AI could make this less pixelated…but so could whatever humans and/or bots took the screenshot and shared it everywhere.
if traditional art is transphobic how are drag queens a thing
(i know drag !== trans but still)
Please make me a wine glass filled to the brim with wine, almost spilling over.
I to have no talent and am unable to create traditional art.
-More Creative
-Creates the same thing over and over
-Cannot create new things like an overfull wine glass without reference imagesThe only thing it can do is regurgitate.
I think it has some value. I’ve been enjoying political deep fakes. Like that one of trump sucking musk toes.
I also think AI has some value for artist to use as a tool. Not to fully create pieces but to help.
If it’s used in that way it’s more ethical. . For instance, if I’m working on a painting, I often start with a real photograph. (My own or free to use reference image from a source giving permission).
I put it in Photoshop and use filters to increase edge contrast. Then I create a sketch over it. I print the sketch to scale and then transfer it to my canvas or paper. Or use it to make digital painting.
Another thing I do is use filters in Photoshop (the cutout one) to help me better able to see blocks of color changes. Because human perception makes it difficult for us to actually perceive these.
I then reference that image during the painting process.
Now that’s not using AI. But I am using software. Ai can be used similarly though.
With a specific AI you can apply a painting style of one image to another. This was actually the first free AI type art. It was called deep dream or something like that. About 5 years ago. The website is still up but doesn’t offer this anymore. But I found one that does.
So yeah you upload two images. A photo you took. And a painting you made. And set the percentage of change.
And it can help you plan a painting by making a version that will have your painting style applied. It’s actually kinda awesome.
But as you can imagine you could upload someone else’s photograph. And someone else’s art piece.
Stealing their style.
I still think this specific AI tool has the most value for artist to use.
I don’t have time to read replies like this.
Okay then. Just gives outline of how I use Photoshop and AI as a tool for traditional art.
How much you bet on that this very same person is now part of the “dark enlightement” after the progressives almost unanimusly rejected generative AI slop?
I’m tired.
Anyone can make art if they want. I’ll just keep saying it. Look at Hyperbole comics, Cyanide and Happiness, folk art—you already know the spiel. There are classist traditions in some art spaces but you don’t have to participate in them. We have outsider art. We have fringe subcultures and movements.
I’ll be honest, it’s hard to tell if anything is a joke anymore. I thought Trump was a joke and he’s in the White House now… blame the autism.
All that person is gonna do with that grip is rip the eraser off.
Sometimes non vegan… it’s boiling the fucking planet.
I mean, the impact AI has on the climate is nothing compared to the animal product industry
The impact per work of AI vs, say, a set of pighair brushes is massively higher.
Which is the fairest way of comparing them, per artwork.
There’s probably a bigger impact when you consider how paint and brushes are manufactured and the fact that it’s most likely shipped here from other countries.
It’s also laughable how little actual energy one picture takes to generate.
It’s a non starter when you actual compare it to something physical. It’s like saying sending a normal letter is better for the environment then an email.
The issue is the infrastructure and scale. Hundreds of thousands of these images are created every day.
I don’t know your workflow but it usually takes quite a few iterations before someone gets the image they want. It’s the literal definition of inefficiency because its rebuilding the diffusion every time, be that from cached memory or a new vector path.
Both of those things have a really small impact, to the point that it doesn’t matter. Generating one picture using AI takes like 30 seconds of your GPU running at full power. Besides, I don’t think that’s a fair comparison in the first place. Pighair brushes are not the main animal product people consume and generating something using AI models isn’t what’s using the majority of the energy but training the models is. The metric that’s actually important is what both industries as a whole are contributing to climate change, otherwise we can just keep picking examples that prove the other one wrong.
Lololololololololol. No. Unless you have a massively expensive GPU, no. The image is not being generated by your device. It’s being generated by a mile wide server bank that churns through petrochemicals like a city all on its own. That’s the part of AI people are talking about when they reference it being bad for the environment. And if you do own a massively expensive GPU and generate AI images offline, you are not part of the conversation because your activities are an ounce in an ocean.
🎣
What art are they looking out? Artists have been making powerful pieces with hidden messages and symbols since forever. Even graffiti can be used to disrupt and inform. Yes, there is garbage, but there’s garbage everywhere.
I hope we all realize that this is clearly satire or some weird way to make “woke” people seem stupid, right? 😭
It truly does get hard to tell after a certain point, though. People get mentally fatigued when “it’s just a joke bro” has been said the millionth time. And when crazy awful oligarchs with too much money are backing that joke. I’m tired.
This is cartoonishly obvious bait.
Engaging with bait like this is 90% of why the world is in the mess it’s currently in.
Counterpoint, but CREATING content like this is 90% of the reason, and these people should be remembered in history as the cockroaches they are. I can at least understand people who get mad at bait.
So much of modern life feels like ‘internet troll’ became a personality affectation.
Our brains were never meant to be so over-exposed to so many conflicting messages all day, every day, and a lot of powerful people are exploiting this fact to an absurd degree.
deleted by creator
I don’t even really hate AI art but it produces extremely hypersexualised depictions of women almost by default. It does of men too but only a bit less so.
So is AI art. It’s designed to look like human art, with the same biases.
deleted by creator
I’m not sure, in its early days, generative AI slop was kind of promoted like that. Then anyone left of Margaret Thatcher rejected it, and almost only the Curtis Yarvin type techbros embraced it, so it slowly became the “anti-woke” alternative to real art.
Obviously. I mean, even when AI could not do fingers (and today they are mostly fine), you could simply recreate the picture until you had something usable.
Having a picture like this and the over the top “negative/positive points” is done deliberately.
This feels just like the twitter men roleplaying as women saying that they love misogyny.
They’re using “woke” language to promote anti-woke subjects.
good way to put it
Meaningless. Soulless. Dead.
