AI Artwork Gen (Bing)

DOODOO

FREE AI GENERATORS! /protest!

BUTTS

Stop cheating

If it is just the nose that you have problem with but not everything else, just Photoshop the nose. That saves the headache keep rerolling an image over and over for a perfect result.

There are also tools that allow the user to reroll a small section in an image if there is one small part that you don't like.

It's not just the nose, though. The nose and ears are definitely the most distinct facial features, but there's so many subtleties to it. Part of the reason why I love XI is that of its non-human races (enlightened or otherwise) have so much effort put into them. But it makes it basically impossible to describe to one of these tools lol

cosplay winrar

Don't know the char, but is the twin heel lore accurate?

Yeah she is from modern feminist star wars. Gotta make sure you crush em both.

Looks like a SW skin in Overwatch2 for Mercy. I don't think they get official crossovers like that or anything, saying it looks like that.

...its just sad how basic all this is and yet the attention we give it...

Basic in what sense? I could spend a week trying to create one of these artworks and come up with a worst result. A talented artist could certainly do it faster than I could and better than AI, but I'd wager it's still measured in hours not seconds. Then, you have to have a constant back and forth to get the exact product the client wants. The AI can spit out 30 options in a minute, and client can bring that to the artist to refine the most appealing of them.

The bigger concern is that if legal intervention doesn't happen(and it very well might), these models will continue to advance and encroach on different creative/intellectual sectors. Humans want to believe we have a spark of divinity, or a monopoly on creativity, etc.. but any thought process can eventually be modeled.

in terms of raw quality of scale, shading, and style- you are correct there are definitely elements that should be considered "high end". The issue is that every one of those sexbot-cat-femme-fatale stereotype has the same facial structure as Taylor Swift; that the body dimensions for that trope only exist in 2 combinations of dimensions; that there are only 4 accepted poses for this trope. So at what point is it still "art" vs giving a skilled program a task that includes WHAT to make, and does that remain art or is it now paint-by-numbers? But because its purdy and done at high resolution it gets to piggypack on what is called "art"? Maybe for most, but I'm just not comfy with that.

You also mention "but any thought process can eventually be modeled". Certainly won't disagree with that truth- my complaint comes in that in order to model it, first a human had to have the thought, and that spark of creativity is still the missing link...and at least in my mind not given near the respect it deserves.

Most of the litigation moves at a glacial pace, and by the actions of the defendants you wouldn't think they have any open legal challenge to the products they are pushing and investing in so much.
https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/artificial-intelligence-and-intellectual-property_part-ii-copyright

I have been following the github copilot case since it started in late 2022, and the last update was in march of this year, but it is still on-going
https://githubcopilotlitigation.com/

Ahh wait a minute. This was drawn by my friend Peti. Not AI. I've failed at the thread. OTL

Is this true of all AI-generated art, though? Or is it a prompt that the perverts in this thread are using (sexy? attractive? feminine?) that's directing it in that way? Seems pretty obvious that there's a common intent among the people using it here that may manifest in prompt words.

I'd call it anything but basic. It absolutely copies famous artists' styles and rips some of their work, so I completely understand why they are so upset, but it draws high tier art just like those artists. It's not perfect, sometimes it looks like complete garbage, you need to use lots of prompts and generate multiple times, but it can print out perfect ***sometimes that looks exactly as good as real, good artists.

To be able to do that as someone who either can't or doesn't want to learn art, pay thousands of dollars for tablets and programs, and just wants to know what Tom Holland would look like as Wolverine for a quick laugh, all for free, it's pretty *** nice.

Again, I completely get the moral argument against it. ***on the morality all you want, but the quality? Nah, the quality can be amazing sometimes.

Edit: To continue with your second comment about them all looking the same, yeah. Real artists do that too. Take a look at an artist like Sakimichan. Her work is absolutely amazing, top-end ***, but most of her characters, from Tifa, to Samus, to whatever all have the same face. That is their style and maybe that's a flaw with her that some other artists don't have, but it's not something only AI does is my point.

I don't use Bing, but another open source generator spat this out.



Apparently she hacked off her own tale cause she doesn't know how to hold a dagger.

You seem to be under the impression that these tools are learning how to draw in various styles, then drawing images from scratch using its learned knowledge. That's now how these tools operate. When you give it a prompt, it basically does a Google search for what you asked of it, then overlays and stitches a bunch of the images together.

Artists aren't upset because they're being imitated, they're upset because they're being stolen from. These tools aren't creating anything, they're basically just an automated Photoshopping service.

Yeah, this is bs. Most art on the internet is fan art copying other's style. Is all of that "stolen"?

AI is already being used extensively in:
Graphic Design
Automotive Design
Industrial Design
Interior Design
Architectural Design
Games Design

There's a huge difference between using another artist as reference and literally copy-pasting their work and calling it "art". One is gathering inspiration and using that to create and evolve, the other is doing a sophisticated Google search.

And I'll admit that it's fun to see what it will cobble together sometimes. But I know enough that it's using existing works to make it, and I'm not going to pretend that I nor the tool are "artists".

All artists copy from others, how did western artists learn to draw anime style? they copied it from Japanese artists. Also these generators are tools, the "AI" isn't making art for itself. A human is creating it via the tool. If anything you can make the argument that it is opening Art up to the masses, who previously could not enjoy it.

Most artists will be fine no matter how good this tech gets, because art is just as much about the artist as the art itself. Only the pop art or porn is at risk. As Vyre said above, the person that drew the pic is as important to him as the picture itself.

wonder who this person copied from

Stolen from the San! Appropriation Alert!

Just kidding...ancient cave drawings are mind blowing.

Apparently the ancient Chileans hunted freaking WHALES. Like, with spears and their own swimming ability. Puts good old Ishmael to shame.

The realty of "AI" is that it is the future and it's only going to get better, whether we like it or not. The battle right now is for the big companies controlling "AI" to spend billions on lobbying to create regulations they want via scaring the public about it. They do this in order to lock out open source and smaller players, so they can control the industry.

Open AI, Google etc

"AI" will be in everything in the next 10 years, and even if our generation refuses to accept it. The next generation that grow up with it will just see it as normal tech and embrace it fully.

My only real gripe with it is how these companies marketed it, cause none of this stuff is AI at all and it never will be AI because they are not researching in that direction. It's all just tools that have had mass user +1 / -1 training on results to give us what we like.

This is also why images often show the pretty women, cause almost all the +1 / -1 rating is done by guys who like pretty women.

This may be the faster way to do creative work but it is not the absolute most ideal way in many situations.

By "choosing to from 30 options use AI and refine what's most appealing", you are already making compromise in the very first step, it is literally the opposite of how artists work in situations that time is less of a problem.

To be exact, when artists work on a piece they try to make their 10/10 piece in mind by tweaking and fixing what they have, until they run out of time or reached they can do with their skill ceiling. In this process the entire art is often being throw away because the "base idea" just isn't good enough.

If AI spit out 30 images and you use that as a base, you are stuck with that structure moving forward, it is just compromise and limitation to creativity from the very first step.

Personally I would only use AI art when quality really really doesn't matter. If they do then the best use of AI is still inspiration/brainstorm at this point imo. I wish "choosing from 30 options use AI and refine what's most appealing" is the easy solution for everything but this is often not the case.



Constant back and forth is part of creative process. You don't know the ideal solution, so you keep throwing away bad solutions away until a good one is found.

The fact that capitalism tries to convince us that such process should be removed because "money" is just silly.....

I remember reading about how that now that the internet is getting flooded with "AI" art, the pools they draw from are getting tainted and overwhelmed by it. They've started using uncanny, weird-fingered drawings as their baseline, causing them to effectively inbreed.

The only way to stop it is going to be to hire even more people to filter those images out. But especially as there's less real art to choose from. Maybe it will keep getting better, but not without the operational cost climbing exponentially. The corporations that are trying to control these tools aren't going to like that.

It does makes me laugh (genuinely, I find it funny) how dystopian this all feels. Instead of creating computers and robots to take on the dangerous or menial jobs so human beings can focus on the arts, we've automated art.

Never have I felt more on the losing end of a shifting world that I know will win out, but want nothing to do with that winning.

Keep thinking that the image tiramisu being ***out by Open AI's is "art".....and give yourself a decade or so until those AI's have nothing to draw from except other AI-generated images, over and over, and true art just ends. We know you'll all win- you've got the numbers, the money, and the apathy of the public behind you. But that is the endgame being created for the future.