I just combed through the midjourney subreddit and it's not looking good for us. There's generated graphic novels out there that actually look really good. People are buying these things. It really is just dawning on me now the seriousness of this aspect of technological advancement. I think it's inevitable that AI will have to be used in some way to supplement art, whether it's creating concepts or backgrounds, or get left behind in the dust. Isn't it FUCKING HILARIOUS, cruelly ironic, almost a cosmic prank that the ONE thing everyone thought artificial intelligence would never be able to replicate is the first thing it's able to replicate when it was concieved?StillThere is a fundamental flaw in the ai generated content that I'm only 50% sure it won't be fully fixed, and that's emotion. There's a sort of soulless vacancy that haunts the incredibly aesthetic ai generated content. The poses aren't very fluid, there's no technique with exaggeration. It can't capture the emotional complexities of a human. There is no "story", nor experience, no evidence of another, different conscience that experiences his own version of qualia. I hope and pray to god with every vessel of my flesh that AI doesn't figure that out, because if that happens,1. There's really no point in artists anymore. It'll be reduced to a skill that's only impressive in that wow, you can "do stuff like a computer can"2. The implication that humans aren't special, we are just machines that can be easily figured out, the human 'spirit' is an illusion.
Well, for the sake of my sanity, i refuse to believe it. Painters had to make do with photography in the past, and what came out of that were just creative art that photography can't replicate. What can we, as artists do that AI can't? I don't think AI will be able to replicate the complexities of human life intertwined with emotional-social interactions. I don't think animation AIs will ever capture the erratic idiosyncracies of human-made animation. An individual artist has a "way", a "style" which defies convention and breathes life, pieces of themselves into an art, that AI art can't because it pulls inspiration from everything, and compiles it to make an aesthetic "average" of the specific prompt.The age of the artist making a living off consumerism is dead. Let's face it, 90% of all art transactions has either been realizing somebody's original character with your art skills, or porn. AI can do that now. We must rise above consumerism. (Hell, this could just be a kick-in-the-ass wake up call to stop making art in the name of consumerism) We must find a way to survive. We must follow the footsteps of Picasso and Andy Warhol, and make up new shit that technology can't. Conjure up your spite, your desire to exist, and your indomitable human spirit. Yes, this machine is more powerful and much more advanced than any other technological opponent humanity has faced. This artificial intelligence may be the cruellest prank that was pulled on humans. But our creative spirit has managed to survive all the others that came before it. We mustn't let machine usurp us, no matter what. What's more dangerous than AI threatening to usurp us are doomers, with their nihilistic lie-down-like-a-dog ways and disregard for fighting back.Anyways, what do you guys think are works you believe can't ever be replicated by AI? You know, like the Yababaina music video or something like that?
Skullfuck your local AI "artist" today. Make world a better place.
>>7141777
go back
>>7141824Oh geez, it's been a long time since I visited here I forgot how much you people hate redditors. (Funny thing is --my habit of spacing lines like that comes from my recent ventures into writing comic scripts, if y'd believe it)Anyways, nah I don't wanna. There's too many autistic retards and gay minors in art communities and ic seems to be the only place where it's at the very least free of gay minors.
Art can finally be art again instead of a product to be consumed at a profit. Should be happy desu
Yah but it wont be profitable because it can't be protected by any law so just wait for all the ai fags to be culled
>>7141773>There's generated graphic novels out there that actually look really good.I dunno man, the stuff I've seen has a lot of "whiz-bang" but doesn't work as comics once you read it. I wonder how may here have dug deep into the history of the medium and discovered how far many have pushed comics with lettering, cartooning, and storytelling. Seems so many here are easily impressed by 'flair' that's skin deep.Of course there are consoomers that will eat that shit up, and if you care then get that bag. If anything having some art foundation will give you an edge. Honestly I don't even care if artists choose to use AI in the future, I think it will always take some drawing/art knowledge to take it to the next level.
>>7141773As>>7141774 stated>"indomitable human spirit"The arts are our birthright and never will I surrender what makes me humanEven If ai does take over doesn't mean they can stop us from doodling. An artist is who finds ways to express himself. If you take away the AI from an AI "artist" he isn't gonna do much. (It explains how ai artist just pop up) I know it's debuff but still you're gonna keep drawing along with every hardworking man/woman out there. And that what matters me boy. Think of this as a test as the lord will never give up his creations for a "thing" that mocks us
>>7141773>There's really no point in artists anymore. It'll be reduced to a skill that's only impressive in that wow, you can "do stuff like a computer can"It's been like this. Many normies have thought of Photoshop as AI (meme related). My family shrugged when I explained AI art to them; "Haven't computers been able to do that for a while?"They're only impressed by skilled ink/pencil on paper, anon. AI changes nothing in that regard.>The implication that humans aren't special, we are just machines that can be easily figured out, the human 'spirit' is an illusion.Can an AI live a life? When I read an Inio Asano manga or a Robert Crumb comic I'm reading someone's experience—from where they've lived to their unique psychology. And it doesn't have to be 'biographical', something like Berserk can have similar qualities. It's why ChatGPT will never completely replace novelists (except the shittiest genre fiction).
>>7142475I'm not well versed about ChatGPT but why fiction? Is it because people can actually verify non fiction with how it makes them feel?
>>7142468>The arts are our birthright and never will I surrender what makes me human>An artist is who finds ways to express himself.>If you take away the AI from an AI "artist" he isn't gonna do much.this is it./thread
>>7142486>I'm not well versed about ChatGPT but why fiction?I mentioned "genre fiction" (like science fiction) because it is usually filled with tropes (even if those tropes are subverted in some way). Those who have fucked around with ChatGTP talk about how it depends on tropes.Life experience influences the best art, even fiction. William Faulkner was a good example, he wrote fiction, but it was deeply influenced by his life in early 20th century deep south (and he also had a unique writing style). Because of this there was little that was cliché in his work, he portrayed the nuances of (often dysfunctional) aristocratic families living in a post-civil war south.
>>7141773>I just combed through the midjourney subreddit>RedditStopped reading right there. OP is a fag.
>>7142504So you're saying since AI doesn't have access to these life experiences. And this makes the AI lack soul?
>>7142504This is making insanely good sense to me. Thanks anon
>>7141774>The age of the artist making a living off consumerism is dead.Your post is mostly gold, but I disagree with this point—if by "consumerism" you mean making bank from your art. Putting your "soul" or "way" into your art is a value-add—it's what will distinguish you from the waves of AI-slop.>We must follow the footsteps of Picasso and Andy WarholNot sure Warhol is the best example since he embraced mechanistic modes of production (he ran a factory and used existing photos, which got him into copyright trouble). He would've probably embraced AI.Picasso and other modernists are a better example. Though they're hated here, when you look at them in the context of history and the threat of technology they faced, their turn towards radical expression and experimentation makes perfect sense.But also note that most of those modernists were mega-rich from their art, which negates your earlier point about "consumerism.">Anyways, what do you guys think are works you believe can't ever be replicated by AI?Anything that is deeply reflective of personal experience/psychology. But I don't think we've seen the last of "skill." If anything there will likely be a return to skilled art in traditional mediums (I've already seen this on YouTube, with more videos on traditionally inked comics etc.).But the reaction to AI can go in any number of paths. I think it'll become obvious how important the parasocial aspect of art is, that most humans want to enjoy art by other humans. Expect more process videos, streams, performances (like KJG), etc.
>>7142544>Most of those modernists were mega-richBecause you're only counting the famous ones you fucking retard
>>7142539>And this makes the AI lack soul?yep>>7142542>Thanks anonno problem
>>7142563>Because you're only counting the famous ones you fucking retardyeah no shit. but the fact Picasso was billionaire status (in today's money) where the top representationalists at the time were upper middle class suburbanites working for magazines and ad agencies shows where the zeitgeist was.
>>7141773>subredditGo back.
>>7142475>My family shrugged when I explained AI art to them; "Haven't computers been able to do that for a while?"They're only impressed by skilled ink/pencil on paper, anon. AI changes nothing in that regard.My friend told me he once showed his digital art to some normie IRL and he was not impressed in the slightest, he asked him why and he replied " these are pictures not drawings"I laughed more than I should, normies really think digital art just spawn out of nowhere lol
>>7143084Digital artists deserve to go extinct. They were already making the same excuses AI fags did with the "work smart not hard lol, just photobash it all it's faster" bullshit back when digital became standard. They made their bed when they courted the machine for the sake of ease, now let them shit in it.
>>7143084>ctrl+z>warptoolwarptoolwarptoollassoI respected it more before I saw your timelapses. It’s a joke. Put pen to paper and show me what you can actually do.
>>7143111I'm digital but have never photobashed or done shit that's "efficient" because it's not fun and I believe it stunts your growth as a draughtsman. But I also don't care about AI, I'm going to keep drawing no matter what some nigger or robot has to say about it.
>>7142534>>7142592R/midjourney is the only place where I could go to actually see the entire potential and range midjourney is capable of. I had to comb through a lot of NPC generated bullshit with cats holding lightsabers, y'know. This shit is what we're up against, by the way. I sure hope generative ai is reaching a plateau, because we're fucked if it's not.
>>7145282Ah whoops here are the images
>>7145282>we're fuckedYou're fucked. I'm not impressed.
>>7145283
>>7145287And I'm pretty sure you won't be impressed either if AI actually figures out a way to exaggerate the poses and lines on those images. When it figures out that it can make more expressions than those vacant smiles. When it figures out how to exaggerate body shape, how to deviate from the perspective grid lines to give the picture more dramatic appeal, and how to use asymmetry to make emotions more dynamic. When it figures out how to replicate line weight in a way that a human will draw it. I'm not showing you these to impress you, but to show you that Midjourney is able to branch out from its usual overrendered anime girls with the same art style. It has learned to vary to that level. There is a real possibility that AI will unlock the secret of the human soul. At that point it'll also learn how to imitate the quirks of the human in other aspects other than art, and it'll be impossible to tell if someone is a real human being on the internet. I'm not letting that stop me or whatever, but I have a feeling a lot of artists are in denial of the very possible realities of our situation.
>>7141773>or get left behind in the dustOh boy it’s the “join us or die” ai cultist cope again. You can’t leave anyone behind if you’re not going anywhere yourself.>>7145302If that’s the case than we have a lot more serious things to worry about than comic books. Like, an actual terminator or matrix situation
>>7145302In fact, I think there's a LOT of shit artists are in denial of.We've always thought of aesthetic as a form of creativity. But there has always been a formula to technical art skill. Drawing a perfect form is just math and geometry. Proportions is math Color theory is a formula. Fractals determine "attractive" randomness that replicate nature, but it's still math. Humans have always been drawn towards certain thing. Of course art is the first thing that was automated by generative ai. It's all math, and to find that human aesthetic is just a formula is a pretty devastating realization isn't it?It was arrogant of us to mystify human aesthetic. There always has been a reason why the phrase "it's just an art style" is a stupid statement. Even stylized art needs to be proportioned correctly to be attractive. All we have left is the soul.
>>7145309Guess I didn't word my intentions clearly enough.I'm not ever going to touch AI art, and it's going to get me left behind in the dust, and I don't care.
>>7145312I see, well my point stands that these grifters aren’t going anywhere with their totally origial idea guy slop. Only tech and entertainment CEOs will benefit from this.
>>7141773Please accept that you need to return to that subreddit and stay there.
>>7145325No, I will not be going back to fucking reddit, and here's why:I've tried to have this exact same conversation on reddit and I wrote an entire paragraphs-long post on the ramifications of AI art and how it'll change the meaning of "art", and I've tried to explain to them using tangible terms why AI art feels so empty and lacks dynamism without using wishy-washy emotional mysticism. I talked about people facing problems with denial regarding the inevitability of AI technology. And what was I met with? Retards. So many fucking retards, and they're not retarded because they disagreed with me. There were a couple of people who presented well-written disagreements which I acknowledged, and even thanked them for. But nooo, it seems that my post had personally attacked a LOT of ai bros and they started to ARGUE with me on SEMANTICS. Fucking semantics. There were so many retards who had a problem with the fact that I didn't specify what kind of AI I was talking about (i was talking about the generative ai that the subreddit talked about 99% of the time). There was this one bitch that told me I was ableist for suggesting that technical art skill is something anyone can learn because it's literally a fucking formula and there's guidelines and nobody is born with this innate instinct on the mysteries of art. (How can it NOT be a formula if it was so easily automated, retard?) They didn't want to talk about the actual shit I wanted to discuss, and just pointed out what they thought were logical fallacies in my presented topic, which I easily proved otherwise because they never read the entire post. Those redditors never actually fucking talk about the topic I wanted to discuss. They don't even want to argue against the ideas I am actually trying to perpetuate. I could feel the percieved drop in iq over there on reddit. There's a fuckton of retards here, that's for sure, but oh, thank god, there's a LOT LESS reddit moments here, aren't there? YEAH???
>>7145335And you know what's hilarious? Everyone here is anonymous, so that give us more liberty to be retarded here right? There are usernames attached to people on reddit, and somehow, there are SO MANY MORE FUCKING RETARDS.
>>7145335>retard finds out that shills are desperate to protect their ego substituteLurked and post on plebbit as well since generals on others boards are pretty much the same shitposting faggots, but i figured pretty early on that people don't want to talk, they want to feel heckin valid and you can't call them out on their faggotry or they'll just downvote you to autodeletion+getting stalkers or your profile deleted, if anything you say goes against the main narrative.>there are a lot less plebbit moments herelurk moreit's the fucking same since it's unironically the same no-life discord trannies posting everywhere.Can't tell you how many times i've seen posts on that site resembles exactly the usual bait and trolling threads on here.People now are just clinically retarded, Jack. All they want is consume and feel heckin valid about it and god forbid someone threatens their delusions.I ended up getting banned off a subreddit for something genuinely innocuous, that ended up becoming true, but apparently got people triggered.
>>7145335>ableistI remember a time when you would only hear this kind of retarded nonsense on twatter. Now the Reddit/tumblr/twatter nonsense has leaked into normiesphere and you have to watch what you say at work lest you get a trip to HR over the most benign things
i feel like skilled artists don't have much to worry about. they're creative in a way that ai people aren't, since the ai people are just generating shit like "REALLY GOOD PICTURE OF MY PREGNANT WIFE." for shit artists like me though, it's worse, because my art literally looks worse than ai. i don't think art's gonna be killed, but people will be way less likely to get into it.
AI has made me think a lot about whether it's worth continuing to pursue art. But ultimately, AI can't make what I want to make. It's just a slot machine that spits out someone else's creation. A random theoretical person's piece of art, not mine. Even if AI eventually gets good enough to make actually pleasing work, I think it will always be unsatisfying to the artist because it can't make what the artist truly intended. This is especially unfortunate because I believe it can (and maybe already does) satisfy the audience.
>>7141773>it's not looking good for us>usSpeak for yourself crab. Mine is the pencil that will draw the heavens.On a more serious note, unless you were really good when you were a child/young teen, it was already risky to expect that you would become financially independent from art alone which is why you should have gotten a day job to fund your own artistic pursuits. AI doesn't change anything unless you wanted to be a concept artist or a social media influencer.
>>7145335The iq on the internet is very low if you thought arguing with strangers online aka literal retards was productive then i have bad news for you
>>7141773>I think it's inevitable that AI will have to be used in some way to supplement artLet's reconsider this statement during the next energy crisis. I can make charcoal and fixative in my backyard and I have a shit-ton of paper. I'll be able to produce art when AI will just be dead servers.But now I just don't give a shit. I make art because I like it, money is just a bonus.
Artists figured out photography and digital. They'll figure this one out, too.
>>7141773I'm not in it for the money so AI and AI "artists" can suck my cock.
>>7145558Photography wiped out portrait artists for good and digital is just a different set of drawing tools. AI isn't like either of them.apples to oranges.
>>7145283>>7145282you do not draw
>>7145302>There is a real possibility that AI will unlock the secret of the human soul.We looked at the data!
I can't draw. I brute force every line and gaslight people into thinking I drew something with dishonest effects. But I won't give up, because the second I do: the world wins.
>>7145436>>7145451>>7145454Art is still worth pursuing. There will be a new art revolution. A new art style that AI will have trouble replicating will be created out of spite. Artists will push the limits of how much soul and expressionism they can inject into their art. We'll just shift our art in a way that showcases the fundamental differences between machine and human. If it automates it, we'll just bullshit a new thing because we're humans and we totally can. Like the revolution of paintings that don't replicate reality after photography, there will be a shift in focus towards expression, fluidity, human quality from aesthetics and structure. Long gone are the days of commercialized, overrenderred human drawn art. Long live those who fight against the machine, drawing in ways that mock the machine out of spite.>>7145740Midjourney v7 is aiming to improve details, more complex prompts, "enhanced stylistic options" (it may be able to figure out how to actually emulate a style without that generic tainting), most worrying of all, "enhancing character poses, anatomy, and INTERACTIONS." I'm not worried at all about ai stopping artists from drawing, cuz it never will.I'm worried about the day ai art will be indistinguishable from human art, and we'll never be able to tell the difference. Individual images may be able to fool even artists for now, but it's easy to see in a collection of works, in animation and comic strips. >>7145769Based based based based don't let them winI want artists to draw out of anger more. I want artists to band together and figure out in what ways we can outperform the machine. I want us to make shit that clearly separates us from the machine. I want to us to mock the "ai artists" with drawings that they will never be able to produce. I want less complicitness, more anger. I want us to DO more than SOMETHING, EVERYTHING, EVERYTHING IN OUR POWER.A fundamental aspect of human identity is being threatened by a fucking machine.
Sneed's Feed and SeedFormerly Chuck's
>>7141773For my own sanity I just think AI won't get better. It made massive gains but this is itAnd I'm fine with that. AI is kinda shit
>>7145340I think it's because of the reddit echo chambers. You disagree with common consensus and you get downvoted. What a shit hole
The only constant in change. Deal with it.
>>7146170People who say this shit always have some kind of selfish agenda. As soon as shit hits the fan for them it’s not a matter of “change” anymore
