3 ms·

Probably accurate for videos and music. Videos because there’s going to be just too many things to correct to make it time efficient. Music because music just n

Probably accurate for videos and music. Videos because there’s going to be just too many things to correct to make it time efficient. Music because music just needs to be excellent or it’s trash. That is for high quality art of course. You can ship filler garbage for lots of things. 2D art has a lot of strong tooling though. If you’re actually trying to use AI art tooling, you won’t be just dropping a prompt and hoping for the best. You will be using a workflow graph and carefully iterating on the same image with controlled seeds and then specific areas for inpainting. We are at an awkward inflection point where we have great tooling for the last generation of models like SDXL, but haven’t really made them ready for the current gen of models (Flux) which are substantially better. But it’s basically an inevitability on the order of months.

jsheard 2y ago
Even with the relatively strong tooling for 2D art it's still very difficult to push the generated image in novel directions though, hence the heavy reliance on LoRAs trained on prior examples. There doesn't seem to be an answer to "how would you create [artists] style with AI" that doesn't require [artist] to already exist so you can throw their life's work into a blender and make a model that copies it. I've found this to be observable in practice - I follow hundreds of artists who I could reliably name by seeing a new example of their work, even if they're only amateurs, but I find that AI art just blurs together into a samey mush with nothing to distinguish the person at the wheel from anyone else using the same models. The tool speaks much louder than the person supposedly directing it, which isn't the case with say Photoshop, Clip Studio or Blender.
- jncfhnb 2y ago
  Shrug. That’s a very different goal. Yes, if you want to leverage a different style your best bet is to train a Lora off a dozen images in that style. Art made by unskilled randos is always going to blur together. But the question I feel we’re discussing here is whether a dedicated artist can use them for production grade content. And the answer is yes.
- RunSet 2y ago
  https://www.kiplingsociety.co.uk/poem/poems_conundrum.htm https://www.kiplingsociety.co.uk/poem/poems_conundrum.htm

jsheard 2y ago

Even with the relatively strong tooling for 2D art it's still very difficult to push the generated image in novel directions though, hence the heavy reliance on LoRAs trained on prior examples. There doesn't seem to be an answer to "how would you create [artists] style with AI" that doesn't require [artist] to already exist so you can throw their life's work into a blender and make a model that copies it. I've found this to be observable in practice - I follow hundreds of artists who I could reliably name by seeing a new example of their work, even if they're only amateurs, but I find that AI art just blurs together into a samey mush with nothing to distinguish the person at the wheel from anyone else using the same models. The tool speaks much louder than the person supposedly directing it, which isn't the case with say Photoshop, Clip Studio or Blender.

jncfhnb 2y ago
Shrug. That’s a very different goal. Yes, if you want to leverage a different style your best bet is to train a Lora off a dozen images in that style. Art made by unskilled randos is always going to blur together. But the question I feel we’re discussing here is whether a dedicated artist can use them for production grade content. And the answer is yes.
RunSet 2y ago
https://www.kiplingsociety.co.uk/poem/poems_conundrum.htm https://www.kiplingsociety.co.uk/poem/poems_conundrum.htm