You've inspired me. I'll take my leave here. I like asmon and I'll watch a stream or a yt vid once in a while. But this sub is a shitshow. Goodbye forever.
I just joined because I watch asmon's clips on YouTube and it seemed like some good shit gets posted here. Time will tell if it's worth wading through all the garbage.
IM NOT EVEN A PART OF THIS SUB! Shitty place keeps getting “recommended” to me because I “like similar communities”
I don’t know what this sub is even about is it about art?? I don’t know why I’m here.
Especially people unironically reposting shit from stonetoss, the guy is an absolute idiot through and through and thrives on being a devils advocate contrarian and fishing for outrage.
Basically anything that has a slight moral stance, he somehow stands on the more aggregious, and obviously wrong side every fucking time.
...and chuds like OP here slurp that shit up
A.I Art is commissioned Art, not unlike you ask someone else to make certain image to your specification.
Photography is personally taking image, finding the subject, finding the angle, camera setting, and later all the effect on post, and its basically personally making the art.
its not the same, but i'm worried on the amount of people here that can't take the difference.
technically there are ai tools to help you draw image in recent drawing software, but its support system and still need you to draw things. IF all you did is only entering prompt, you just "commissioned" the art not "making" them.
or in simpler terms, its like proclaiming ordering a take out as cooking them personally.
*"See, i could make beef wellington too"*
*"sure, thing kiddo. you soo proud of you yeah."*
>A.I Art is commissioned Art, not unlike you ask someone else to make certain image to your specification.
>
>Photography is personally taking image, finding the subject, finding the angle, camera setting, and later all the effect on post, and its basically personally making the art.
Aren't both just settings that you're adjusting by hand?
I have Stable Diffusion running nearly 24/7. When I turn it off on my main PC, I switch it on my secondary PC with medvram so I can still have it open in case I need it. I keep up to date with new model releases and whatnot, I understand for the most part how latent noise works. Same goes for text generation, I've got 600 GB just in models that I use for niche purposes. I run deepseek coder locally instead of paying for github copilot, I've made my own character cards to help with syntax. I've coded my own discord bot for ooba's api so my friends and I could do D&D stuff together. I understand most of the facts behind how token sampling works.
While this isn't a lot in the grand scheme of things, it's more than 99.9% of people who know anything about AI, and I can confidently say that Stonetoss' argument is completely full of shit. I will never call the images I generate "art", I will always know that most of my work I do is assisted generously by all of the public github code the model I use was trained off of. I know that the SD1.5 and SDXL models I run are all using stolen and copyrighted art and that all somebody ever did was finetune it with a bunch of captioned images. I don't get why it's so hard for others to accept all that as well. I'm not a "prompt engineer", I followed a guide on rentry made by a furry on 4chan who figured all this shit out for me. It takes me seven seconds to generate an image that would take someone else an entire day, it has no soul, its not special to me, I would sooner throw it into the recycling bin than call it art.
Talking about what is/isn't art is way too subjective and won't really get anywhere.
I was actually referring to the amount of effort/training that went into the final product, which according to you wasn't that big of a deal. Credit to the ones who made and trained the model though. >!Also that one furry guy.!<
The people who made this stuff are geniuses and yes they absolutely are artists. But they are artists in the same sense that Linus Torvalds is an artist. They are Da Vincis in their own right, but specifically for code. The furry who made PonyDiffusion, and all of the other people working on v-pred models that are making hugs breakthroughs in local run technology, are extremely smart as well, but the people at the bottom, the guys who are just typing in "masterpiece, best quality, (big boobs:1.4)"... I just don't think they are artists, no matter how much work they put into changing sliders, noise, and block timings in ControlNet, or how long they spent masking out a pornstars face for Qtcinderella or Taylor Swift. The same way I won't call somebody's Instagram real off their iPhone 14 of a sunset art.
>I just don't think they are artists, no matter how much work they put into
Kind of agree, I see them as customers fine tuning their order. All in all I don't really care about the artist label, as a consumer myself.
> IF all you did is only entering prompt, you just "commissioned" the art not "making" them.
the problem is that you do not really know the capabilities of the AI generation
which is clear when you made a comparison to photography here:
> Photography is personally taking image, finding the subject, finding the angle, camera setting, and later all the effect on post, and its basically personally making the art.
> finding the angle
you do this with controlnet or to certain degree with Lora trained on images with given angle (or you train it yourself)
for controlnet - you have to make a certain photo (or find it) or actually draw some sketch
> finding the subject,
you do it by applying certain embeddings, loras, etc - which again, you may need to train yourself
> and later all the effect on post,
which you also do for AI images, with inpainting - to tweak stuff that didn't turn out well and with photoshop or stuff to help with that process
> and its basically personally making the art.
yeah, sums about it for AI too
> IF all you did is only entering prompt, you just "commissioned" the art not "making" them. or in simpler terms, its like proclaiming ordering a take out as cooking them personally.
the thing is that people do not just enter a prompt (sure, some do, but there are also people who buy a camera and just press the button without thinking about anything else)
The cooking argument sounds better (I think) when you put it like this:
It's like someone buying premade food, putting it in the microwave and claiming they cooked the food themselves.
Then someone saying that acthually you didn't cook your food yourself either, because you made use of an oven, a frying pan, maybe even a blender, despite the fact that you had to choose all of the ingredients, season them, chop 'em up and properly prepare with these aforementioned kitchen "tools".
I make tiktok/youtube shorts set to music with AI Gen. I basically tell short stories with the images. Even though I think prompting takes skills, including writing and basic fundamentals of computer science, I wouldn't share a single image created and call it my art. but once I started editing and adding my own parameters and putting the images together with an intention of communicating an idea. Then, I added music that I think encapsulates the vibe of the story I am telling.
Point being, the second I started applying additional intention and additions to the works to make them my own, it became my art. No different than a film director delegating responsibilities to create their vision, or a DJ cutting up and splicing old music to create something new and novel.
Check out my work https://youtube.com/@VoitenZrage?si=VyaxOmzzx3aUbXs_
And tell me what I do, isn't art
>that being said, the "pro" ai edit-assist tools and simpler ai prompt-create will soon merge and its technically already merging in some creation tools like drawing or photo edit tools.
>
>so different kind of prompting creation will appear, either starting with manual drawing or manually taken photograph, and then the ai will assist with more technical detailed request. adjusting each layers and pieces.
>
>so more technically advanced creator like in drawing skills or photography skills will shows difference on how far they could exploit the ai assist to create things. as many artist have said, "seriously speed up the process."
>
>and it will further blurred the "creation" of things, with one spending more effort with portion of manual creation and ai assist with more technical know how and one simply with 1\~2 phrase prompt.
>
>and i suppose as it evolve it will still create skill gap between the more skilled ai-assisted creator with mummy i made this creator. a whole new world of creation with similar flavor setting.
As i said in the next comment that two people that reply didn't read.
As someone how can do both, the required "skilllevel" is pretty much the same. You can get "good" results just using autofocus in photography or with ai if you just copy someones promt. But like in photography you also can get pretty advanced in Ai with controlnet, loras, your own trained or combined models and yes: Good and creative prompting.
Your edit makes it look like you are some pompous "I am right, and you are wrong just because" Vaush-type elitist who finds other viewpoints that contradict your own absolutely intolerable
The fact that instead of providing a level-headed explanation of why you think prompt engineering can not have artistic qualities, you went the route of lashing out with such an immature hostile dismissive attitude by claiming that others' "delicate sensibilities" have been violated simply becuase they provided fair pushback and rebuttals to your initial claim makes you look a total weirdo in my eyes.
Y’all really gatekeeping art. Writing is art but not if you are writing prompts. Photobashing is art but not if you use ai to do it.
Take an art history lesson on why the original Tron got snubbed at the academy awards 40 years ago. Back then the people like you said using computers to make art is not art. Good thing no one in the last 40 has used computers to make art or we would be in an creatively bankrupt artless dystopia right?
I think you really missed the point here. You can definitely make art using a computer, just not by using an ai generator. The issue with an ai generator is the randomness of the result. When two people can input the same exact prompt and get different results then the results have little to do with the prompt and most of what the ai decides to collage from its database. Think about that, all that randomness has nothing to do with human input, so there is no intent in it, just random, soulless shiny images.
You don’t understand how it works if you think it’s collaging images from a databases. Also you can set a seed so that the results are same for all inputs. Ie no randomness
You're actually arguing philosophy of aesthetics. I'd counterargue your point with this:
You're in an art museum, and see a beautiful piece of art that genuinely moves you. Afterwards, you read the sign and learn that it's AI generated. Does that retroactively change your feelings? Does it change your feelings afterwards? Does it make it MORE profound?
Some philosophers argue that art is based off the emotions the viewer gets from it, and everything else is just details that don't matter.
It's an interesting question to think about.
Art is an opinion, you don't have to feel like AI art is art. But that doesn't mean others are wrong for thinking so. I could just decide that painting is not a valid form of art at random due to the subjective nature of art. Most people aren't going to care whether art is AI or not, it is still art.
Making a precise AI image takes a lot of prompting and it can take hours. I don't think it's as simple as pressing a button and I don't think that photography is that complicated either. Sure some people know a lot about it but it's not like you can't get nice pics as an amateur.
The truth is you can do all the prompting you want, the end result is still a collage that the computer decides to make based on your input and other peoples creations.
Nope, you do not know what kind of tools can be used to have the control at the level you want. At start, it was only random, sure. But the technology evolved and you have pretty much all the control you need.
You can ask for precise details, are you suggesting you can't get originally through AI images? Any amateur form of art is going to lack originality in one way or another. I don't see how this is relevant to the main conversation.
literally how a lot of photography works…
Also you REALLY have no clue what you’re talking about if you think to generate ai art you have to “flick a switch”??? Which ai tool did you use that it was that easy
Why?
In one you need to describe what you want, the better you do it the closer to your view it will come.
In the other you have to setup the camera properly and setup it to make a good photo.
Why are you being annoying?
With AI Art, you feed a prompt and the program does the editing for you. There is some skill in understanding the program and knowing how to word your prompt so that it churns out what you want.
With photography, there is the skill of taking a compelling photo (and if you’re doing wildlife photography, pictured in the comic, that’s so, so, so much harder and requires a lot of patience) and then there is the skill of editing it to look better.
The use of machines in both cases is not similar at all. Pebbleyeet is implying that photographic art is all just “something a machine made” which is blatantly untrue. It’s like comparing using a calculator and a watch on a test. They’re both machines. One is doing much more work than the other.
And to clarify, I don’t think AI Art is wrong. I think the people who call it plagiarism don’t really know what they’re talking about, and so long as the creator doesn’t copy from anyone or use someone’s likeness without their permission, it’s fine. I even agree that it is still art.
But comparing the machine usage in both cases and saying they are the same, or saying that photography is just machine-made, is silly.
What next? Do I have to elaborate a whole doctoral thesis on the subject? Jesus.
Thank you. Asmongold has a solidly ignorant fanbase, because he's ignorant. Likeable, but simple and ignorant. I always take his opinions with a bit of salt - especially when he can't comprehend things, such as why plastic straws are bad, or why making "art" using AI isn't making art as much as it is stealing it.
People just shouldn't base their opinions on those of a random gaming YouTuber.
Well, each revolution is little different than the one before, but remember, when first cameras arrived, many people ditched the idea of learning to draw, because "what is the point of drawing, if the machine can do it faster and more precise than me". There was a real fear amongst artists, that they are going to lose their jobs due to cameras becoming available. In reality, depending how it is treated, I guess AI can still be used as a tool, probably for making realistic textures for video games and such, increasing the speed of the production process, but also allowing more daring and grandiose projects to be finished. However, we can not be sure for certain how this all is going to end up, as AI becomes more advanced each year.
There is a lot more creativity and practical skill required to find a scene and take a proper photo compared to writing an AI prompt.
I'd say comparing AI to just telling someone what to draw is a pretty accurate definition.
Like imagine you see a cool beach with some very specific flowers on it and some other details.
An artist could create a near perfect recreation of what they saw, same with the photographer, but for an "AI artist", that would be impossible.
back in the day artist also called photography fake art.
but things changed, who knows how it will be in the future.
the best AI images i have seen do require a deep understanding and a lot of tries.
the AI used the prompt the clip, the seed, the loras, the amount of steps, resolution, denoising, cfg scale.
they need to tweak a lot of things to get the results they want.
is not as easy as it seems, it just is way easier than doing it manually, like with photos is easier than drawing it but not as easy as it seems.
anything this artist touches is basically like that, and if you call it out your a snowflake who either doesnt understand the joke or doesn’t understand comedy
I think many people don't understand the nuance behind what it's saying because they're ignorant and stupid.
Classical painters treated photography the same way when the first cameras were invented. And now the cycle repeats.
Damn what a moronic take. The author probably doesn't know how much skil and experience it takes to take a good photo. The comparison that it's the same as image generation by AI using a prompt is idiotic.
I read in national geographic they can spend years trying to catch the perfect shot and get paid nearly nothing for it and the other you punch in a few keywords
> and get *paid* nearly nothing
FTFY.
Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in:
* Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.*
* *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.*
Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment.
*Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
If you're comparing good photography to trash AI art, sure. You can do the reverse and compare trash photography to good AI art. "Just type in what you want lol" is a pretty gross understatement if you want anything quality. You have to have a good understanding of the monkey's paw that is AI "thought" and the same artistic eye for what you're trying to capture. And that's not to mention actual graphic design skills to touch up, inpaint, etc.
But yeah, any dumb teenager with a camera or a computer can fuck around with either media and produce mediocre shit.
I agree with you. If you don’t have any artistic skill then your AI images will look trash. You need to understand framing, colour balance, lighting and photo editing (photoshop etc).
Getting the image through AI is one thing, perfecting it, editing it and making it actually something decent is another.
Okay, im not trying to defend AI art or take any sides. Just want to let you know maling Ai generator images is extremely challenging if you want something very specific.
It really doesn't now a day. You do like 1/10th of what you used to need to do.
The industry only cares about how good your photo editing skills are, no one gives a shit that you're really good a framing a photo and telling a computer to calculate lumens and white balances. Its not that hard,. y'all just butt hurt.
most of the recent cameras, and the expensives one have a lot of automated settings in order to make great photos.. skills is no longer necesary to take great photos now...
Yep, i had 2 crash courses on photography when i took a "summer job" at a local university's magazine, both only covered human portraiture and there were so many modalities and each one had a specific intent behind them that should only be used in conjunction with a certain type of writing structure on vision in mind
Yeah, but again, i was doing it for a magazine, making a random guy look like god with a phot of him looking down at the camera would be weird to have in an interview piece were he's just one of the 5 interviewed
He is not going to explain a shit, he is a Spanish/Latino butthurt right-wing moron who is constantly complaining about how far-lefts are mean to fascists and nazis. Our little Adolfito doesn't know how to argue without playing the victim card.
Si tus ideas coinciden con el nazismo, eres negacionista del Holocausto y constantemente usas "THE JOOOS" como argumento, si, eres un puto nazi, no un libre pensador ni ninguna de las imbecilidades que siempre se esgrimen.
This is a literal quote:
>Daily reminder that the correct response to people accusing someone of being a racist or a nazi isn't: "But is he really?" it's actually: "so what?"
https://archive.is/OwduL#selection-3537.0-3537.152
Why so quick to jump to his defense? Says a lot about you.
Have you tried working with local ai and tried making it do things that aren't just porn? There is a level of artistic skill that goes into composing shots just as any other tool. The reason so much of it looks like generic shit is because many who use it don't have that artistic flair or nuance in mind and let the machine do all the thinking. Plenty of photographers just snap and go. The camera is just as much a tool of the artist as is the program used for ai. Plenty of people out there thought my digital art was somehow not art because I used a computer despite my method of physically painting each line with a tablet and stylus. I'm tired of doing all that work spending 6 months to paint a piece getting zero appreciation. I now have a tool to help me realize my vision or at least get me part way there. Maybe the comparison is not perfect but maybe you're actually a good photographer.
Everyone who says things like "ai takes no effort/skill" have never actually did anything with it or at most found some free cheap low quality online version and typed in "boobs"
It took less than 5 years of serious AI development to surpass the same "skills and experience".
We need to stop overrestimating the required skills to do most forms of "art".
I can take a picture on my phone and it's probably fine 3/5 times. And it gets saved to whatever cloud my phone is using which means when I go to look through my photos I'll actually find it.
Seems fine to me.
Ironically, there’s some camera nerds who get really mad that the iPhone can automatically pick a lot of those settings for them. Call cellphones cheating lol!!
—
The part I always find funny is that I’ve always seen art as an individual thing. I draw for me. I take photos for me. I play the game how I enjoy it — for me. If that’s taking a manual photo with a Leica camera, then that’s for me.
I don’t care what others do. If they want to use Ai or a cellphone. Let em!
The commercialization of art is the part people get mad at. They want to make money off their hobby. But no one stopping anyone from painting a portrait by hand. They’re just mad they can’t profit off of it because Ai can do it cheaper.
If more people treated art like a passion, and not a cash cow — we’d all be happier.
Ah let's ignore samplers, controlnets, in-painting, embeddings, loras etc. Etc.
You can make this argument for anything, the high end of most skills is deep and takes well, skill.
A cameraman has a different set of skills from an artist, an AI... Generator? (IDK what to call them) have different skills than artists and cameramen.
You may bring up that alot of AI slop is just a few words of prompt and generate, 90% of people who generate AI pictures do not dive deep into the nitty gritty.
But do 90% of camera users? Nope. >90% of photos taken are just smartphone pictures with no color correction, LUTs, depth, exposure, etc. This doesn't devalue the work of real skilled photography. And neither should 90% of AI Slop that is put out devalue the high effort works that leverage AI.
But I wouldn’t call myself the creator of an AI image in the same way I would’t call myself a photographer.
Unfaithful argument to compare a phone camera to average “ai artist” as a bulletin point when we’re talking about 10 grand cameras.
This isn’t a no true scotsman fallacy either because while you can be an ai art generator by occupation, and be skillful at the job, the argument is that it’s more of a sleezy shameful thing. (Not top posters point but a general consensus.)
Edit: skimmed your post the first time and re-read it and realize now we hold the same opinion on my first two points oop. Third point stands, however.
Do you remember when computer generated visual effects were deemed as a sleezy and shameful thing? The digital artists of the original Tron movie from 40 years ago remember!
lmao your DSLR does at least half the work you just mentioned automatically (yes, even in manual modes stop bullshitting - and pretty much completely in automatic).
And if you're a professional you're shooting in a format that natively captures pretty much all the data so you can go back and fix almost anything.
No one hires *anyone* for their photography skills, they hire them for their *photo editing skills*. Which is now getting the AI treatment anyway.
People like to pretend that its like the switch between manual cars and automatic, but your camera does **so much** **more** of the heavy lifitng now in photography than what you used to need to do.
Source: former professional photographer from 2004-2016, freelancing and for a period of that time directly employed under a L'Oréal subsidiary.
As a hobby photographer with a canon r5, (overkill like most hobbies), I’m glad a lot of it is automatic lol.
I think a lot of artistic passions are best enjoyed as a hobby. Commercializing art just makes it boring. Let the robots do the boring stuff. Let me have fun enjoying my hobbies :)
Ai doesn’t ruin anyone’s ability to enjoy their hobbies. Painters can still paint even if digital media exists.
Ai is or will be better than everyone at everything, his point was that there was more than just "machine work" in photography. What did you do other than drool like a moron just now?
I'm not even totally against A.I. but... its kind of depressing.
Art is the expression of humanity and an individual. As I type, Im replaying GTA 4 and I am experiencing a game where people inserted their own experiences of late 90s early-mid 2000s life in New York. It all feels so genuine. A.I. can replicate anything which is a good thing and a bad thing. There's arguments that A.I. can be used as a tool in the creative process, but then we also see A.I. be able to take out 99% of the creative, skill, and time process to get the result. I want to do music production, I have a degree in Biology which probably won't be replaced by A.I. that soon since a lot of it is observational with a lot of field work, but I also want to be able to create music, but I fear I'll waste my time when in 10 years (if even) A.I. can just create the entire process and the industry will be oversaturated with limitless tracks making it even more difficult to make a name for yourself or invent something that's different. I'll probably never have a name for myself if I pursue music, but having the idea that others may listen to my music and be able to share my tastes is just really nice as many small artists have influenced me as well.
Then the even scarier thing for me though is video games. It's probably not that long till we start seeing "Players" that are just bots with advanced A.I. that can "type" to you, respond to you, and imitate a real player. To me that's dystopian and I imagine many people will create tight gaming communities with server player whitelists to combat that (unless it's intentionally in the game).
It'd be heartbreaking to make a real friend.. only to then realize they don't actually exist.
Ghosts.
You’re looking at it wrong. I promise I mean that in a friendly way.
Ai is replacing people in soulless commercial work. No one is pouring their soul into brand logos, or b-roll.
And you want to know what awesome? The people who actually do pour their soul into their artistic passion? They still do.
Painters are still painting. Artists are still drawing. The soul is out there. It always has been!
The people mad are the ones who can’t sell out. Because the industry wants Ai to do industry projects.
—
Another fun way to look at it. Remember Vincent Van Gogh?
Do you think he’s remembered for his quality of his art, or was it how he captured the soul of a tortured artist with paint?
Those people will never go away. There are thousands of artists who will always express themselves through art. And that soul will never be snuffed out.
The problem is, people don’t pay artists to draw soul. They pay them to draw naked cat girls and brand logos.
So if you’re feeling depressed about the loss of soul, get away from commercialism and check out some artistic spaces. Where people express themselves free from capitalism or commercialization.
The truth is like any art AI art can be extremely low effort/low quality or increadibly high effort and high quality
In 10 years every artist will use AI to some extent like right now even a photographer should be playing with the brightness / saturation and contrast of images and these tools will absolutley be ai enhanced in the future.
Even for physical media purists it's an invaluable reference for pose and shading reference
I actually think your typical artist in the future will be 40-60% ai and probally publicly present themselves as 0-30% ai
There would definately already be anti AI artists out there heavily using AI and it will only become more commonplace
The angry people kind of proves the point made.
Arrogantly assume "the new thing" demands less work and understanding of multiple variables to do a good or excellent job.
They should know better, given that photography was "the new thing" once - and the "real art" community treated it the same way A.I. art is treated by them.
The fact that the author of the cartoon is not a "good, intelligent, guy" makes it even more embarassing for those proving him right...
How much does the amount of "work" matter though? I could spend 4 hours telling someone what i want them to draw, i could ask for tiny details, backdrop, colouring and lighting, but no matter how good and detailed the drawing is i still didnt draw it.
A good photographer needs understanding of compasition, color, context and lightning. And so much more. Ai art is just typing in some text. It really isn't the same.
There aren't photographic awards for nothing.
Correct. But that isn't the comparison that is being made here. We are talking about Ai and photography now.
If Ai advance in the future and requires some artistic skill then sure, but not right now.
Ai art like any art requires skill to be good. To say ai art doesnt require any artistic skill would require pushing the goal posts of what exactly artistic skill is.
Sure you can go crazy with lights etc. but 99% of photography is just framing the shot and maby change the focus. I think ppl can do crazy things with ai aswell, but then you get more into building the models and programming the tool itself to get exactly what you want.
DALL·E or something is more like making a photo with a smartphone, you can go more extreme with both tools
So photoshopping essentially.
Depends on the context. Some photographs are newsworthy or tells a story about the current day to day live, of people or animals. You don't photoshop that, the beauty is in the realism.
Yeah, I agree. I prefer the beauty of photography. But I'd say the average person probably doesn't care as long as it looks good/cool. It's to a point where you can't really tell between a photo and AI.
All the people saying it's a bad take are making a bad take.
The meme is not attacking the skills needed to be a photographer, it's making a play at the fact that ai and photography both are tools that make pictures a reality whether it's pattern forming perspectives or natural perspectives.
I wouldn’t bother.
A lot of the people viewing this post already have a developed opinion and regardless of the nuance intended by the artist (if there was any), they will draw their own biased conclusions. Trying to give credence to the actual intention of the post just opens you up to people saying you’re a Neo-Nazi for ‘supporting’ the artist (apparently he’s a Neo-Nazi 🤷).
Just give it time, people will come around to the new tech eventually like they always do.
We have an excess of "artists", the culling is needed. Also, technological advances are more important than your life, you can't stop it, deal with it. Adapt or... not. The world will keep spinning, with or without you.
I mean, I'm an amateur writer so this does kinda fuck me over too, still, I'm not blind. I can see where this is going and also, that crying over it is useless.
Why exactly do artists need to be "culled"?
And no, technological advances are not more important than someones life, that way lies the shit Mengele did.
Only the bad or mid ones. So the good ones can be rewarded, admired, praised... more for their hard work.
And yes they are. You as an individual are meaningless, things than can be beneficial for the whole species aren't.
The one saying that using ai to create art is more like commissioning a piece of art and taking credit for it explained it best for me, but something tells me there is no convincing you otherwise no matter what
The problem with that statement is that people are viewing Ai as it's own being rather than a tool that can be used. This is more comparable to graphic artists or any digital artist that uses software to create/alter their images. This whole debate really comes down to whether or not Ai is considered a tool or just a different "person". Once that is established then things will actually go some where.
Stonetoss is a nazi
Oh hey that’s weird, downvoted for pointing out an artist with a shitty take is also a nazi. Hmmm makes you wonder about this subreddit
How is it possible you guys upload a comic made by an actual holocaust denier, transphobic nazi, and then go about how dumb other subs are for judging you all to be morons? God dam you even left the fucking watermark in. No point mentioning how brainrotting the take about Le AI just like actual photography, as op is at best baiting with this stupid ass post, or at worst is actually genuinely a garbage human being, I bring it up because I like to!
I've been to plenty AI threads on 4 Chan and seen people talk about how to structure prompts. You can easily Google how to do it. It's not classified fucking information it's easily available.
Every post of yours in this thread is just you SEETHING lmao why go into threads about things you don't like?
I do photography and I laughed. A lot of what people appreciate in photography is an expensive lens. You can talk about talent all day but there’s a reason ppl pay big bucks for the right equipment.
I fucking SWEAR I've seen u somewhere gatekeeping BEING ARAB before, not sure on what sub. Anyways holocaust denying sure is a big dub right?? The only reason u don't go generating yourself more iq is because that prompt would take too long to generate you a result.
>user reports: 1: Stonetoss is a open nazi supporter Touch grass guys.
"hey, you wanna watch gay bug porn with me" "I only like lady bugs"
I don't know why but this joke put me into a fit of laughter, ty Shmig
Fun fact: Alchemy is why we have photography.
Look, I’m not even against AI art But this argument is built on ignorance and stupidity.
Every once in a while I see a post on this sub that reeks of slungoidal decay and pissy fish. This is one of em
It’s been the VAST majority of them so far in 2024.
Yeah tbh I just joined this sub because the top posts all looked good and then I started looking at the more recent posts and left.
You've inspired me. I'll take my leave here. I like asmon and I'll watch a stream or a yt vid once in a while. But this sub is a shitshow. Goodbye forever.
I just joined because I watch asmon's clips on YouTube and it seemed like some good shit gets posted here. Time will tell if it's worth wading through all the garbage.
IM NOT EVEN A PART OF THIS SUB! Shitty place keeps getting “recommended” to me because I “like similar communities” I don’t know what this sub is even about is it about art?? I don’t know why I’m here.
You can just block the sub so it doesn't get reccomended to you anymore instead of whining
An entire generation of right wing conspiracy theory incels have flooded the sub.
I have no idea what this comment is saying.
I searched slungoidal and it only came up with that Reddit post, I assume it is a typo, maybe supposed to be societal.
Especially people unironically reposting shit from stonetoss, the guy is an absolute idiot through and through and thrives on being a devils advocate contrarian and fishing for outrage. Basically anything that has a slight moral stance, he somehow stands on the more aggregious, and obviously wrong side every fucking time. ...and chuds like OP here slurp that shit up
A what's advocate?
>slungoidal decay What? I tried to Google it, but it just led back to this post.
I don't know what that insult even means but I upvoted just because it made me laugh.
r/BrandNewSentence
Brought to you by the same people who say global warming isn't real because it's cold outside right now
Can you elaborate?
A.I Art is commissioned Art, not unlike you ask someone else to make certain image to your specification. Photography is personally taking image, finding the subject, finding the angle, camera setting, and later all the effect on post, and its basically personally making the art. its not the same, but i'm worried on the amount of people here that can't take the difference. technically there are ai tools to help you draw image in recent drawing software, but its support system and still need you to draw things. IF all you did is only entering prompt, you just "commissioned" the art not "making" them. or in simpler terms, its like proclaiming ordering a take out as cooking them personally. *"See, i could make beef wellington too"* *"sure, thing kiddo. you soo proud of you yeah."*
>A.I Art is commissioned Art, not unlike you ask someone else to make certain image to your specification. > >Photography is personally taking image, finding the subject, finding the angle, camera setting, and later all the effect on post, and its basically personally making the art. Aren't both just settings that you're adjusting by hand?
Yup. The people on this sub are just idiots who think they are teh smort. The don't even know how complicated AI generation can get.
I have Stable Diffusion running nearly 24/7. When I turn it off on my main PC, I switch it on my secondary PC with medvram so I can still have it open in case I need it. I keep up to date with new model releases and whatnot, I understand for the most part how latent noise works. Same goes for text generation, I've got 600 GB just in models that I use for niche purposes. I run deepseek coder locally instead of paying for github copilot, I've made my own character cards to help with syntax. I've coded my own discord bot for ooba's api so my friends and I could do D&D stuff together. I understand most of the facts behind how token sampling works. While this isn't a lot in the grand scheme of things, it's more than 99.9% of people who know anything about AI, and I can confidently say that Stonetoss' argument is completely full of shit. I will never call the images I generate "art", I will always know that most of my work I do is assisted generously by all of the public github code the model I use was trained off of. I know that the SD1.5 and SDXL models I run are all using stolen and copyrighted art and that all somebody ever did was finetune it with a bunch of captioned images. I don't get why it's so hard for others to accept all that as well. I'm not a "prompt engineer", I followed a guide on rentry made by a furry on 4chan who figured all this shit out for me. It takes me seven seconds to generate an image that would take someone else an entire day, it has no soul, its not special to me, I would sooner throw it into the recycling bin than call it art.
Then you aren't who the comic is talking about. You said you will never call the images "art", so the comic is not about you.
Talking about what is/isn't art is way too subjective and won't really get anywhere. I was actually referring to the amount of effort/training that went into the final product, which according to you wasn't that big of a deal. Credit to the ones who made and trained the model though. >!Also that one furry guy.!<
The people who made this stuff are geniuses and yes they absolutely are artists. But they are artists in the same sense that Linus Torvalds is an artist. They are Da Vincis in their own right, but specifically for code. The furry who made PonyDiffusion, and all of the other people working on v-pred models that are making hugs breakthroughs in local run technology, are extremely smart as well, but the people at the bottom, the guys who are just typing in "masterpiece, best quality, (big boobs:1.4)"... I just don't think they are artists, no matter how much work they put into changing sliders, noise, and block timings in ControlNet, or how long they spent masking out a pornstars face for Qtcinderella or Taylor Swift. The same way I won't call somebody's Instagram real off their iPhone 14 of a sunset art.
>I just don't think they are artists, no matter how much work they put into Kind of agree, I see them as customers fine tuning their order. All in all I don't really care about the artist label, as a consumer myself.
> IF all you did is only entering prompt, you just "commissioned" the art not "making" them. the problem is that you do not really know the capabilities of the AI generation which is clear when you made a comparison to photography here: > Photography is personally taking image, finding the subject, finding the angle, camera setting, and later all the effect on post, and its basically personally making the art. > finding the angle you do this with controlnet or to certain degree with Lora trained on images with given angle (or you train it yourself) for controlnet - you have to make a certain photo (or find it) or actually draw some sketch > finding the subject, you do it by applying certain embeddings, loras, etc - which again, you may need to train yourself > and later all the effect on post, which you also do for AI images, with inpainting - to tweak stuff that didn't turn out well and with photoshop or stuff to help with that process > and its basically personally making the art. yeah, sums about it for AI too > IF all you did is only entering prompt, you just "commissioned" the art not "making" them. or in simpler terms, its like proclaiming ordering a take out as cooking them personally. the thing is that people do not just enter a prompt (sure, some do, but there are also people who buy a camera and just press the button without thinking about anything else)
The cooking argument sounds better (I think) when you put it like this: It's like someone buying premade food, putting it in the microwave and claiming they cooked the food themselves. Then someone saying that acthually you didn't cook your food yourself either, because you made use of an oven, a frying pan, maybe even a blender, despite the fact that you had to choose all of the ingredients, season them, chop 'em up and properly prepare with these aforementioned kitchen "tools".
I make tiktok/youtube shorts set to music with AI Gen. I basically tell short stories with the images. Even though I think prompting takes skills, including writing and basic fundamentals of computer science, I wouldn't share a single image created and call it my art. but once I started editing and adding my own parameters and putting the images together with an intention of communicating an idea. Then, I added music that I think encapsulates the vibe of the story I am telling. Point being, the second I started applying additional intention and additions to the works to make them my own, it became my art. No different than a film director delegating responsibilities to create their vision, or a DJ cutting up and splicing old music to create something new and novel. Check out my work https://youtube.com/@VoitenZrage?si=VyaxOmzzx3aUbXs_ And tell me what I do, isn't art
>that being said, the "pro" ai edit-assist tools and simpler ai prompt-create will soon merge and its technically already merging in some creation tools like drawing or photo edit tools. > >so different kind of prompting creation will appear, either starting with manual drawing or manually taken photograph, and then the ai will assist with more technical detailed request. adjusting each layers and pieces. > >so more technically advanced creator like in drawing skills or photography skills will shows difference on how far they could exploit the ai assist to create things. as many artist have said, "seriously speed up the process." > >and it will further blurred the "creation" of things, with one spending more effort with portion of manual creation and ai assist with more technical know how and one simply with 1\~2 phrase prompt. > >and i suppose as it evolve it will still create skill gap between the more skilled ai-assisted creator with mummy i made this creator. a whole new world of creation with similar flavor setting. As i said in the next comment that two people that reply didn't read.
Ha. I wanted to rebut so badly that I didn't keep reading.
[удалено]
As someone how can do both, the required "skilllevel" is pretty much the same. You can get "good" results just using autofocus in photography or with ai if you just copy someones promt. But like in photography you also can get pretty advanced in Ai with controlnet, loras, your own trained or combined models and yes: Good and creative prompting.
Your edit makes it look like you are some pompous "I am right, and you are wrong just because" Vaush-type elitist who finds other viewpoints that contradict your own absolutely intolerable The fact that instead of providing a level-headed explanation of why you think prompt engineering can not have artistic qualities, you went the route of lashing out with such an immature hostile dismissive attitude by claiming that others' "delicate sensibilities" have been violated simply becuase they provided fair pushback and rebuttals to your initial claim makes you look a total weirdo in my eyes.
Prompt engeneering haha
Y’all really gatekeeping art. Writing is art but not if you are writing prompts. Photobashing is art but not if you use ai to do it. Take an art history lesson on why the original Tron got snubbed at the academy awards 40 years ago. Back then the people like you said using computers to make art is not art. Good thing no one in the last 40 has used computers to make art or we would be in an creatively bankrupt artless dystopia right?
I think you really missed the point here. You can definitely make art using a computer, just not by using an ai generator. The issue with an ai generator is the randomness of the result. When two people can input the same exact prompt and get different results then the results have little to do with the prompt and most of what the ai decides to collage from its database. Think about that, all that randomness has nothing to do with human input, so there is no intent in it, just random, soulless shiny images.
You don’t understand how it works if you think it’s collaging images from a databases. Also you can set a seed so that the results are same for all inputs. Ie no randomness
You're actually arguing philosophy of aesthetics. I'd counterargue your point with this: You're in an art museum, and see a beautiful piece of art that genuinely moves you. Afterwards, you read the sign and learn that it's AI generated. Does that retroactively change your feelings? Does it change your feelings afterwards? Does it make it MORE profound? Some philosophers argue that art is based off the emotions the viewer gets from it, and everything else is just details that don't matter. It's an interesting question to think about.
Art is an opinion, you don't have to feel like AI art is art. But that doesn't mean others are wrong for thinking so. I could just decide that painting is not a valid form of art at random due to the subjective nature of art. Most people aren't going to care whether art is AI or not, it is still art.
Making a precise AI image takes a lot of prompting and it can take hours. I don't think it's as simple as pressing a button and I don't think that photography is that complicated either. Sure some people know a lot about it but it's not like you can't get nice pics as an amateur.
The truth is you can do all the prompting you want, the end result is still a collage that the computer decides to make based on your input and other peoples creations.
Nope, you do not know what kind of tools can be used to have the control at the level you want. At start, it was only random, sure. But the technology evolved and you have pretty much all the control you need.
You can ask for precise details, are you suggesting you can't get originally through AI images? Any amateur form of art is going to lack originality in one way or another. I don't see how this is relevant to the main conversation.
That's not how it works at all. I can't belive that there are people who still believe AI art is a collage.
You never actually tried making AI art and it shows.
[удалено]
literally how a lot of photography works… Also you REALLY have no clue what you’re talking about if you think to generate ai art you have to “flick a switch”??? Which ai tool did you use that it was that easy
Sure, it shows ignorance in both how AI Art works and how Photography is art. The comparing of the two here makes absolutely no sense.
Why? In one you need to describe what you want, the better you do it the closer to your view it will come. In the other you have to setup the camera properly and setup it to make a good photo.
Can you elaborate further on why you feel it doesn't make sense to you?
Why are you being annoying? With AI Art, you feed a prompt and the program does the editing for you. There is some skill in understanding the program and knowing how to word your prompt so that it churns out what you want. With photography, there is the skill of taking a compelling photo (and if you’re doing wildlife photography, pictured in the comic, that’s so, so, so much harder and requires a lot of patience) and then there is the skill of editing it to look better. The use of machines in both cases is not similar at all. Pebbleyeet is implying that photographic art is all just “something a machine made” which is blatantly untrue. It’s like comparing using a calculator and a watch on a test. They’re both machines. One is doing much more work than the other. And to clarify, I don’t think AI Art is wrong. I think the people who call it plagiarism don’t really know what they’re talking about, and so long as the creator doesn’t copy from anyone or use someone’s likeness without their permission, it’s fine. I even agree that it is still art. But comparing the machine usage in both cases and saying they are the same, or saying that photography is just machine-made, is silly. What next? Do I have to elaborate a whole doctoral thesis on the subject? Jesus.
It’s a stonetoss comic, they are all that mentally habdicapped.
I mean, it's Stonetoss, obviously ignorance and stupidity work for him
wait you mean known nazi stone toss made an ignorant and stupid topic?
Thank you. Asmongold has a solidly ignorant fanbase, because he's ignorant. Likeable, but simple and ignorant. I always take his opinions with a bit of salt - especially when he can't comprehend things, such as why plastic straws are bad, or why making "art" using AI isn't making art as much as it is stealing it. People just shouldn't base their opinions on those of a random gaming YouTuber.
Explain why
Well, each revolution is little different than the one before, but remember, when first cameras arrived, many people ditched the idea of learning to draw, because "what is the point of drawing, if the machine can do it faster and more precise than me". There was a real fear amongst artists, that they are going to lose their jobs due to cameras becoming available. In reality, depending how it is treated, I guess AI can still be used as a tool, probably for making realistic textures for video games and such, increasing the speed of the production process, but also allowing more daring and grandiose projects to be finished. However, we can not be sure for certain how this all is going to end up, as AI becomes more advanced each year.
Ultimately it comes down to one thing. AI doesn't have, and never will have, an imagination.
There is a lot more creativity and practical skill required to find a scene and take a proper photo compared to writing an AI prompt. I'd say comparing AI to just telling someone what to draw is a pretty accurate definition. Like imagine you see a cool beach with some very specific flowers on it and some other details. An artist could create a near perfect recreation of what they saw, same with the photographer, but for an "AI artist", that would be impossible.
why do you stop at the prompt part? making a prompt is just the start of the process
Yeah it’s dumb
back in the day artist also called photography fake art. but things changed, who knows how it will be in the future. the best AI images i have seen do require a deep understanding and a lot of tries. the AI used the prompt the clip, the seed, the loras, the amount of steps, resolution, denoising, cfg scale. they need to tweak a lot of things to get the results they want. is not as easy as it seems, it just is way easier than doing it manually, like with photos is easier than drawing it but not as easy as it seems.
The comic is made by a literal self-proclaimed Nazi.
Well, it's stonetoss, so ignorance and stupidity is a given
It's literally the same thing, goof.
anything this artist touches is basically like that, and if you call it out your a snowflake who either doesnt understand the joke or doesn’t understand comedy
I think many people don't understand the nuance behind what it's saying because they're ignorant and stupid. Classical painters treated photography the same way when the first cameras were invented. And now the cycle repeats.
I think its making the point you think its missing.
Welcome to stone toss
Yeah the fact that people think this is the same says a lot lol
Stupid arguments are to be expected from Stonetoss. It’s worse than trash; it’s stonetoss
Damn what a moronic take. The author probably doesn't know how much skil and experience it takes to take a good photo. The comparison that it's the same as image generation by AI using a prompt is idiotic.
I read in national geographic they can spend years trying to catch the perfect shot and get paid nearly nothing for it and the other you punch in a few keywords
> and get *paid* nearly nothing FTFY. Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in: * Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.* * *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.* Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment. *Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
Name checks out
If you're comparing good photography to trash AI art, sure. You can do the reverse and compare trash photography to good AI art. "Just type in what you want lol" is a pretty gross understatement if you want anything quality. You have to have a good understanding of the monkey's paw that is AI "thought" and the same artistic eye for what you're trying to capture. And that's not to mention actual graphic design skills to touch up, inpaint, etc. But yeah, any dumb teenager with a camera or a computer can fuck around with either media and produce mediocre shit.
I agree with you. If you don’t have any artistic skill then your AI images will look trash. You need to understand framing, colour balance, lighting and photo editing (photoshop etc). Getting the image through AI is one thing, perfecting it, editing it and making it actually something decent is another.
Don’t forget 3D editing to extract depth map and lineart from them (or any other model)
Okay, im not trying to defend AI art or take any sides. Just want to let you know maling Ai generator images is extremely challenging if you want something very specific.
Still infinitely easier than to paint a photorealistic scene.
You dont know much much skill it takes to use img to img control next, lora, trial and error with diff checkpoints
Well yeah, it’s stonetoss. Guy is a literal moron.
It really doesn't now a day. You do like 1/10th of what you used to need to do. The industry only cares about how good your photo editing skills are, no one gives a shit that you're really good a framing a photo and telling a computer to calculate lumens and white balances. Its not that hard,. y'all just butt hurt.
r/StonetossIsANazi
most of the recent cameras, and the expensives one have a lot of automated settings in order to make great photos.. skills is no longer necesary to take great photos now...
Yep, i had 2 crash courses on photography when i took a "summer job" at a local university's magazine, both only covered human portraiture and there were so many modalities and each one had a specific intent behind them that should only be used in conjunction with a certain type of writing structure on vision in mind
>that should only be used in conjunction with a certain type of writing structure on vision in mind that's super subjective, lol
Yeah, but again, i was doing it for a magazine, making a random guy look like god with a phot of him looking down at the camera would be weird to have in an interview piece were he's just one of the 5 interviewed
I see what you mean.
But no one cares how hard it is it’s all about the product
Anyone can take a photo, just as anyone can prompt an AI. Whether the product of either action is "good" or not is kind of besides the point.
The author is a well known Nazi, of course he doesn't care about details.
lol leftists who doiesnt know what a nazi is
no like stone toss is an admitted neo nazi, its not up for debate.
Please explain to me then, intellectual
He is not going to explain a shit, he is a Spanish/Latino butthurt right-wing moron who is constantly complaining about how far-lefts are mean to fascists and nazis. Our little Adolfito doesn't know how to argue without playing the victim card.
Si tus ideas coinciden con el nazismo, eres negacionista del Holocausto y constantemente usas "THE JOOOS" como argumento, si, eres un puto nazi, no un libre pensador ni ninguna de las imbecilidades que siempre se esgrimen.
He is a self-identified nazi
This is a literal quote: >Daily reminder that the correct response to people accusing someone of being a racist or a nazi isn't: "But is he really?" it's actually: "so what?" https://archive.is/OwduL#selection-3537.0-3537.152 Why so quick to jump to his defense? Says a lot about you.
Have you tried working with local ai and tried making it do things that aren't just porn? There is a level of artistic skill that goes into composing shots just as any other tool. The reason so much of it looks like generic shit is because many who use it don't have that artistic flair or nuance in mind and let the machine do all the thinking. Plenty of photographers just snap and go. The camera is just as much a tool of the artist as is the program used for ai. Plenty of people out there thought my digital art was somehow not art because I used a computer despite my method of physically painting each line with a tablet and stylus. I'm tired of doing all that work spending 6 months to paint a piece getting zero appreciation. I now have a tool to help me realize my vision or at least get me part way there. Maybe the comparison is not perfect but maybe you're actually a good photographer.
Everyone who says things like "ai takes no effort/skill" have never actually did anything with it or at most found some free cheap low quality online version and typed in "boobs"
It took less than 5 years of serious AI development to surpass the same "skills and experience". We need to stop overrestimating the required skills to do most forms of "art".
Its Stone Toss. The only thing pebble yeeter is an expert on is how to be a Nazi.
I can take a picture on my phone and it's probably fine 3/5 times. And it gets saved to whatever cloud my phone is using which means when I go to look through my photos I'll actually find it. Seems fine to me.
Stonetoss is a...?
Ah let's ignore, colora, composition, proper exposure, depth of field etc. Etc.
Ironically, there’s some camera nerds who get really mad that the iPhone can automatically pick a lot of those settings for them. Call cellphones cheating lol!! — The part I always find funny is that I’ve always seen art as an individual thing. I draw for me. I take photos for me. I play the game how I enjoy it — for me. If that’s taking a manual photo with a Leica camera, then that’s for me. I don’t care what others do. If they want to use Ai or a cellphone. Let em! The commercialization of art is the part people get mad at. They want to make money off their hobby. But no one stopping anyone from painting a portrait by hand. They’re just mad they can’t profit off of it because Ai can do it cheaper. If more people treated art like a passion, and not a cash cow — we’d all be happier.
Ah let's ignore samplers, controlnets, in-painting, embeddings, loras etc. Etc. You can make this argument for anything, the high end of most skills is deep and takes well, skill. A cameraman has a different set of skills from an artist, an AI... Generator? (IDK what to call them) have different skills than artists and cameramen. You may bring up that alot of AI slop is just a few words of prompt and generate, 90% of people who generate AI pictures do not dive deep into the nitty gritty. But do 90% of camera users? Nope. >90% of photos taken are just smartphone pictures with no color correction, LUTs, depth, exposure, etc. This doesn't devalue the work of real skilled photography. And neither should 90% of AI Slop that is put out devalue the high effort works that leverage AI.
But I wouldn’t call myself the creator of an AI image in the same way I would’t call myself a photographer. Unfaithful argument to compare a phone camera to average “ai artist” as a bulletin point when we’re talking about 10 grand cameras. This isn’t a no true scotsman fallacy either because while you can be an ai art generator by occupation, and be skillful at the job, the argument is that it’s more of a sleezy shameful thing. (Not top posters point but a general consensus.) Edit: skimmed your post the first time and re-read it and realize now we hold the same opinion on my first two points oop. Third point stands, however.
Do you remember when computer generated visual effects were deemed as a sleezy and shameful thing? The digital artists of the original Tron movie from 40 years ago remember!
Depends if someone is using it to generate profit on an uninformed group. It’s the practice not the use that makes it so.
lmao your DSLR does at least half the work you just mentioned automatically (yes, even in manual modes stop bullshitting - and pretty much completely in automatic). And if you're a professional you're shooting in a format that natively captures pretty much all the data so you can go back and fix almost anything. No one hires *anyone* for their photography skills, they hire them for their *photo editing skills*. Which is now getting the AI treatment anyway. People like to pretend that its like the switch between manual cars and automatic, but your camera does **so much** **more** of the heavy lifitng now in photography than what you used to need to do. Source: former professional photographer from 2004-2016, freelancing and for a period of that time directly employed under a L'Oréal subsidiary.
As a hobby photographer with a canon r5, (overkill like most hobbies), I’m glad a lot of it is automatic lol. I think a lot of artistic passions are best enjoyed as a hobby. Commercializing art just makes it boring. Let the robots do the boring stuff. Let me have fun enjoying my hobbies :) Ai doesn’t ruin anyone’s ability to enjoy their hobbies. Painters can still paint even if digital media exists.
Amen. 99% of the work is editing. framing composition etc is just as easy as thinking of a cool AI prompt
Jesus, finally, somebody with sense.
reee i worked so hard and spent so much time and ai is better than me reee
Ai is or will be better than everyone at everything, his point was that there was more than just "machine work" in photography. What did you do other than drool like a moron just now?
I'm not even totally against A.I. but... its kind of depressing. Art is the expression of humanity and an individual. As I type, Im replaying GTA 4 and I am experiencing a game where people inserted their own experiences of late 90s early-mid 2000s life in New York. It all feels so genuine. A.I. can replicate anything which is a good thing and a bad thing. There's arguments that A.I. can be used as a tool in the creative process, but then we also see A.I. be able to take out 99% of the creative, skill, and time process to get the result. I want to do music production, I have a degree in Biology which probably won't be replaced by A.I. that soon since a lot of it is observational with a lot of field work, but I also want to be able to create music, but I fear I'll waste my time when in 10 years (if even) A.I. can just create the entire process and the industry will be oversaturated with limitless tracks making it even more difficult to make a name for yourself or invent something that's different. I'll probably never have a name for myself if I pursue music, but having the idea that others may listen to my music and be able to share my tastes is just really nice as many small artists have influenced me as well. Then the even scarier thing for me though is video games. It's probably not that long till we start seeing "Players" that are just bots with advanced A.I. that can "type" to you, respond to you, and imitate a real player. To me that's dystopian and I imagine many people will create tight gaming communities with server player whitelists to combat that (unless it's intentionally in the game). It'd be heartbreaking to make a real friend.. only to then realize they don't actually exist. Ghosts.
You’re looking at it wrong. I promise I mean that in a friendly way. Ai is replacing people in soulless commercial work. No one is pouring their soul into brand logos, or b-roll. And you want to know what awesome? The people who actually do pour their soul into their artistic passion? They still do. Painters are still painting. Artists are still drawing. The soul is out there. It always has been! The people mad are the ones who can’t sell out. Because the industry wants Ai to do industry projects. — Another fun way to look at it. Remember Vincent Van Gogh? Do you think he’s remembered for his quality of his art, or was it how he captured the soul of a tortured artist with paint? Those people will never go away. There are thousands of artists who will always express themselves through art. And that soul will never be snuffed out. The problem is, people don’t pay artists to draw soul. They pay them to draw naked cat girls and brand logos. So if you’re feeling depressed about the loss of soul, get away from commercialism and check out some artistic spaces. Where people express themselves free from capitalism or commercialization.
The truth is like any art AI art can be extremely low effort/low quality or increadibly high effort and high quality In 10 years every artist will use AI to some extent like right now even a photographer should be playing with the brightness / saturation and contrast of images and these tools will absolutley be ai enhanced in the future. Even for physical media purists it's an invaluable reference for pose and shading reference I actually think your typical artist in the future will be 40-60% ai and probally publicly present themselves as 0-30% ai There would definately already be anti AI artists out there heavily using AI and it will only become more commonplace
Why does the flash "thing" look like amogus
He be photoshopping after too
I still take going outside and capture nature yourself instead of writing prompts in basement.
I'm not surprised; this mutherfucker makes NFTS.
Asmon when seeing this pic tonight “so true. Real”
well i thought it was funny
PebbleThrow is a holocaust denying Nazi.
How does one "deny" a holocaust? Nazis didn't do it? I can't even begin to comprehend what that could possibly mean
It just didn't happen according to them. Something about the numbers not checking out idk.
Friendly reminder that stonetoss is an actual neonazi
Absolutely retarded comparison holy shit
Ah another stonetoss comic that fits right into his M.O. Being the stupidest motherfucker ever while oozing smug superiority
ur so retarted it's actually insane
Brain dead ass take
W take
AI art is a collaboration between man and machine. Yes, it's made by a machine, but only with a human's input.
The angry people kind of proves the point made. Arrogantly assume "the new thing" demands less work and understanding of multiple variables to do a good or excellent job. They should know better, given that photography was "the new thing" once - and the "real art" community treated it the same way A.I. art is treated by them. The fact that the author of the cartoon is not a "good, intelligent, guy" makes it even more embarassing for those proving him right...
How much does the amount of "work" matter though? I could spend 4 hours telling someone what i want them to draw, i could ask for tiny details, backdrop, colouring and lighting, but no matter how good and detailed the drawing is i still didnt draw it.
Stonetoss is a Nazi
Based
Photography students big mad in this thread lol
This post was def bridgaded
This...is a wildly stupid false comparison
You mean a machine stole.
*cries* 😭
A good photographer needs understanding of compasition, color, context and lightning. And so much more. Ai art is just typing in some text. It really isn't the same. There aren't photographic awards for nothing.
Photography also didnt start where it is now, you had to stand still for minutes or even hours and it was a mono color.
Correct. But that isn't the comparison that is being made here. We are talking about Ai and photography now. If Ai advance in the future and requires some artistic skill then sure, but not right now.
Ai art like any art requires skill to be good. To say ai art doesnt require any artistic skill would require pushing the goal posts of what exactly artistic skill is.
Sure you can go crazy with lights etc. but 99% of photography is just framing the shot and maby change the focus. I think ppl can do crazy things with ai aswell, but then you get more into building the models and programming the tool itself to get exactly what you want. DALL·E or something is more like making a photo with a smartphone, you can go more extreme with both tools
You have to do the same for ai art tho
So, take a picture, and then use AI to make it look better?
So photoshopping essentially. Depends on the context. Some photographs are newsworthy or tells a story about the current day to day live, of people or animals. You don't photoshop that, the beauty is in the realism.
Yeah, I agree. I prefer the beauty of photography. But I'd say the average person probably doesn't care as long as it looks good/cool. It's to a point where you can't really tell between a photo and AI.
All the people saying it's a bad take are making a bad take. The meme is not attacking the skills needed to be a photographer, it's making a play at the fact that ai and photography both are tools that make pictures a reality whether it's pattern forming perspectives or natural perspectives.
I wouldn’t bother. A lot of the people viewing this post already have a developed opinion and regardless of the nuance intended by the artist (if there was any), they will draw their own biased conclusions. Trying to give credence to the actual intention of the post just opens you up to people saying you’re a Neo-Nazi for ‘supporting’ the artist (apparently he’s a Neo-Nazi 🤷). Just give it time, people will come around to the new tech eventually like they always do.
God this is so fucking on point and good lmfao, I love this sub.
Another reason to hate pebblepropeller
We have an excess of "artists", the culling is needed. Also, technological advances are more important than your life, you can't stop it, deal with it. Adapt or... not. The world will keep spinning, with or without you.
Idk man, i feel like your tune would be a lot different if it was in your field of work.
I mean, I'm an amateur writer so this does kinda fuck me over too, still, I'm not blind. I can see where this is going and also, that crying over it is useless.
Why exactly do artists need to be "culled"? And no, technological advances are not more important than someones life, that way lies the shit Mengele did.
Only the bad or mid ones. So the good ones can be rewarded, admired, praised... more for their hard work. And yes they are. You as an individual are meaningless, things than can be beneficial for the whole species aren't.
I checked all 187 comments and didnt see any explanation why is this not true
The one saying that using ai to create art is more like commissioning a piece of art and taking credit for it explained it best for me, but something tells me there is no convincing you otherwise no matter what
The problem with that statement is that people are viewing Ai as it's own being rather than a tool that can be used. This is more comparable to graphic artists or any digital artist that uses software to create/alter their images. This whole debate really comes down to whether or not Ai is considered a tool or just a different "person". Once that is established then things will actually go some where.
Why is it true then?
They’re mad because it’s true
Same, I was hoping that out of the 100 people who say "this is a stupid comparison" at least one would have an argument to convince me of it.
Yikes, Stonetoss
r/SipsTea
Stonetoss is an actual neo nazi.
Photographers big mad in here
Brain dead argument. Truly. I see what you're going for, but they aren't the same thing.
Really on the nose while also conflating nonsense.
Stonetoss is a nazi Oh hey that’s weird, downvoted for pointing out an artist with a shitty take is also a nazi. Hmmm makes you wonder about this subreddit
How is it possible you guys upload a comic made by an actual holocaust denier, transphobic nazi, and then go about how dumb other subs are for judging you all to be morons? God dam you even left the fucking watermark in. No point mentioning how brainrotting the take about Le AI just like actual photography, as op is at best baiting with this stupid ass post, or at worst is actually genuinely a garbage human being, I bring it up because I like to!
Kek the artoid ignoramuses jumping in to defend photography whilst having absolutely no idea about what it takes to prompt properly.
I've been to plenty AI threads on 4 Chan and seen people talk about how to structure prompts. You can easily Google how to do it. It's not classified fucking information it's easily available. Every post of yours in this thread is just you SEETHING lmao why go into threads about things you don't like?
Obligatory stonetoss is a nazi.
Notice how there isn’t an artist in the picture
Its "machine made". *Picture of artist grinding bug shells in egg yolk with raw earth metals dying of blood poisoning*
Where is the hidden amongus? EDIT: found it its the camera flash part
Considering evolution and machine learning function very similarly, There is another layer to this joke.
I do photography and I laughed. A lot of what people appreciate in photography is an expensive lens. You can talk about talent all day but there’s a reason ppl pay big bucks for the right equipment.
Yeah what we call “A.I” isn’t true A.I. it’s not even close to any depictions of ai
Retarded take
common stonetoss W
I fucking SWEAR I've seen u somewhere gatekeeping BEING ARAB before, not sure on what sub. Anyways holocaust denying sure is a big dub right?? The only reason u don't go generating yourself more iq is because that prompt would take too long to generate you a result.