4 ms·

I’ve tried once with MJ and it looks OK. I’m not even surprised anymore. The devil, though, is in the details. It’s hard to control the outputs. The scene wil

I’ve tried once with MJ and it looks OK. I’m not even surprised anymore. The devil, though, is in the details. It’s hard to control the outputs. The scene will look 80% OK, but then you want to add some cat somewhere and that won’t be trivial (at the moment). There are already a lot of impressive tools to help you out, like ControlNet, but it’s a bit difficult still. You also have to do cleanup, because some random animal in the background of the illustration will be horribly mangled. This all basically requires you to actually be a (digital) artist to fix properly. Again, for now. Edit: I wanted to add that this, to me, is similar to AI coding. On a good day, it might be 80% OK, but you actually need to be a programmer to catch its lies and/or incompetenties.

riffraff 4y ago
> This all basically requires you to actually be a (digital) artist to fix properly. Again, for now. right, this is my impression of the "graphic ai revolution": it will be a boon for actual digital artists that can take the output and refine it, much like Copilot can help programmers while not replacing them. for now, anyway.
- p-e-w 4y ago
  My impression has been that Stable Diffusion has outclassed the vast majority of digital artists from day one. The only reason people feel otherwise is because when you look at human-made digital art online, you tend to only see the best of the best of the best. The one-in-a-thousand artists who make it to the DeviantArt or ArtStation frontpages. But most artists aren't anywhere near as good as those few geniuses, and neither are they as good as what Stable Diffusion generates. So my prediction is that 99% of digital artists are essentially obsolete today, and the remaining 1% will become obsolete some time in the next 3-5 years.
  - hammyhavoc 3y ago
    "obsolete" assumes distillation of art down to output and not the value of expression and enjoyment of the process itself. To not consider this is to misunderstand creativity. See starving artists who do what they do because they love it.
  - raincole 4y ago
    > today More like yesterday, to be honest.
  - SanderNL 4y ago
    It's great, but I think reliability is as big a problem there as it is in coding. It's hard to control the output. I won't go into the various problems these tools have, like them ignoring my instructions if they are outside what 90% of the population is doing, because I think they can and will be solved to various degrees eventually. But the bar will raise. The quality that customers expect will start rising. Eventually the level of control and quality that is demanded will again only be adequatedly matched by people we usually call "artists". Sure, I - some scumbag programmer - can create some fancy generic shots today for a generic company blog post and for now that is impressive, but in the long term this won't cut it. Folks will want highly fine-tuned specific imagery trained on company stuff or whatever. Branding will have to match exactly. The complexity of the design will explode. Good taste and raw visual skill, not to mention creativity - being an "artist" - will win and the average dude will not have the proclivity to keep up those skills. I think it's more than holding a pencil and being good at drawing lines. I do think the raw skills of "holding a pencil" and such is becoming obsolete. That's like having good "punching card" skills. However, knowing what to "punch" is a timeless skill or at least a good part of it is and it's easy to adapt to a new era if needed. Punching code, typing code, selecting code-snippets from AI, it's different for sure, but the underlying high-level skills are adaptable and useful. I think the same holds for artists.

riffraff 4y ago

> This all basically requires you to actually be a (digital) artist to fix properly. Again, for now. right, this is my impression of the "graphic ai revolution": it will be a boon for actual digital artists that can take the output and refine it, much like Copilot can help programmers while not replacing them. for now, anyway.

p-e-w 4y ago
My impression has been that Stable Diffusion has outclassed the vast majority of digital artists from day one. The only reason people feel otherwise is because when you look at human-made digital art online, you tend to only see the best of the best of the best. The one-in-a-thousand artists who make it to the DeviantArt or ArtStation frontpages. But most artists aren't anywhere near as good as those few geniuses, and neither are they as good as what Stable Diffusion generates. So my prediction is that 99% of digital artists are essentially obsolete today, and the remaining 1% will become obsolete some time in the next 3-5 years.
- hammyhavoc 3y ago
  "obsolete" assumes distillation of art down to output and not the value of expression and enjoyment of the process itself. To not consider this is to misunderstand creativity. See starving artists who do what they do because they love it.
- raincole 4y ago
  > today More like yesterday, to be honest.
- SanderNL 4y ago
  It's great, but I think reliability is as big a problem there as it is in coding. It's hard to control the output. I won't go into the various problems these tools have, like them ignoring my instructions if they are outside what 90% of the population is doing, because I think they can and will be solved to various degrees eventually. But the bar will raise. The quality that customers expect will start rising. Eventually the level of control and quality that is demanded will again only be adequatedly matched by people we usually call "artists". Sure, I - some scumbag programmer - can create some fancy generic shots today for a generic company blog post and for now that is impressive, but in the long term this won't cut it. Folks will want highly fine-tuned specific imagery trained on company stuff or whatever. Branding will have to match exactly. The complexity of the design will explode. Good taste and raw visual skill, not to mention creativity - being an "artist" - will win and the average dude will not have the proclivity to keep up those skills. I think it's more than holding a pencil and being good at drawing lines. I do think the raw skills of "holding a pencil" and such is becoming obsolete. That's like having good "punching card" skills. However, knowing what to "punch" is a timeless skill or at least a good part of it is and it's easy to adapt to a new era if needed. Punching code, typing code, selecting code-snippets from AI, it's different for sure, but the underlying high-level skills are adaptable and useful. I think the same holds for artists.