3 ms·
> I'd feel scammed if it wasn't clearly labelled as AI TBF - have you looked at a digital photo made in the last decade? Likely had significant 'AI' processi
by w0m 2y ago
> I'd feel scammed if it wasn't clearly labelled as AI
TBF - have you looked at a digital photo made in the last decade? Likely had significant 'AI' processing applied to it. That's why I call it a regressive pattern to dislike anything with a new label attached - it minimizes at best and often flat out ignores the very real work very real artists put in to leverage the new tools.
- AlienRobot 2y agoYou still have to take the photo. That's a billion times more effort than typing a prompt in ChatGPT.
- w0m 2y agohonestly, that's the same argument people made against photographs when the technology became available. Same argument made against the printing press. New tools aren't inherently inferior, they open up new opportunities.
- AlienRobot 2y agoI've never seen a photograph pretending to be an illustration, or vice-versa. It's only AI that pretends to be a genre it isn't.
- bobthepanda 2y agoIf anything photography mostly just replaced painted portraits, hence why high art went super abstract in response.
- numpad0 2y agoFace it. People are okay with super resolution efforts, including most deep learning-based methods. But not "AI". You can run video through i2i as a cleanup tool and upload it on the Internet, some tried and quit. YouTubers and TikTokers aren't doing it and they're all for attention. Output of current image generators are trash. It's unsalvageable. That's the problem, not "regressive pattern".