Because it gets a negative response? Regardless of whether they think it has a valid place as an art form, if they know it will get a negative response they probably won’t want to share it.
I made a cool new avatar concept for one of my public accounts, shared it with some people to see what they thought, used AI to do so. Everyone said it was amazing and they couldn’t wait to see it in use until I mentioned it was an AI mockup to use to pay someone to make something like it, then suddenly it sucked
It’s like Hitler’s paintings, they’re kinda somewhat decent enough for what they are but because of who/what made them they’re suddenly a big deal
ETA: See? Dipshits auto-angry at AI art because their brains are too small to think about things
They’re bland and not particularly well executed impressionist style pieces. Better than a quick doodle, better than I could paint, but by no means good
‘make majestetic art’ art isn’t just ‘content’. It’s supposed to have thought and emotion behind it. Come back to me when you have spent 3 hours slaving over a real piece, where every single stroke has a thought behind it.
The amount of effort that goes into something has no bearing on its value, otherwise Leonardo’s doodles are less valuable than your efforts, and that’s clearly bollocks
Ah, so you’ve never seen something described as “charcoal on parchment” or “oil paint on canvas” or “photograph, film” or the number of other ways artists use to specifically describe art and the medium used?
You want AI generated art to be respected? Declare like any other medium.
Also you shouldn’t think someone is hating because they want a label for the object they are interacting with.
I don’t see it getting better nearly so much as I see it getting pervasive. When AI is one submission in ten and you’ve got a 90% flag rate, you can trim the instance of unflagged content to one submission in a hundred. But when AI is nine submissions in ten, half your feed is still AI-slop. When its ninety-nine submissions in a hundred, you’re looking at nine AI images in ten even with a filter.
The AI doesn’t need to get any better at evading the filter. It just needs to beat the filter by raw numbers.
I think that will be increasingly impossible to enforce, as AI art gets increasingly better.
Also, if someone finds some cool art online how are they to know if AI was used or not?
For me it would not be about enforcing but about giving the option to disclaim it.
exactly 👍
If AI artists are so confident that they are equals, why are they trying so hard to hide it?
Because it gets a negative response? Regardless of whether they think it has a valid place as an art form, if they know it will get a negative response they probably won’t want to share it.
As a result, suspicion falls on everyone and AI image uploaders are seen as dishonest.
There’s an Among Us joke there that I just can’t find.
I made a cool new avatar concept for one of my public accounts, shared it with some people to see what they thought, used AI to do so. Everyone said it was amazing and they couldn’t wait to see it in use until I mentioned it was an AI mockup to use to pay someone to make something like it, then suddenly it sucked
It’s like Hitler’s paintings, they’re kinda somewhat decent enough for what they are but because of who/what made them they’re suddenly a big deal
ETA: See? Dipshits auto-angry at AI art because their brains are too small to think about things
Naah, hitler’s paintings were actually pretty crap, him getting rejected from art school was entirely justified
They’re not art school caliber, but I’d definitely be impressed if a random friend of mine had painted one
They’re bland and not particularly well executed impressionist style pieces. Better than a quick doodle, better than I could paint, but by no means good
Yes. That’s why I’d be impressed if a random friend showed me one and said they painted it.
Wtf I was with you until the part on Hitler’s paintings
Edit: looked up Hitler’s paintings. Damn. They’re actually…
We’re not trying to hide it, we care if you think it’s AI or not. We just want to make majestic art
‘make majestetic art’ art isn’t just ‘content’. It’s supposed to have thought and emotion behind it. Come back to me when you have spent 3 hours slaving over a real piece, where every single stroke has a thought behind it.
The amount of effort that goes into something has no bearing on its value, otherwise Leonardo’s doodles are less valuable than your efforts, and that’s clearly bollocks
I think if you’re an art enthusiast, maybe, but for me I just go “oo pretty”
Then why not label the method of production?
Why? Do you need a label saying “made with pencils”? The hate bubble is deflating and you lot are losing. Get on with it already
Ah, so you’ve never seen something described as “charcoal on parchment” or “oil paint on canvas” or “photograph, film” or the number of other ways artists use to specifically describe art and the medium used?
You want AI generated art to be respected? Declare like any other medium.
Also you shouldn’t think someone is hating because they want a label for the object they are interacting with.
Of course I have. In a gallery. That’s not the gotcha you think it is
Because I don’t care enough to? You can label your stuff “made without AI” if it bothers you
Ah, enjoy getting more “AI is bullshit” type posts.
I already state what medium I use, because I’m not a petulant child about it.
deleted by creator
I don’t see it getting better nearly so much as I see it getting pervasive. When AI is one submission in ten and you’ve got a 90% flag rate, you can trim the instance of unflagged content to one submission in a hundred. But when AI is nine submissions in ten, half your feed is still AI-slop. When its ninety-nine submissions in a hundred, you’re looking at nine AI images in ten even with a filter.
The AI doesn’t need to get any better at evading the filter. It just needs to beat the filter by raw numbers.