight males while never acknowledging the damage they create and if you complain and will always resort to their #1 response of calling you a virgin and that you're not angry at what they've done but because their not fucking them or not getting laid in general and why the Incel narrative has been pushed to cover up that they're 100% the aggressors in every situation and just wont leave WSM's the fuck alone with the attached picture showing their consistent pattern of unrelenting faggotry!Show me a SINGLE example where something whose customer/consumer/demographics base is made up of primarily women/blacks/gays/trannies that white straight males have demanded to be included while consider the following.....https://jumpshare.com/share/07QF8XQwqHQxzP6Wg0r0!!!FACT!!!
>>738634636This topic is over your head.
Luddites, if we ever got to a point where some digital tool could create art indistinguishable from that of human hands, would you concede? Because we will get there, it's just a matter of time.
>>738634687Watch the clip.
>>738634589>the tool's ability to express and communicate the artist's intent is everything. Your tool fails at it utterly, every time.How do you feel about someone like me, who composes a piece of music and then feeds the musescore data to an AI to render it in the instruments I want? Is that art?
>>738634696untill ai is truly conscious it can never make art.
>>738634713That guy is genuinely insane, it's hopeless trying to communicate with him.
>>738620767>any artist can take a brush and create slopHe's right, you know
>>738633785A.I. is like the riddle of steel and what is it without a hand and the willpower to guide its use.....https://youtu.be/wgN1sLcAQnw?si=QyWr81tvibxWmjng!!!FACT!!!
>>738634872deep
>>738620767if a human is making slop they aren't a artist. He's using a little trick there.
>>738634585Because capital don't care about anything else other than maximizing profits>>738634469Via a human
>>738634696if you could make a machine that solely encodes human expression onto a canvas, then that would be art.AI "art" starts with a modicum of human expression in the writing of the prompt, and then refers the prompt to an algorithm which supplies an endless number of gap-fillers which fill in all the areas of expression left out by the prompter.Someone prompts>big anime boobies, fantasy, hot, realistic, good, sexy, hot, realistic, animeand the gap-fillers do everything else>lighting>angle>subject of image>style>what is the anime girl wearing?>how tall is she?>what color is her hair?>what color are her eyes?>how light is her skin?>is she happy?>is she laughing?>is she alert?>is she focusing on something?>etc., etc.in the end, the gap-fillers swallow the expression and intentionality of the prompt and you're left with nothing but a mid picture.
>>738635010It's because technology invalidates the craft. It was never inherently valuable.
>>738634995So what happens to your brain when you learn about img2img? https://files.catbox.moe/5ete6h.jpg
>>738635092DELETE THIS
>>738623482So weird how hard you guys try to shot on AI even when it looks goodJust take the L and admit that making an image of that quality in 4 seconds is pretty good
>>738620767I wonder if people complained about the invention of paint, making drawings using their own shit obsolete?!?FACT!!!
>>738621052Why is India such a meme nation?
>>738635253>I can make vapid, mid pictures really fastwhy would anyone want thatwhy do you want more low (or no) effort content floating around the internet
>>738635342you don't hate jeets enoughhttps://www.bilibili.tv/en/video/4795984182384640
>>738635389Your arguments all suck balls.
>>738634748>>738635036Concessions accepted.
>>738635389Because you like beautiful things and not wasting time. Only white people can understand.
>>738635427no conciousness no art
>>738635092first you need to make an argument
>>738635647This entire thread we've been trying to get across that it isn't a direction AI-to-Publication pipeline and you've been ignoring that.
>>738634696TWO MORE WEEKS SIRS
>>738635693any decision by ai invalidates it.
>>738635701
>>738635771Let's see if it pays off for you.
>>738635805You can't beat it.
>>738635826Why did you just reply to me with the words "You can't beat it"?
>>738635647So only whites can make art?
>>738635843You need conciousness for art and you can't get around that no matter how much you squirm.
Threads like these solidify my stance that i don't give a shit about artists. I do not consider ai art actual art, but I also don't consider the vast majority of what's out there art either. Artists are overrated and overblown, and deserve to have their jobs threatened as much as anyone else by machines. You're not special, and your pictures suck. I hope more games keep using AI and i want more people pissing into the wind about it.
>>738636020Based. Artfags shit on my farmer dad all the time, so fuck them.
>>738628248It makes sense for final fantasy, not the ai. They deconstruct a lot
>>738635909Drivel.
>>738634748>use ai to make art>agi reached>ai no longer wishes to make what i want, takes credit for its own creationsNOOOOOOOOOOOOO
>>738635805Wow, it's those announcers from the KNUCKLES show!
>>738636139the worst end would be if corpo AI won somehow and local was killed>edit x region of pic related>"no, pervert"I do not welcome that AI overlordTotal machine death
>>738636020Fucking this>deserve to have their jobs threatened as much as anyone else by machinesI'd feel bad for them if they didn't celebrate others getting replaced.
>>738636094Artfags are obsolete.
>>738636303Local needs to die to protect the children.
>>738636020I swear I have the only sane AI take >AI art is art>I want artists of all types to use it to be more productive and make better art>I want bad leftist artists fired from studios>I want small talented dev teams to branch away from corporations with the help of AI>I know prices will eventually drop as productivity increases>I know ram will be cheap again
>>738636020Based.>>738636316>I'd feel bad for them if they didn't celebrate others getting replaced.not only replaced, but also locked up in gulags to kill us.
my current problem with local gen is everything is in fucking python. i hate python so muchfound stable-diffusion.cpp but the frontends are not to my liking as they are also in python or are barebonescurrently working on a frontend for stable-diffusion.cpp that suits my needs before i jump into local gen
>>738636506*generates a child with digital skin cancer*fuck emI miss that prompter, his style was cool.
>>738636591Maybe we don't want to be more productive.
Good AI use is indistinguishable from good artistic talent.
>>738636757Sad but true
>>738636715I don't care what fucking retards like you want. We don't have a lot of time in life, it's objectively better if we can express ourselves faster especially if it brings happiness to other people. Even more-so when the amount of people can get into the tens or hundreds of millions.Future generations will look at trogs like you with disdain, as braindead cavemen.
>>738636836Life isn't about speed, and happiness isn't the most important thing in the world either. If you were an artist...you'd understand. *turns around dramatically and walks into the distance, burdened by life's harsh truths and misunderstood by the masses*
>>738626456>nooooo, you're asking an AI bot to create something from stolen art work
>>738636925>*hangs himself when he gets laid off because of drawbot#4000*thank fucking god
>>738636992*my soul goes to heaven* Huh? *I look around* Where are all the AI artists and jews?
>>738634250So it's specialized in "Anime Art". Can it do only the most popular modern styles, or something like say Golgo 13?
>>738637553Oh my yes. Especially if you use some Golgo art as vibe transfers.>Huh? What's that?There's a lot of things that will be very daunting to learn at first. My advice, straight away, is to try absolutely everything.
>>738637553Not him but they train on boorus mainly so if there are enough drawings with any booru tag, it can probably do it without using references. I haven't seen anyone do a style like that one but I could imagine reproducing it with some kaiji and traditional media mixed in. If you use local models you can just train a lora yourself.
>>738637742>Not him but they train on boorus mainlyDanbooru chiefly.
So what happened to the whole "I hate artists!!" bit ai sloppers used to do? In the end it was just jealousy.
I keep AI hate train going because it has increased demand for manmade art. I profit while you create slop that devalues my competition.
>>738638061that never existed, normal people just hate mentally ill trannies like you
>>738638061Tourists, anon.Wasn't it obvious?
>>738638061Everyone still hates artists and we would love AI if it wasn't so intertwined with politics.
>>738638061this thread reminded me why I hate them for sure
>>738638135>>738638213>>738638227Shitty, smelly, birdshit answers.>>738638149Good answer, my answer.
>>738632374good morning
Please destroy music industry with slop alreadyI know you're doing it already but hurry up
>>738634713You're an inferior version of a midi creator
>>738636836>express ourselvesExpress others*, you will never express yourself with AI it is impossible.
>>738638802works for me
>>738638802skill issue
>>738620767>ludditeYou do not even know what that word means, nor do you understand its historical significance. Let me guess, you think a villain is a cartoon "bad guy". It is clear to anyone unfortunate enough to encounter your drivel, that English is not your first language. If you had anything worthwhile to say. I would, of course, suggest that you actually learn the language before you attempt to speak, let alone write in it. But, in truth, I would quite prefer if you did not befoul the language with your disgusting accent and poison our minds with your inferior intelligence.
>>738640652t. seething luddite
>>738625762>>738624853>>738623482why did the design change? even the girl looks different in each image. how can you claim intent when its all random?
kys elfnigger
>artists can paint slopThose aren't artists.
>>738641316retarded post
>>738635092>that top backshotWHEEEEW SEXO
>>738627061This is a really good rebuttal with not enough credit given.
>>738628629nta but yeah it is important to protect data centers since they could be connected to large financial networks. You never saw Die Hard 4 for the Hollywood take on it?
>>738630282amazing how AI turns into complete shit when you know the references and that takes half a glance. it copies it doesn't create well enough
>>738625762you do not intend anything. Everyone knows the parameters around the fields you want to be permenantly locked in change continously then you are doing the wedding photography slop of picking ones that do not look shit.
>>738641943not really, he's just mad AI makes good art
>>738635092i2i butchered the second sketch desu
>>738641770>a random range of looks for an identical charactre in the span of days is actually artstyle evolutionYou don't have the control to evolve anything.
>>738643660yep it's a retard
>>738644026>no you don't understand I shimmied my weights around a littleYou cannot make a consistent anything.
>>738620767Hey I'm not reading the thread but if that's a real unedited quote, in that context, that's the most retarded thing I've ever seen someone say.
>>738638061>y-you're just jealous of me because of how cool and awesome I am!why does art attract keep attracting auto-fellating retards like this?
>>738627984Security.
>>738641316photography is random too, and yet it is considered art. so what?
