#ai is the fucking worst

[elenorasweet]

What gets to me about mainstream AI enthusiasts is that all of them

all of their talking points

can be boiled down to "I hate artists".

It's all either about replacing the very few art jobs that pay (writer, cover artist, voice actor, actor, 3D renderer, graphic designer, ...) in larger industries...

... or it's about creating "art" (patterns, prints, characters, posters, colouring pages, fabric designs, ...) without needing to actually develop any skills or spend any time, and then selling it on etsy, spoonflower, redbubble, etc, thus taking money and attention away from artists...

... or it's about just being able to claim you made a thing and "showing them up", either by showing that you cando what they do with no effort, or more often, by just not saying it's AI and getting the attention and admiration that they get. Or to get clicks and defraud people who think they're buying a real thing, which still involves creating fake art.

And it's fucking everywhere. As a crafter, I've seen hundreds of crochet, knitting, cross-stitch and quilting patterns that are made by AI, and they NEVER say that in the description when selling them. Literally look up "cross-stitch pattern" on etsy and a large percentage of the first page of results is AI.

My sister collects colouring pages for her library branch, and takes great pride in paying artists for them, because she wants to pay people for their work. She literally has to dig through several pages of AI art to find a single real artist right now. Recently, I've seen several cross-stitch and colouring book artists closing shop because they can't compete with AI and it's not worth the time anymore.

And there are legitimate uses for AI that don't involve these things, like people using it to diagnose cancers and rare illnesses and shit. It could be used to reduce people's workloads immensely. It's barely being used for that, though, because what people seem to really want to FOCUS on is this:

"art is easy", and "I could do that too if I had the time/skill", and "artists are cheating us by charging for their work" and "I hate artists".

[crowcrownprince]

I hate AI made character songs. THIS is what character songs should be like

[iamespecter]

Some idiot said that my colorblind Caine art was, and I quote, "it's got an AI feel to it" and I've never felt the need to obliterate a random ass stranger with a concentrated energy cannon blast from outer space

if anyone wants visible proof that it's not AI for some reason, here's proof of the sketch and unrendered state (because I keep backups in case I want to overhaul)

[sarafangirlart]

Omg there’s a Danaë retelling let me check out the synopsis- oh…

[shipspainfulships]

The way my favourite productions (reason: cast, crew and, the amazing writing by Dorian.) collapsed and is in shambles rn just because ONE person decided to be a bitch and ruin everything.

FUCCKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK

[prankthevillainousvan]

*Pure Wheezing and Crying*

@bamthebatmobile @snowybatwheels159 @quizzthesillyhelicopter

@bibithesillyscooter @Feral-atv-hyena

[thescaryhyperfem]

what if they met just think about it

[moerusai]

When asked about the proposal during the press conference, Crabtree-Ireland said that “This ‘groundbreaking’ AI proposal that they gave us yesterday, they proposed that our background performers should be able to be scanned, get one day’s pay, and their companies should own that scan, their image, their likeness and should be able to use it for the rest of eternity on any project they want, with no consent and no compensation. So if you think that’s a groundbreaking proposal, I suggest you think again.”

Source: The Verge

[hecksupremechips]

Ever think about Date’s view on family and how that relates to his character? When Mizuki asks him to define family, he just awkwardly offers that its like being blood related to someone. It leaves a bitter taste in his mouth and Mizukis, but like, he literally had no idea what a real family looks like. He’s an orphan, a man who grew up with no family and no name, but he doesn’t know that yet. He has no memory of his past, no way of knowing if there’s someone out there waiting for him to come home, if he even had a place to call home. His only frame of reference for a family is Mizuki and her parents. Deep down he knows it’s not right, not loving, but it fits the mold of a nuclear family, man and woman, blood related, so that must be what family is. When he’s asked to take in Mizuki, he’s absolutely clueless because he literally has zero frame of reference for how a child is supposed to be cared for. He puts distance between them because this isn’t his place, he doesn’t have the right to love this child as his own because he isn’t the real dad. There’s no place for someone like him in a family. And it’s baffling to him to hear that Mizuki not only loves him, she needs him because he is her family. Date believes he’s a nobody, just a sad, lonely man with no name who absolutely does not deserve this kind of love. But he has it anyway because he chooses it, he makes something that neither he nor Mizuki have ever had before. HES HOME

[akai-anna]

Round 6

Round: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8

[batwynn]

Hello. So I have a genuine, honest question as someone who isn't an artist. I saw you made a post about AI art floating around Tumblr lately. How does one differentiate between AI-created art vs. ACTUAL art? Some things have been easier to notice than others (ie: YouTube videos and like, moodboards and the opening to Secret Invasions) but for art specifically, are there any key things to look out for that make it obvious it's AI generated? I do not support AI in any fashion but in this day and age I do find it increasingly more difficult to tell the difference between something that was created by AI vs. created by an actual person.

Hi anon! So, heads up this might be a bit long of a post but I wanted to point out some things that I don't see frequently mentioned in other posts about A.I stuff.

First things first: Look at their other 'art' pieces. If they have a generally consistent style, a consistent type of work (Realism vs ink art for example), characters you see more than once and from different angles, character sheets, etc. You're going to notice if someone suddenly switches from little ink doodles to fully colored and realistically rendered 'art'. Now, this doesn't mean everyone switching styles or mediums is A.I, but it means to take a closer look if you notice something vastly different than their usual stuff. More A.I. clues below!

For things to look for, there's a lot of different clues but generally you're going to notice a certain new car shine to everything. Everything will be a little too clean, even if the style they are ripping off is sketchy. Sketches will have crosshatching that doesn't really make sense or random lines in a place that an artist probably would not put there. That being said, here's some examples where that isn't as noticeable:

Here you've got your usual body/anatomy problems. (Plus some elements I'll talk about later as well. This one's got it all!)

Glitchy foot, glitchy hands. glitchy eyes. Strange proportions for legs that don't exactly fit a stylization, but more of an glitch. Now, of course an artist can draw 'glitchy' things like this either by accident or intentionally, but you really only see these types of things in A.I vs actual art of a similar style. Realism artists are generally not adding extra fingers or varying sized fingers, they're not rendering the foot to only have too many toes, missing toes, and the foot also... sort of part shoe. Unless art artist is otherwise intentionally including these elements, it's generally a clear cut example of A.I stuff. (For example: Different body types and disabilities exist, and there are people with different shaped hands, shorter/longer fingers etc. But you will also usually find some kind of info with the post about the person/character that will tell you about them that can clue you in on if it's A.I vs real art.) If the artists are drawing in a style with 'exaggerated' anatomy, you can almost always see that as a persistent and intentional STYLE in their art. If they aren't, this is something you'll really notice in A.I vs realism. It can be especially true with people who fully render realistic art because it's not in line with the style, and the relevant elements of rendering art this way. Artists who do realistic rendering at this level generally know their anatomy very well, and are going for realism in all elements of the art. Some stuff like the exaggerated long legs in women are kind of everywhere, but the hands, the foot, the lopsided winky eyes (I don't know how to describe it) are not things a professional artist rendering realistic art would generally do. It's just not in line with the style, or the ability/skill that the artist has worked on. (Again, unless completely intentionally and in line with the person/character.)

For 'real' life items like the tables below, you've really just got to ask yourself: Is this physically possible? Do all the elements make sense and actually work together in a real way?

Sometime it's hard to know if you don't have any experience with, for example, acrylic and wood table making. But there are things that just don't work in real life, and there are things that maybe someone can do, but even in the provided examples it just doesn't make sense to do. For example, the little 'tree' hanging from the bottom of the left table. Would that be possible? Probably. Would someone do that? Probably not. If you're really stumped, sometimes just looking up videos of people making that type of thing can give you a better idea of what actually works together, how it's made, etc.

Here's something that really helps when you're really struggling and zooming in for every detail: TANGENTS

Ok, so tangents in art are when you're drawing a thing, like hair, and it's lining up with a different object to the point where the visual line continues from one part of art to another and it looks really unrealistic/weird. Most artists figure out how to avoid this on their own just from noticing it and feeling uncomfortable with how it looks, while others learn via the internet etc. It can happen in anyone's art at any skill level, but the amount that it happens in A.I stuff is HUGE. It's almost every single image, and you can really notice it in places where something overlaps like hair or, from the above image with the money: there's two bills that just kind of bleed together. From the same image, you can also see how her hair bleeds into the wrinkles of her jacket in an unnatural way. Comparatively, you can see in the Hela art I did below that there are overlapping elements like the hair and the ribbons behind it that do not mesh or bleed together.

Something else to look at: Symmetrical elements that don't work right. So, this is kind of getting harder to see depending on what they're generating as a subject matter and the style they are using. As always, there is a disclaimer for this. Art does not always have perfect symmetrical elements in it.

For example: in the real world, this dude's coat would have more clean symmetrical elements. As it is a sketchy doodle, they're there but they're not 100% symmetrical. With a LOT of A.I stuff, you'll notice that something meant to be mirrored on the other side of the clothing, room design, etc. is actually completly wonky/incorrect or not even there at all.

For example, in this A.I we have missmatching elements on both sides. Not only in things that could be designed to be asymmetrical, but also things that 100% should be mirrored. The left side under the buckle on the shoulder has a diamond shape. The right has a weird spikey thing. The little leaf pattern on the gold lapel area appears to be just blobs on the right side. The left shoulder area has a button and additional little detail under the buckle area. It is not there on the right side. And, again, some of this can be intentional with real art. Her arm bands could be intentionally different, for example. But elements that clearly should be reflected on the other side and are very clearly not are generally a good clue that it's A.I. A few last moment things to look out for:

Styles that are recognizable someone else's whole thing. Example: The monstrosity that someone just generated that is supposedly Calvin and Hobbs. It's pretty easy to tell because it looks like shit right now, but generally if someone is ripping off a distinct style of someone famous, it's probably A.I or at least worth double checking.

Did they suddenly start doing ______? This could be anything, backgrounds, drawing horses, full color, etc. But if they're suddenly, overnight just BOOM they're 'drawing' in a whole other style, it's suddenly really rendered, and/or there's no 'growing pains'/work shown that they've started working on drawing the thing they never drew before... It's time to take a closer look. Last but not least, look for the language they use around the stuff they're putting out. A.I people are often... a certain type. They use a lot of that NFT bro lingo that can tip you off. The tags might be all over the place for styles, or tagging certain famous artist's styles, etc. They also can be a bit more blatant in the tags and just outright tag A.I or NFTs somewhere in there. And, in the end, if you really can't tell and you really love the thing and want to share it: Ask an artist. Or just don't share it.

Thanks for reading, and I hope this is helpful in some way!

[skiitter]

Feel insane trying to explain to people how emotionally moving the fucking Dungeon Crawler Carl series is, especially and specifically the audiobook version.

[jacenotjason]

one day im just gonna upload a rant about how much i hate AI onto my youtube channel amongst the speedpaints

[allycat75]

Ouch! People are starting to notice outside of Tumblr, Boston Dumb Fuck.

If only you could be as successful, personally and professionally, as Ryan Reynolds. Although, while his marriage appears real, she seems to be as much of a bitch as your fake one.

In a bit of schadenfreude (from the mother tongue of your half-Teutonic twit of a wifey), I take particular shameful joy with this part:

So glad you threw away your moral compass, character, integrity and murdered your own soul to tie yourself forever (even after the "divorce") to this racist, antisemtic, fatshaming, arrogant, childish, untalented, lazy, entitled dumb dumb for these shitty roles and a bought and paid for service award for your corruptible and useless ego-stroking poisonous snake of a political website. I hope the family and close friends you used to try to pull off this unmitigated embarrassment are willing to forgive you, because your most loyal fans bounced once you, you team and your teat-sucking brother blamed them for having the audacity to believe their own eyes, called out this witless stunt and didn't feel like sticking around for the gaslighting.

Maybe Honey, Don't, The Materialists, and Sacrifice will turn it all around... no, I can't do that! Telling obvious lies may be something your are totally kosher with (irony intended), but some of us are not comfortable deceiving and manipulating others to get our jollies.

Of course you could come clean- tell the whole truth and make authentic amends because who doesn't love a redemption story? The question is whether you have the courage to get CAAs hand out of your keister, take back your balls and realize your life is your own.

[batwingsblogs]

CHAT I RELEASED ANOTHER ONE

@prankthevillainousvan @thatstoopidduckyboat @snowybatwheels159 @jastahsillyyhana @quizzthesillyhelicopter

@datonebattruck @bibibatsilly @bamthebatmobile

[acewithapaintbrush]

Oh fuck I have just encountered the tag "AI generated text" in the Ao3 wild for the first time and it's as rage inducing as I always though it would be