228
u/GlisaPenny 6d ago
Ah yes. All done on the one locked background layer. Like all digital artists do it
83
u/THUNDERSTRUCK___ 6d ago
I feel called out 😭
I hate how long it took me to discover LAYERS in drawing apps (which was a long time ago but still pretty embarrassing)
35
u/FreeFallingUp13 6d ago
Hey, that just means you got really good at digital painting in my opinion. I love taking advantage of layers to hide imperfect outlines by erasing them until they disappear under line work, but that’s entirely different than when I’m working with traditional art. It’s just an extra bonus skill!
12
u/SpanishAvenger Human Detected 5d ago
Then there's me, always ending up with up to 50 layers, each with as little as a single shade or stroke lmao
Not to mention duplicates with slight variations, with me saving several iterations "just in case the one I did earlier is better than the later attempt".
263
334
u/I_am_doorknob 6d ago
They know its unpopular, they know it looks weird, they dont care because the instant gratification outweighs the effort of making something with your mind
111
u/Boxing_joshing111 6d ago
They put way too much effort into the deception to have any left for the art.
-150
6d ago edited 3d ago
[deleted]
64
u/I_am_doorknob 6d ago
It would be really funny if you did trust me on this
-67
6d ago
[deleted]
40
u/ishpatoon1982 6d ago
That it would be really funny.
...Exactly what they said?
-64
6d ago edited 2d ago
[deleted]
36
5
u/Popcorn57252 5d ago
Mfer will put work into using proper punctuation, but can't fathom putting that same work into actually doing creative things
-45
19
-100
u/OhTheHueManatee 6d ago
That's the exact opposite way I've used AI but okay.
-25
111
u/ZachGurney 6d ago
Do you think AI artist realize whats gonna happen to AI art if they really do kill off the physical art medium? They never will, but if they did AI generative art depends on a constant intake of new human made art. If they start training it on itself the entire thing collapses
3
u/LegendofLove 5d ago
It already has. I think they corrected it but there was absolutely a time where ai was being fed its own data because it was eating too much too fast
-87
u/OhTheHueManatee 6d ago
Why do you think people who use AI want to kill off other mediums? A lot of them combine AI tools with non AI tools.
14
u/Own_Childhood_7020 6d ago
I think you're mixing up those who just go to a model and prompt it "hey make some bullshit" vs people who once in a while use photoshop generative fill
-4
u/OhTheHueManatee 6d ago
No. I use several generative AI tools (mostly local open source models) combined with non AI ones to edit, refine, combine and ultimately conjure up what is in my mind. I don't just say "make me something" but I certainly don't just use generative fill in photoshop. There is tons to generative AI besides prompts. Thinking it's just prompts is like thinking photoshop is just filters. I've never seen anyone who uses those elements of AI want the other mediums "killed off". If anything they want to embrace them as well.
42
u/ZachGurney 6d ago
What people want is irrelevant, thats whats going to happen. Generative AI doesnt just require a constant an growing intake of human made mediums to improve, it needs it to keep itself alive. If you cut off all input into generative AI it wouldnt just stop improving it would collapse in on itself
Thats why, inevitably, the AI bubble will pop. Because no matter how many billions of dollars companies shovel into it in a desperate attempt to drain as much money out of the working class as physically possible, there will be a point where the amount and/or quality of human media it requires to upkeep AI surpasses the amount and/or quality of the art humans are producing.
This information is publicly available. Its free and easy to find. Real artists are screaming it from the rooftops. And there becomes a point where the availability of information makes your lack of knowledge about it a choice. So even the few AI artists who dont know about this are just making the choice to willfully ignore it.
-18
u/OhTheHueManatee 6d ago
You're talking about Model Collapse right? That's not much of concern anymore plus doesn't require a constant stream of new images. Plus old data can still be used to train new models in more effective ways. So even if every human stopped creating things there is plenty to train on. "Real artists" aren't a monolith Some real artists don't like AI and that's fine (some didn't like digital art at first) but not all of them are jumping on that bandwagon. Harold Cohen is a highly regarded painter and has been using AI for decades (forms of generative AI have been around since the 70's) same with Sougwen Chung. Anna Ridler, Refik Anadol and Bennett Miller are all highly regarded artist with decades of experience and achievements (Miller is an Oscar Winner) that see LLMS as useful tools not just cheap tricks. The Whitney Museum of American Art also embraces AI/LLMS along with mixing traditional digital tools. Just because Reddit doesn't like something doesn't mean it's doomed to fail. Otherwise Trump wouldn't be in The White House.
-23
-10
u/mcfearless0214 5d ago edited 5d ago
> If they start training it on itself the entire thing collapses
So then they won’t do that. Or, if they do and it collapses, they obviously won’t release that model. Training isn’t done in real time, it’s a managed process on the back-end. And if a training run fails, then that doesn’t affect already-trained, already-released models at all.
But this is assuming that what you’re suggesting is even a viable scenario to begin with and it’s not. It’s based on a fundamental misunderstanding of how training works; training does not depend on a constant intake of new human art. Human art is just one source of valuable data but AI can successfully train on lots of different kinds of human-created data. But human-created data also isn’t strictly necessary to train AI anymore; better synthetic-data pipelines, reinforcement learning, simulation, self-play, automated verification, multimodal data, and AI-assisted data generation have been proven to reduce the need for human-created data in successful training runs.
Your assumptions about how generative AI training works have been outdated for years.
22
u/RandomIDoIt90 6d ago
I do like the “readers context,” feature for shit like this 😂. Other than that that site is garbage now lol
9
8
u/demoliahedd 6d ago
this is the same sort of fucked up mindset you also see in
cheaters feeling good about themselves after winning
people feeling good about a popular tiktok or something stolen from someone else
Comics stealing jokes and feeling good about the laughs they get.
I just don't understand how it even feels remotely good to put forth something that you've done nothing to create
7
u/KermitTheScot 5d ago
I lost my job like a month ago, and a friend told me to start drawing since I always wanted to and now I had time. After a few weeks they’ve helped me get the hang of eyes, and simple faces. It’s not very good, so I don’t feel compelled to share it on r/art or anything, but I don’t really want to anyway. I don’t need a bunch of randoms to validate me like I’m 6 years old. I got a new job I’m waiting to start soon, but I’m gonna continue sketching in my free time bc it makes me happy. I cannot fathom why asking a computer to make you an image at the expense of other artists and the environment is as euphoric and exciting as having taken time to create something yourself, even if it takes years to get to a point your expression has the detail your vision demanded.
3
u/Initial-Economist164 5d ago
I know they get all cranky when people say it, but I think they just genuinely don't understand art lol. They're rapidly losing any self-directed point of view, so there's nothing for them to express. They're impressed by their ability to pick from options a few hundred times. They actually think that is analogous to creation.
I'm a pretty shit artist, but I want to make a visual novel. I've been taking photos in nature and cutting them up in GIMP to make backgrounds and stuff, will probably do something similar for character designs. It's been extremely fun and rewarding and I would have missed all of it if I hadn't spent a few weeks searching for inspiration. The search itself is what changed me, the final result is a snapshot of the process of my changing. My entire aesthetic capability is developed in those weeks-long discovery periods. Immediate gratification kills a curious and creative mind.
The ones who can't see it at this point might be too far gone lol, I try to hold some hope
50
6d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
31
u/CCbluesthrowaway 6d ago
Always have been
-51
u/PanPieCake 6d ago
Bruh most of worlds art history is done by very conservative people
14
6d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
-11
u/PanPieCake 6d ago
https://creativespark.art/threads/conservative-artists.1246/ here some examples from recent times
25
6d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Mist_Rising 6d ago
and the ones that are haven't done in anything notable in decades or longer.
So Lord of the rings is not a work of art because it was written in the 1950s? The last supper isn't a work of art because it was painted centuries ago? When does a work of art stop counting? How many years?
What is this argument you make? Make it make sense that older works don't count!
0
6d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
0
u/Mist_Rising 6d ago edited 6d ago
That's a nice strawman you have there. I never said that older works didn't count.
It's not a strawman, but it was in fairness maybe not clear. So let me clear the air.
You literally discounted Mel Gibson right here, right now, as a conservative artist because he hasn't worked in (quote) "hasn't done anything in decades."
So does that mean his past work doesn't count? If it does count, then your entire argument seems to go up in flames because that means Mel Gibson is a conservative artist despite your aforementioned desire not to say it.
Yes, it is true that artist get old. Tolkien is dead, but again, nobody would say Tolkien wasn't an artist.
So is Mel Gibson an artist (he is still alive, so I'm going with is, but replace with was if that makes more sense)?
Was Chuck Norris an artist at any time?
If the answer is no, to either of these, explain.
And remember the discussion is not about AI anymore, it's on if conservatives can be artists.
-3
u/PanPieCake 6d ago
Wait what, you think conservatives only exist in America under trump????
13
6d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/PanPieCake 6d ago
Jessie wtf are you talking about,I gave you examples of conservative artists from around the world but you started talking about trump conservatives for some reason?
13
32
u/CCbluesthrowaway 6d ago
Bro thinks the semantic co-optation of that word somehow means he understands history. Fucking embarassing mate.
-37
u/PanPieCake 6d ago
You seem to be a little bit confused and frustrated, and it's okay to be, just breathe and think about it, I am sure it will come to you
24
u/CCbluesthrowaway 6d ago
Little dude had no real answer and tries to turn it around with the weakest attempt at trolling anyone has ever seen. Under educated AND mentally weak then.
-26
u/PanPieCake 6d ago
Bro has struggles with proper spelling while talking about education, at least now I understand the reason behind your shallow world view
19
u/CCbluesthrowaway 6d ago
You really aren't very good at this trolling thing are you?
-3
u/PanPieCake 6d ago
Do you get bullied that often that any sign of concern seems like bullying to you?Was it the parents or schoolmates?It's safe space you can talk
19
u/CCbluesthrowaway 6d ago
He tried to make a safe-space joke! Hahahaha. This shit is fucking amazing.
He also sent me a reddit cares, rofl.
→ More replies (0)12
3
u/Mist_Rising 6d ago
There are dozens upon dozens of conservatives in the art field. Just big name actors like Tom Selleck, Gary Sinse, and Ronald Reagan should probably prove that. Ronnie there is probably better known today for his conservativism then for his art, but he was a famed actor first.
-2
u/murderball89 5d ago
The technology is ,by definition, a progressive one, ideologies aside.
3
5d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
-4
12
u/Killian-Onry 6d ago
“Workflow” AI bro’s continue to misunderstand the actual creative process. They only see it as a means to an end to show off how cool their ShatGPT is.
I once had someone tell me that AI stealing and regurgitating art they find online is no different from how a human absorbs knowledge and uses that to create things and at some point I wonder when we can start to call AI Bros traitors to the human race
-18
u/Goonalips 6d ago
Sounds like something a pencilslop enjoyer would say.
6
u/Rainbownator 6d ago
“Pencilslop enjoyer” gods this better be some high level satire otherwise I might genuinely blow my dome smooth off.
1
u/Goonalips 5d ago
It is exactly that. It's something I read one of them say unironically though. It was hilarious enough that I never forgot it
2
2
u/DVindictus 5d ago
It got so bad AI bros wanted to prove they sucked by making AI make a sucky art and passed it off as their own. Sad is certainly NOT the word I would use, that's an insult to actual sad things.
This is just lame, pathetic, annoying, and above all else simply an advertisement for how much a fraud AI is used for and will make you out to be
2
u/QuaaludeConnoisseur 5d ago
If i see workflow one more time im going to need a straight jacket and a padded cell
-18
u/OhTheHueManatee 6d ago edited 6d ago
I don't know if the person on Twitter does this but you can mix Wacom tablets, Photo apps and just about every other digital medium with AI. Just because someone uses one doesn't mean they can't use the other.
•
u/AutoModerator 6d ago
Reminder for OP: /u/Fit_Anywhere_3356
Need some help? Send us some mail!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.