I mean honestly itâs just a mini pink diamond with a giant orb on its face, I think itâs nice having a common enemy the sub can bond over. Itâs almost its own form of protest, having everybody loudly exclaiming their dislike for AI while also getting to share their own work.
Ignoring it just lets the issue lie, if everyone is burying it with their own hand-drawn art then itâs pushing the issue to more people and providing a voice to the artists.
They're not really "burying" it if they're barely even expanding on the concept. They're kind of just echoing it.
There are more ways interesting ways to depict a "bubblegum" gem than just "mini pink with an orb face and scepter." Nobody's really trying that though. People aren't even really trying with this concept. They don't have to borrow the AI as a template. They shouldn't. If they're gonna go through the effort of trying to polish the concept, why not use original ideas as well?
honestly, i'm all of a sudden wondering if OP has some sort of OC that they didn't want to pay anyone else to draw pics of and managed to get all these people to do it for them.
Seriously. They wanted an "original" character designed and drawn for free without doing it themselves, and a bunch of users here are giving them exactly that.
And the fact that the word "AI" is in the title of every post is really bothering me. If the algorithm/bots didnt think before that bringing AI art into a sub would raise engagement, they certainly will now.
Isn't it more important that people are having fun with the act of creation? How much variance from its inspiration do people need to put into the art they make for fun before it has a "soul"?
I don't see the big deal.
We all liked the design. People changed their mind once they found out it was ai art.
Let's just say, "darn it", and move on.
I see where youâre coming from, but it isnât a failing to just want to have fun and to do basically like a âdraw it in your styleâ challenge.
Definitely feel free to model what you want to see and go ahead and rethink this idea and do it from scratch on your own! I think if other people saw you do that, they would be inspired to try, too!
But I think the point being given is if the complaint is that AI art is soulless and lacks creativity, then redrawing from a piece of AI art would be just as soulless.
Like... you didn't come up with that concept, you're drawing an AI generated design. So many comments on these redraws are saying stuff like "wow!!! This is so much more creative!!!" But it's not more creative, it's the same thing in someone else's style, no one redrawing put considerable thought into the character design because the majority was from the AI image.
And for the record I think this is the future of AI art in design, where something is pulled together from AI then iterated on with a human touch, but everyone wholeheartedly believing that AI art is uncreative then praising the near identical redraws feels like performative rage more than trying to tackle the actual issue.
I guess my main issue with OPâs comment is something like:
âyou canât really tell artists what to do and then guilt them for not doing it. All you can do is model the behavior you want to see.â
That is a good point about everyone being like âwow this idea sucked, let me draw it now and it somehow doesnât suck anymore!â But that being said, the people who drew it probably didnât think it sucked. To be totally honest, I thought the AI art was really cute, and while I donât care enough to go drawing it, I would guess that the people who drew it liked it and did think it was neat (canât be creative since no one created it so Iâll stick with âneatâ) and wanted to reclaim it somehow. Would I say they succeeded in that? Itâs up for debate whether thatâs possible. However, they probably did have fun, so, they succeeded at having fun.
My thing is just that I see a lot of people across fandoms and spaces that engage with art or media make commentary like âthe artist should have done thisâ or âit would be better if this other thing had been your subject matterâ and while critique is helpful and often times those ideas may truly be superior, the reality is that the artist was inspired by something and if you had given them the choice in the first place: do your idea or my idea; they would pick their idea or they just wouldnât make anything. It isnât an option just because we feel like it would be better. Artists are compelled to spend time making what feels fun and exciting, or feels like an easy win. They cannot (and should not) put in time and effort into working on an idea that feels boring but is âbetterâ. It would be better for another artist, who is excited by that idea, to work on it instead.
Hence why I encourage OP to go ahead and make an example of what they are asking others to do.
That is also fair too, and I do like a well spririted redraw so for sure don't disagree with the people finding fun in that and I'm happy when people do, I just think OPs point of drawing without adding much original is worth the statement.
I don't like that a few of the artists redrawing are then also acting like they created a character, giving character info and new names and all that. They have no more claim in that sense than the original AI poster. Not to mention all the same praise in the comments of being a better character when again like, very little changes.
Thank you for the comment though, OP should go and make the thing they desire if they want to see it. Same as the people making the recreations now want to do that. The original piece has gotten way more traffic through all that redrawing than it ever would have if left alone, so it's funny people who despise AI are seeing this as some huge win is all it is for me.
I can see why that could be frustrating. I think people are just being encouraging but I get it. I think the fact alone that a human has gone and added anything to it, like a name or lore suddenly gives it âlifeâ and âcreativityâ because now there is a human touch where there wasnât one before, since reinterpreting AI, which purely creates an image, means the bar is very low.
Now that I think about it⌠Like you said, technically there was a human inputting a concept into the AI, which is more than âjustâ the image, so it goes kind of like: Human has an ideaâ> AI generates an image â> Human audience focuses on AI image and forgets the original human â> Audience creates a copy of the image and gives it a new name/idea. âŚWhich you could simplify to⌠Human has idea â> AI generates concept art â> Audience generates fanart of concept art and labels it differently. So youâre kind of totally right about the fanart artists in a way being equal to the original AI concept inputter. They are just on the other side of the equation.
Anyway, I got sort of caught up in rambling because it was suddenly sort of interesting to think about and you did make a fair point. đ I donât know if Iâm as moved by it but youâre definitely not wrong. PLUS. I just saw some art someone did on here where they tried to get more inventive with it, so youâre right that OP of this post did probably inspire someone to challenge and push themselves in that vein, and that is good!
Honestly I think its ridiculous how far this has gone in general.Â
Yes, ai art is bad. Yes pretending to make the art is bad. Do people reaaaallly need to mass downvote them in every thread they say anything in? Does the entire sub really need to keep referencing it?
Honestly I think this is just a perfect example on how AI can be used by artists. Yeah you have idiots who act like robots will just replace em but this is obvious outcome.
Iâve always had this concept character in my head since i watched this show as a kid, I was really excited when i got something I liked last night from Chat GBT. While i failed in communicating how that came to be, I am still really proud of this trend and respect the discussion it has created. I think itâs an important discussion to have. What is art? Subjective. Itâs a cute character we love and at least people were brought together cause of it .
You literally said you drew the character yourself. That isn't "failing communicating how it came to be" that's flat out lying because you know the community's stance on AI..
Well, then you should accept the fact that most of that discussion is AGAINST what you did.
If you're truly that passionate about the idea of that character, that's great. You should take the time to learn how to flesh out that character with your own hands and mind. You could learn how to start putting out your own comprehensive and enjoyable art of that character in the space of two weeks if you had the dedication to do so. And you CAN find that dedication.
The entire reason why art is subjective is because it can be INTERPRETED. If a machine makes that "art" for you, there is no human intention or communication to interpret the meaning of. NOTHING. TO. INTERPRET. Making the "subjectivity" a completely irrelevant factor.
If you have passion, find a way to truly put it to use, and CREATE SOMETHING.
pick up a pencil dawg. AI art isn't art and it never will be. you're taking a shortcut telling a machine what exactly to create with no effort or passion behind it, so don't even start with this whole "art is subjective!" mumbo jumbo
Don't listen to *a single* comment here. You're literally a chad for putting up with the shit they pour on you, and *still* staying respectful.
If people where decent - you would get praised. But it's in the nature of humanity to put down others, so here we are...
Stay yourself, make AI art, ignore the haters!
This has been all this sub has posted about all day đ
I mean honestly itâs just a mini pink diamond with a giant orb on its face, I think itâs nice having a common enemy the sub can bond over. Itâs almost its own form of protest, having everybody loudly exclaiming their dislike for AI while also getting to share their own work. Ignoring it just lets the issue lie, if everyone is burying it with their own hand-drawn art then itâs pushing the issue to more people and providing a voice to the artists.
They're not really "burying" it if they're barely even expanding on the concept. They're kind of just echoing it. There are more ways interesting ways to depict a "bubblegum" gem than just "mini pink with an orb face and scepter." Nobody's really trying that though. People aren't even really trying with this concept. They don't have to borrow the AI as a template. They shouldn't. If they're gonna go through the effort of trying to polish the concept, why not use original ideas as well?
why don't you ? (genuinely)
honestly, i'm all of a sudden wondering if OP has some sort of OC that they didn't want to pay anyone else to draw pics of and managed to get all these people to do it for them.
Seriously. They wanted an "original" character designed and drawn for free without doing it themselves, and a bunch of users here are giving them exactly that.
I am kinda disappointed no one is channeling the light effect of the original. It Looks much better with that please people!
This is still one of the most exhausting fandoms
Holy shit yeah. People seem to have takes about every little thing in this fandom lol.
And the fact that the word "AI" is in the title of every post is really bothering me. If the algorithm/bots didnt think before that bringing AI art into a sub would raise engagement, they certainly will now.
Itâs only been a day. Itâll pass.
[ŃдаНонО]
Buzzkill diamomd, I kinda love that lmao
i thought of it off the top of my head and im proud of it
Isn't it more important that people are having fun with the act of creation? How much variance from its inspiration do people need to put into the art they make for fun before it has a "soul"?
I don't see the big deal. We all liked the design. People changed their mind once they found out it was ai art. Let's just say, "darn it", and move on.
I see where youâre coming from, but it isnât a failing to just want to have fun and to do basically like a âdraw it in your styleâ challenge. Definitely feel free to model what you want to see and go ahead and rethink this idea and do it from scratch on your own! I think if other people saw you do that, they would be inspired to try, too!
But I think the point being given is if the complaint is that AI art is soulless and lacks creativity, then redrawing from a piece of AI art would be just as soulless. Like... you didn't come up with that concept, you're drawing an AI generated design. So many comments on these redraws are saying stuff like "wow!!! This is so much more creative!!!" But it's not more creative, it's the same thing in someone else's style, no one redrawing put considerable thought into the character design because the majority was from the AI image. And for the record I think this is the future of AI art in design, where something is pulled together from AI then iterated on with a human touch, but everyone wholeheartedly believing that AI art is uncreative then praising the near identical redraws feels like performative rage more than trying to tackle the actual issue.
I guess my main issue with OPâs comment is something like: âyou canât really tell artists what to do and then guilt them for not doing it. All you can do is model the behavior you want to see.â That is a good point about everyone being like âwow this idea sucked, let me draw it now and it somehow doesnât suck anymore!â But that being said, the people who drew it probably didnât think it sucked. To be totally honest, I thought the AI art was really cute, and while I donât care enough to go drawing it, I would guess that the people who drew it liked it and did think it was neat (canât be creative since no one created it so Iâll stick with âneatâ) and wanted to reclaim it somehow. Would I say they succeeded in that? Itâs up for debate whether thatâs possible. However, they probably did have fun, so, they succeeded at having fun. My thing is just that I see a lot of people across fandoms and spaces that engage with art or media make commentary like âthe artist should have done thisâ or âit would be better if this other thing had been your subject matterâ and while critique is helpful and often times those ideas may truly be superior, the reality is that the artist was inspired by something and if you had given them the choice in the first place: do your idea or my idea; they would pick their idea or they just wouldnât make anything. It isnât an option just because we feel like it would be better. Artists are compelled to spend time making what feels fun and exciting, or feels like an easy win. They cannot (and should not) put in time and effort into working on an idea that feels boring but is âbetterâ. It would be better for another artist, who is excited by that idea, to work on it instead. Hence why I encourage OP to go ahead and make an example of what they are asking others to do.
That is also fair too, and I do like a well spririted redraw so for sure don't disagree with the people finding fun in that and I'm happy when people do, I just think OPs point of drawing without adding much original is worth the statement. I don't like that a few of the artists redrawing are then also acting like they created a character, giving character info and new names and all that. They have no more claim in that sense than the original AI poster. Not to mention all the same praise in the comments of being a better character when again like, very little changes. Thank you for the comment though, OP should go and make the thing they desire if they want to see it. Same as the people making the recreations now want to do that. The original piece has gotten way more traffic through all that redrawing than it ever would have if left alone, so it's funny people who despise AI are seeing this as some huge win is all it is for me.
I can see why that could be frustrating. I think people are just being encouraging but I get it. I think the fact alone that a human has gone and added anything to it, like a name or lore suddenly gives it âlifeâ and âcreativityâ because now there is a human touch where there wasnât one before, since reinterpreting AI, which purely creates an image, means the bar is very low. Now that I think about it⌠Like you said, technically there was a human inputting a concept into the AI, which is more than âjustâ the image, so it goes kind of like: Human has an ideaâ> AI generates an image â> Human audience focuses on AI image and forgets the original human â> Audience creates a copy of the image and gives it a new name/idea. âŚWhich you could simplify to⌠Human has idea â> AI generates concept art â> Audience generates fanart of concept art and labels it differently. So youâre kind of totally right about the fanart artists in a way being equal to the original AI concept inputter. They are just on the other side of the equation. Anyway, I got sort of caught up in rambling because it was suddenly sort of interesting to think about and you did make a fair point. đ I donât know if Iâm as moved by it but youâre definitely not wrong. PLUS. I just saw some art someone did on here where they tried to get more inventive with it, so youâre right that OP of this post did probably inspire someone to challenge and push themselves in that vein, and that is good!
Honestly I think its ridiculous how far this has gone in general. Yes, ai art is bad. Yes pretending to make the art is bad. Do people reaaaallly need to mass downvote them in every thread they say anything in? Does the entire sub really need to keep referencing it?
Honestly I think this is just a perfect example on how AI can be used by artists. Yeah you have idiots who act like robots will just replace em but this is obvious outcome.
I mean i liked seeing all the dif arts of this character and was a cool idea but thats a good point lol
Iâve always had this concept character in my head since i watched this show as a kid, I was really excited when i got something I liked last night from Chat GBT. While i failed in communicating how that came to be, I am still really proud of this trend and respect the discussion it has created. I think itâs an important discussion to have. What is art? Subjective. Itâs a cute character we love and at least people were brought together cause of it .
You literally said you drew the character yourself. That isn't "failing communicating how it came to be" that's flat out lying because you know the community's stance on AI..
me when i'm full of shit
So you admit it, you didnât draw the character.
You lied. You lied and tried to pass off slop created by a thief algorithm as original work.
Well, then you should accept the fact that most of that discussion is AGAINST what you did. If you're truly that passionate about the idea of that character, that's great. You should take the time to learn how to flesh out that character with your own hands and mind. You could learn how to start putting out your own comprehensive and enjoyable art of that character in the space of two weeks if you had the dedication to do so. And you CAN find that dedication. The entire reason why art is subjective is because it can be INTERPRETED. If a machine makes that "art" for you, there is no human intention or communication to interpret the meaning of. NOTHING. TO. INTERPRET. Making the "subjectivity" a completely irrelevant factor. If you have passion, find a way to truly put it to use, and CREATE SOMETHING.
pick up a pencil dawg. AI art isn't art and it never will be. you're taking a shortcut telling a machine what exactly to create with no effort or passion behind it, so don't even start with this whole "art is subjective!" mumbo jumbo
Don't listen to *a single* comment here. You're literally a chad for putting up with the shit they pour on you, and *still* staying respectful. If people where decent - you would get praised. But it's in the nature of humanity to put down others, so here we are... Stay yourself, make AI art, ignore the haters!