|
Wheany posted:There are some ways of refining a result you like: Thanks for the suggestions! So I've mainly been using it to create visual aids for TTPRGs like Monster of the Week. It's a really easy way to add detail to a game and the results have produced some interesting flavor in our games with the random elements that the AI has decided to add to certain pictures. I'll post some of the better ones it's made when I'm on my home PC.
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2022 15:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 22:06 |
|
|
Pulcinella posted:Serious post: it definitely seems like the training sets are just raw copyright infringement. But unless the AI reproduces images with obvious water marks (which it has for stock photo services like Getty) or the developer of the AI releases the training set you would never know if they used your images or not. Also seems like the kind of thing the courts or legislature would retroactively legalize because the cat is already out of the bag and it’s basically rich people vs artists so beyond the large stock image sites maybe negotiating some kind of nominal fee I don’t see artists winning. Death of the author is literally just a tool used to interpret the meaning of a given piece, how the hell can anyone argue it doesn't apply to AI art? It's not necessary for AI art, because the AI isn't providing you opinions or outside context that needs to be filtered out, but it can absolutely be applied to more or less anything. Anyway no strong feelings on the technology other than it sucks that yet another Potentially Really Cool Thing is going to be used to strangle workers and enrich bastards. At least it will provide some modestly amusing images along the way.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2022 18:45
|
|
|
Still trying to learn how to massage the end results. Friend suggested "Jordan Peterson looks sad while the Pope turns away in disgust", but one of the first things it spat out was this horror. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2022 19:58
|
|
|
SplitSoul posted:Still trying to learn how to massage the end results. Friend suggested "Jordan Peterson looks sad while the Pope turns away in disgust", but one of the first things it spat out was this horror. Micheal Cohen?
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2022 21:00
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2022 23:26
|
|
|
Rockstar would never model buscemi's mutant face so perfectly
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2022 23:49
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/wizard0rb/status/1575557769050324992 This is a trash rear end analogy - a mcchicken is food, and in this case the "chef" making the sandwich is also making 5x as many mcshits and you have to pick the edible ones Also the gut in the QT is an idiot, he stole a real picture to put in to img2img so maybe dunking on him is the correct moral stance
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2022 13:15
|
|
|
"making AI art is real art" yes of course. It is a tool like every other tool in art that has come before it. were people mad about the clone stamp in photoshop too? lol
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2022 13:18
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
Pink Mist posted:A lot of artists are worried that this will put them out of business. Yeah they're automating a lot of jobs nowadays
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2022 13:28
|
|
|
Skyl3lazer posted:https://twitter.com/wizard0rb/status/1575557769050324992 Nah, it's a perfect analogy since AI art is made out of an information pink slime.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2022 13:30
|
|
|
Pink Mist posted:A lot of artists are worried that this will put them out of business. this is a problem w/ capitalism not ai art though
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2022 13:30
|
|
|
*losers type a few words and a computer slaps a bunch of poo poo together in a pale imitation of existing creative work* "I'm an artist"
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2022 13:31
|
|
|
WrasslorMonkey posted:Midjourney is pretty great. Midjourney is amazing. I went on there a couple weeks ago and someone was generating horrifying dark souls burgers
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2022 13:32
|
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:*losers type a few words and a computer slaps a bunch of poo poo together in a pale imitation of existing creative work* "I'm an artist" 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?
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2022 13:32
|
|
|
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? It's a decent short cut for producing a first draft and refining but you're kidding yourself if you think that will be the main use of it over just pumping out more and more derivative images for commerical work. AI tech is seriously over hyped when in reality it's just a very complicated form of imitation. The computers are taking a big pile of human information, turns it into a pink slime, and hands you a chicken nugget that sort of looks like what you asked for from the parts of that pink slime. Is it an interesting tool in the art creation process? Sure. Is it creating art and people writing prompts artists? Lol no.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2022 13:43
|
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:It's a decent short cut for producing a first draft and refining but you're kidding yourself if you think that will be the main use of it over just pumping out more and more derivative images for commerical work. I think it's cool
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2022 13:44
|
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:Art is seriously over hyped when in reality it's just a very complicated form of imitation. The artists are taking a big pile of human inspiration, turns it into a pink slime, and hands you a chicken nugget that sort of looks like what you asked for from the parts of that pink slime. Gumball Gumption posted:Collage is seriously over hyped when in reality it's just a very complicated form of imitation. The artists are taking a big pile of magazines, turns it into a pink slime, and hands you a chicken nugget that sort of looks like what you asked for from the parts of that pink slime. Gumball Gumption posted:Photography is seriously over hyped when in reality it's just a very complicated form of imitation. The cameras are taking a big pile of photons, turns it into a pink slime, and hands you a chicken nugget that sort of looks like what you asked for from the parts of that pink slime. Gumball Gumption posted:Writing is seriously over hyped when in reality it's just a very complicated form of imitation. The authors are taking a big pile of books, turns it into a pink slime, and hands you a chicken nugget that sort of looks like what you asked for from the parts of that pink slime.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2022 13:46
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
Skyl3lazer posted:this is a problem w/ capitalism not ai art though power looms were bad for the exact same reason its just artists thinking the leopard wont their faces
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2022 13:48
|
|
|
Oh no you've bought into the hype of machine learning. It's smoke and mirrors.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2022 13:48
|
|
|
Fat-Lip-Sum-41.mp3 posted:power looms were bad for the exact same reason And all those folks were proven wrong and industrialization didn't create a single existential crisis.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2022 13:48
|
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:And all those folks were proven wrong and industrialization didn't create a single existential crisis. what? no. the advent of power looms exposed a problem of capitalism, not of industrialization or mechanization or automation. its the same fuckin thing as this, except it's artists out of work instead of hand weavers. the issue, as always, is who gets the benefit of these new machines, and who is forced to starve. the luddites had no grudge against the machines, only the ownership
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2022 13:50
|
|
|
Pink Mist posted:If anything, I think the opposite way would be more effective. The artist makes a sketch and the machine finishes it, renders, adds color. Depends on which way the process is going, I think! If the artist already has something specific in mind this way would be better. In the other direction, just as an example, I was generating images for a TTRPG campaign where the players were fighting against a giant snowman. What I liked about it is that after generating like 12 options, I could pick and choose the elements from each one that I liked and then combine them all in photoshop and clean them up.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2022 13:51
|
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:Oh no you've bought into the hype of machine learning. It's smoke and mirrors. Gumball Gumption posted:And all those folks were proven wrong and industrialization didn't create a single existential crisis. so which is it, is it hype or is this thing going to destroy the art industry?
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2022 13:52
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/ativhanna/status/1575622051632594944 oh...well...ok then...
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2022 13:53
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
I just like making stuff, so no part of making art is "bitch work" to me.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2022 13:57
|
|
|
Pepe Silvia Browne posted:so which is it, is it hype or is this thing going to destroy the art industry? The hype is that machine learning produces something novel like a human can off of inspirations. The tech will kill art jobs. Your posting is fan boy level where your entire argument is that you think it's neat so people shouldn't harsh your buzz. Computers that can match images to words you feed it are very cool, they're not producing art and they're not producing anything new. Gumball Gumption has issued a correction as of 14:11 on Sep 30, 2022 |
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2022 14:03
|
|
|
I'm strongly in the camp that ai art is horrific fever dream of capitalism and thus an interesting and valuable exploratory tool through which to examine society and humanity
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2022 14:05
|
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:The hype is that machine learning produces something novel like a human can off of inspirations. The tech will kill art jobs. You're posting is fan boy level where you're entire argument is that you think it's neat so people shouldn't harsh your buzz. Computers that can match images to words you feed it are very cool, they're not producing art and they're not producing anything new. AI Art is Here Even If You Hate It
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2022 14:08
|
|
|
Here's the true dividing line for me, AI art has no why. The computer doesn't have any purpose in what it creates beyond "other art that matches these terms looks like this so it should look like this" while a human artist even when heavily copying is making decisions about why they're putting what they put into the art. There is no unified image in AI art that was chosen for reasons by the artist, it's just incongruent stuff slapped next to each other because that's what it's supposed to look like based on the training data.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2022 14:09
|
|
|
Grey Fox posted:https://twitter.com/ativhanna/status/1575622051632594944 oh...well...ok then... cant argue with results
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2022 14:10
|
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:Here's the true dividing line for me, AI art has no why. The computer doesn't have any purpose in what it creates beyond "other art that matches these terms looks like this so it should look like this" while a human artist even when heavily copying is making decisions about why they're putting what they put into the art. There is no unified image in AI art that was chosen for reasons by the artist, it's just incongruent stuff slapped next to each other because that's what it's supposed to look like based on the training data. I mean, have you heard of a concept called "Death of the Artist"
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2022 14:12
|
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:Here's the true dividing line for me, AI art has no why. The computer doesn't have any purpose in what it creates beyond "other art that matches these terms looks like this so it should look like this" while a human artist even when heavily copying is making decisions about why they're putting what they put into the art. There is no unified image in AI art that was chosen for reasons by the artist, it's just incongruent stuff slapped next to each other because that's what it's supposed to look like based on the training data. So if a human is using the AI as a tool, and IS choosing parts of that art for a reason, then it becomes art.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2022 14:13
|
|
|
To me it just seems like you're posting "this paintbrush isn't an artist" over and over again
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2022 14:14
|
|
|
Yeah, it's very much A Cool Idea In Theory whose main practical application in this hell we live in is destroying the livelihoods of the people whose creative works are being fed into it as seed data. You can recognize it as neat in concept and still acknowledge that it's completely hosed in practice and is going to be used to devalue, currently, the small-time illustrators for news articles and the like (who are already publishing articles with AI-generated images made to mimic the creative work of people those publications used to pay for that labor), and eventually as much creative labor as can possibly be replaced or destroyed. The AI-generated images don't even always have to be good, they just have to be good enough that you don't have to pay anyone and they'll become the norm in any space where that's the case. gently caress, petrochemicals are loving badass in theory and responsible use of them would still allow us to have tons of excess food and leisure time and cool explosions and spaceships and the occasional monster truck rally. That doesn't mean you should poo poo on the people trying to bring attention to the climate apocalypse, or mock the people destroying pipelines, because that's not how That Sweet Crude Oiyahl is actually used and it's killing everything. So while it's not the goo that's killing everyone, AI art in practice isn't a good thing and mocking the concerns of people in the already-shaky landscape of creative work is lovely. You can enjoy your automated goats and/or men without being a pissant about yet another market of actual productive labor being undermined by the inevitable techbro hellmachine.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2022 14:14
|
|
|
Skyl3lazer posted:I mean, have you heard of a concept called "Death of the Artist" I have, What about that highly debated concept which has little to do with the idea of "if a machine is just producing imitation is it art?"
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2022 14:15
|
|
|
Pepe Silvia Browne posted:So if a human is using the AI as a tool, and IS choosing parts of that art for a reason, then it becomes art. Yes, using it as a tool makes sense. But the AI itself can't produce art because it only knows how to imitate. Pepe Silvia Browne posted:To me it just seems like you're posting "this paintbrush isn't an artist" over and over again Lol yes because you keep posting "But what if the paintbrush is the artist because I think the paintbrush is neat"
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2022 14:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 22:06 |
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:Lol yes because you keep posting "But what if the paintbrush is the artist because I think the paintbrush is neat" No dude I'm not, you're just not reading what I'm actually writing: 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. 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? Pepe Silvia Browne posted:"making AI art is real art" yes of course. It is a tool like every other tool in art that has come before it. were people mad about the clone stamp in photoshop too? lol how much clearer can I be about saying "THIS IS A TOOL" so you'll stop being a dick?
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2022 14:17
|
|