>>7956172 It's not the worst thing, but why not just look up an actual reference? It'd be a lot more accurate. If you're trying to reference something that doesn't exist, you're delegating the actual creative work to an AI.
>>7956176 >but why not just look up an actual reference Because sometimes there are very specific poses or things you wanna draw but you can't find any good references for them.
>>7956208 and how are you gonna make an ai produce your "very specific pose" that you can't find on the internet nor take a picture of yourself, retard?
>>7956172 Nah, but be warned that the result may be different than how the pose/whatever should look like. Kind of a last resort or a way to see a specific style
>>7956208 Then you're going to have to compromise somewhat and use a reference that isn't exactly what you're looking for - like use a straight one backshot as your reference to place the muscles onto a 3/4 turn backshot drawing. Even using AI, you'll not be able to prompt exactly what you want often.
Besides, if we're talking poses, there are free 3D artist models for referencing, that'd be quicker and easier to use than fiddling about with an AI.
To me, it just seems like the more you rely on AI, the less creative input you are giving your work, so what's the point of the art then? Even if you make some mistakes, so long as they're not displeasing to the eye, that's your artistic decision, compared to just following along with whatever was plopped out by the AI.
>>7956208 Learn blender and you'll get more control Use 3D models supplemented with photos of your own body and you won't need AI for anything. It's not whether using AI is bad in itself (it kinda is, maybe, but that's beside the point) it's that AI is just bad at what it does and you're hamstringing yourself. If you're going to cheat there are just flat out better ways to cheat. 3D models aren't going to randomly change their proportions or morph into something else entirely when you rotate them around and you can trust their perspective to be always correct. You can pose and rotate them to any specific angle that you need without having to pray that RNG brings you something close enough. You can place light sources wherever you want and simulate whatever materials without having to guess what words to use so the goofy algorithm maybe understands what you want if you get lucky. You can adjust focal length to exactly what's needed, etc. etc. More control, precision, exactness, accuracy. AI is like an artist in the sense that it's fallible and makes mistakes, which makes it less useful as a tool that is meant to reduce your chance of making mistakes, which is what references are supposed to be for.
>>7956538 Not really worried about permabegs tracing 3D or AIslop. cuz most of the time they don't enjoy the act of drawing and learning anyway, they'll be bored in 6 months tops. Unless they could keep up on it like Cris and Gabe.
>>7956556 people who trace 3d models are just as much scum as ai "i need it to brainstorm" users. There's a million photo references to use and also you can just get better at drawing from imagination.
>>7956617 usually you are working off partial refs, rather than just working off a 3d model that solves all proportions and (most) anatomy for you. it's just brain dead and creatively bankrupt if you skip all the problem solving.
>>7956615 I'm not overly concerned with what sonichu99 from deviantart thinks. None of the people who paid my salaries in the past 20 years seemed to care.
>>7956620 I mean you can also deliberately work off partial or imperfect 3D models rendered from the wrong angles if you're worried about the task not being challenging enough or killing your creativity or whatever. And you could also take your own photos of staged scenes tweaking all the conditions until there's nothing to manually problem solve in the drawing phase. It's about how you use your references not where the references come from.
Not really, it's the same as photobashing. I used a slop image for a pose of an animal I wasn't getting after looking for hours on pinterest and like 4 different search engines- I didn't generate it, but google showed me this clearly shopped picture but the anatomy was solid enough (the fur had that creepy AI feel though)
>>7956215 >and how are you gonna make an ai produce your "very specific pose" that you can't find on the internet nor take a picture of yourself You can send it a rough sketch of the pose or an unfinished picture and tell it which element you need it to visualize. Obviously it's a terrible idea to use it for any sort of detailed anatomy (gets shit wrong in ways you won't even realize as a beg), but if you've got a stylized picture you just want to finish and feel burnt out spending hours looking up references instead of drawing, it does the job. I'm not proud of it but I've done it as a last resort.
>>7956897 okay, so it's a terrible idea to use it for anatomy, so you sketch a pose to have it make a reference for the pose you already sketched with bad anatomy are you dumb?
>>7956903 I said detailed anatomy, meaning muscles, bone, what have you. If you're not going for realism and just want the general perspective and proportions of the pose it's usually smart enough to get it right even from a bad sketch.
>>7956906 >meaning muscles, bone, what have you that's what anatomy is, there's no lower level anatomy than that why the fuck would you need a reference for proportions, are you retarded?
>>7956172 >>7958086 you risk introducing drawing habits that will be difficult to get rid of later on. but it's your call as to how far you want to take things, in the end.