I was playing around on Midjourney today. Here are a few pics I generated. Post up your creations!
- Thread starter HellBoy
- Start date
A few lil sumpins. Have a great weekend!
Last edited:
So what are some good prompts to enter..?
Let's keep this on the front page!!!
Maybe you meant CBS News in the Morning? Here’s two recent videos I uncovered.
Art created by artificial intelligence: "Frightening and fascinating all at the same time"
Artificial Intelligence software programs can turn anything you type, no matter how absurd, into art, drawing from hundreds of millions of images in its database ... and with this technological advance come some serious downsides.
www.cbsnews.com
Last edited:
I took this pic
...and turned it into this..
...and turned it into this..
Too dope!
How did you put in that watermark? Canva?A few lil sumpins. Have a great weekend!
Photoshop
Nice. You gotta upscale these!
I keep having issues with the hands.
Last samples
nothing but dopeness
because AI cannot do hands.
Chatgpt and AI generated art are not original thoughts or conceptions from the human mind. It’s machine learning technology based on human input.
So I can definitely understand why traditional artist and writers would have an issue. But they’ll have to learn to live with the future of things.
I’m not against the technology. And I even support the artistry for those that have difficulties coming up with ideas. I just hate that it makes things easier for idiots to get over.
but its literally stealing art and from humans and remixing it.
I somewhat disagree with you (and agree).
What the tech has done is make it bone simple for laymen to appear like they have artistic skill. It's easy to type in a prompt to say "Make Spiderman sticking to the side of a building. Super realistic." ...and then have one be impressed at themselves and impress their friends who are also new to the technology. Midjourney is an amazing program, but as it relates to people, it has a Midjourney look- very detailed and accurate, but also cookie cutter, as if everything people do involving realistic renderings of people look as if it was painted by the same person.
On the other hand, if you put a visual artist behind that same technology, it can be a tool to expand the greatness they already possess- without their being imitative of anybody else's art or style. It's a tool that is simple on the surface but contains much complexity and many possibilities beneath the surface. I've been a photomanipulation visual artist for more than 20 years. At present, I use the AI in a nearly identical way as I do Photoshop and other related tools. The shit I shared on here was just some doodling around.
There's thousands of tutorials on YouTube about how to use AI progs. Very little to no AI tuts about how to be original or creative or have an eye.
It can be that, if used that way. It is stealing in the broad sense, yes. Because none of us gave permission to stable diffusion etc to use our shit in it's AI brain and many of the top services charge folks to use them.
On the other hand, AI is very similar to the human brain in that an actual visual artist draws an apple according to how they have learned and according to composites of hundreds of thousands + of visual/mental snapshots, pictures, paintings, sculptures, angles etc of apples. The AI, I believe does not steal one person's picture of an apple (unless someone specifically asks for the Apple Logo lol). Probably, the AI apple one generates is a composite of tens of thousands of images of an apple- the same thing with any AI edits applied to the same.
It is possible to develop originality as well from it if one is truly creative. In Prince, for example, one can see sort of a mashup of James Brown, Little Richard and Jimi Hendrix. But the WAY he combined those influences mixed in with his own personality, experiences and perception made for a wholly unique artist.
but this isnt inspiration, its actually using art a person made, pulling it apart and restructuring it into different art.
its plagiarism.
Disagree. And I'm cool with agreeing to disagree.
It can be inspiration to create art or not be that, depending on the individual. Being able to tell it to make a pretty image doesn't make one an artist.
Stable Diffusion didn't just pull billions of art images, it pulled photos as well which include editorial photos, stock photos, snapshots people take etc. Basically, anything that is visual and 2 dimensional. I don't want to go into specifics of my own creative process, suffice to say it does not involve directly stealing someone's art pieces in any sense.
Several of my own pieces are in stable diffusion too without my permission. I'm not really tripping at this point because I know the way it pulls it apart is likely equivalent to it being a single molecule from a single piece of mine combined with molecules of 20,000 other artists going into making that image someone is making. I don't have a problem with that.
@BigDaddyBuk It could be argued that if Michael Jackson was doing James Brown's dance moves as a child, dances that James specifically developed and popularized, that he was biting JB's dances. No? Pulling them apart and restructuring them directly.
Nothing anyone does artistically comes out of pure aether.
Now as far as AI goes and the illegality of Stable Diffusion and all the companies using that tech utilizing folks' stuff goes, that's an issue that should be addressed. The speed of development of the tech has clearly exceeded the speed of the law. That could begin to change soon, though.
Nothing anyone does artistically comes out of pure aether.
Now as far as AI goes and the illegality of Stable Diffusion and all the companies using that tech utilizing folks' stuff goes, that's an issue that should be addressed. The speed of development of the tech has clearly exceeded the speed of the law. That could begin to change soon, though.