You can't jerk off to AI Art.

[seaoflove]

People have masturbated to everything you can imagine, and more.

 

[AlluraHikaru]

Skill and model issue. Honestly. Whipped this up locally on my PC in like 5 minutes. I can do seggs too, just a bit more annoying. And here is food for thought, really good models are all private and rarely see the light of day. But if you want to pay, NAI v3 from NovelAI does pretty good Anime + Cartoon fap material.

 

[MannBobinson]

There are some fantastic models out there. I'd highly recommend using SDXL, with a good model from CivitAI. If you want intentional results, like specific poses and placement of objects and whatnot, check out ControlNet, or some of the various LORAs available online.

Here's an example of what SDXL is capable of, using the Animagine V3.0 model with no further LORAs or external tools.



As you can see, the results are pretty impressive. If this isn't fappable, I don't know what is.

 

[ChadChan3D]

View attachment 3290547 View attachment 3290552 View attachment 3290553

As you can see, the results are pretty impressive. If this isn't fappable, I don't know what is.

This is the stuff that I wrote about: Technically impressive but without heat.

It's the digital equivalent of watching a documentary on tribes in Africa and seeing bare titties flopping around. The presentation, devoid of desire, elicits no sexual feeling. And the more art of this style that people see, the more desensitized to it they will become.

Be honest--do the images above even make your penis twitch?

 

[EvolutionKills]

There are some fantastic models out there. I'd highly recommend using SDXL, with a good model from CivitAI. If you want intentional results, like specific poses and placement of objects and whatnot, check out ControlNet, or some of the various LORAs available online.

Here's an example of what SDXL is capable of, using the Animagine V3.0 model with no further LORAs or external tools.

View attachment 3290547 View attachment 3290552 View attachment 3290553

As you can see, the results are pretty impressive. If this isn't fappable, I don't know what is.

Mangled hands missing fingers and fingernails. Extra eyebrows. Who know how weird the genitals may or may not be under the pixilation.

EDIT: Earrings don't match either, and the right one doesn't even appear to be attached properly.




Mismatched eyes. Random unexplained crease in the thigh. Nonsensical creases and abdominal placement. Again, no idea how mangled the genitals may be under that pixilation.




Not just mismatched eyes, but nonsensical puddles of color. Mangled hand. Extra additional leg outline around the knee joint. The hair transforms into neck creases and the collarbones.


One of the great things about good art is being able to notice the smaller details that you might have missed at first glance. A greater depth to the image that the artist is capable of creating. The kind of piece that you can appreciate more the more you look at it and notice the smaller details that compliment the larger composition.


AI generative art is the antithesis of that; where the more you scrutinize it, the more it falls apart.

 

[Ennoch]

Can. Will keep doing so.

 

[MannBobinson]

One of the great things about good art is being able to notice the smaller details that you might have missed at first glance. A greater depth to the image that the artist is capable of creating. The kind of piece that you can appreciate more the more you look at it and notice the smaller details that compliment the larger composition.


AI generative art is the antithesis of that; where the more you scrutinize it, the more it falls apart.

Hey, don't get me wrong, I totally agree that AI art is not a replacement for real art. I'm just saying that, when I am cranking my hog to such art, I am not coming at it with a scrutinizing artist's eye for anatomy and details, nor am I 'appreciating' it in any way beyond my own gratification. I'm whacking it to anime girls, not visiting the Louvre, so AI art is perfect for my needs.

 

[ChadChan3D]

AI generative art is the antithesis of that; where the more you scrutinize it, the more it falls apart.

Yup! Instead of engaging the viewer it repels them.

Some guys here say, "Well I jack off to it, it ain't gotta be the Mona Lisa." But your eye is better than you give it credit for, it picks up on these things and feeds it to your subconscious.

If men just want dumb, braindead faps, then why are we posting on a forum about story-driven, adult experiences?

 

[trc450]

AI generative art is the antithesis of that; where the more you scrutinize it, the more it falls apart.

Yet it looks fine, even with all those mistakes. It can even make interesting mistakes that humans would not even think off.

Personally aside from usual the imperfections, my only gripe is that there is no obvious pattern and source how it came to that conclusion.

 

[EvolutionKills]

If men just want dumb, braindead faps, then why are we posting on a forum about story-driven, adult experiences?

People like slop, and it always sells well. Also, this forum is hardly just for the high-brow art appreciation fans among us. This site is host to a lot of slop, and unsurprisingly it attracts a lot of hogs.

Yet it looks fine, even with all those mistakes. It can even make interesting mistakes that humans would not even think off.

Personally aside from usual the imperfections, my only gripe is that there is no obvious pattern and source how it came to that conclusion.

We must have very different definitions of the words 'fine', 'interesting', and 'gripe'. I'd call them soulless drek built upon the ashes of a million stolen artist by unapologetic 'move fast & break things' tech-bros and venture capitalist ghouls.

 

[AlluraHikaru]

lol butthurt anti-AI crowd crying as always, another day another "muh soul, MUH heart, MUH ARTIIIISTS". Tech will advance, and soon you will never be able to tell. No more commissions for you, buddy boy, you will never know what hit you. Art is democratized now, and not in control of greedy few. Art is FREE OF CHARGE.

 

[EvolutionKills]

Art is democratized now, and not in control of greedy few. Art is FREE OF CHARGE.

Theft is now democracy.

Funny thing to say coming from the slave of a venture capitalist ghoul...

 

[AlluraHikaru]

Theft is now democracy.

Funny thing to say coming from the slave of a venture capitalist ghoul...

prove it in a court of law and provide list of items that are gone from possession of artists (stolen). As far as I'm concerned, AI has every right to look at creations of others and learn. You have no idea what you taking about and you let your biases talk. Stable Diffusion is open source and COMMON man is making the models and optimizations, not corporations.

Have fun with your 3DCG soulless slop, i guess.

 

[ChadChan3D]

lol butthurt anti-AI crowd crying as always, another day another "muh soul, MUH heart, MUH ARTIIIISTS". Tech will advance, and soon you will never be able to tell. No more commissions for you, buddy boy, you will never know what hit you. Art is democratized now, and not in control of greedy few. Art is FREE OF CHARGE.

You're missing the point of this thread.

The debate about AI art is moot because AI art is here. It is the 2024 equivalent of debating whether photography is art.

I want to push AI art forward for erotica. Make it better.

The first step is to identify what makes AI art so unstimulating, then we can figure out how to make it hotter.

Surely a room full of porn artists and developers can come up with ideas.

 

[AlluraHikaru]

You're missing the point of this thread.

The debate about AI art is moot because AI art is here. It is the 2024 equivalent of debating whether photography is art.

I want to push AI art forward for erotica. Make it better.

The first step is to identify what makes AI art so unstimulating, then we can figure out how to make it hotter.

Surely a room full of porn artists and developers can come up with ideas.

Talk for yourself, I find plenty of stimulation in AI art. Like I said, tech will be better (first open source models appeared LESS than 2 years ago) and if human finds something appealing, AI will lean from it and will add it to the latent space's whole. I trust technology NOT artists and game developers.

 

[heralder]

It's not like humans can make bad proportions hand bodies and so forth...oh wait.
Clearly human art has that special thing that apparently is so unique that they can attack each other in witch-hunts when they can't tell. lol
But hey i guess it's not real art, you know, like digital art or photography or using pre made paints. no real art is berries on cave walls.

And if you want to judge an art form by the worst parts then you should do so with all the forms, and then they'd all suck. Be it ai, human, scuplture, painting, charcoal or whatever. But that's hardly fair is it? In terms of time ai can make better are than any human could in the same time. So if you want something quick, be it for ideas, testing or a wank they can do that. And you can always iterate and improve upon it if you want. You think humans make detailed art in one go without iterations or fixing things on the way?

And if you complain about small things being wrong in generated images, great! then you can generate and just fix the small problems and save yourself a lot of time then.

Art is whatever people want it to be, in which ever way they want to express themselves. Things don't have to be profound or meaningful. Be it from big titty anime waifu or depictions of the horrors of war, they are all valid expressions in whatever medium they use.

But hey if you are against people expressing themselves with images you don't like, You'd seem like the antithesis of an artist if you ask me. Some people want to be put on pedestals and look down upon others, i find them a sad lot.

And you also have to remember it's only getting better, Its massively improved since ai art first became available.

Spoiler: Images

You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.

 

[EvolutionKills]

prove it in a court of law and provide list of items that are gone from possession of artists (stolen). As far as I'm concerned, AI has every right to look at creations of others and learn. You have no idea what you taking about and you let your biases talk. Stable Diffusion is open source and COMMON man is making the models and optimizations, not corporations.

Have fun with your 3DCG soulless slop, i guess.

Not how copyright works. Everything gets a copyright, it is not something you need to actively seek like a trademark. Once you make something, you own the copyright for it. Now there is the Fair Use doctrine, a set of guidelines for being able to both protect the original copyright holder while allowing others to use and experiment with it. Generative AI basically violates all 4 pillars of the Fair Use doctrine, meaning it is almost certainly de facto copyright infringement (e.g. THEFT); and on a worldwide scale effecting millions of individuals.

You must be registered to see the links

1 - The intended purpose and use is absolutely commercial (non-commercial uses like parody are more likely to get a pass). So Big L for the 'Purpose and Use' pillar.
2 - AI are incapable of imagination (they also don't get copyright protection for their output as per the US Copyright Office), and so fail the 'Nature of Use' pillar.
3 - The algorithm ingests the whole work to study it. Again, this is a product. The whole artwork is being used to 'teach' the end product. So you don't need an archive of copied work to cut/paste from to violate the third pillar 'Amount and Substantiality'.
4 - This product is absolutely being groomed in such a way as to compete with and replace actual artists. So another Huge L for the 'Effect of the Use Upon the Potential Market' pillar.

Stable Diffusion is a corporate product. It's only 'free' now while they're building up hype, using techbros as unpaid beta testers (corporations love your free labor), and have VC money to burn. Make no mistake, it will be split off into a sperate branch intended for corporate use and sold at the enterprise level; and that walled off version will have all the good shit. After all, who's actually paying for all the server farms, their electricity, and the massive CO2 they produce? Those VC ghouls are intent on getting their pound of flesh eventually.

This is not a COMMON MAN revolution. This is stealing form the common man in order to benefit the select few. It is yet another way for the elite to skim wealth off the top of those who already have less than them. You don't own shit, and the shit you don't own was made by stealing from others.

This would be like declaring the Guttenberg printing press as a COMMON MAN revolution, if it was exclusively powered by slaves with access to a library who could copy anything you asked them too for shits and giggles, and routinely needed to also burn down entire forests worth of CO2.


3DCG, so long as you're buying the models and have any modicum of skill with posing and lighting your render? They have to potential to be far less 'soulless' than anything generative AI spews out. Because you'll still be able to infer intent from the work, with the choices they made in their shot composition; photography and videography are now rather mature art forms with a deep communication visual language. What intent can you infer from a algorithm blackbox you have no control over, whose output even with identical input/prompts will still be entirely randomized? None. That is soulless.

 

[EvolutionKills]

But hey if you are against people expressing themselves with images you don't like, You'd seem like the antithesis of an artist if you ask me. Some people want to be put on pedestals and look down upon others, i find them a sad lot.

The saddest lot is those who take pride in a machine doing all the work for them.

Like bragging about your prowess at footracing when you use a moped.

 

[AlluraHikaru]

Not how copyright works. Everything gets a copyright, it is not something you need to actively seek like a trademark. Once you make something, you own the copyright for it. Now there is the Fair Use doctrine, a set of guidelines for being able to both protect the original copyright holder while allowing others to use and experiment with it. Generative AI basically violates all 4 pillars of the Fair Use doctrine, meaning it is almost certainly de facto copyright infringement (e.g. THEFT); and on a worldwide scale effecting millions of individuals.

You must be registered to see the links

1 - The intended purpose and use is absolutely commercial (non-commercial uses like parody are more likely to get a pass). So Big L for the 'Purpose and Use' pillar.
2 - AI are incapable of imagination (they also don't get copyright protection for their output as per the US Copyright Office), and so fail the 'Nature of Use' pillar.
3 - The algorithm ingests the whole work to study it. Again, this is a product. The whole artwork is being used to 'teach' the end product. So you don't need an archive of copied work to cut/paste from to violate the third pillar 'Amount and Substantiality'.
4 - This product is absolutely being groomed in such a way as to compete with and replace actual artists. So another Huge L for the 'Effect of the Use Upon the Potential Market' pillar.

Stable Diffusion is a corporate product. It's only 'free' now while they're building up hype, using techbros as unpaid beta testers (corporations love your free labor), and have VC money to burn. Make no mistake, it will be split off into a sperate branch intended for corporate use and sold at the enterprise level; and that walled off version will have all the good shit. After all, who's actually paying for all the server farms, their electricity, and the massive CO2 they produce? Those VC ghouls are intent on getting their pound of flesh eventually.

This is not a COMMON MAN revolution. This is stealing form the common man in order to benefit the select few. It is yet another way for the elite to skim wealth off the top of those who already have less than them. You don't own shit, and the shit you don't own was made by stealing from others.

This would be like declaring the Guttenberg printing press as a COMMON MAN revolution, if it was exclusively powered by slaves with access to a library who could copy anything you asked them too for shits and giggles, and routinely needed to also burn down entire forests worth of CO2.


3DCG, so long as you're buying the models and have any modicum of skill with posing and lighting your render? They have to potential to be far less 'soulless' than anything generative AI spews out. Because you'll still be able to infer intent from the work, with the choices they made in their shot composition; photography and videography are now rather mature art forms with a deep communication visual language. What intent can you infer from a algorithm blackbox you have no control over, whose output even with identical input/prompts will still be entirely randomized? None. That is soulless.

You have no idea what you talking about, and none of this has been proven in a court of law. AI art is 100% transformative and fair use. Also look it up, you CANNOT copyright a style. Nice anti-ai propaganda tho.

Enjoy your 3DCG trash tho, hog.

 

[EvolutionKills]

You have no idea what you talking about, and none of this has been proven in a court of law. AI art is 100% transformative and fair use. Also look it up, you CANNOT copyright a style. Nice anti-ai propaganda tho.

Enjoy your 3DCG trash tho, hog.

Transformative? Oh, that's why all AI output lacks any copyright protection huh?

Are you Shadaversity? You sound like Shadaversity.