|
A lot of artists are worried that this will put them out of business. Imagine if someone fed your portfolio into a machine and then axed you. Lol
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2022 13:25
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 18, 2024 16:04 |
|
|
Pepe Silvia Browne posted:I guess. You don't think there's any potential in allowing this thing to create first drafts which a "real artist" then uses to make a more refined image? If anything, I think the opposite way would be more effective. The artist makes a sketch and the machine finishes it, renders, adds color.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2022 13:46
|
|
|
As it is, you don’t have much control of what the machine spits out, outside of subject matter. That makes AI art perfect for people who just want “a picture of X” and don’t care about anything past that. It’s the opposite of a creative tool. It removes the creative process from art and makes the painter’s job to remove AI artifacting and make the hands/eyes not look weird. So it’s removing the artist’s control and giving them the bitch work. If you really want to automate art effectively, you should automate the bitch work instead. Make the machine do the lines, coloring, in-between frames for animation, etc. The way these AI tools are designed, it’s clear that they’re built to remove power from the artist’s hands and give it to the Idea Guys who don’t care about quality of output Pink Mist has issued a correction as of 13:58 on Sep 30, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2022 13:56
|
|
|
Pepe Silvia Browne posted:Depends on which way the process is going, I think! If the artist already has something specific in mind this way would be better. So photobashing together reference images. Which is fine, but a different beast than drawing or painting.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2022 14:20
|
|
|
Pepe Silvia Browne posted:Sure, is that not a creative process? Are things created in photoshop also not art now? I’m not saying that’s not art. But drawing/painting have advantages that photobashing can’t replicate. I would argue that drawing something from scratch offers more control for the artist, and Idea Guys will leap at the chance to take that power away from painters Plus, like, do you really think people who employ artists will care enough to photobash and tweak the output? A lot of them don’t want good, just passable.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2022 14:28
|
|
|
AI is automating the most creative part of the artistic process instead of the least creative part, this makes little sense to me I would completely buy the “it’s a tool for humans” bit if the goal wasn’t to completely generate (*lovely-looking) images from scratch instead of removing manual labor from the process Pink Mist has issued a correction as of 15:39 on Sep 30, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2022 15:37
|
|
|
Pepe Silvia Browne posted:then you should start using it the way that you think makes more sense! When they make an AI that can make linework for my sketches and generate lighting based on a sample, I will use it. I have no interest in taking a half-baked image of Jpow as the joker and twiddling with his eyes/fingers until they don’t look uncanny valley anymore. That’s already the worst part of art.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2022 15:42
|
|
|
Pepe Silvia Browne posted:Good news: You can set up Midjourney to input your own reference images already! That doesn’t do what I mentioned. Are you trolling?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2022 15:45
|
|
|
It’s cool that someone has the idea, even though it isn’t usable. For one thing, that sketch already has better lines than the AI output, which not only looks bad but is also too simplified to be worked into a final piece without redoing all of it anyway. But maybe one day the technology will be there. Honestly if they made an AI fill bucket that detected gaps really well without blurring everything to hell that would already be useful
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2022 15:52
|
|
|
I agree However This requires legislation and what are the odds of that happening
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2022 18:24
|
|
|
Mola Yam posted:it's a fun toy. cool tech. lots of valid concerns. cat out of bag etc. etc. The hands and eyes are special cases because our brains are very good at parsing them. If anything, those will be the last subjects to look passable. It’s not impossible for AI art to get there, it would just take longer. It might not be a coincidence that both those examples you posted are wearing glasses/visors. I would compare it to self driving car tech. Now your car has a light that tells you when it’s safe to switch lanes, but that doesn’t mean it can do all the object detection required to drive itself. It isn’t impossible for AI to improve enough to drive the car, but it’s been 5 years away for a while now because you can get pretty close without the cigar.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 3, 2022 23:40
|
|
|
turn off the TV posted:honestly the more i use stable diffusion the less limitations it feels like it has, but i'm also using it to edit photographs. the img2img function gets rid of jpeg artifacts incredibly well and it can be used to create super high quality upscales of even the most janky of images. This is a good use of ai. The biggest quality sticklers I know don’t like the mushy artifacting it currently makes, but for something like scaling your 200dpi poster up to 300dpi, it works great. Communist Thoughts posted:A lot of the art I've made with midjourney kicks rear end and even as someone halfway decent at it I'm glad that people who can't draw or paint can now produce nice art. It’s less common than you’d think. Generally you learn how to compose while you learn to draw the circle. When we’re kids, we learn that pictures should logically make sense, which has us draw static, symmetrical, centered compositions that are ineffective in art. Think people standing in the center of the frame facing directly towards the viewer. You learn how to stop doing that at the same time as you learn how anatomy and linework work. Photographers need a while to get good at composition too.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2022 00:59
|
|
|
Lostconfused posted:https://twitter.com/ArcadiaSofka/status/1577498654566363137 I think this person misunderstands the excitement behind this technology. They remind me of those artists who assumed NFTs would be used in good faith to protect digital artwork. Just because the tech has a hypothetical use case does not mean it’ll get used that way. Artists will be on the sidelines and people won’t care.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2022 05:07
|
|
|
Maya Fey posted:new act of defilement dropped No but you see, the result could hypothetically be used in a photoshop or collage, so this is definitely a tool for artists and not a way to remove them from the process entirely
|
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2022 12:14
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 18, 2024 16:04 |
|
|
Actually when a few researchers steal a billion illustrations for their algorithm to replicate it’s extremely democratic
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2022 00:50
|
|