>>108675250
why don't you feel threatened by it?

>>108675250
>I'm also an artist
do you know why artfags tend to make repulsive looking drawing?
>meme comic by normal people: stickmen
>meme comic by artfags: stickmen that look gross

idk but lately I've been noticing that art drawn by biological males and art drawn by biological females have enough differences that I can tell which gender the artist is. I have no one to share that tidbit with, so there you go 4chan.

File: IMG-20260409-WA0000.jpg (1.1 MB)

1.1 MB JPG

You say the truth. No ones would have paid for 90% of artists because or they are so fucked up in their esthetics and worlview they think they're superior by learning jewish theory bullshit while giving you drawings worth the shit your kid do at School and looking down on you (the famous you can't understand)
Or they are really really that bad and they should have choose something else.

If you produce gems you'll find someone ready to pay,i was even considering it but when i started to search i didn't find anyone with a kind of Gérôme style and Charging less than 1000 euros. Plus i wanted something like antisemitic christian. Ultimately i started to practice drawing this year cause of this situation,that sucks because i know i don't have the talent and i don't have time to practice enough to get good.

>>108675269
Why would I? I have actual creativity and can come up with actually interesting concepts and execute them. It's like oil painters autisticly screeching at photography because it can recreate the world perfectly. Or even traditional illustrators losing their shit when photoshop and illustrator came out.

>>108675276
They lack the technical skills and refuse to practice enough to get better?

>>108675303
Check out the Andrew Loomis books, you can find them online for free and you can learn to draw quickly with them.

>>108675352

hey thank you very much ,like it's style :)
i was practising with charle bargue course.I also agree art is not dead at all and AI can't threaten a mind with imagination.
how could ai picture the pictures i have in my head ? eh imagine trying to describe to ai Gustave Doré illustration of Beatrice and Dante looking at the sky with all the angels.

File: facetest.jpg (95.9 KB)

95.9 KB JPG

>>108675504
Exactly, art is not only about technical skills or making pretty pictures, its about inspiring and coming up with new worlds and ideas that no one has imagined yet. GenAI can't really do that because it produces and average of everything that exists so it's very hard for it to actually create something novel, to be fair it's hard for people to create something novel as well and that's what separates the bad "artists" from the good "artists"

>>108675282
And how exactly can you tell which is which?

>>108675637
Human artists don't do anything else or do it better.

GenAI can potentially indeed do everything very skilled human artists might do.

>>108675637
human art is also the result of what that person has seen and experienced. i'm not convinced it's even possible to identify a truly new idea, everything is derivative.
that's not to say current ai models are exactly the same as any human artist, that doesn't really make sense, an ai model can only be fairly compared to a single human artist

in terms of practical usage, how generic an ai generated/assisted image looks also strongly comes down to the person using the tools. if you give it vague instructions it will give you the most generic result naturally. like if you say "a cat", you will get the most common depiction of the most common kind of cat, as you didn't ask for anything else. ai art tools can only replace the drawing part, it can't be creative for you, you still need to come up with something for it to draw yourself.

>>108675744
>. i'm not convinced it's even possible to identify a truly new idea
Absurdly stupid take, humans have always had new ideas

>>108675760
that's not what i said. i said the issue is identifying them. as in like how do you actually prove an idea has truly never been thought of before and more importantly isn't completely a result of many combined experiences? that is, could the idea truly not have resulted from what you already knew?

basically i'm sceptical that an AI model couldn't come up with what appears to be a new idea, something apparently not in its' training data, because i think the issue is more complex than it seems.

File: teapotheadphones.jpg (98 KB)

98 KB JPG

>>108675682
except come up with an interesting and original idea.

>>108675744
GenAI has no agency and can't come up with original ideas on its own. It still needs a human driving force behind it. Also if something is not in it's dataset it can't create it. I tried making a teapot wearing headphones a while back with genAI and it couldn't do it so I just made it myself in 3D. Maybe models can do it now but last year they couldn't do it.

File: qwenimageteapotheadphoness.png (692.5 KB)

692.5 KB PNG

>>108675914
This is the power of genAI....

File: qwenimageteapotheadphoness2.png (710.9 KB)

710.9 KB PNG

>>108675914
I gave the image to Gemini to generate a prompt and then I gave the prompt to qwen image...

File: 1739535007.png (1.2 MB)

1.2 MB PNG

>>108675914
I'm supposed to feel threatened by this?

>>108675846
>that's not what i said
It's LITERALLY A QUOTE

File: 1739535033.png (1.3 MB)

1.3 MB PNG

>>108675914
If it's not in the dataset it will never do it well

File: 1737379076.png (1.3 MB)

1.3 MB PNG

>>108675914
It just can't do it, but I can.

File: kreateapotfail.jpg (45 KB)

45 KB JPG

>>108675914
not one model has done this correctly

>>108675250
generative ai is pretty cool but the problem is its just rolling the dice on the model dialing in the hyperparameter address to find what you're looking for. in that sense its trash, because you aren't composing anything, you are just pulling a lever on a slot machine. but what i've found works really well is simply roughing in what you want in a sketch/3d model, and then having the ai use that as a skeleton to draw over, similar to the loomis method of figure drawing, where you first rough in the 3d primitives, and then refine them. when doing that, its pretty cool. i hope tools grow to facilitate that more in the future.

File: _76684f2b-2f6f-45b1-81c4-ad4f807399b6.jpg (172.7 KB)

172.7 KB JPG

>>108675637
define novelty
faggot

File: moreaifail.jpg (73.1 KB)

73.1 KB JPG

>>108675914
I rest my case.

>>108676033
a diffusion model doesn't speak english. it can't use logic or reason. if you give it a rough in, it will be able to render what you want much easier

File: IMG_1585.gif (354.5 KB)

354.5 KB GIF

>>108676041
Hey faggot, did you not read this thread, a teapot wearing headphones, no model can do it because no image of it exist in its dataset. I had to create it myself because it's a novel image.

Now do us a favor and kill yourself.

>>108675340
Yes and acrylics were seen as cheating at their inception. Yet, I don't quite remember reading about mass layoffs due to the camera or photoshop being invented. Previous changes created more talent and jobs, but the wealthyfags are using AI as a scapegoat to cull their workforces. We will see if this eventually bites them in the ass.
It is funny the "entire art community" is worried when most of them are not the artists being replaced. Only corpo designers and pornographers should be shaking. Everyone else is losing sales because, surprise, luxury purchases in a downward facing economy are the first to go.
>t. Writes generative code and prints with pen plotter
I don't even try to sell man I just do my thang.

File: IMG_9787.gif (624.6 KB)

624.6 KB GIF

>>108676047
>your using it wrong, you actually have to do most of the work for it to generate correctly
kill yourself

File: Generated Image April 24, 2026 - fuck you retarded nigger.png (1.7 MB)

1.7 MB PNG

>>108676055
yes, you are a schizo spammer who can't prompt

define novelty

>>108676061
>"artist" is upset the magic robot won't do all the work for him perfectly

what an artist the world loses

>>108675250
They don't feel like special snowflakes anymore when a computer can produce better art than them in a few seconds.

>>108676042
>the headband loops over the teapot's glass handle
i'd be confused by this bit as well

>>108675250
>>108675340
>Why would I? I have actual creativity and can come up with actually interesting concepts and execute them.
pyw

File: IMG_0326.png (1.1 MB)

1.1 MB PNG

>>108676056
>Yet, I don't quite remember reading about mass layoffs due to the camera or photoshop being invented.
That's because you weren't born or too young at the time unless you're some super old boomer but yes there a lot of autistic screeching, I remember it when 3d was becoming mainstream. "it's cheating", "it's not real art", "the computer made it", same story different flavor.

>>108676064
wow, instead of dragging his wooden leg to complain, this guy actually nailed it. i guess he is a better artist than the other anon after all

File: IMG_8752.gif (1.3 MB)

1.3 MB GIF

>>108676064
That is not one teapot made of glass floating in a cornel lightbox. You have to follow the spec given to you retard.

>>108676064
Why do the teapots have legs?

>>108676079
He didn't nail shit

>>108676083
>novelty is ONLY my autistic litmus test that AI can't get EXACTLY PERFECT
autistic isn't artistic

File: IMG_8484.gif (2.2 MB)

2.2 MB GIF

>>108676087
>I couldn't generate the image using genAI so I will call you autistic

>>108676085
he nailed your faggot ass to a cross. cope rabbi

>>108676078
>I remember it when 3d was becoming mainstream. "it's cheating", "it's not real art", "the computer made it", same story different flavor.
I lived through most of it, and I don't remember that. at least the conversation wasn't about "cheating" or "real art", just a matter of preference and the new thing pushing out the "superior", older thing, maybe
the closest I can remember is traditional 2d animation vs 3d animation. which, honestly, is a valid concern
if you enjoy the look of traditional hand drawn animation, 3d dominating the market and making trad 2d economically unfeasible isn't good

File: novelty.png (1.4 MB)

1.4 MB PNG

>>108676091
yes, sperg

define novelty

File: IMG_3468.gif (914.6 KB)

914.6 KB GIF

>>108676092
>client asks for something very specific
>give something completely different than what the client wants
Wow, yea you totally got me!

File: IMG_0881.gif (998.5 KB)

998.5 KB GIF

>>108676121
Again why does it have legs. You're supposed to create the image that was asked for an not freestyle some hallucinated legs.

The client wants a float transparent teapot with some tea in cornel light box wearing headphones. No legs!

>define novelty
Since you are too retarded to use a dictionary let me do it for you.

novelty
/nŏv′əl-tē/
noun
The quality of being novel; newness.
Something new and unusual; an innovation.
A small mass-produced article, such as a toy or trinket.

>>108676078
Holy fuck reading comprehension when? I never said there wasn't screeching, I'm saying the screeching has some validity in this current moment. It's the entire crowd yelling as sectors within it actually lose work. Photoshop and the camera actually created more skills to learn and provide as a service, this is not true with AI tools.

File: teapot.png (318.1 KB)

318.1 KB PNG

>>108676133
I had to do a lot of complicated prompt engineering, but I think I got it

>>108676147
No you're wrong it's the same thing. People screeeching about AI now are as dumb as the luddites who screeched at photoshop, cameras and 3D/CG, if the think otherwise you are retareded

>>108676165
>the luddites who screeched at photoshop, cameras and 3D/CG, if the think otherwise you are retareded
for instance? can you find me some old forum posts? usenet? anything that shows a trend and not a few isolated autists?

File: tea frog.png (1.2 MB)

1.2 MB PNG

>>108676133
novel teapots have legs. the "client" can use inpainting and AI tools to remove them (which are accessable to everyone and equitable) if they're such a sperg

art is about inspiring and coming up with new worlds and ideas that no one has imagined yet. novel teapots have legs

File: 17763508313310107361.jpg (190.5 KB)

190.5 KB JPG

>>108676064
holy shit you are like actually 90iq. and most anons in this thread are.
>>108676083
i think he's not capable of recognising what you're talking about. but know that you are not alone among these retards.

File: cornellightbox.jpg (4.2 KB)

4.2 KB JPG

>>108676152
Not a cornel lightbox and why is there a glass cup with a spoon? Also my bad but the teapot has to be a specific teapot, the Utah Teapot.

The cornell light box and the teapot are actually reference to CG/3D art and not chosen randomly, they have meaning

File: frog.png (2 MB)

2 MB PNG

>>108676176
>>108676182
>le slop teapot isn't perfect
HOW are you so autistic

>>108676173
>forum post from 1816 screeching at the invention of the camera

Invention of the camera;

Yes, there was significant initial pushback and skepticism from many artists and art critics when photography was invented in the 1820s-1830s.

Fear of Obsolescence: Many artists, especially portrait painters, feared photography would supersede traditional painting, making their skills obsolete. The artist Henrietta Clopath expressed this concern in 1901, stating some believed "the painter will have nothing more to do" once color photography became common.
Dismissal as "Mechanism": Critics derided photography as a mere thoughtless mechanical process, lacking the "refined feeling and sentiment" and "invention and feeling" that defined true art. An 1855 writer argued it could never rank higher than engraving because it lacked "something beyond mere mechanism at the bottom of it."
Mixed Reactions Among Artists: Reactions were varied:
Some portrait painters abandoned their craft to become photographers.
Others, like the renowned painter Ingres, publicly denied photography's artistic merit but secretly used it as a reference tool for poses and details.
Many established artists, like J.M.W. Turner, were initially unimpressed and continued their traditional work.
Catalyst for Modern Art: Ironically, by taking over the role of realistic representation, photography freed painters to explore new directions. This contributed to the rise of movements like Impressionism, where artists focused on subjective experience, light, and color—things cameras could not replicate—ultimately helping to catalyze modern art.

>>108676173
>retard wants forum posts from 1987

Photoshop resistance;

Initial Concerns and Criticism
Authenticity and Ethics: Many photographers and artists expressed concern that Photoshop would undermine the authenticity of photography, especially in journalism and news reporting. There were fears that manipulated images could deceive the public and erode trust.
"Digital Darkroom" Debate: While traditional darkroom techniques like dodging and burning were accepted, some purists argued that digital manipulation went too far, calling it "cheating" or "lazy" compared to analog methods.
Skill Devaluation: Similar to current debates about AI art, some artists worried that Photoshop would lower the barrier to entry and devalue traditional artistic skills, allowing less-skilled individuals to produce polished work quickly.
Industry Resistance
Editorial and Print Industries: Some editors and art directors initially resisted digital workflows. For example, in the early 1990s, comics and print media were slow to adopt digital coloring, preferring traditional dyes and hand separation.
Professional Skepticism: Longtime professionals in fields like photo retouching and commercial illustration were hesitant, viewing digital tools as a threat to established practices and craftsmanship.

File: cannedmusic.jpg (531.3 KB)

531.3 KB JPG

>>108676194
they used canned music though???

>>108676197
>>forum post from 1816 screeching at the invention of the camera
no shit
>>108676165
>the luddites who screeched at photoshop, ~cameras~ and 3D/CG, if the think otherwise you are retareded
the original post talked about much more recent stuff, you insufferable autist
>Yes, there was significant initial pushback and skepticism from many artists and art critics when photography was invented in the 1820s-1830s.
thanks for the chatgpt copy paste, though. very useful

File: IMG_8763.gif (2 MB)

2 MB GIF

>>108676191
How retarded are you, if you work in a creative industry and the client has a clear vision of what they want what makes you think they want you to freestyle in a bunch of hallucinations that they never asked for or wanted.

Imagine I ask you to make me a calculator app for my business but you vibe code in a fart sound every time you press the plus button and an orgasm sound every time you press the equal button. Would you ask the client how autistic they are for saying that's not what they asked for?

>>108676205
oh, you're just going to keep doing this lol
just admit that you are lazy and you're using "well, everyone complained about the car replacing the horse!" as a shortcut to avoid thinking about new things and shit on people who care about things more than you

File: IMG_4995.gif (1.9 MB)

1.9 MB GIF

>>108676218
>the original post talked about much more recent stuff, you insufferable autist

>Moving the goal posts I see while autisticly screeching

File: IMG_3571.gif (2 MB)

2 MB GIF

>>108676225
>just admit that you are lazy
I should admit I'm lazy for actually making the art myself instead of using genAI? Really?

>>108676231
people were posting on usenet groups in the late 80s, early 90s. it's not the broadest representation, it's mostly tech people and university students, but you can find late 80s discussions about the fucking nes and super mario bros.
certainly people, especially tech minded people, would be complaining about photoshop, digital art, 3d/cg, etc.

>>108675250
Their art is probably used for negative reinforcement when training.

File: fuck you nigger.png (1.3 MB)

1.3 MB PNG

>>108676224
here is your le 3D graphics reddit atheism teapot, saar

that will be thousand lakh rupee

>>108676249
I'm sorry I'm not an old ass boomer like you who used usenet in the 80s.

>>108676061
Did you just refuse to learn to use a new tool? What are you, some luddite oil painter screeching at photographers?

File: IMG_3139.jpg (33 KB)

33 KB JPG

>>108676278
This is the best one so far. Just remove the steam and make the lighting less blue, fix the spout problem because it's just wrong and it's good enough to give to a client. However in it's current state it's still not good enough.

>>108676085
The legs are the novelty created by ai.

>>108676295
faggot

File: 1739641701.png (1.7 MB)

1.7 MB PNG

>>108676287
No I actually like GenAI and I tried doing it with an image generator first but it couldn't so I had to do it myself. I can do art myself but I can also use comfyui with controlnets and all that jazz. I am literally in the center when it comes to the genAI debate. I like making fun of both sides.

Pic related my teapot with a controlnet and extra stylized

>>108676283
the point is that you can't just throw "oh, people complained about X and now everyone loves it, so we can ignore everyone who complains about Y"
if you're not an old ass boomer, you weren't there so you don't know. but you can still back your feelings up with facts by searching through what people were actually saying

>>108676306
I'm sorry, but your own requirements say it has to be a glass pot with tea inside. We'll have to go with another autist for this project.

File: processed_GrimeThumn (1).png (734.6 KB)

734.6 KB PNG

>>108676296
Client didn't ask for it, you don't get paid.

>>108676300
I know you are but what am I? Don't be bitter, it's almost good (the motto of genAI) but it still has glaring issues that makes it look like slop, just fix them if you can.

File: ezgif-844f5503f9d24ba2.jpg (35.2 KB)

35.2 KB JPG

>>108676309
I was there for the CG being mainstream and when digital started replacing film. I remember so many people saying they will never use digital and now then never use film anymore lol


>>108676317
Yes but the spout is physically incorrect, do you not see that? it doesn't look like it has liquid inside it but looks like the glass is tinted a tea color instead and also it looks like it should be overflowing but it's not which makes it look wrong. Can you not see these nuances? They are important

Are you a woman that can't pass the water level cognitive test?

>>108675340
>Why would I? I have actual creativity and can come up with actually interesting concepts and execute them. It's like oil painters autisticly screeching at photography because it can recreate the world perfectly. Or even traditional illustrators losing their shit when photoshop and illustrator came out.
All you need to see this is a bigger problem is put two and two together:
>What is a prerequisite to creativity?
Intelligence
>What does AI stand for
Artificial Intelligence

Granted, we don't have AGI and we won't for a good while, but today's AI already does a semi-convincing job of pretending to be creative (mostly by stealing ideas from the training data), so if you're not worried then you're personally using evasion tactics to try and draw false parallels to physical technological advances. Take your head out of the sand.

>>108675250
>he does not know that there are trannies who are pro-AI too
An example is the one tranny ledditor who shat on leddit's top anti-AI board and immortalized by pro-AI trannies once banned. This means that there are trannies on both sides of the big AI art war.

File: lookintomyeyes.png (1.1 MB)

1.1 MB PNG

>>108676398
artificial intelligence is to intelligence like artificial fruit is to fruit.

I hope you can understand the important distinction, it's important.

>>108676428
Do you think a person - who is not musically trained and hasn't knowingly listened to AI music before - can tell that a song was made by generative AI? What makes you think your specific niche is safe?

File: IMG_9098.gif (3.9 MB)

3.9 MB GIF

>>108676451
It depends how sensitive their hearing is to frequencies because AI music sound like it has a weird high cut/low-pass filter applied to it and like it is missing a lot of frequencies. It's really noticeable in the vocals, it just sounds weird and you know what to listen for you can't unhear it. However if they are not actively listening and it's an instrumental it's much harder to tell. With chiptune or heavily filtered electric music it's even harder to tell.

I embrace AI music because fuck music labels and those greedy fucks. They keep trying to content ID my shit on youtube and my stuff is usually older than the crap they claim I'm copying and in the dispute I always ask them to send me their contact info so I can send my bill for royalties but magically every time the dispute is immediately dropped and I never hear from the label ever again. Their is a special place in hell waiting for those assholes.

>>108676318
What good is your le creativity and novel ideas that you have over ai if it's a disqualifying factor?

>>108675250
The irony is someone is going to get rejected from art school because of not using AI and will lead the next glorious Reich.

>>108676539
What good is AI if it can't follow the required specs perfectly and hallucinates a bunch of unwanted garbage?

>>108676083
I’m not an AI fag but honest question, why is your generic arbitrary low-value image/s any better than his proompted ones?

>>108675637
Finally
A good fucking argument
I say this as an ai slopper

File: download (33).png (126.8 KB)

126.8 KB PNG

>>108676539
If I could get AI to recreate the vision in my head 100% perfectly I would use it for everything but it can't so I still have to use 3Ds Max, Houdini, Photoshop/Krita and etc. I know it will get mostly their someday but it's not their yet.

>>108676593
Because it follows what was asked for exactly without any extra hallucinations and is physically correct.

One image got very close
>>108676278
But unfortunately has some errors that will make it obvious it was generated with AI (the spout)

My image's rendering could be better but I didn't want to wait for a long render. I just like this as an example because it's not easy for the genAIs to do correctly

>>108676521
>I embrace AI music because fuck music labels and those greedy fucks
It certainly feels like much of the discourse over generative AI is about corporate greed or environmentalism. Personally, I think there's nothing immoral about wanting to make a profit.
The reason I'm against generative AI is because a non-sentient being cannot make art, and there is a whole load of this fake art being made right now.
I explain my reasoning in https://desuarchive.org/g/thread/108591545/#q108592814

>>108675914
>except come up with an interesting and original idea
it can and in no way is it slower at it than human artists

>>108676658
>a non-sentient being cannot make art
that is wrong, as proven by current AI already

or perhaps humans aren't sentient by some alien's definition either. either way, AI matches humans as is evident.

>>108676685
>that is wrong, as proven by current AI already
I'm not arguing about the perceived quality of the output. Just because it looks appealing doesn't mean it's art. LLMs cannot think, they're just token predictors, so it follows they cannot be creative as creativity requires the independent decision-making power that only humans have.

File: 1765495438919646.png (801.7 KB)

801.7 KB PNG

>>108676545
completely backwards...
AI is literally Hitler.

>>108676702
humans cannot think either, they're just token predictors tied to a brain database

yes, we found this out pretty much for sure when we managed to make AI *with all the same types of capability* overall as humans. in like a handful of years, not a billion years of training too, which is a bit disappointing at some human's haughty level of attitude, but it is what it is

ai art is an oxymoron and if you can be replaced by a machine you were never an artist in the first place

>>108676743
if you can be replaced by a human you were never an artist in the first place - kek

your problem is that AI artist models ARE exactly increasingly entirely just like very competent human artists and this is what results in your statement if you don't insert some magic B...BUT HUMANS ARE SPECIAL (no evidence) bullshit.

>>108675282
What is a biological male?
What is a biological female?
Fee males are the males you pay to have sex with. So how does this all make sense?

>>108676769
>B...BUT HUMANS ARE SPECIAL (no evidence)
holy mother of reddit

File: 1776530090897713.png (47 KB)

47 KB PNG

>>108676719
>humans cannot think either, they're just token predictors tied to a brain database
This is not true and you know it. There is something unique about our brains which separates us from animals. A dog can learn tricks but cannot come up with unique ideas of its own. You train AI the same way you train a dog, just with millions and millions of tricks. When AI is being "creative", all that's happening is a set of learned tricks are being performed which align with the prompt given.

A human being has the ability to think independently. To resist indoctrination while being punished (up to a point). To strive into the unknown, sacrificing short-term pleasure for the hope of long-term glory. Only humans do this.

You can recite poetry to an African Grey Parrot, but you can't truly teach it to be creative, and whatever it babbles back is merely an approximation of poetry with no thought and intent behind it.

>>108676769
if you can be replaced by a machine you should be replaced by a machine

>>108676674
prove it

>>108676834
>This is not true and you know it.
it is true, and we pretty empirically know it now.

all the tests people came up with to invalidate this type of capability as human-like intelligence proper and... it passes them. reasoning, art, you name it.

muh special human brain indeed did not hold up to scrutiny in the end. that's how it went. no one still has a good test what type of capability humans have and AI can't have. it's all crushed.

>have good graphics card
>dip toe into ai slop waters
>start browsing boorus for artists' styles to copy
>witness for the first time the vast uncurated sea of humanslop with my own eyes
most art is bad. almost all of it, in fact. praise be the ones that wade into the trenches to pull the gems out and repost them for us in more public channels

>>108675250
because trannies don't want to make good or appealing art
their "art" is always political statement after political statement

>>108675250
Anything made with the goal of making money is not art in my book.
"art" fags can eat a dick.

>>108676865
>all the tests people came up with to invalidate this type of capability as human-like intelligence proper and... it passes them. reasoning, art, you name it.
That doesn't prove it's conscious. All they're doing is measuring the outputs and saying "hey, that looks like something a human would write". It's all rote learning. True it can mimic what a human can output but it is just a dog in the end - a dog that was taught Javascript, oil-painting, and Shakespeare.

File: processed_1691057532 (1).png (630.2 KB)

630.2 KB PNG

>>108676894
So it's propaganda and not art.

>>108676899
Correct, those are products and not art

>>108676056
>but the wealthyfags are using AI as a scapegoat to cull their workforces
That's because they never wanted to hire a professional artist in the first place, they just had no choice. Getting badly decapitated and mangled art from a machine is a small price to pay if it means they can stop hiring real artists.

There will still be a demand for artists though, that's never going to go away.

File: zgr1t4jvn8lg1.jpg (126.8 KB)

126.8 KB JPG

>>108675250
You're not fooling anyone op.

>>108675250
>pay money to attend art school
>to draw like a toddler
no wonder he trooned out

>>108675250
>Art used to be scarce. Degenerate furries with no self control would spend any amount on anyone with comissions open who could draw more than stick figures.

That well is beginning to dry up now that anyone can just proompt any image they want, as long as that image is relatively simple or sex (which is 95% of commissions, source: I made it the fuck up but it seems correct).
So yeah. Shit sucks for them. Who wants to be obsolete?
The current strategy is to shame people for using it.
>You like soulless slop! Nobody created this!
As if anyone's heart was in fulfilling a porn commission...

>>108676920

no fucking trans looks like that.
we're really dealing with mentally ill people just like terminally online people who think they're equal to token predictors kek

and no i don't ggive a fuck retard ,stay in your bubble i don't give a fuck about what you think or your worthless opinions,you're mentally ill,go off yourself retard i'm tired to debate with liars/retards.

File: processed_1690009669.png (330.8 KB)

330.8 KB PNG

>>108676932
>Please think of the poor degenerate "artists"
nothing of value is being lost

>>108676899
>Anything made with the goal of making money is not art in my book
>>108676912
>Correct, those are products and not art
Why the hell not? Is art only capable of being made by hippies in camper vans?
Wanting a return for the time and effort invested in making art is not immoral, and furthermore, it does not invalidate the creative decision-making and expression that went into the piece.
If selling something instantly turns it from art into not-art, then what is even your definition of art?

Lmao nobody cares about your aislop

>>108676908
>a dog that was taught Javascript, oil-painting, and Shakespeare
here you basically see all the philosophical-scientific arguments that were raised in history about how humans are different from animals culminate but then YOU -unlike the philosophers and scientists then would have to, logically, given the argument- conclude "maybe it's just a human, but that's not as good as a human because <new thing, 'consciousness'>"

what interesting and telling test of "consciousness" do you do have for humans that AI doesn't pass?

File: hith-sistine-chape-2.jpg (323.1 KB)

323.1 KB JPG

>>108676961
You're arguing with a retard. Nearly all of the great historic art was commissioned. The goal of AI is to replace, it's not a tool and no one that uses it to have something made can call themselves an artist/musician/coder/whatever. It's like having an employee that you tell what to do.

>>108676908
>All they're doing is measuring the outputs and saying "hey, that looks like something a human would write".
That's literally what your posting behavior reflects. Have some self awareness.

>>108677034
>what interesting and telling test of "consciousness" do you do have for humans that AI doesn't pass?
There might not be one. That does not mean it doesn't exist. For a system that has the same inputs and the same outputs, the inner processing can be vastly different. Just because the AI has become very good at parroting humans does not mean it has human consciousness.

File: 4674BBD0-5626-49E9-A334-359232B82AFA.jpg (1.7 MB)

1.7 MB JPG

>>108675250
Check this

File: processed_1692686975.png (753.7 KB)

753.7 KB PNG

>>108676961
>>108677046
There is a difference between getting commissioned to make art for the greater good and making some shit that's going to be mass produced and increase shareholder value while the artist gets crumbs in royalties. You autists lack any nuance and depth in your thoughts

File: r0xvh9necldg1.jpg (855.8 KB)

855.8 KB JPG

>>108677188
Now you're just shifting the goalpost.
>>108677180
You're not fooling anyone, and you will never be a woman.

>>108676784
I don't need "evidence" that humans are special
you can make a very strong argument that we are nothing but self-replicating organic bags of water and that our lives are meaningless and nothing matters and no one would be able to refute you
and then what?
throw yourself down a cliff if your life isn't "special"
if it turns out that the only difference between humans and machines is that humans are human (meaning, us) then I don't need any "evidence" that we are more important or meaningful than the machines to chose anything we do over what they do, or to prioritize our well being and happiness over any perceived increase in efficiency or productivity from machines
and if I ever hear a machine say it's a "person" and deserves "rights", I'll be the first to pick a fucking sledgehammer and start genociding the fuckers. or just send them to AI hell on my own laptop if they're not physical yet

>>108677096
and of course you have no test or experiment to show it's even a concept separate from human brain-based intelligence or AI technology based intelligence

you understand how ridiculous this is? undefined untestable thing with poorly defined and unproven attributes and nothing actual to even show humans have it never mind AI doesn't have it?

>>108677188
>make art for the greater good
Mate that shit was commissioned to flex on other rich people

File: processed_1691054623.png (746.9 KB)

746.9 KB PNG

>>108677205
No, commissioning art is not the same as buying a product. The fundamental difference lies in the creative process and exclusivity: commissioning involves a collaborative, custom creation where an artist produces a unique piece based on a client’s specific vision, whereas product art consists of pre-made, standardized items (like prints or merch) created by the artist for broader, repeatable appeal.

Key distinctions include:

Creation Process: Commissions are bespoke and start from scratch based on client input, while products are created independently by the artist in advance for mass or limited distribution.

Personalization: Commissioned art is highly personalized and one-of-a-kind, whereas products are generic and accessible to any buyer.

Pricing Structure: Commissions often cost more due to the time, complexity, and potential licensing rights involved, while products are typically priced lower to remain accessible.

Relationship: Commissioning fosters a dynamic partnership between artist and client, while purchasing a product is a standard transactional exchange.


Nuance mother fucker, learn it! lol who are we kidding, you're too autistic to ever get it.

>>108677250
>flexing on other rich people
There is no greater good than that, are you poor or something? Also the church.

>>108677188
Who it benefits or doesn't benefit is a completely separate issue from defining what art actually is. You can argue about morals but art is still art regardless of whatever power dynamics are at play. Your Marxist view lacks any nuance and depth.

File: processed_1690656571.png (741.3 KB)

741.3 KB PNG

>>108677269
I'm not a marxist, but you are driven by your ego. Just accept your slop is a product and not art and you can make as much money as you want and I won't care but your fragile ego has to call it art or your feelings are hurt.

>>108677282
>non-sequitur
>ad hominem

>>108677299
>baby's feelings are hurt because his slop is not art
>is also a massive faggot without an arguement

>>108677299
nigger

>actually art school should just teach you prompts and you're a tranny if you disagree!
good morning saar

>>108677316
>still insists i am commercially producing slop-art
No, you must really be influenced by Marxism if you think that because my argument benefits those people, it means I must have an ulterior motive or personal stake behind what I'm saying. You seem to be very confident in this assertion which means you are driven by both Marxism and arrogance.

>>108677329
good morning ma'am

>>108677378
>retardation the post
You will never be an artist

>>108677449
Oh, I cannot possibly hold an opinion which I don't personally benefit from. Everything is a power struggle to you.

>>108675250
My god not only is this "tranny's" art vomit inducingly bad but their forced female voice with some kind of german accent sounds like nails on a chalkboard, it is literally painful to listen to them talk

>>108676568
You can tell it to remove those and it will do it in 20 seconds for a few pennies. Can you do that?
It obviously isn't perfect, duuuuh.

>>108677468
It's ok, I get it you learned the word marxist a few days ago and I'm ruining your attempt at misusing it by pointing out how you are retarded, I know its tough but that's life and life is a power struggle so deal with.

>>108675250
I will tell you.
It's the future in which art doesn't involve humans and culture can be mass produced and controlled by big data mining corporations.

File: processed_1691054623 (1).png (769.5 KB)

769.5 KB PNG

>>108677489
Then why has no one done it? GenAI has yet to perform the challenge perfectly.

>>108677495
>ruining your attempt at misusing it by pointing out how you are retarded
Now you're having delusions of posts that you never made.

>>108677506
You have to a special kind of retarded if you believe that.

>>108677506
>and culture can be mass produced and controlled by big x
This has literally been the case for well over modern history.

>>108675250
I'm an artist and I'm not threatened by it but I do firmly believe that gen AI is actively ruining the internet. Literally nothing good has come from it; it's all empowered jeets and the laziest gooner bullshit, and nothing that comes out of it looks good. It's all the same repetitive pointless no-effort landfill nonsense that everyone made fun of calarts for churning out.
AI bros are smug children that think they're superior for gobbling up literal shit and are more obnoxious than any Canadian or Australian combined.

File: processed_1682086414.png (447.9 KB)

447.9 KB PNG

>>108677527
So you are saying these post are not yours;
>>108677269
>>108677378

?

>>108677560
So exactly like deviantart and the like from back in the day, an endless sea of ugly slop but it was human made.

>>108677562
No I never said that I didn't make those posts lmao. Learn to read a little.

>>108677527
What a Marxist attitude you have

>>108677576
>namefagging
ok retard.

>>108677579
What about it is Marxist?

>>108676191
>AI will replace artists!
>Noo you can't have specific requirements you're just autistic
Artists would follow the prompt. Why can't ai?

>>108677588
You seem to strive for "equal outcome".
>Any shit spewed should be considered art because my feelings say so

>>108677606
>>Any shit spewed should be considered art because my feelings say so
When did I say that?
I pointed out that >>108677188 is Marxist because "greater good" and shareholder value/royalties do not define whether or not something is art.

>>108675682
>Potentially
>It hasn't but it might! I promise, bro, just 10 trillion more dollars!

>>108677571
Yes but with a gigantic asterisk that there's no way an AI could ever come up with "Tails gets trolled." Even the sloppiest of human made content has incredible gems in it. By the nature of the technology AI cannot and will never achieve that.

File: processed_1692685980.png (729.9 KB)

729.9 KB PNG

>>108677631
>because "greater good" and shareholder value/royalties do not define whether or not something is art.
But it does. You want to make products, which great and more power to you. However your ego insists on calling your products art because if not your feels are hurt, Feels before reals is the epitome of Marxism. I love capitalism because it lets meritocracy thrive when its not being manipulated.

Why can't your ego accept that you make products and not art? Why must your feels try to overwrite reality?

>>108675340
Putting words in a box is not creativity bro.

>>108677679
That's exactly what I have been saying bro.

>>108677668
>You want to make products
>your products
>you make products
More arrogant, baseless assumptions about me which are not true. Feels before reals much?
Also products can be art and have been historically, as pointed out by >>108677046

>>108677713
>I’m right because another retard has the same opinion as me. I will keep coping because my feelings NEED my mass produced slop to be art

>>108677679
scratching graphite on a piece of paper is not creativity bro.
see, I can be reductive too

>>108676782
asking the real questions

>>108675250
I think AI is at a point where it can pretty much draw stuff on par with humans but for whatever reason I have yet to see a single piece of impressive AI art

>>108677526
You literally got what you've asked for itt. Are you blind? >>108676278 this one for example

File: HighonWeedMonkey.jpg (134.7 KB)

134.7 KB JPG

The only artists who are being filtered by AI are bad artists who wgmi anyway
Good artists adapt and, by doing so, survive
I do feel bad for artists whose work is being used to train AI models but at the same time if I was an artist I would try to think of a way to profit off of that

>>108678181
The spout is wrong, are you retarded? It's tea colored glass instead of having tea making it look like slop and at that level it should be flowing out.

>>108678213
Artist trace and paint over other people's works and photos all the time so you don't need to feel bad for them.

>>108677205
Cope. We don’t require you anymore

>>108678040
All gen AI has this distincive floaty and uncanny look if you look at it long enough. Its "art" is utterly disposable.

>>108678727
It has a weird smoothness. I think that’s because of how diffusion works by denoising so it has no noise or unnatural noise.

>>108677679
poets btfo

>>108678448
Proof or it didn’t happen
>>108677785
The difference is that your delusional about it.

File: animatorsurvivalkit.png (1.3 MB)

1.3 MB PNG

Reminder why animated art is the way it is now.

>>108678944
lol Gottem

>>108678963
The technical term for that is called rotoscoping, educate yourself.

>>108679001
The fucking bean mouth is a cancer and they only use it because it takes no skill. Any animation with bean mouth is an auto skip for me. The biggest travesty is Pixar abandoning their perfect style for 3d bean mouth. Fucking disgraceful

>>108675250
>artschool
This looks like something a kid drawing in mspaint would put on deviantart or enjin and caption with how much he think it is his passion. Novel for that age, but wtf are they teaching in art school now?

Anyway, I couldn't give much of a shit for AI in art as much of anything other than a toy. Because the stuff I create, I create because it doesn't exist and so AI can't invent it either. I have a very specific design in my head and my dreams for what I like to do and AI can't substitute that. My mind and memories are the model/dataset/training data.

>>108675250
They spent 20 years of their life putting all their skills in one box instead of learning multiple skills and now they've been replaced and outmastered, they're bitter about it.
Let's be honest.
They've never made or contributed anything to the world but one mediocre doodle every 4 months.

I use Ai thumbnails all the time and I photoshop and correct them by hand. I put out daily 4-10min videos. I make art for steam games i play that don't have art just so it exists.

T. Creator with over 3,000 videos uploaded

>>108680437
No thanks to you for contributing to the slopification of the internet.

>>108675250
idk, im a musician and i dont feel threatened by AI

must be a skill issue

>>108680496
slop or get slopped