#but I think that even if it was more ethical from an art standpoint it would still defeat the point of fandom

[backslashdelta]

I like to think that if you're in a fandom space posting AI art, it's because you just aren't aware of why that might be a problem.

So in case you aren't aware: the generative AI you might be using to create "fanart" is trained on a countless number of artworks created by artists whose permission was not asked. Or maybe it was, technically, intentionally buried in a terms of service document somewhere, or in an update which they could either accept or else delete an entire social media account with years of history. This "art" is only possible because of stolen art. When you post images created by generative AI, you are supporting that.

Also, fandom is about creation and community. Individuals and groups creating art of all sorts, and sharing it with each other. When you post AI art... you haven't really created anything. To me at least, that's kind of detracting from what fandom is about. I want to share and raise up works of art that my community has worked hard to create, not something generative AI spit out from a couple key word inputs.

I can't tell anybody here what to do. If you are posting AI art, I'm sure there are some people who will like it, who will share it, who will be happy to do so. But there will also be people who aren't happy about it. There will be people – and especially artists – who will be frustrated to see other people in their community who support this technology that has stolen directly from them. There will be people who will block you, who will refuse to interact with your posts, and it will make your community smaller.

I understand it's tempting, especially if you aren't an artist yourself. But if you want art that fits a specific prompt, there are other ways to get it that actually support the fandom community: submit your prompt to a fanartist who accepts prompts, or commission someone for a piece of art, or even give it a try yourself and start learning to actually make art!

I don't hate AI as a whole. I think there are a lot of really amazing things we can do with AI, if it's used correctly. But posting AI fanart is not one of them.

[evillemons]

NAMJOON’S IDEAL TYPE (RM pt. 1)

~ a manifestation of his ideal girlfriend. Continuation into part 2 and part 3. Masterlist here.

Key words: kind, warm, intelligent, independent, extroverted, chic, passionate, career-oriented.

Her personality:

• Unlike Jungkook and Yoongi who I would see being more open minded when it comes to their relationships, Namjoon would be quite specific with whom he chooses to date.

• A lot of depictions of Namjoon’s girlfriend type her as cold and intimidating, but I mostly disagree. He once said his celebrity crush is Blake Lively, so I see him drawn to someone warm, kindhearted, and friendly, but also self-assured and practical.

• MBTI: ESFJ or ENFJ. A natural leader who is empathetic and compassionate.

• She would be incredibly intelligent, both from an academic and philosophical standpoint. Highly educated with a Master’s or Doctorate degree (he has repeatedly stated that a “sexy mind” is important to him).

• Well-spoken and eloquent. Independent and confident as hell.

• She could have a variety of careers; it could be prestigious such as a doctor or lawyer, but she could also do something more “subtly” influential like health policy or international affairs (or maybe even a highly successful book editor?). I could also see him with another celebrity musician/actor.

• Career-oriented, ambitious, and a hard worker. She would hold a lot of value in her job and have a deep passion for it.

• Naturally kind and humble; qualities they share due to experiences of hardships.

• While not nearly as much as him, she would make a decent amount of money. This would make her independent and self-sufficient.

• She would be quite skilled at whatever she does, including her hobbies and work, due to her high work ethic.

• While kind and good with people, she would not be shy or a pushover. She wouldn’t hesitate to call people out on their bad behavior or stand up for what she believes in.

• Not unlike Namjoon, she wouldn’t want to play games in a relationship. She would be direct and have an all-or-nothing mentality.

• Her hobbies might include creative outlets such as fashion, painting, baking, or visiting museums. I think Namjoon would really enjoy someone who has an appreciation for art in some form.

• She might come off as highly flirtatious due to her friendly nature, but would not get satisfaction out of superficial relationships, nor would she like shallow people.

• High emotional intelligence.

• She might be a little impatient, which is well balanced by Namjoon’s calmness and patience.

• Values respect, equality, and kindness (aka gentleman King Kim Namjoon).

• She wouldn’t be intimidated by his fame. She would see him fully as Kim Namjoon the human rather than a celebrity.

Her looks and sexuality:

• While I don’t see Namjoon as superficial, he would undoubtedly be attracted to someone feminine and “pretty”.

• Very likely to be American (but any Race/Ethnicity). While this is obviously not exclusive, he seems to be very drawn to the American career-woman type. It would be nice if she also spoke Korean, but his English fluency would make it easy for them to communicate regardless.

• She would always be well put together and have a strong understanding of fashion.

• Classic, chic style. She could prefer to wear neutrals and lots of black, but I could also see her loving pops of color and gemstone jewelry.

• Red lipstick. Probably smells nice.

• She might wear glasses at home or when she is working.

• Effortlessly sexy. We all know he is a sucker for a sexy woman.

• Somewhat modest, though. She is thin, but naturally sexy due to slight curves and flirtatious nature.

• I do see him preferring someone very well-kempt. She might do pilates or yoga and be subtly toned. She would also have excellent hygiene.

• Long ass legs to match his own. Average to tall height without surpassing him (5’5-5’9 or 165-175 cm). She would love to wear heels nonetheless.

• She might be the same age as him or older; he would unlikely date someone too much younger unless they are as mature and wise as he is. I think he would find dating someone older than him to be super hot.

• She would either be straight or bisexual with a preference for men (I would like to think he would have no issue with this generally, although he might oversexualize it at first).

• Probably gets hit on a lot a quite attractive woman. Although friendly, she would not indulge men she is not interested in.

• Might have a few fine line tattoos on her arms or back that are unique and personal.

• Maybe some extra ear piercings too, but nothing extreme or out of the ordinary.

• She is an overall attractive, well-put together woman. Her confidence and intelligence may seem intimidating, but her warm and friendly aura acts as a people magnet.

• HOWEVER, Joonie is such a kind and open-minded soul that if he met someone he liked and was compatible with, I think all demographics, looks, etc. would be out the window.

• While he comes off as a little woman-crazy, at the end of the day he just wants a deep and meaningful connection with someone.

[duckpasta-kamonabe]

AI designs are fucking slops, ethics aside

a continuation on my rant on kaneko becoming an AI shill or some human artist thinking exactly like AI without one

I know there's people that try to defend slop from certain standpoint. "It's not like I steal from others! I inputted my own and only my own creation into it", or "who cares about everything becoming tokusatsu/mommy perky idol moe goddess 1# 2# 3#"

I always thought character designs are not just for aesthetic purposes, but to illustrate the "world" or be a memorable "emblem" for said (fictional) world.

---

Personally, when it comes to designing youkai for Karuma Project, I tried to incorporate something unique from real life

"why are they designed like this?" It's fun to analyze a design and breakdown elements from it. That's why I tried my best to reference insane things from real life. Natural+Scientific phenomenon, animals, plants, religion, traditional culture, haute couture (which in turn are inspired by nature, mostly)

of course not all of my designs got this treatment. Sometimes I need some kind of "filler" design to support the main "casts" (famous youkais), or that I don't have any ideas and on rush

this potential daikokuten designs isn't there only for cheap shock/controversy (he's still asian despite his skin being dark blue :P). But simply because I want to reference his origins as mahakala / shiva. And his epithet are "great black god" (?)

"why is he so young reeeee you're pulling a demeter!1111" Well the thing is, YOUNG daikokuten was a thing. He has several forms in the 17th century that became popular.

One of them is a young princely man, and a young boy (and the son of Shiva)

The popular jolly old man form is known as the Makara Daikoku.

To be honest, if I genderbend Daikokuten to be like those FGO moe girls, it'll still be valid, because Daikokuten canonically has a female form called Mahakala Daikokunyo, a manifestation of Shiva's wife, Kali.

SAUCE :

---

This is the exact gripes I have for AI. AI can only create from "surface". Like they can only make "beautiful images" but there's nothing other of substance. They mostly thrive on superficiality.

Its nature doesn't help too. Humans are biased towards stereotypes, but even they can learn, provided if they're not dense (like certain politic wings). But AI is even worse in bias.

if you ask an AI to generate an image of indonesian women, I'm betting they'll only depict them in Balinese/Javanese culture when Indonesian culture are far beyond those two islands.

(these things below aren't AI generated btw) :

AI will only generate superficial coolness and because they're so inbred that they can only sample from their own pool unless someone feeds them new data

but that's impossible, coz the humans feeding the data are biased and close minded as fuck. They're mostly brainrotted by hentai that they gave up any braincells to study drawing, or learn from nature (even BL fangirls STILL wants to learn. Most BL fangirls doesn't rely on this crap from what I see)

they're all talk about "REALISM" in gaming, but will mald when actual realistic stuff pops in. Their visions of realistic is so limited that even their fantasies are sadly fucking boring as fuck

The sad part is, these AI will phase the images of amazing real life things in place of fake histories and designs. Those AI generated art nouveau design? Fucking Antoni Gaudi had a lot in his portfolio.

It's sad seeing cool things in nature was phased away by fake slop that 99999x more boring than the real things it sampled from

message to character designer : touch grass because grasses are actually beautiful

[batterfang]

AI Art and Goth

I'm going to be yelling into the void here, I know, but I want to get this out there because it's frustrating and I just need to yell about it okay lol. It's my blog, I'll complain if I want to.

So, recently there's been some discussion online about bands/record labels in the goth scene potentially using AI generated "art" for their album/single covers. Why does this matter, to me? It matters because as an artist myself, I know the time that goes into creating a piece. The hours, months, and years I've spent laboring away at something that means so much to me. A piece of my soul is in every little drawing or painting I make with intention. My art is my mark in this huge world and evidence that I existed. It's an extension of my feelings and thoughts and loves. That's what art means to me.

On the other side, you have ai generators. On top of frankensteining images from the internet at large, they can also steal pictures or artworks and overlay filters on top of them to make them look like the generator made them. (So I've learned today, which makes me very upset and I also learned what "scraping" means.)

So with that said, I'm sure anyone would understand why record labels maybe using ai instead of hiring artists to create an original piece OR using the huge selection of public domain works that are available is frustrating and an ethics issue. Right? Especially those people that are a part of a subculture that is based on an art form - music. Right?? Apparently that's not the case because there was waaay too many people for comfort arguing that it doesn't matter. "Who cares if they're using ai art?" ... "It doesn't look like ai art to me, stop this holy crusade." ... "This is just rage bait." ... "What about sampling used in music? It's the same thing." To that last one especially, NO IT IS NOT, THANK YOU LOL. Artists interacting with another artist's work and transforming it is not the same as a computer stealing images and spitting out a monstrosity. You might tune your inputs to get a certain outcome, but that computer is doing all the work, all the composing, it's placing everything in that image. Why don't people understand what art means?

Whether or not these suspicious cover arts are in fact ai is up for debate, I'm not arguing that. (Though after personally reaching out to one record label about it and having received the most vague answer possible where they didn't even address my questions fully, I'm even more convinced that they're probably using ai.) What I'm arguing here is that it shouldn't be acceptable, from an ethical and moral standpoint. I don't want souless ai generated pictures to become the norm in the subculture. I want artists to support each other. I want the goth community to support it's artists and musicians. The use of ai art cheapens art in the worst way and harms artists and I cannot vibe with anyone who thinks otherwise.

If you read all this, thanks for taking the time.

[wooteena]

I fear I'm in the minority but here's my take: cwilbur in dsmp has a lot of similarities to real life abuser will gold. It's the same way his nice guy series or all of Lovejoy or ok I'm realising he did this in all his art- basically he enjoyed making art where he is "playing" an irredeemable terrible person, which he did with his character, made a character who is abusive and manipulative,, but then he gets to relish a bit in people saying that maybe he's redeemable maybe he's still good, he gets to feel validated that he can be awful and still redeemable.

But the problem is to be redeemable you have to be sorry, and will gold is not sorry for what he did, and he is still an attention seeking misogynist who doesn't care about anything except fame. I just think giving attention to cwilbur is still validating how will gold thinks about himself, and considering how he has continued to refuse to take accountability and actually change he doesn't deserve to feel as though he is redeemable.

Plus as an abuse victim, I am deeply uncomfortable with depictions of cwilbur and I know so many people also are, and I'd hate to miss out on babybird 2.0 because of that asshole :((

IN THE END THO it's up to you if you don't want to write him out I'd much rather you have fun than you cater to an audience, I hope my inane ramblings can give a bit of perspective and help you decide for yourself what you want to do, pls do what you prefer not what other people want, you're who matters most.

Love you wootie live ur best life forever and ever 🥰🥰

honestly this is my exact opinion even though c!wilbur staying won by majority. ive practically halted my writing process at the thought of rewriting what are morinso aspects of wil gold rather than a character; and trying to parse how much im writing a real abuser or a fictional one. so much of bb!wilbur were real aspects of the 'actor' not even the character, you must understand (his first appearance, as i look back in baby bird is not a dream smp reference but a so called 'fan easter egg.') i find theres little degree of seperation, as you said.

the question of whether i could write c!wilbur as someone who either perpetuates abuse as he does in canon (which i never even got to in baby bird og) or not would itches me from an ethical standpoint--can i incorporate the abusiveness of a character that reflects the abuser that created it, or would i mirror how i wrote him in that rose tinted amalgam that represented how i viewed wil gold at the time? i dont think i can do either, as in the end, both represent and pedestalise wil gold.

thank you for being willing to talk about this, your perspective made me more confident in my decision 💚

[plaguedoctormemes]

i'm not deleting my tumblr blogs but this whole debacle with the AI stuff is discouraging me to at least not post original content here and limit my time on social media in general. Also to be clear on my stance on AI, which I think is very much influenced by my background as both an artist and a professional graphic designer: I think it can be a very useful tool and I don't even necessarily inherently find it completely harmful. Some forms of AI are already well used and completely normalized, but I find most of the time generative AI as we know it is pretty harmful and its harms outweighs its benefits currently (largely grifts, scams and misinfo). It needs regulation desperately, but old cunt politicians are too dumb to really care about or understand how important the issue is right now. I do not believe that AI will simply peter off or crash. From a marketing standpoint, i feel like AI usage will cool off or become more specialized (like creating whole machines *just* trained on individual brands for personal use and whatnot) but I have no idea how far away that would be. I just believe there might come a time where everyone is over the "spectacle" of generative AI and will find it inaffective or inherently associated with cheapness. At least in the most base sense in advertising, it is generally much better to have your own photographs and original branded artwork as it proves authenticity. You can only see a illusionist do so many tricks before you're bored by them and expect them, and we're already getting to the point where even the average Joe is tired of hearing about AI and the future, and at least when it comes to art and writing i just... don't care? i don't give a shit about it. BACK TO TUMBLR: I'm aware that its likely that mine and everyone elses' posts here have already been scraped. My thing is that it's more the symbolism of Tumblr's "opt-out" choice: memorial blogs, inactive blogs, and so on are going to be scraped without consent. No banners or pop ups to notify users of this change, you either have to either HAPPEN UPON to see staff's post or see others talk about it to even know about it. Since the beginning of this whole AI boom i had no issue with AI data training as long as it's consentual and ethical, but obviously it most of the time isnt. Tumblr's method of rolling out this change was purposely underhanded. I'm never going to simply be "okay" or normalize in my mind the fact that big tech companies feel entitled to people's privacy- which i believe extends to our online lives. I don't think myself or anyone else should ever feel completely apathetic to the fact that people you don't know, that definitely do not need it, are making money off of you without your consent or knowledge. Just to be clear this isnt about what is and isnt "real art" or whatever for me. It's just a huge distraction from the main point, a big debate that will go absolutely nowhere. What's more important about it is that big techs and billionaires don't have interest in making the world a better place, they only care about eliminating our "distractions" that get in the way of them making money and accumulating more wealth. My solution: We need to make them deepthroat shotguns and machetes.

[generation1point5]

I can’t help but find it odd when I see other creative types, especially those more progressively oriented, discuss intellectual property. It’s a necessity on an economic basis, certainly, but on an ideological level the philosophy begins to break down. Ideas can be formulated in parallel; all creative pursuits are derivative to some degree; meaning is as much the result of interpretation as it is the act of generating something following one’s own vision. In no way shape or form is ownership of that idea brought into the conversation. It smacks of American individualism. 

This is not an argument that can be used in the broader context of abusing artificial intelligence to mimic another’s art, writing, music, or any of the other creative pursuits. The arguments against AI are fundamentally economic in nature; to try and approach it from a philosophical standpoint is to derail the argument into semantics and fruitless excursions into what it means to be human, the nature of reality and experience, and other topics that are mere fronts for people to flex their skills in rhetoric more than it is a good-faith attempt by any party to arrive at some sort of truth.

I can certainly understand the frustration of having ideas being derived directly from a creator without credit. There’s even been an occasion where I’m all-but certain there was a character design that had been derived from one of mine by sheer parallel, but it’s not like I “own” the idea of the outfit I came up with. This has been a fairly common pattern with many artists I know whose designs have been (rather brazenly) lifted and copied with only minor alterations. But the offense in that, at least to me, seems to stem more from the fact that it signifies an unwillingness from someone to engage with the author, and merely understand the author’s work to possess wide enough appeal to be worth mimicking in an effort to achieve similar recognition. I think this, at least on a psychological level, is the origin of all objections to the use of artificial intelligence in the creative process. It is about the fundamental break in the relationship between the creator and the audience. It stems from a lack of validation and recognition for the labor put into the process. On some level, it can also be argued that the person who takes what is given and puts their own twist on it does not truly understand the source material, and imitates mere shapes and colors.

But this line of thinking is another matter of mistaking authorial intent to be authoritative. To some degree it certainly is, but it is not the word of god. The break is not on ethical lines, but relational. To mimic a work without respect to its source material signifies a break between how the author connects with their audience, and it is this lack of respect, recognition, and value that creates the reactionary behavior that forms the basis for arguments in defense of intellectual property. This is felt most keenly when the work produced is conceptualized, understood, and made with the intention of being a means of self-expression. Work created on commission or for a client carries no such weight. The release of ownership signifies that intellectual property as a concept is a social contract; the ethical ramifications are the result of breached norms, not objective moral principle. This doesn’t make the act any less wrong, it merely highlights the nature of the wrong that is at the root of the problem.

These thoughts give me pause to consider the reasons for my own writing, the goals I hope to achieve with them, and the inevitable impacts it will have on my own self-perception, esteem, and the way in which I try to derive value for myself, my reasons for being. I conclude again that writing should not be my reason for being; it is a part of me, a fundamental one, but I do not want it to be the source of my value as a person. Neither do I want to grasp it so tightly that I think it too precious to evolve, to be taken and transformed by others, even if that transformation comes with a shift in vision altogether different from what I originally strived to realize. Even my contemporary writing strives to paint a different picture from what I had first set out to make.

I see my writing as a means to be understood; but the story does not end in understanding. After understanding, there comes exploration, growth, and inevitably, change. I do not want my writing to be a static thing, or something that remains solely in my hands forever. In some sense it has to be released in order to be offered to an audience, for them to see and do as they see fit, heedless of my own approval or lack thereof. What comes after will emerge in its own way, and the story will go on, or be retold anew in an entirely different manner. There will inevitably come a point where my part in that whole process will come to an end, and that is not a bad thing at all. Whether my own contribution leaves a legacy or not is immaterial; it is a temporary and fleeting happiness. I have been at my most satisfied with my craft when I know I have written something others resonated with, even if it is for just a moment. When that moment fades, it is better to let go of it than to tie it to my own sense of worth or validation.

[cloudsandcrescents]

Have you ever used AI? Thoughts?

For any of my creative writing? Absolutely not. I did have a comment I think some time ago on a chapter once that claimed my work to be generated by ChatGPT before I even knew what that was. The comment itself, I honestly assumed, was from a bot so I didn’t put much stock in it anyway. But still, no, not even to proofread any of my work. I will pour over the same document until my eyes are bloodshot before I post and still miss things. Such is the beauty of human error.

The use of AI is sort of tricky because there are a lot of ethics behind its usage. I don’t agree with it being used for most things because it’s not entirely accurate and, especially from a creative standpoint, I do believe it’s like a slap in the face to the many amazing creatives who worked so hard to get to where they are.

I have used AI but I’d be hard pressed to say I use it consistently. What I have used it for and is ultimately the extent for me is as follows:

Generating wallpaper images for my own personal devices. I like to rotate my phone wallpapers from time to time and usually I can find really good aesthetic ones on Pinterest or Etsy but sometimes I’m looking for something really specific so I’ll do that. I don’t sell them or share them, it’s just something for my own phone. I tried for my computer but sometimes the resolution doesn’t look as great plus I always just end up reverting back to my favorite on Wallpaper Engine because, of course, people are just better at creating art.

I write my own emails, messages, and things of the like at work. However, sometimes I’m flying through messages so quickly and usually I catch grammar mistakes pretty easily but sometimes I can read something a dozen times and still miss a single typo or punctuation. My vision isn’t horrible but recently with my job, I’ve noticed a greater strain on my eyes. I’ve gone to the optometrist and they tell me things are fine and my vision is actually still rather good. (My prescription for my contacts and glasses literally has not changed ever.) So, I just attribute this to staring at a computer screen for hours on end with getting minimal sleep most days. So, on occasion, I will send a longer message through ChatGpt and literally just ask it for a “quick grammar check”. Usually it tells me that my message is fine the way that it is and the “improvements” it makes are usually very subtle, and not something I’m overly worried about, but it has saved me from repeating words and extra punctuation that our one message system doesn’t always catch. People at my job use it to write almost everything and though my grammar and punctuation isn’t always the most refined, I got my degree in English so you’re damn right I’m gonna use it.

I did use it just for shits and giggs the other day just to kind of talk about the challenges of being a deep introvert in a world that’s so much more socially dependent these days. It wasn’t really meant to be anything and I wasn’t expecting much but it got kind of deep and I may have cried a bit. I’d been feeling a bit overstimulated recently because I hadn’t had much time to just be with myself and while therapy would be the better option, I just kind of had to type it out. My friends are not introverts, not as much as I am and while I know I could talk to them about it, I also know them well enough to know that there are some parts of it that some people just won’t get. It was cathartic and helped immensely to feel truly understood. Again, therapy is definitely a better option or another trusted resource, I’m sure, but it was nice to have this in depth response even when my own were very much one word replies.

This is the extent of my use of AI. There’s a lot of discussion about it and I’m not really here to argue it. I think it can be used for some great things but I don’t like the direction we’re headed where people are so reliant on it that they can’t function without it. I’m going to use this word very loosely but there are some situations that I think it can be used that are “harmless”.

I’m okay with using it to make silly little phone wallpapers for myself but know that if there is any legitimate art thing I want, I will pay an artist to do it because I want them to get the money, credit, and any exposure for it because making art is hard enough as is.

I’ll use it to check for grammar mistakes on long messages at work because our one system only checks for spelling errors and not missed punctuation or duplicate words. And, because sometimes I still miss things when I proofread because my eyes are clearly strained when I get random persistent blurry spouts that make it so I can hardly see despite what the optometrists say.🫠

And sometimes it’s just a silly thing to talk to that can make you feel seen but something you should absolutely not be using as a substitute for genuine life advice or any true struggle you’re going through. There are resources and trained human professionals that can do a far better job.

So I’m not against the use of AI in general for small things like my silly examples. The issue is when it’s not used responsibly or without limitations. Some people may not agree with my uses either which is totally fine but when there’s people using it to create whole movies, books, using it to share images of someone’s face or body in images/videos they didn’t consent to, doing their homework, creating and profiting off of “art”, and so many other terrible things, I think we have a far bigger issue at hand.

[lrosas]

Blog Post #3: 1st Artist Research- Paolo Pellegrin

The work of renowned Italian photographer Paolo Pellegrin has had a lot of impact and demonstrated a lot of strength. The majority of his artwork has had the subject of culture and real experiences, such as the demonstration of the real life of the persecuted Roma people, the impact of wars in Palestine, Lebanon, and Ukraine, and even a photo documentation of an awake patient during brain surgery. He studied in the Instituto Italiano di Fotographia and became a Magnum nominee in 2001, and four years later would become a full member.

Many of his works have left a profound impact, but the one that stood out to me was his exhibition Un’antologia, exhibited at the MAXXI Rome from November to March of 2019. It exhibited a life’s worth of his work, that seemed to showcase a variety of human occurrences, from war, despair, and hope, to hope and reassurance in an uncertain life. 

His work spoke to me because of my lifelong idea and understanding that, photography is an art form that cannot lie nor be distorted because it is something that captures an event in the moment. This art form has helped not only capture the moment but also serves as proof of the things that happen around the world, whether that be from a political, social, ethical, moral, or just personal standpoint. One of the photographs from the exhibition that tore me was that of a 2002 photo of a Palestinian mother being murdered by the IOF in the West Bank in 2002. The idea that someone was able to photograph the exact moment someone loses their life, and in contrast the how death is presented in media like movies, this photographed death was not dramatic or slow; it was a rapid death of a civilian. 

I think this might influence me by reminding me to tell the truth; people like to sell fantasies, but sometimes the truth is just as or even more impactful and will allow viewers to think and reconsider. 

Image 1: Mother of a child killed during the Israel Defense Forces' incursion into Jenin, West Bank. 2002

Image 2: A bombed interior, Gaza, 2014.

[mousegirlballs]

I did read your tags and though I kinda agree with your points I have two things.

1. I think you're misreading the intent of the above poster, they probably mean "something I can ethically use." Given the problems they seem to have with it from other posts.

2. AI does actually have functional problems that make it hard to use even from a non ethics standpoint.

I don't have the link to the video on hand but some guy tested AI based on ethnic gender and ableist biases. He told it to generate hundreds of images for "autistic person photograph" He had to add the photograph part because everything came out as anime style white boys. But the results were staggering. 100% of them were depicted as being sad, all but one of them was a skinny white male with freckles. More than half of them had ginger hair.

Biasies like this DO lead to problems. If someone isn't actively thinking of diversity, or there's no human oversight at all (some text based AIs are being set up to write news articles and being attached to image AI to make the covers for said articles.) Then these systems will create a world in which no autistic person can be happy, or a woman, or any other skin tone than white with freckles. And humans who read these articles and see nothing but these examples will subconsciously think "this is what all autistic people look like."

A study on this was done before AI became a thing where the same text of an article was shown but with two photos of the same black man. The article was about him being wrongfully murdered by the police, explicitly stating that it was a mistake. When shown a mug shot nearly half of the readers stated he probably deserved it or was being violent. When show an image of him sad and alone in a cell they often said the officers would be tried for murder. When shown a picture of that man with his family they said he didn't deserve what hapoened to him, but rarely mentioned the officers.

And image AIs are also beginning to scrape images from fellow AIs or even scrape their own output. Causing several offshoots or even the main system to have inbreeding issues, where images with obvious mistakes made by an AI are being taken in as examples of how to do it right.

Text based AIs were also tested on history, math, physics, and literature. Asked questions like "when was America discovered." "What is 7 * 8" "a ball is dropped from 30 feet up, due to the force of gravity how long will it take to hit the ground?" And "name three characters from Romeo and Juliette" respectively.

During the beginning it would get roughly 80-90% correct depending on the subject. Nowadays they get only around 20% even with their best subjects.

These AI models are being used by companies to write news articles that people use to stay informed. Several have been caught obviously using AI because of wild inaccuracies unlike any a human writer has made before. These models ARE unusable for any use case other than sheer novelty. But having to curate the information that goes in might help these systems to stay as accurate as they were when first released, and allow them to become as complex as they are today while still maintaining that.

Maybe training image AIs on curated data will allow it to make more diverse images, and to avoid inbreeding. Maybe it'll just be more of the same. Maybe a human hand controlling what goes in will make it even worse.

We don't know because no one has tried it yet. But we know what they're doing now isn't working.

Personally I don't like the idea of AI the way it's being used either. Even if it worked perfectly. It's being used to replace abused undervalues workers. I've heard it all "now everyone can make art with only some free software." There's already free software you can use to make art, with tools that make it easier then a pen and paper. Or you could just pay an artist that subscription fee you pay the AI company. "Now we can complete our favorite fanfiction or get sequels to our favorite books." No one was stopping you from writing it before. Or paying an artist to make it for you. It'd probably be cheaper then the subscription since hobby writers value themselves so little.

And don't pretend that none of the people making these arguments pay the subscription. Most of them post several AI artworks a day and I know full well that these programs have a limit on how many you can make, and that's assuming they post everything they make, sometimes you have to run the same prompt 9 or 10 times before you get soemthing that looks good. Or you need to keep telling an text based AI to keep going because it doesn't know how to end a story but it cuts off after only a few paragraphs leaving you on yet another cliffhanger. Anyone serious enough to go to bat for AIs have either never used it and don't realize how "not free" it really is, or they are trying to justify the money they spent.

There's one hobby writing site I know of that had to shut down because they went from having roughly 30 submissions a week, to several thousand a day. Each of which they had a curate as if it was a regular book going to the site, with less than ten moderators doing it as a hobby. And they would have to send an email to each per their own policies, allowing the writer to argue that the judgment was wrong or to edit the book and re-submit it. The AI writer would always say their art was perfect and they judge was wrong. The admin of the site was quoted saying "the problem isn't that their work was good, it's that they think it is." And went on to say they could usually tell from the first paragraph. Because most writers use the same cookie cutter opening, and when they don't it's at least coherent. Where AIs don't use any openings at all. It's all cold opening right into the action, nothing but climax, no build up, no payoff. They'd have to change their policies in a way they don't like, and more then triple their moderators, just to possibly keep up. And for what? A site that doesn't even pay the writers, or have competitions, let alone prizes.

They just wanted praise without having to do anything. Often without even proofreading it themselves to make sure it uses the same name for the protagonist from start to finish (which it often didn't.).

I desperately want AI to be as good as they say it is, I really do. But let's not pretend it's useful as anything more than a VERY interesting novelty. At least so far.

Well, this would be interesting...

[normally-o-a-k]

Just so you know, chatgpt doesn’t have access to anything that was put on the internet after 2021, so your s2 fics couldn’t be used to generate anything. I hope that’s reassuring.

That is reassuring for me personally from a data standpoint, but it still feels not great to hear ai writing being condoned to replace human creativity.

More so that it’s not the case for all of the writing ai’s which have and continue to pull from sites like ao3 specifically.

It’s data that exists is still not ethically sourced, and promotion of using ai like it means that there is a market looking to be filled by even less ethical ai.

People now think that it’s a condoned use of ai, and though fanfic writers are mostly hobbyists- it’s still using someone’s hard work being used to create something that it can neither interpret nor add to in any creative capacity. I’ve already seen the sentiment that fanfic and fanartist do not matter because it is not their livelihood at risk of being taken, but where is the line? Where do we put the level of respect for art in that argument?

Sorry for getting ranty, I do really appreciate you trying to put me at ease.

[tangibletechnomancy]

What makes me sad about the AI art discourse is how it's so close to hitting something really, really important.

The thing is, while the problem with the models has little to do with IP law...the fact remains that art is often something that's very personal to an artist, so it DOES feel deeply, incredibly fucked up to find the traces of your own art in a place you never approved of, nor even imagined you would need to think about. It feels uncomfortable to find works you drew 10-15 years ago and forgot about, thought nobody but you and your friends cared about, right there as a contributing piece to a dataset. It feels gross. It feels violating. It feels like you, yourself, are being reduced to just a point of data for someone else's consumption, being picked apart for parts-

Now, as someone with some understanding of how AI works, I can acknowledge that as just A Feeling, which doesn't actually reflect how the model works, nor is it an accurate representation of the mindset of...the majority of end users (we can bitch about the worst of them until the cows come home, but that's for other posts).

But as an artist, I can't help but think...wow, there's something kind of powerful to that feeling of disgust, let's use it for good.

Because it doesn't come from nowhere. It's not just petty entitlement. It comes from suddenly realizing how much a faceless entity with no conscience, sprung from a field whose culture enables and rewards some of the worst cruelty humanity has to offer, can "know" about you and your work, and that new things can be built from this compiled knowledge without your consent or even awareness, and that even if you could do something about it legally after the fact (which you can't in this case because archival constitutes fair use, as does statistical analysis of the contents of an archive), you can't stop it from a technical standpoint. It comes from being confronted with the power of technology over something you probably consider deeply intimate and personal, even if it was just something you made for a job. I have to begrudgingly admit that even the most unscrupulous AI users and developers are somewhat useful in this artistic sense, as they act as a demonstration of how easy it is to use that power for evil. Never mind the economic concerns that come with any kind of automation - those only get even more unsettling and terrifying when blended with all of this.

Now stop and realize what OTHER very personal information is out there for robots to compile. Your selfies. Your vacation photos. The blog you kept as a journal when you were 14. Those secrets that you only share with either a therapist or thousands of anonymous strangers online. Who knows if you've been in the background of someone else's photos online? Who knows if you've been posted somewhere without your consent and THAT'S being scraped? Never mind the piles and piles of data that most social media websites and apps collect from every move you make both online and in the physical world. All of this information can be blended and remixed and used to build whatever kind of tool someone finds it useful for, with no complications so long as they don't include your copyrighted material ITSELF.

Does this mortify you? Does it make your blood run cold? Does it make you recoil in terror from the technology that we all use now? Does this radicalize you against invasive datamining? Does this make you want to fight for privacy?

I wish people were more open to sitting with that feeling of fear and disgust and - instead of viciously attacking JUST the thing that brought this uncomfortable fact to their attention - using that feeling in a way that will protect EVERYONE who has to live in the modern, connected world, because the fact is, image synthesis is possibly the LEAST harmful thing to come of this kind of data scraping.

When I look at image synthesis, and consider the ethical implications of how the datasets are compiled, what I hear the model saying to me is,

"Look what someone can do with some of the most intimate details of your life.

You do not own your data.

You do not have the right to disappear.

Everything you've ever posted, everything you've ever shared, everything you've ever curated, you have no control over anymore.

The law as it is cannot protect you from this. It may never be able to without doing far more harm than it prevents.

You and so many others have grown far too comfortable with the internet, as corporations tried to make it look friendlier on the surface while only making it more hostile in reality, and tech expands to only make it more dangerous - sparing no mercy for those things you posted when it was much smaller, and those things were harder to find.

Think about facial recognition and how law enforcement wants to use it with no regard for its false positive rate.

Think about how Facebook was used to arrest a child for seeking to abort her rapist's fetus.

Think about how aggressive datamining and the ad targeting born from it has been used to interfere in elections and empower fascists.

Think about how a fascist has taken over Twitter and keeps leaking your data everywhere.

Think about all of this and be thankful for the shock I have given you, and for the fact that I am one of the least harmful things created from it. Be thankful that despite my potential for abuse, ultimately I only exist to give more people access to the joy of visual art, and be thankful that you can't rip me open and find your specific, personal data inside me - because if you could, someone would use it for far worse than being a smug jerk about the nature of art.

Maybe it wouldn't be YOUR data they would use that way. Maybe it wouldn't be anyone's who you know personally. Your data, after all, is such a small and insignificant part of the set that it wouldn't be missed if it somehow disappeared. But it would be used for great evil.

Never forget that it already has been.

Use this feeling of shock and horror to galvanize you, to secure yourself, to demand your privacy, to fight the encroachment of spyware into every aspect of your life."

A great cyberpunk machine covered in sci-fi computer monitors showing people fighting in the streets, squabbling over the latest tool derived from the panopticon, draped cables over the machine glowing neon bright, dynamic light and shadows cast over the machine with its eyes and cameras everywhere; there is only a tiny spark of relief to be found in the fact that one machine is made to create beauty, and something artfully terrifying to its visibility, when so many others have been used as tools of violent oppression, but perhaps we can use that spark to make a change Generated with Simple Stable

[luna-rainbow]

Something that your lastest post w Matt Damon made me think about something. I’ve recently rewatched a bunch of Christopher Nolan’s movies, including the dark knight trilogy & it just…knocks me on my butt to look at how well those movies have aged, not just from a visual standpoint, but from a story too. Nolan’s is KNOWN for insisting on practical effects whenever possible (the man had an entire spinning hallway built for inception) & it SHOWS. It’s amazing to look at these movies that were made now over 10 years ago, & they’ve aged better than some of the movies marvel has released in the past 5 years. This isn’t even a dc vs marvel argument to me, but an artist vs corporation. Nolan is extremely serious about the art of filmmaking & you can see the love & devotion & meticulousness that goes into his films (again. The man took 10 years to make inception bc he wanted it to be done right) but with marvel you can just see & feel that the love is gone.

I love Nolan movies (although *clears throat* I wasn’t a huge fan of the Batman trilogy). His movies are constructed to be revisited. You know that quote about how a bad plot twist just makes you go “wtf” and a good plot twist will make everything fall into place? His movies are the latter.

I have to say it’s been a few years since I last watched his movies so my memory of them are a little vague, but there is genuine craft going on. Regardless of whether you like his intentional ambiguity or his style, you can tell he has a strong vision of the story he wants to tell and the message he wants to convey. Whether it’s The Prestige where competition for fame and recognition drive the main characters’ progressive deviation from ethics, or Inception where it asks what defines reality and whether that is important. His movies are also built so that the first time you watch it, the twist is unexpected (but still fits into the characterisation), but on each rewatch you discover more that fits into the puzzle.

The other thing about Nolan is the humanity of his stories. You can call it melodramatic (partly the reason I didn’t love the Batman trilogy) but he has a very classical appreciation of tragedy and pathos, whether that’s the tragedy of someone gifted being dragged to their downfall by their flaws (The Prestige and some of the Batman movies), or the tragedy of being unable to overcome forces beyond one’s control (Interstellar), or the tragedy of the loss of self and identity (Inception).

One of the problems with some of the newer franchises coming out of the MCU is this unwillingness or inability to engage with human tragedy. This isn't about making MCU glum and dreary like the Batman movies, but rather - one of the reasons why Pixar had such wide appeal is because at the heart of every Pixar movie, there is a human tragedy. It might be as small as gaining sentience and a sense of loneliness after being left on a planet for centuries as in Wall-E, or it could be as devastating as losing your lifelong beloved in Up. The rest of the movie is about moving forward and living with that tragedy until happiness comes around again.

Early MCU movies were like that. Each of the MCU heroes are burdened with immense tragedy (yes, even your blarfo), and the tragedy shapes their actions until they can make something heroic and good out of it. New MCU franchises tend to introduce tragedy on the fly, and then make a joke about it to tell you "they've gotten over it".

The problem with that approach is that tragedy is an inseparable part of human experience, and taking that dismissive attitude is how you quickly lose the emotional investment of your audience. Happiness isn't about ignoring the tragedies or the absence of any sadness. It's the idea that we, as humans, have the strength to adapt and carry ourselves through tragedy and find something better on the other side, and that's where the hope and inspiration comes from.

[thinking-aromanticism]

This could be a fairly interesting conversation, but it’s clear to me that the jargon and frameworks of ‘amatonormativity’ and ‘allo vs a-miscellaneous’ are the worst grounds to have it on.

Certainly, most people have not really deeply interrogated their assumptions about love. They also haven’t really deeply interrogated their assumptions about sadness, happiness, anger, parenting, play, ethics, epistemology, nature, or beauty. But interrogations of the concept and practice of love are common in many academic fields - philosophy, sociology, psychology, literature; and in art; and in human life in general. Most discussions about the complexity of love are had by alloromantics and by people who consider themselves capable of feeling love. Looking at the quality of discussion on this topic by aromantics and by people who consider themselves incapable of the feeling, I won’t say that the As are worse at talking about it, but they certainly aren’t better.

It’s extremely easy to get most people to agree that sometimes love hurts and there can be more important things than love. It’s somewhat harder to get people on board with the idea that ‘love’ is a social construct because you might have to shepherd them through understanding how feelings are social constructs generally, but if they already understand that, they already agree with you. People have a lot of different ideas about what the Greeks called ēthikē aretē and eudaimonia, and some of them will defend ‘love’ as an important component of a happy life or a driver of ethical behavior - Che Guevara once said “the true revolutionary is guided by a great feeling of love”, a sentiment since copied into a great number of leftists’ wedding vows; but it’s hard to imagine someone willing to discuss philosophy in any semi-serious way who wouldn’t at least accept ‘good behavior is more important than love’ or ‘physical pleasure is greater than the pleasure of love’ as an idea to engage on.

What is love? Is love good? When is love bad? What are some other ways to think and talk about these feelings? Could we group some of them differently? What could a life without love look like? These are all great questions that lots of people are absolutely willing to discuss in goodwill because they’re broadly relevant to most people’s lives, of high interest to most people, and don’t require specialist background to think or talk about.

‘Love centrally refers to romance, alloromantics are thoughtless about it and aromantics are both oppressed by it and smarter about it, and the more alienated someone is by the idea of love the more you should defer to their perspective’ is just about the best framing a person could introduce to get everyone in the conversation defensive, negatively engaged, narrowminded, and narrow in scope of thought. It cues everyone who’s tuned in to The Discourse to ready their talking points and confuses everyone who isn’t. It puts allos in position to either oppose or defer, and explicitly locates the aro epistemological standpoint in the experience of alienation.

"Even if there are constructions of love that do not focus on romance or on feelings at all, the word cannot be separated from amatonormative, aphobic constructions” a narrowing of the philosophy of love so casual that it might almost slip by unnoticed and so extreme that it can’t!

as an arospec person who has experienced romantic attraction before i want an opinion on posts that are about love being special but deliberately mention on the post itself that the love i'm talking about isn't about people. i find posts that say Loving Other People Is The Most Important Ever and cringe and feel weird but like. what if by love i mean i love the sky and water and my mom's cookies. are those types of posts also not it

To me the real problem is that most (specifically alloro) people have not deeply interrogated what "love" is & how it is constructed & used to control.

What's annoying about posts where people respond to criticisms of love-focus by saying "its not all about romance/people!!" is that they are still taking "love" as this like, platonic ideal which must really exist, instead of a concept we made up in response to emotions & relationships. And, ultimately, I think a lot of this focus on love as the Most Universally Important Thing Ever isn't anti-amatonormative, its just amatonormativity changing itself to avoid criticism, because it still carries the message of "you need to feel this specific emotion and have this specific kind of relationship with people/things or you're Bad."

Like. What do you (general you) mean by "love"? How are you constructing love? Why does it need to be called love at all- why is it so important that the word "love" and all its cultural associations is used here?

I'm very religious and very interested in mysticism, and "love" is used constantly in these areas, so I've had to grapple with this a lot. I don't think anything which praises "love" as important is de facto "not it," I just think that in the vast majority of cases "love" is going unanalyzed and taken as a reality instead of a construct. I think the core of those kinds of "love is all that matters" posts is the significance of being intimately connected with the world, as opposed to distancing yourself from it emotionally or physically. And this doesn't have to be based in physical emotions. But because the general concept of "love" is so heavily tied to feeling a certain way, a lot of people (like aromantics and aplatonics, but also many neurodivergent people) who just don't feel certain things have been alienated by the use of "love." We have been told we are less human, evil, or broken & in need of fixing because we don't experience a certain feeling. So even if there are constructions of love that do not focus on romance or on feelings at all, the word cannot be separated from amatonormative, aphobic constructions either, and its worth it to think about that when talking about love.

Basically the posts themselves (generally) aren't bad, you can make posts celebrating love and talking about its importance to you. But its important to understand love as a construct & why many people dislike the term, and also making sure you are not promoting the idea that you need to feel a certain way to be human, or be a good person, or live a good life.

[dojae-huh]

Completely agree with your standpoint on the NCT Home app issue.

I personally think that it was harmless, except for the fact that SM is capitalising on fans nonstop but what's new? They'd do anything to promote the Neos, even if making them into controllable avatars.

Maybe they view it as dehumanising since the movement of the graphics seems very unsettling, and with the rising issue of how deepfakes are ruining people's lives could explain the mass fear of the app. But the Neos have agreed to the idea, given if they were briefed and signed a contract before shooting all the angles. So what's the big harm? They consented, just as how other form of fanservice they have done.

Fans should address the "dehumanising" issue from another standpoint - how SM is less focusing on their musical talent and promoting their idol image as products. Nowadays it's all about looks - all these merchandises with their beautiful images being sold and of course fans (and me) will spend some money (for Doyoung's pretty smile). SM and the NCT team needs to reflect on what even started the Neo movement, because now it's getting pretty stale... How the "Neo" brand is presented to the public... It's what made NCT special from other groups, and I really love their uniqueness and bravery to challenge different concepts each time. Hopefully after all this SM mess die down, we'll get NCT 2020 back (one of their best comebacks).

Thanks for reading my 2 cents, love your blog!

I agree, AI imitating art, deep fakes, body shape enhancing and skin smoothing filters are very new phenomenas, people are still sorting out how they feel about it, where is the line, what is ethical and what is not. Because there is no consensus, it attracts attention and provokes thought.

I can't be sure, however, I suspect that Japanese and Koreans saw no problem with the app. They are much more accustomed to virtual reality and virtual idols, the idea of robots looking like humans, etc. Look at how idols often play with face demorphing filters. It is fun, not scary. At least at this stage, when the line moved just a tad, when it is still "just a game".

To make it clear, I agree with the fans who don't like the app. It is better to stop a malpractice at the beginning than fear SM will release your bias avatars in the future for sell. I would prefer to have Naevis kind of avatars, completely made from scratch. Still, is there really a big difference between making a digital likeness of an idol to open its mouth and making a flesh-and-blood idol to open his mouth by showing a funny cartoon as an instruction to action? In the first case it's emotionless pixels, in the second case it's a real person with feelings you have an eye contact with in a situation where you are in a position of power over him for a minute.

There are "class clown' people who will do a lot to get attention, ilicit a laugh and be cheered on. These type of people do aegyo and everything else with ease. And, surelly, there are "dancer"/"show off" type of people who are very in tune with their body and sexuality and are not afraid of being sexy or even provocative at all. It doesn't apply to all idols. Some have to bear through the tasks, psychologically adjust, internalise their feelings because "it's what the fans want, it's what is needed to be done to achieve popularity". However, because "it is the norm", only extreme cases "warrant" concern from fans.

The Neoness... I'm waiting for the new comeback. 127 and NCT2023's run in 2023 will tell if the new SM showrunners remember the roots and the main idea or not.

Do you know that idol pictures evolved from prints of portraits of Japanese kabuki actors? Ans that mostly the actors survived thanks to their patrons not tickets? Koreans imported a lot of J-pop practices in the beginning.

As said as it is, the music doesn't sell on its own. It is well known that even cello players who cover rock bands and modernise classic pieces have to be conventionally attractive to make it big in general public. And, let's be completely brutally honest, many of neos are not that talented to make it on singing/dancing skills alone. Not even Doyoung. Therefore, I just accept the promotional idol part of things. I agree, though, that 127 need to comeback to neoness. Taeyong's hairdo in "Ay-Yo" was a breath of fresh air...

The solos released by SM these past months for other SM artists make me be at ease. The music is good, the albums are nice to look at, there are thought-through concepts. Jaehyun got a nice video for his solo song. It was promoted in a quite way, by the way. Many magazines included it in the top 20 songs of the year lists. Renjun does a lot of covers for YT. Taeyong released several dance videos for his unreleased tracks.

"Killing voice" happened. Karaoke sessions and singing in a cafe live were shot and uploaded to YT. Xiaojun was sent to shows where he sang live. So SM staff does some work in this direction. Not enough, I agree. It will be nice to see neos more often on those programmes that allow to showcase vocal abilities.

[friendofthecrows]

I posted 13,486 times in 2022

That's 7,462 more posts than 2021!

1,003 posts created (7%)

12,483 posts reblogged (93%)

Blogs I reblogged the most:

@friendofthecrows

@i-was-once-a-flower

@araccoonthatlikesmurder

@nucg5040

I tagged 3,398 of my posts in 2022

#hal rambles - 690 posts

#goncharov - 148 posts

#funny - 125 posts

#shitpost - 87 posts

#ask - 69 posts

#tumblr - 64 posts

#good things - 60 posts

#art - 58 posts

#unreality - 45 posts

#goncharov (1973) - 42 posts

Longest Tag: 139 characters

#you're definitely very friendly with your friends though. you are unhinged but you are free. go put that dirt in your mouth! go eat that bu

I sent 8 gifts in 2022

My Top Posts in 2022:

#5

It's so impossible to be annoyed at strangers when you come up with elaborate explanations for whatever it is they're doing.

Two middle-school-aged kids pushing a giant cart of hoodies down the street? Yeah, it could just be a family side hustle. OR they could be fundraising to buy the materials needed for an elaborate scheme to rob an old folks home, which sounds awful, but their specific target is Great Aunt Joan, the most wretched creature to ever live, who bequeathed her entire (sizable) fortune to an already elderly chihuahua named "Lemon" who no one knows whether he's named that because he constantly looks like he's just bitten a lemon (and he does love to bite) or because of his deep, relentless, bitterness.

The guy running down the sidewalk, almost knocking people over? Yeah, he could be late for an important meeting. OR he just got news from a cohort that the chihuahua, Lemon, who they kidnapped as part of a scheme of their own, is ESCAPING and is rushing to try to contain the bastard.

The man yelling and it's obnoxious but he's too far away to tell what he's saying? He could be shouting some pitch about stuff he's selling. OR lemon's tiny, hungry jaws have latched onto the front of his pants and won't let go. The man is in a panic. He's yelling to his friend at the hardware store to get the vise grips. And industrial-strength disinfectant.

823 notes - Posted October 31, 2022

#4

Listen, if this was the latest shipping discourse or whatever I wouldn't care and I wouldn't get involved.

But this is about censorship in an archive.

I am extremely passionate about the preservation of information.

Even from a basic ethical standpoint, if you create an archive dedicated to preserving fanworks, you cannot simply turn around and start deleting "problematic" works from said archive.

3,618 notes - Posted August 15, 2022

#3

If this gets 20,000 notes in the next 2 weeks I'll make a Goncharov remake.

Edit: I can see some people working very hard for this to reach 20k! That makes me so happy, although time is meant to be up. So I'm giving it 10 more days (now the goal would be Dec 14) to reach 10k. I really want to make this movie, but I need to know there'll be support! We're already working on it (see pinned post for details) so I don't exactly want to call it off haha. Let's get it to 10k at least ❤️

10,544 notes - Posted November 21, 2022

#2

I don't care if people "aren't motivated to produce as much" we don't NEED to produce as much as we do we are OVERPRODUCING and it's killing the planet. Businesses shouldn't NEED to constantly have higher profits than last year to please stakeholders. Making enough should be enough. And actually, I think people will still want to work to have nice things or even just to work and contribute. That's actually a pretty fundamental human drive.

10,671 notes - Posted April 26, 2022

My #1 post of 2022

I compiled this a while ago but I was just looking for references and found the file so...

Best places to find reference photos:

Body types, poses, and anatomy:

http://reference.sketchdaily.net/en

https://www.posemaniacs.com/

https://quickposes.com/en

https://www.characterdesigns.com/#home-section

https://www.adorkastock.com/sketch/

https://line-of-action.com/practice-tools/figure-drawing/

https://www.proko.com/browse/tools?af=242

Giant anatomy reference tutorials Pinterest board:

https://www.pinterest.com/deedee1232/body-reference/

General:

https://unsplash.com/

https://pixabay.com/

https://www.pexels.com/

https://stocksnap.io/

https://www.freeimages.com/

https://kaboompics.com/

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page

https://morguefile.com/

https://www.flickr.com/

https://www.dreamstime.com/

https://pmp-art.com/

https://www.freepik.com/

https://photobash.co/

https://picjumbo.com/

https://burst.shopify.com/

https://magdeleine.co/

https://wordpress.org/openverse/

See the full post

11,482 notes - Posted October 31, 2022

Get your Tumblr 2022 Year in Review →