Felt like this was a good place to ask this.

How do you see AI art?

I personally see it as a tool for ideas. Not something to copy 1 to 1, but something to help you get started. god forbid using it as reference. At least TRY to find something similar made by a human and use that (giving credit is important too) :sob:

I've seen this discussion on several places, and i'm curious as to what the answers shall be.

AI can be a useful for artists, the problem is ing off AI "art" as a creation, when the majority of the effort involved is typing in prompts. i know you have it striked out lol but realistically it isnt the worst to use AI for references, especially if youre looking for something oddly specific. for a blunt example, "how would this anime girl I drew look like with dog ears? what about cat ears?" it could be a great time saver in the right hands. the information from it could be useful, but again, i think thats about the extent of its viability. AI art lacks depth, and as others mention frequently, its inconsistent, looks fake a majority of the time, and has no actual emotional intention behind anything it makes. these are flaws im sure will be minimized as AI continues, but will never be "fixed".

ERA Basil wrote: 14w1i

AI can be a useful for artists, the problem is ing off AI "art" as a creation, when the majority of the effort involved is typing in prompts. i know you have it striked out lol but realistically it isnt the worst to use AI for references, especially if youre looking for something oddly specific. for a blunt example, "how would this anime girl I drew look like with dog ears? what about cat ears?" it could be a great time saver in the right hands. the information from it could be useful, but again, i think thats about the extent of its viability. AI art lacks depth, and as others mention frequently, its inconsistent, looks fake a majority of the time, and has no actual emotional intention behind anything it makes. these are flaws im sure will be minimized as AI continues, but will never be "fixed".

..okay valid maybe using AI references is not THAT terrible.

Since AI is the future, I use AI generated illustrations as a means to let an artist recreate an idea I had from using Stable Diffusion 1.5 (My illustrative LLM of choice).

i see it as over hated a bit, like bro ai art is not that big of a deal

Slowpoke1135 wrote: i1ze

i see it as over hated a bit, like bro ai art is not that big of a deal

It is a big deal for artists who actually draw. Like would you be pissed, if you made something so beautiful and ai takes one of your drawings and makes its own. And then the “ai creator” claims it’s theirs, even though the only effort they did is to ask ai something like
“Draw a ghibli themed landscape”

Tho the only justified thing about ai art is personal or commercial use

Aireunaeus wrote: 25e15

Slowpoke1135 wrote: i1ze

i see it as over hated a bit, like bro ai art is not that big of a deal

It is a big deal for artists who actually draw. Like would you be pissed, if you made something so beautiful and ai takes one of your drawings and makes its own. And then the “ai creator” claims it’s theirs, even though the only effort they did is to ask ai something like
“Draw a ghibli themed landscape”

Tho the only justified thing about ai art is personal or commercial use

bro idgaf what someone does with my theoretical art, even if it was actually beautiful and not ugly

Slowpoke1135 wrote: i1ze

Aireunaeus wrote: 25e15

Slowpoke1135 wrote: i1ze

i see it as over hated a bit, like bro ai art is not that big of a deal

It is a big deal for artists who actually draw. Like would you be pissed, if you made something so beautiful and ai takes one of your drawings and makes its own. And then the “ai creator” claims it’s theirs, even though the only effort they did is to ask ai something like
“Draw a ghibli themed landscape”

Tho the only justified thing about ai art is personal or commercial use

bro idgaf what someone does with my theoretical art, even if it was actually beautiful and not ugly

lmaoo i see. but some people feel like they are doing art for nothing when their stuff gets stolen with ai etc.. but im no artist so idk

Slowpoke1135 wrote: i1ze

i see it as over hated a bit, like bro ai art is not that big of a deal

It isn't if you disclose that you used AI to generate it. As I've said, I use it to let artists recreate what I generated (if any are willing to remake it).

smart tbh

I don't see the issue with it provided that there is indeed a disclaimer that it is AI. That said, I don't usually like it, the narrative that it's "soulless" is pretty true tbh.

it's ass

imo some ai art are good, some are absolute terrible. when an ai draws a human being, it can mess it up soooooo badly. the human can have 7 fingers, 3 hands, 4 feets, and other weird stuff. other than that ai art is pretty cool

It's just zero effort, like okay if you want to use it for yourself go ahead, but if you make AI "art" to sell it to other people it makes you look like an idiot for exploiting people who think it's real, and with time it's getting harder to recognize it.

I've seen some restaurants use AI generated images on their food menus, even in artistic shops like AI generated cats on keychain vinyls and I don't like that it's being normalized.

Waifu wrote: 4q502n

It's just zero effort, like okay if you want to use it for yourself go ahead, but if you make AI "art" to sell it to other people it makes you look like an idiot for exploiting people who think it's real, and with time it's getting harder to recognize it.

I've seen some restaurants use AI generated images on their food menus, even in artistic shops like AI generated cats on keychain vinyls and I don't like that it's being normalized.

A lot of people around me seem to love AI a lot, to the point where they use it regularly. I personally see AI "art" as extremely lazy. Why get a picture in seconds when you can actually a human being and get a digital drawing in a matter of hours to a few weeks?

I liked AI art when it actually looked like AI art.
The moment it stopped making eldritch horrors and started imitating actual art is the moment it stopped being fun.

Ymir wrote: 6g5y2r

I liked AI art when it actually looked like AI art.
The moment it stopped making eldritch horrors and started imitating actual art is the moment it stopped being fun.

BluePyTheDeer_ wrote: p2465

A lot of people around me seem to love AI a lot, to the point where they use it regularly. I personally see AI "art" as extremely lazy. Why get a picture in seconds when you can actually a human being and get a digital drawing in a matter of hours to a few weeks?

The current trend around italian AI generated trallalelo trallalas and similar is one thing I don't really hate. I wouldn't call it "art", but more like shitposting. So it's more of an entertainment thing cause it is funny as long as you are aware it's shitposting.

i hate ai art tbh

it should be banned forever (:

[-Omni-] wrote: 2f5t3k

it should be banned forever (:

NOW THIS IS TRUE

something we never needed. Not a completely stubborn perspective from my side but realistically thinking, we already had all tools, no?
Most of the times I see AI-generated art it just gives me a headache looking at it and the people believing what they see. On social media, you will stumble over information posts all the time but it's even worse when the things they see is purely fake to a point that it's really easy to tell for experienced people in the topic but not recognizable for people out of touch

Lyawi wrote: 1df2j

something we never needed. Not a completely stubborn perspective from my side but realistically thinking, we already had all tools, no?
Most of the times I see AI-generated art it just gives me a headache looking at it and the people believing what they see. On social media, you will stumble over information posts all the time but it's even worse when the things they see is purely fake to a point that it's really easy to tell for experienced people in the topic but not recognizable for people out of touch

true

JLuca913 891 wrote: 294g57

imo some ai art are good, some are absolute terrible. when an ai draws a human being, it can mess it up soooooo badly. the human can have 7 fingers, 3 hands, 4 feets, and other weird stuff. other than that ai art is pretty cool

I think it really comes down to good prompting if done right. My previous points I made about this still stand for me, though.

Also, if a GMT would be so kind as to lock this thread due to inactivity, that would be appreciated.

I think some AI art are useful or just funny. But the art drawn by a human is much better and has more "soul".

Neigdoig wrote: n1941

Also, if a GMT would be so kind as to lock this thread due to inactivity, that would be appreciated.

no need to

I personally think ai shouldn't be used for any kind of imaginative/creative purposes. (Maybe not the correct word but you get it). If it's used as a method to help you out in order to get better at it, then yes, cheers for ai.

I actually hate the ghibli ai art with my soul. Completely goes against what ghibli actually stands for.

Let them be, just don’t put AI content where people are sharing their own and don’t want that.

If you want to, you can share and compete with others on platforms like Civitai.

i think its not too bad, but its not too good too
whatever i dont care

[-Omni-] wrote: 2f5t3k

it should be banned forever (:

To be honest, I find it quite sad I mean It's was cool at the beginning but now I'm feel kinda bad for the real artist I mean sometimes it is difficult to differentiate them and I find that bad for the drawings of real artists who put time and energy into them. Now AI artists are more present than real art :/

still this

Fujiya wrote: 59653i

Let them be, just don’t put AI content where people are sharing their own and don’t want that.

If you want to, you can share and compete with others on platforms like Civitai.

but, if

Chisa- wrote: 2s1k4r

it is difficult to differentiate them

then it will be over and there will be no point to differentiate

It's OK when used by individual whose art is not their strongest skill to express their thoughts into pictures (and, by extension, videos and musics as well). Or by small businesses to generate new ments and stuffs without a lot of expenses.

However, I think it should not be treated and appreciated as "art". AI-generated "arts" are made by AI mashing together stuffs, that they're trained to recognize, to give the exactly what they asked for. They're soulless and devoid of any ion and imagination.

Jangsoodlor wrote: 455q5

... They're soulless and devoid of any ion and imagination.

The person who writes the prompt is responsible for part of the imagination, not the AI.