Combining @StabilityAI #StableDiffusion generative powers + Human guidance and graphic skills* with tools like @Photoshop in a coherent workflow.https://mobile.twitter.com/wbuchw/status/1563162131024920576
But you can tell it's soulless. It's like a Daz render in the 3d scene.
>>434823cope. It's just the stone age for ai, it'll make sharper stones, move onto metal, perfect that, then use fucking lasers to be fucking perfect. We're living in a simulation and people don't realize it.
I still havent seen anything generated by AI that doesnt look like it was generated by AI
>>434953That ends now, behold Wombo AI's eerily accurate interpretation of the prompt "Chuck Berry" in "Realistic" mode.
>>434812Holy fucking shit you faggot just shut the the fuck up about this bullshit.Where are the jannies to fucking send this away already?
>>434953Some anon made this today
>>434953We are literally not even in the first decade of AI graphics generation, and most of the recent stuff only came out this year or in the last 15-20 months. Give it time. I will be adapting.
>>434823Soulessness is a cope and if it wasn't Fivver would have never worked.
>>434812It's mostly "over" because artists are too pussy to actually do anything against it. So many of you losers are all>"h-haha! n-not bad! a-acutally it's kinda cool! hahaha!"You deserve every year of destitution and disrespect coming your way, wishy washy cunts. Thud McChuds out there will make millions off of something he "created" by typing in a text box, meanwhile you'll be hanging yourselves.
>>435558what should they be doing exactly? why dont you do it?
>>435561>what should they be doing exactly? why dont you do it?retard: the post
>>435574excuse me what?
If I give an image can turn a brunette into a redhead without changing anything else?If so how?
>>434812Need this for 3D modeling.
>>435585It's far easier to do that in photoshop. Like, can you color in the lines? Tier easy.
>>435585>needing an AI to change hair colorRetard.
>>435529It's hard to call something soulless when it's based around actual good artwork, it's poor taste than anything else really.
Ok but what is the issue?There will always be demand for real art
Wake me up when I'm able to do that using my own computer, and when this software is free as in freedom.
>>434812This is just a more user friendly version with less steps. You can do this right now locally. https://youtu.be/XtMvk0dpnO4
>>435561I don't know nigger, it's your field, you decide. And general public doesn't give a fuck whether your fancy art is made by human in 2 days or by AI in 2 minutes. Improvise, adapt, overcome, learn to use AI tools to shit out absurd amount of [insert product] generated by AI for full price until it's commonly adapted and some jew comes up with cheap photobank full of AI photos/drawings. Oh wait, these have been here forever and people still need professionals to properly use them so it doesn't look retarded.>t. programmer - it will also change, but we'll probably never fully drop the human factor there, if we do, then literally nobody will need to work, so everything is fine.
>>436674you sound upset anon
>>434838But how stolen are these images tho?They all just seem like remixes to me.This one for example is probably some CP2077 art and if I was to use it commercially thinking the AI generated something totally original, I could be infringing on the artists rights since remixes of works (unless to the point of complete obscurity but then it's a moot point) are infringement and cannot be copyrighted.
I'm using stable diffusion with an old 1070 graphics card and it's pretty slow. How much can I speed this up by buying a current gen card?
>>434812It's only just begun. We going to make some amazing art.
>>436736>This one for example is probably some CP2077 art and if I was to use it commercially thinking the AI generated something totally original, I could be infringing on the artists rights since remixes of works (unless to the point of complete obscurity but then it's a moot point) are infringement and cannot be copyrighted.Chads IA are just showing us how retarded are kike's copyright bullshit.
>>436674Truly demonic, take your fucking meds dude.
By accident I made mouse chick ludes. I'm sold on it
>>436979Oh man !>>18794True.https://l.instagram.com/?u=http%3A%2F%2Ft.co%2FlFDQuDyswa&e=ATMXamwUs16qlmQdk5nOD-VHrJOzm--Ziki0lBW7-b1C5XuomN9HG2KcKE4BwnwOe1rmHHTTwKqct6jvFQGpDA&s=1
>>436979>>436857We should just Photoshop boxing gloves over all their hands to hide it. The Strongbad method
>>434823Crazy how the soulless Daz artists are able to make so much money with commissions
>>435585It's really bad at simple things like that, actually. Same with intuitively trivial shit "draw ten rectangles".
>>436435>on my own computer >free as in freedomDude, it's open source.
>>436622Great video, especially that part at 1:27.
>>436622>scared of saying retardWhat a niggerfaggot
>>437423I laff about your tiny little world.
How does one actually install this?Is it harder or easier than getting dwarf fortress to work?
>>434812very nice. it will be just a different way of creating art
>>436857Don't worry that will be fixed in future updates, 10 years from now art skills will be completely worthless.
>>437656I doubt it will even take that long.2 years max.honestly nobody in their right mind would argue against artistically stimulating products done by a human dying at this point. everyone who doesnt believe it either didnt try any of the current programs themselves, has way to high expectations from judiciary, knows absolutely nothing about big corporation media firms or simply isnt able to physically comprehend.imagine the flood of funds these businesses will keep facing the more progress they make. imagine the hope to be the one leading this future market. imagine the greed for calculating all sorts of things that are beyond pure images. in the end all data is the same. bunch o' ones and zeros!This is huge. we cannot even understand. 50 years from now we'll be looking back at today and wonder how weird a worldview we had. absolutely every nuance of life will be changing.
Indeed. Why would someone pay and stress with a gd freelancer to give me minimum effort mountain of designs to pick from that don't under the concept behind what they're designing for, when I can get large batch files from a incubating machine god in no time? It's already moggimg /ic/. You semi-automated /gd/ and /3/ niggers are the first to go
>>435245rectangular centered, wide angle news photograph of young Chuck Berry plays guitar on stage, live rock concert, crowded theater, 1956 (Full_Body_Shot portrait), photograph, digital photography, vibrant color, Eos 1v, 85mm, Portra 400, depth of field, volumetric
>>436736>But how stolen are these images tho?How dense are you?Current artists take inspiration and references from other existing works. Is that stolen as well? It's a very similar process to how AI generates this stuff.
>>437756>>437755Annnd...still looks nothing like Chuck Berry and despite getting the race right would be no more likely to cause someone to guess "Chuck Berry???" without a guitar for context than the one that looks like Neil Young's cousin on vacation.
>>437795you fucking moron.stop regurgitating with that kind of certainty stuff you dont even understand. what do you even know about how AI works to just repeat this statement without a hint of doubt or proof for expertise.there is a group of people who conceptualize like you did, yes.but that doesnt mean it is the whole truth. at most it is one possible part of the truth. seriously what do you know about anything to act as if you can pull stuff out your ass without even giving logical reason or examples.please reevaluate yourself.The Ai is not a tool/invention that is separable of the images it is being trained on, just as a car is not separable of the motor that is built into it. no images - no AI.no motor - no car.the ai is not the blank programm itself before being trained. the ai is the domesticated form of that program.yet the car manufacturer has to face legal systems aimed at protecting the work of other real people. people who are only able to provide value to society because a system of rules protects them from being exploited.---the car company has to pay the person (or group of people) who owns intellectual property in the form of a motor.---and just like that an AI is nothing without these things built into it that are made by other people; images.reality is messy. sometimes artists should be charged for using ideas of others, yet often enough they arent. that is in cases a sad truth. and in others beneficial to us all. reality is fucking messy.yet either way a machine relying on work of others as a crucial piece and not paying a fair return is not the same as a person being inspired by something.after all a machine/object has no rights.but rights need to be in place as to not allow social entities of unmatchable power to fuck up everyones life without being held responsible for it.
Have any of you tried it for anything professional? Like "Logo for mid-size furniture retailer, modern, clean"Even just for inspiration of basic elements
>>437798Yes with stable diffusion There are actually some really good models, and you yourself can train models to follow i.e a certain style to get consistent results.This is useful for shit like icons or banners. I know /gd/ is a slow board but I am surprised that there isn't much talk on this.https://huggingface.co/jvkape/IconsMI-AppIconsModelforSDThere are others and you can get a pretty good results but will less consistency with vanilla SD 1.5.
>>437797Oh god you're a moron. But I'll entertain you. First, I'm a fucking software developer, so I do know a thing or two about programming an AI. Also work on a company that deals with this kind of shit, although on a different field, not in generating some random 'artwork' - But deep down it's all the same.How the fuck can you say "no images - no AI". Firstly, educate your fucking self. What we call "AI" nowadays, is just a buzzword for what is actually machine learning. A program where you train it with input to generate a desired output. You can have a motor and not have a car - The motor is the "AI". You feed it fuel and it goes BRR, but without the fuel it's still a fucking motor. That's what the machine learning algorithm does - You write a program that given a number of inputs, spits out a 'prediction' of what the output would look like. These Image generators work just in the same way, you feed it a prompt and it spits out an image. How that works is because it was trained on a model, like other machine learning algorithms - Feed it a data set, that associates each image with a text-based description, and the AI stores in it's memory that the word "duck" can look like the 3 million images of ducks it has stored. So when you tell it to give you an image of a duck, it looks at the "knowledge" of those images, and spits out a "new" duck image.If I tell an AI do draw a duck, and it samples from 7000 different artists/photographers, should I credit them all on the final image? don't think so, and this is no different from you drawing a fucking duck. You've seen ducks, you've seen pictures and drawings of ducks, so you can probably draw a fucking duck. Are you gonna credit everything you've ever seen?Your examples are just too fucking stupid and prove you know next to nothing about AI
>>437835lol homie>I am a software developer so I know a thing or twofucking kek.don't you think the main message of that introduction was>without even giving logical reason or examples?literally you just burped the most basic bitch answer imaginable, when in fact some interest for actual solutions would be so more adequate. and I want to make you responsible for that.you saying you'd be concerned with tech makes it even more ridiculous. you should be familiar enough with this stuff to be able and not just suckle on easy to digest headline-concepts.I don't know how you would argue against anything I wrote in that first part besides of>NOOOOOOOOOf course AI is a buzzword. but literally we all know that. you think users of 4chan started using the web like yesterday?hindering discussion with that shit like COME OOOOONthere is no point talking about that shit anymored.The subject is publicly easiest to target with the term AI. might as well accept it for sake of discussing actually important and beneficial matters instead of fucking around with stupid words.1/2
>>4378362/3dude. no. the programm we download and use and coloqually refer to as 'AI' (eventhough you understandably dislike the term) is not the raw machine learning algorythm from before training.arguably the bigger part of work manifested as this 'AI-thing-product' as it runs on my computer lies in logistics and energyconsumption of trainingcenters as well as pure production of training data.and that training data was taken from people who didn't sell them their property for doing so.>an AI without training data is useless. just as a car without motor is useless. and with any product the work of people who contribute to its usability HAVE to be compensated. argue why it would be otherwisse!Do you really think a person who photographs animals for a living is okay with a corporation stealing his artistic skills for framing a duck in order to kill this same photographer?a mechanical engineer doesnt have to build each motor in order to own its theoretical value. and it's the same with personal artistic principles which are being stolen just as the textural details of a fucking feather.The AI is not only drawing A duck. It is drawing all of the components inside a rasterized image, many of which are result of pure human expertise. even if you yourself have no clue about composition, lighting, focus, bokeh or any other abstract principles leading to beautiful images, the machine picks up all of them, without acknowledging how incredibly much time and effort went into creating its sum.in case of a human doing work and owning a picture you wouldn't say 'this person owns the concept of a duck'. they own the fucking image because it takes expertise, time and effort.yet as soon as an AI did it you act as if the only thing it does is reproduce a duck, when it actually rips of this whole set of expertise as well.
>>4378373/3the AI doesn't invent motors. it builds motors based on property owned by others. The people who were thrown into the training data are obviously being ripped off.if (as you say) it actually would be no problem at all to teach a computer what a duck is, corps wouldn't have to rely on peoples property.and I am really curious how you think it would be fair for real existing people with real existing jobs and real existing children should be ripped of like that 'because cool toy that draws my dnd characters'
>>437836>>437837>>437839Machine learning algo is one thing, training data is another. Yea we use AI for everything and it's easier to just say "it's an AI", even if it's used for the most basic bitch thing like scanning a QR code with your phone. Misuse of terms annoys the fuck out of me, but that's also because literal autism. Anyway.An "AI" exists without it's training data. That data just makes it work, but the algorithm is there. The training data is nothing without the AI either, so that motor/car example doesn't quite work. You can have a car without a motor and still look at it and "yep, that's a car, it just doesn't go very far".As for the AI using everyone's knowledge to produce images, that's just the way it is. It sucks for artists that worked hard on developing those skills, and I can sympathise as I was a graphic designer before switching to software dev ( better pay and design clients fucking suck ). Even with basic shit like photoshop neural filters. I spent years learning PS and even did a side gig restoring and colouring old photos. Photoshop does most of it with a single click now, and any 14 year old can do what took me years to achieve. Sucks to be me. In any case AI isn't going to stop just because of some copyrights grey area. I'm making the argument that what an AI does is not much different from learning by yourself, during some years of studying light, composition, framing, anatomy, etc etc, condensed into a neatly packed "training data" package. Humans have that training data as well, it just takes longer to learn and practice vs an actual machine.
>>4378402/2>and I am really curious how you think it would be fair for real existing people with real existing jobs and real existing children should be ripped of like that 'because cool toy that draws my dnd characters'It's not, like most new tech. It wasn't fair for any profession that died because of technology, like when cars appeared, industrial mass production of objects/furniture, digital editing/painting tools, etc. I'm sure there's a shit ton of examples, and in all of them, people losing jobs or seeing their set of skills become nearly obsolete did not stop progress. AI is just the next one in line, and sadly artists are the next to go, for the most part.It's also a really fucking dangerous path if you ask me. I like AI, I like writing some shit and seeing a cool image pop out, but millions other people are doing the same right now. There's so many AI generated images right now that in a few years time, most of digital images will be AI generated, and that will just lead to a loop of training data, where AIs are being trained on AI generations - original pieces and criativity will be a niche thing, and maybe that's were artists can re-emerge? But then AI will get trained on that as well. Fuck everything I guess and just ride the wave.
>>437840>>437841god you are such a cunt'I have autism'nobody cares about your little personal reasons or little personal life.I don't care you are software dev.I don't care you are autistic.I don't care you did graphic design.We are literally two humans and all we can do is search arguments to inform our decisions. and someone saying they're this or that is absolutely fucking unnecessary garbage but instead nopthing more than a sad attempt to excuse mistakes.holy fucking shit.>other technological advancements.I am not against machine learning.I said the people contributing to its existence have to be compensated AND asked.Believe me. people will gladly provide their images to this corporation who pays you for giving them YYOUR KNOWLEDGE AND TIME.BUT THAT DOESNT HAPPEN IN REALITY.they just take it. and they build products around it. and a narrative in order to market future products. and fags like you repeat the shit without any care or original thought.if they are clever enough to build this thing purely from their own work, so be it.BUT THEY ARE STEALING MY AND YOUR AND OTHERS TIME AND EFFORT AND TALENT WITHOUT COMPENSATING.
>>437839when you have to start numbering your posts - stop posting
>>437843when you have nothing to contribute stop posting
>>437842>BUT THEY ARE STEALING MY AND YOUR AND OTHERS TIME AND EFFORT AND TALENT WITHOUT COMPENSATING.Yes they are and they are not gonna stop, and it is just the beginning, the big players are not even here yet.Now you have 3 choices:You keep crying like you are doing right now.You go with the flow and somehow learn to manage your existence with AI, because the technology is here and it's not gonna uninvent itself.You find another job.:not the same person you are replying to
>>437855yo.crying? did you even read the whole conversation? I am telling some people who are interested why it is indeed theft. these corporations exploit people as workers but do not pay them in return. we are collectively building their product which they will then sell to us and kill our own jobs. this is hardcore legal fraud. I love using stable diffusion. its an infinite serotonine rush and just incredibly powerful already. yet it is theft. and Id wish this thing in its current state was banned, since a stable society is worth way more.also what you are saying about just going with it isn't true either. now I am not saying it is false. but to be frank we all can individually decide whether we are shutting our mouths about it or not. I am not disillusioned enough to think me or anyone doing this or that thing would change this or that for good. but after all I at some point of the day have to be able to go to sleep, and at some point in time Ill even die. And honestly your approach doesn't make either one particularly comfy.
>>437855a last thought and food for more discussion.I have a question I do not have a complete answer to.but why do you think the big players are still waiting a bit?I would guess it is because they know that the moment they start entering this big scale, legal investigation would immediately multiply. the best reason I came up with yet is that they hope for a moment of maximum disruption and social acceptance. they are trying to fly under the radar. this is a test round many different stakeholders have all kinds of interest in. eventho at the same time I wouldn't necessarily say>the big players are not even here yetjust like that anyways.as I said, I dunno the answer.I am making shit up at this point.maybe you have better ideas.
>>435528>I will be adapting.Yes. We should all learn to change old people diapers.
>>434812Best thing to happen to hacks since Photoshop.Results will be similar: a torrent of limited range mediocre lookalikes in pastel colours.
>>437857>>437858Google and other big companies have an army of AI/ML engineers and infinite amount of data to train from. SD is one of the biggest practical use case that came out of AI/ML.>but why do you think the big players are still waiting a bit?I'm a programmer, I can offer a different perspective on what they are waiting for. I'm neither a graphics designer nor a legal expert, so take this with a grain of salt.I think they are not only working on the technology but creating a business model to put into effect. Millions of artists worldwide, they can't just let that go to drain. This is not like automating customer support services, because they were mostly low IQ tards, where the biggest business opportunity was to outright kill the market. It is better to charge artists a monthly subscription rather than killing a workforce altogether. It would take a few years to reach there, but I believe that AI and artists can coexist and what I mean by that is to reduce the gap they will create tech that is not as basic as prompt based art like it is right now and won't be as complicated/delayed as drawing something from scratch, but something in the middle and that, I believe, in the end will benefit both: the artist and the art.
>>437179Stable Diffusion has "negative" prompt words such as "missing fingers", "broken fingers", so that they don't get into the final drawing.>>437191Matter of quality. Coomers don't care about it, only about consooming quantity.
>>437796The issue seems to be that this Chuck Berry is a literal who.
>>434812You guys all realize that this "art" is all non copywritable and therefore commercially useless right?
>>437946yep. If they told me to draw Chuck Berry I'd have no fucking clue as to what they even want from me.>>438009Why, if you want to write a shitty ren.py porn game and sell it to perverts on patreon, you now no longer need to pay a person who can actually draw a cartoon Emma Watson sucking dick. That's quite useful, commercially."Artists", on the other hand, will now need to do something actually creative in order to sustain themselves. Like, I don't know, actual art.
Made with stable on nightcafe
current AI models are censored GARBAGEwait until someone cracks this shit wide open until then all this AI shit can F_U_C_K OFF
>>434812It's not fucking "over". Stable Diffusion is illustration, not graphic design. And it's pretty fucking sterile illustration.
>>434812Is there a way to prompt SD to use a specific version of the four images it spits out with revised prompts, or am I stuck downloading, cropping, and re-uploading images to post with a new prompt?
>>434812...the shadows are wrong?
>>434812why not just trace from photos, cgi or pictures from other "artists" like many of these wannabes do all the time? I see no big difference and nothing really new here. Just another possible method.
so i've been messing with the krita plugin and the workflow is interesting.you can get fairly granular, but there's always rng.feels a bit like photobashing or even collaging but the photos you're bashing are being produced on-demand, in context. it removes a lot of the skill required to integrate new elements in (sometimes you still need to tweak h/s/l or levels).as with anything you can start to inject skill into this. i'd say that most people using this right now are people with basically no shoop skills or an eye for composition (and they're incredibly lazy). autists will always autist and there's potential here to generate images at scales previously unfeasible due to time and labour constraints.i'd encourage people to try it even if you have reservations about the whole thing. you have an opportunity to be at the bleeding edge of something that is definitely going to stick around and you have existing skills that will elevate you over the average proompter.
i think the biggest reason this tech will eventually die is 1. like tracing, it fills people with shame. it is literally impossible to be an "ai artist" and get any sort of real fulfillment out of it since it's devoid of any creative process, that is unless youre delusional to the point of clinical level narcicissm. and2. once the tech gets advanced enough where it can copy signature style, i think at that point even artists whove been on the fence about this issue or just didnt care will start giving a fuck and lastly3. society has always shunned plagiarists and assholes, and i think the abrasive demanor alot of ai bros display and their persistent harassment of artists (even ones that least deserve it, like actually good twitter artists that are happy making a relatively meager living off their work) will come back to bite them in the ass real hard.
>>439637 >AI art is devoid of any creative processHaving an idea and forming a concept is the first and most inportant part of the creative process. AI will help with the technical aspect of creating art and make the technical skill mostly worthless. Physical art will hold its value but the technical aspect of digital art is dead. Consequently contemporary artist and ai artist are forced to use their creativity even more then before, not less.
>>439638having an idea isnt a skill. a movie critic offering suggestions on how to make a movie better (valid or not) isnt the same as being the " better director". no one is "the better director, in theory" or "the better artist, in theory". if you are something only "in theory", then chances are you are essentially nothing. atleast as far as that "skill" you claim to have is concerned. there's a good reason for skill segregation existing, and that is to seperate lazy sacks of shit from people that arent lazy sacks of shit. you dont wanna be called a lazy sack of shit? well dont claim to be an "artist". i'm by no means saying only artists can be great people, but you can lead a fulfilling and meaningful life w/o claiming to be something youre not. to put things more plainly: you arent a "hunter" if all you did was press a button to make the deer drop dead. there's no inherent worth in your lived experiences and they dont "deserve" to be visualized simply by virtue of you having been born. like, get a grip you faggot. you can delude yourself into thinking youre "injecting skill" into it by applying your base level grasp of photoshop to whatever it is youre stealing, but deep down you know that is essentially the same as claiming to be some maths savant because you know all the specific commands you can run on a calculator. and thats what you are. a cuckhold. you are being CRUELLY cuckholded by a calculator and no amount of semantics can change that.
>>439637>>439641you need to stop being so naive>>439638you need to actually make something for once in your life
>>439642i think its healthier for me to be optimistic about this. alot of the ai people seem to just cant help themselves but be absolute cunts the way they approach the artists theyre training their ai on. i think they are cunty enough that they'll be universally hated at the latest once the tech matures to a point where they start stealing from actually good arists.
>>439643the tech can be trained by anyone on any art right now for very little money.look, i'm of the view that within the decade these models will absolutely destroy the bottom and middle of the 2d commercial art market in most of its forms. i believe that these models are ethically dubious at best even if they skirt around existing laws.however, i've still used them for few dozen hours now and i'm trying to keep up. i would highly recommend you do the same.this stuff is not going anywhere, because the "productivity gains" afforded by this stuff can't be ignored from an economic standpoint.eventually someone's going to come into a meeting having done 5x the work you have looking very polished for an early stage and the boss will ask how and they will say "ai" and any ethical concerns will go out the window.adapt or die. and i don't mean "just use it like any other tool, bro" because that shit is garbage that clowns say. i mean build an entirely new workflow around it.it sucks, but learn to work with it and do it well.
>>439642also i think you underestimate people's capacity for feeling intense shame over the realization of their own inadequacies. the people who dont feel shame and continue being mean spirited envious cunts will get bullied so intensely that they'll have no choice but to retreat to some very obscure corner of the internet just like what happened with all the deepfake porn.
>>439644i would have no issue over training my own art on ai to increase my productivity, but i still wanna be able to create a great piece of draftsmanship from scratch.
>>439646> but i still wanna be able to create a great piece of draftsmanship from scratch.i'd encourage you to continue doing that, however, what you want and what may be a viable economically in 5 years may not be the same.all i'm saying is, just get familiar with what's out there right now and keep up with it. you already have an edge over non-artists.get set up with krita plugin (the photoshop one is a bit jank right now) and experiment with it for fun.don't show anyone what you're doing. try making things you'd normally never make. get familiar with the tech and working around the limitations.but again, don't go in trying to use it like a plugin for your existing work. just explore it for a bit and see where the limits and weaknesses are.peace.
also i dont think anyone below high academic level draftsmanship should even be eligable for being able to purchase an ai at all. you can call it "gatekeeping" but i have no problem with that. gatekeeping is important actually.
>>437845you first xD
>>439647i will prolly do that at some point this year fasho, but rn i just wanna focus on drawing better:p peace brother HH
>>435417the anon in question:
>>439637>society has always shunned plagiarists and assholesYou ever looked at the billboard charts or highest grossing movies. People love derivative garbage that looks like a million bucks, AI art is derivative garbage that looks like million bucks. Basically everything popular is made by formulas and algorithmic thought models, this is just the next logical step where you just cut out the middle man and let a robot do it.
>>439702This isn't untrue but what also isn't untrue is that the people who are the most alarmist about AI and who white knight for "real artists" as if art itself needs them to survive are also some of the worst offenders when it comes to reflexively shitting on any original art that doesn't rigidly conform to a formula that loosely falls under the banner of what "tradition" dictates is "worthy".They do it with art and architecture and music; there's nothing wrong with traditional art and music or architecture but there's something intensely wrong with acting like it's superior to all else by default and that the existence of different perspectives and styles is an existential threat to all that is "good", that must be shamed and actively suppressed to save art and artists.Quality creative works stand on their own merits and don't need some self appointed gatekeeper with the aesthetic sense of a grandma to survive.tl;dr: ai excels at replicating EXACTLY the kind of art and design that it's detractors pretend is unique and superior PRECISELY because that "traditional" shit they love is formulaic as hell.
>>439704I fear that only shitty MS Paint memes will be an indicator of human craftsmanship in the future. The only area where humans can outcompete a neural network is the same way the jock outcompetes the nerd.
>>437840>design clients fucking suckingits so true, most time you cant draw and waste time with chat to35-ish iq idiots how to iterateok artists are the first, some years later programmers will replaced too by aiits kinda depressing. but its the progress.
>>436435Time to wake up anon
>>435585Yes, inpainting (where eit only generates within the masked portion of a given image) should handle that.But you're basically using sledgehammer to open a walnut. Photoshop can do simple colour changes very easily too.
>>439410If you're running it locally with the web UI there should be a "send to img2img" button which passes the file directly to the img2img section for that.
>>436674>then literally nobody will need to work, so everything is finewhy do miditwits think this is will be a good thing?
>>439643it's true, I was Ai neutral for a time, but seeing how Ai bros treat artists have made me mostly against AI and cheering on the cultural backlash.
>>435417>todaythis images have are at least from september
>>440017>cultural backlashLOL, literally nobody outside of a tiny group of alleged "artists" who can't outperform a computer gives a fraction of a shit about any of this, ESPECIALLY the fragile fee-fees of said "artists"."cultural backlash"... stop it, you're killing me!
>>436770I have a 3070 and can generate images in seconds. Though it has to run all night to train embeddings.
>>439644>adapt or die. and i don't mean "just use it like any other tool, bro" because that shit is garbage that clowns say. i mean build an entirely new workflow around it.That might buy you a couple of years but ultimately the writing is on the walls. You can't adapt to a dead field and the people who think they can are huffing overdose levels of copium. The truth is that people are scared shitless of how bleak the future is and they don't want to accept that there's nothing in their control they can do about it.
>>440081>The truth is that people are scared shitless of how bleak the future is and they don't want to accept that there's nothing in their control they can do about it.https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=p85FTLv5_-M
>>435417LOL, it's trying so hard not to make her korean because this model was trained on so much korean
>>435558>artists are too pussy and love this!are you a moron?
>>440588she has two completely different pupils and her bilateral symmetry is way off. again, it's a cool technology for prototyping or even just getting you something that you can then edit yourself, and not have to pay 200 bills for the getty image.
>>436435Free and easyhttps://github.com/EmpireMediaScience/A1111-Web-UI-Installer
This makes stickmandrawing even more important
>>437835coding bros seeeeeeeeeeething hahahahhhahahahahahhahahh
>>437868HAHAHAHAHHHAHAHAHA>they gonna use machines to pick the cotton now but i'm sure they'll keep all us niggers employed working alongside the machine ayo frthe delusion is only outshone by the cope
>>434953check out >>>/g/sdg they make plenty of good stuff
Go check /g/, they are in full meltdown woth the release of chatGPT4, coders have effectively become the first group of professionals in human history to remove themselves from the market.
i'm a beginner
>>439637>1. like tracing, it fills people with shame. it is literally impossible to be an "ai artist" and get any sort of real fulfillment out of it since it's devoid of any creative process, that is unless youre delusional to the point of clinical level narcicissm.Doing anything you don't like for a living can turn into shame. You get over it quickly if it's the easiest method.>2. once the tech gets advanced enough where it can copy signature style, i think at that point even artists whove been on the fence about this issue or just didnt care will start giving a fuck and lastlyHow does that impact any of this?>3. society has always shunned plagiarists and assholes, and i think the abrasive demanor alot of ai bros display and their persistent harassment of artists (even ones that least deserve it, like actually good twitter artists that are happy making a relatively meager living off their work) will come back to bite them in the ass real hard.Society doesn't give a shit about plagiarists. They only care about products they're used to buying. The only time being an asshole matters is if you have to personally deal with them or they're somehow under the media/gossip spotlight. Most people plagiarize and are assholes.
>>436770There are some benchmarks comparing graphic cards if you google 'em. I'm still running it on a laptop 1050 because I'm broke but I usually prompt an X/Y matrix and leave it running while I sleep because it takes my computer 5-10 minutes to generate a 512x512 image.
>>442551>Society doesn't give a shit about plagiarists. More importantly, the art world and those in positions of authority within it not only don't give a shit on moral/ethical grounds, they regularly refuse to take action regarding counterfeit art when doing so might call attention to the fact that they fucked up and authenticated it as genuine.To do so would obviously be a hit to their credibility as professional authorities, but also risks exposing the fact that what they lavish praise on as "special" is so un-special that some unknown schmo can replicate it well enough to fool alleged experts.That's a huge reason for all the wailing about AI; if all the "human element" and "soul" and approval from gatekeepers *actually* mattered, AI wouldn't be a threat, just as some unknown guy with a bunch of old paper making fake Rembrandt pencil sketches shouldn't be a problem.And it's not just shady dealers and incompetent curators and authenticators who do it, artists themselves have signed the works of assistants for the easy money going back centuries, and Dali is one of the most counterfeited artist of all time in part because he would sign blank litho paper and sell it directly to forgers behind his legitimate publishers back.
>>438045can you elaborate what your prompt was and your settings? love this
>>442610Computer: what if Jesus were white?
>>435585There's a couple of ways, 1: Use img2img and set a low denoising rate so the image doesn't change much except for hair color2: Use pix2pix plugin (it's basically a better version of img2img that doesn't change anything of the source image except what you want to change) and specify the difference in hair color in the prompt3:Inpainting, just cover the hair and specify the hair color in the prompt, keep the de-noising strength low so it looks close to the original4:Use controlnet and set the original image as the source and select "canny" for both prerender and redner options and specify you want the hair color changed in the prompt.Honestly though it would be a lot easier to change hair color in any digital art program (photoshop, paint.net, gimp) by just selecting the hair and altering the hue of the selected area.
>>437797>stop regurgitating with that kind of certainty stuff you dont even understand. what do you even know about how AI works to just repeat this statement without a hint of doubt or proof for expertise.how ironic
It's fun to play with composites in controlnet.
>>436857So paint them correctly using real drafstmanship, knowledge of anatomy and painting skills, faggot.
>>434812Stable Diffusion. Graphic designers are fucked.
So here I was. Thought I would take a look at gd/. Damn. I'm blown away. If I'm getting this digested right..Is it soon going to be possible to make and animate your own movies with just a script and a few character drawings? NGL. I'm going to be first on that bandwagon. I wanted to make some movies that deal with subject mater way to far out and to real to bring to light with real people doing the acting. I can see this being a rise in the slash or horror flicks from days past. For me? Its going to be me an my Laptop creating again anywhere in the world. Just roll some fiber and I'm set. NGL bro's. This future looks bright!
Everyone gets blown away by AIs at first until they realize their limitations.Right now AI art is a toy. The most powerful model available rn is a fucking Discord bot, and it has a distinct aesthetic you can spot at thumbnail size.
>>443736Yes AI art is readily identifiable as AI art but will corporations and their consumers care? Getting “human made art” will become an eccentric niche of an already eccentric niche
Can I create goal! NES style character with ai?
I hate to break it to you... But everything here looks like what it is... A dogshit A.I. piece of "art". Have you seen art? Do you realize that everything from decent lighting and shadows to depth is missing from these? A.I. is by far the least impressive and overrated thing to come out in a while.... Try rendering any sort of complex geometry or fleshed out image with a.i....
>>436979download a VAE brother, your colours suck
>>442546download a VAE, same as I told the other fella
>>435558actually the courts will get to it and the whole thing will shut down so i'm using my chance while i still got it.if you knew how to use ai as a tool, you'd figure out how not good it is and how much touching up it needs to look good
>>444199>anon thinks art is about the technical shit.no it's fucking not. AI lacks human creativity, it will always lack that because it simply can't get into our head
Midjourney is very fun and also quite addictive. Bearing in mind it is only at a very rudimentary stage, I think AI art will have effects on human psychology as drastic as social media and smartphones did. From just using Midjourney for a little while, its strange how you feel a sense of creative satisfaction whenever it returns an image, even though all you did was type in a few random words and wait a few seconds. It will have the effect of turning every NPC into an "artist" and devaluing the time and effort that goes into genuine human creativity. It also makes you look at things irl and question if they are actually real or not, certain things begin to have an AI "look" to them. Hard to explain. Art, fashion and music have long been dominated by hipsterish referencing of past eras and aesthetic movements and most young people obsess over nostalgia from times when they were not even born. AI art will fuel this x100 with every Zoomer inserting themself into their very own 80s budget horror movie or whatever. Perhaps there will be a rise in niche movements where people pay a premium for real human art, similar to people choosing to buy expensive handmade art prints and homewares over mass produced stuff or choosing vinyl over downloads. But all in all, it will fuck artists and especially entry/mid level designers and writers in the long term. Directors will simply sign off and modify the tons of work that intern drones churn out with AI. It does genuinely feel like one of those technological watershed moments. Yes, right now AI Art and ChatGPT are pretty crude but this is just the very beginning of whats to come.
Even if human-made art continues to exist, it's going to be much harder to make it (and learn how to make it) when the entire infrastructure designed to support human artists collapses. You are a market just as much as your clients are.
>>444256>human artistsanon is talking about people who make ads
I see Art/Creative Director jobs asking to have AI skills.What are the best FREE art and chat AIs?I will never pay them a bloody cent, fuck em.
>>440827kek that's a slaughter
I'm a professional graphic designer and illustrator. I also did a little bit of motion and 3D. Overall I have pretty wide set of skills and I take commissions in a lot of different fields of design and illustrations, from branding to characters design and animation.For a few months now I'm trying to "take the pill" and do what AI bros are suggesting but it just doesn't work. AI can generate random-ish pretty images and it might fascinate normies and people without natural talent or imagination(like AI bros) but for me it is completely useless. I see a lot of people who, I assume always wanted to be artists but couldn't, trying to LARP themselves into art and bully everyone else out. It is very strange how AI is the future and how it is officially "over" but yet none of the AI bros can explain to me how exactly do I use AI in my workflow or what "new job" I should consider. I actually was pretty scared at first when AI started to make improvements, but now it seems more and more like a gimmick. So far the only real implementation of AI I saw in art fields are AI porn and some twitter accounts who post anime art but for some reason are really afraid of people who comment that it is AI generated. Oh, and a lot of tiktok accounts with the same issue - post a lot of AI art but very scared every time someone mentions it is AI generated. So maybe at least here some of the AI bros can explain to me exact steps of how do I use AI in my job? Without mental breakdown if it's possible.
>>443943Nah. People don’t want AI art. It’s really no different from grabbing an image of Google search. They won’t value it.
>>444302AI stuff is mostly unusable for high-quality work. I had to generate over 400 images to get the exact rock formation I wanted for an image, for example. I use AI to generate compositions and color combinations and textures. The amount of inpainting and img2img you have to do to get something decent it’s insane. It’s great for photographs but for anything relying on clean lines like vector art. Even if you get the image, you cannot even feel satisfied. It’s essentially a stock image that you could have bought before for $1 that now costs $1+ after renting the GPU for two hours to generate all those variations.
I was curious and playing around with ai art. Did not even trying hard. Even had some mistakes in my prompt. It came up with this. OMG! WE ARE FUCKED! for real, no kidding I totally could totally draw something like this myself, But not this fast! Now everybody with no skills and a rough idea can do it. We are coachmen on a hose drawn carriage.Worked well for centuries but someone just invented the car.
>>434838>We're living in a simulation and people don't realize it.Then I pray I find the cheat code to make my waifu real.
>>444482least glowing aibro
>>434953I thought this one was pretty good.
>>444482What is the monetary value of such illustration? Why have talented artists draw ruffles and hair for two hours? It's a better use of their time to "AI" paint into it or make manual adjustments.
Hi anons, I'm wondering if a platform like what I'm thinking of exists:Ideally something between upwork / an image board. The idea is to allow anons who are good at proompting to make a bit of money by selling their shit to whoever.- business posts a bounty amount and a description of an image they want (ie a logo, background graphic, art asset etc...)- anons submit images that satisfy the description - business chooses their favorite from the submissions within a time-limit, the anon who created the submission receives the bountyIf there's something out there that fulfills the same use-case I'd be interested in knowing about it.
>>434812Is there a guide to getting stable diffusion running? I'm retarded, thanks.
It's over for artists! Ready Made art means anyone can become an artist! I've studied for nothing! Dadaism is the death of art!
>>445157I think dadaism isn't a lost case, but letting anyone do art isLike, you can use a banana to represent how idiotic this idea is, literraly a banana in a wall of a museum is being seen as art, but to let anyone with any shitty reason do whatever they call art and put that into a museum is just retarded, I went to a museum and saw litteral bags of hair aside of a video of the women who cut her hair and put in those bags, wtf is this supposed to criticize or mean?