Discussion in 'Comics/Art' started by One Too Many, Jan 15, 2022.
I think i actually hate this one the most. Not just because of how horrific she is but because that gun is cool as fuck and deserves to be in a better AI drawing.
AI generated images are no longer fun. It's starting to look like spam of the same shit over and over again.
Is this really what you're into, Minimal?
AI sure can make some fairly freakish errors...
It's a technology in its infancy that I use for therapy. I don't see you trying to make it better.
I can draw so I don't need to.
Actually, that reminds me. I gotta download glaze so if anyone scrapes my work, I can make the AI worse.
Oh right, I forgot you don't do well with new concepts.
So to explain: Most AI generated images are made by pattern recognition algorithms, often by scraping data from existing art and images. It's part of why the output gets so wonky with fucked up hands or warped objects, AI has no true intelligence. We also do not have enough understanding of organic brains to replicate and code true intelligence. The pattern recognition can learn to recognize new patterns, but it cannot understand them. AI images are fucked up because AI doesn't truly know anything about what it's scraping from or spitting out. This won't be improved with our current technology.
These days, artists hate AI in its current form. It scrapes data from their art without their consent, frankendolls it together with other art, and spits out spam images that laymen figure are "good enough" to replace real artists. I don't work professionally as an artist myself, so this doesn't hurt me personally, but I do understand why professionals are upset.
That said, there's software in place to protect artists from AI scraping, and it's called Glaze. It is also a type of AI, but one that is designed to fuck with image generating AI. It puts a very subtle filter over image files, so if the image is stolen (or even screengrabbed) and used to train something like Midjourney, it produces a bunch of junk data that poisons the dataset. Kinda like pouring sugar into a gas tank.
Why does it look like she's growing an extra boob in her pocket?
Maybe if it is a "social application" of technology. In any case - not necessarily.
Also I don't mind stuff I draw being used in AI art* by default, however that's me.
*(when "transformative" (in a legal sense) and assuming no deliberate lying -- AKA "plagiarism" -- is going on)
Since you mentioned artist hating AI in its current form due to laymen thinking this could be a good way to replace artist, it reminds me of a video of a man who uses AI to make art that was more than just typing in a prompt such as using photoshop.
TL;DW Man uses stable diffusion and some other tools like photoshop for 14 hours to make the image he wants.
From something like this, it wouldn't surprise me with how the laymen could fail in thinking AI made art would replace artist. I wouldn't be surprised if the actually good and not janky looking AI made art was crafted with other tools like photoshop and used a sketch as a base to build up from. I'm not even an artist in any sense so I can't say much in whether AI made art such as the kind from the guy in the video can count as art but I can say that if one really wanted to make something good out of it, they will very likely need to do more than just type prompts and redo generating in an image.
That said, with all the jank and and failure AI generated images have, I do enjoy the ones that end up looking like body horror and LSD-laced drug horrors. Those make for a good laugh and I remember a friend sharing one that managed to make what I could best describe as some creepy demonic Silent Hill-ish Caitlyn Jenner images.
I imagine there could be at least some artists who don't mind AI art, even if a minority.
Or at least when credit is given, if any significant part of art they make is used in it.
No doubt there'd be some actual artist that don't mind AI art though that'd just be purely as a tool and as long as others aren't stealing their work and then the thieves try to claim it as their own.
Also tried to run Stable Diffusion to make some furry art to see if it'd do an abomination or something decent. Instead, the checkpoint got the bright idea to instead make a anime girl with animal ears instead. Worst part is that her armor isn't too bad for arm protections but it's like the AI gave up and decided to make impractical anime armor instead.
Also tried a more "realistic" checkpoint in making a black man on the streets of Los Angeles with a sword.
It made something but I wish it was more drug induced jank.
That's the thing, consent isn't asked for, and when have you seen an AI image generator ever give credit to the images it was trained on?
I guess I'm in a minority when I think intentional "plagiarism" is lying rather than "theft".
Anyway I don't want this thread to turn into a copyright debate.
Also AI art still has this weird or "off" feel to it.
I can imagine someone making excuses like "it could do text" but then you see the text and it's all melted Simlish.
Also trying out different checkpoints and the like, I seen some good and some bad attempts Stable Diffusion had in making armor.
The only decent attempt but this is like the fashion armor of Baldur's Gate due to the under-armor looking to be cloth, and no freaking gorget or helmet. Elbow armor (known as couters iirc) can be excused since IRL cavalry known as the Polish Hussars, who had a sweet style for their cuirass, didn't need elbow armor but even they had gorgets to protect their necks.
In contrast, the breast plate on this is even worse not just because boob plate but because I'm not a fan of the style of the breastplate (as someone that's a fanboy of the style used by Polish hussars, this fantasy style of plate from real artist and AI should of taken notes in how the lames work). On the upside, she has a gorget but even that can have its share of problem because I doubt any of them had a V on the neck protection.
I also tried to run Stable Diffusion once more after playing STALKER and seeing how it handled weapons.
The AI really borks itself on the guns.
Lying can tie to plagiarism. You just gotta claim a work is your own without even bothering to cite sources. And yes, AI will always have this off and weird feel to it. Some images can get away with it until you take a closer look and notice all the details that are off. Some images straight away just give it off.
It is kind of funny when "transhumanists" think that one day people will "merge with AI", or that "AI will be the last and greatest invention", when AI consistently gets hands wrong. I think if "metaphysical naturalism" is right and consciousness is merely a byproduct of brain function, then AI could get as natural as people in the future, but it's a pretty big "if" even then...
Separate names with a comma.