Why Are Artists Such Chuds?

Why do they fear and lash out at AI? It's derivative, parody art. If you want to have more appeal and sell your art, then make your art better.

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

Rise, Grind, Banana Find Shirt $21.68

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

  1. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Greg Rutkowski needs dutasteride and minoxidil

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      ask me how i know youre both troons

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      He's probably married with kids, I don't think he's worried about that anymore

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      male pattern hair loss is not a disease. imagine taking long life drugs for it. LOL

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        It's not even that bad for him, he just has a receding hairline not literally half or full bald. Women don't mind that at all if you're decently attractive. Stop falling for incel memes

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        anything that makes you look like shit is a disease, simple as

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          nah... medical science and science in general run on objectivity, not subjectivity.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Taking drugs to hold on to your hair for a few more years is fricking gay and moronic.

  2. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >says he was cyberbullied
    hes a gay and he can get fricked

  3. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    ~~*(rudkowski*~~)
    serves him right to get his shit stolen

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >every polish person is a israelite

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        who do you think israeli people are you fricking moron?

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          the guy in the picture is clearly white, moron-kun

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            butthurt belters aren't white

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous
  4. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >make your art better
    They can't. That's why they're mad.

  5. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Human art is more valuable than AI art because a human made it.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      A human had to work for the skill to be an artist, actual hardship and work is something no AI or machine will ever be able to understand.
      The human condition makes the art transcendental, AI is soulless because it doesn't work for it's talent. It knows nothing of pain, and cannot express the deeper parts of life in a sublime way because it knows nothing of suffering.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        That being said, AI will dominate the pornography art industry, so people like shadman will be out of a job, but for works of high culture and high art, human art will always be more valued.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >It knows nothing of pain, and cannot express the deeper parts of life in a sublime way because it knows nothing of suffering.
        The same could be said about most women.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >The human condition makes the art transcendental
        This is pretentious idiocy.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Nothing substantial is being communicated in AI created art, it's just an exercise in prefect adherence to pre-written parameters of what is consider "high art", AKA an imitation..
          There's no deeper meaning, because their is no deeper substance to an AIs life. An AI will be close to perfect without any real effort. It will express effortless perfection in it's art, that is, everything it creates will be perfect, sterile.
          The porn will be perfect.
          Any deep or sublime message in the art will be perfect.
          There will be zero error and if their is it will be intentional to be perfectly imperfect.
          It fundamentally cannot express sublime or transcendental messages in art because one, it does not suffer, and two, it is incapable of imperfection.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Nothing substantial is being communicated in AI created art
            This goes for the vast majority of man-made art as well. It's less "robots are doing human work now" and more "human artists have been doing robotic work for a while."

            >every polish person is a israelite

            Poland would be a lot nicer if this were true, but alas

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            who cares 99% of artists cant meet these conditions, even if they do they are unemployed. Art is something anyone can do. Same thing with running, breathing, etc.. to get paid to do something anyone can do at some level is difficult and highly competitive. If you have hands you can draw, if you have a mind you can create art. Not a single artists with clients and income is affected by AI. It just made their job easier.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Did you just copy paste shit from twitter? You fricking Black person.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        In context of our current time, yes. Slapping a txt2img prompt and shitting out 1girl/solo/pov is hardly anything worthwhile.
        Managing to get a idea that's worthy of having consistent training set, sketching out baseline panels that you use AI to accelerate the process, manually refining the errors, and on top of that having enough writing skill to make a cohesive and engaging story is a completely different story.
        Don't blame the hammer, blame the hand that holds it.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          AI isn't useful as an art tool.
          Like a lot of technology and the effect it's been having on younger generations, AI used as an art tool will create a competency crisis among human artists.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            AI on its own isn't useful, just like a paintbrush on its own isn't useful either. It's an accelerator, not a creator.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Paintbrush cannot make creative decisions, "ai" can.
            >Verification not required

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            It’s not making decisions since it’s not sentient, are you moronic anon? That’s like saying a dice makes a decision because it rolls different numbers

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            In context of our current time, yes. Slapping a txt2img prompt and shitting out 1girl/solo/pov is hardly anything worthwhile.
            Managing to get a idea that's worthy of having consistent training set, sketching out baseline panels that you use AI to accelerate the process, manually refining the errors, and on top of that having enough writing skill to make a cohesive and engaging story is a completely different story.
            Don't blame the hammer, blame the hand that holds it.

            There's finer details to the craft of art that you will miss out on if you rely on AI to accelerate your panels and sketching. For instance, Idiosyncrasies in perspective theory that you would learn for making a certain pose of a character, some bit of knowledge you would miss out on and not be aware of for future use if you relied on AI for your sketch.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Finer details are hardly the focus when it comes to baseline idea behind it. Take Rococo for instance, a style dominated by finer details yet with absolutely no substance, no expression, just sterile perfection. All of it's "samples" look like something that was shitted out from Stable Diffusion.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >All of it's "samples" look like something that was shitted out from Stable Diffusion.
            Black person it's stable diffusion that looks like that art style. You are the proof that ai shitters are mentally disabled.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            It looks so familiar because majority of people who use it are artlets, and have no talent. They just generate 1girl, portrait, low effort crap and roll with it. They don't even bother to look for interesting styles; they physically incapable to imagine beyond what "ai" can do.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >traditional art is more valuable than digital art because a human made it
      >traditional art is more valuable than photograph because a human made it
      Nobody cares

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Why so upset?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Nobody cares
        They do care, moron. The only ones who don't are you disembodied troons who think men can be women. You're completely detached from the human experience. Practically and philosophically.
        And if you're not a troon yet, you're destined for it.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Luddites lashing out by calling everyone they don't like trannies
          Sad

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I don't hate technology. I hate the gnosticism common to both trannies and transhumanists.

  6. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >AI artists.

  7. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    has he tried closing his eyes?

  8. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    AI is the advent of the death of human imagination.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Which ironically also means that we won't have to worry about ai because we won't advance in that field

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        there's enough human-generated text and imagery to train anything.
        AI will ruin the social media, yes, but it was utter garbage for training anything anyway.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >there's enough human-generated text and imagery to train anything
          There's not, actually.

  9. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    the world economic forum states that humans have no souls, that we as people, are not unique. the world has been figured out, humans are machine replicants. the physiognomy of our species is well known by now. pray to your technocratic overlords.

  10. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    > then make your art better
    How about you teach how to accomplish this?
    Or are you to foolish to draw even the simplest of studies?

  11. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >target by cyberbullies
    >quote when will you get a real job unquote one email reads

  12. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    All the negative fallout people "warn" about already happened when art became the domain of "art types" rather than artists. AI isn't destroying art, university hipster doofuses whose idea of using paint for art is "lay down a huge blank sheet, get the crew over and play around on the sheet with some buckets of paint" destroyed art. Bauhaus killed art. Warhol killed art. Corporate Memphis killed art. "Yeah, I'm an ARTIST, I'm, like, DEEP" killed art. THE SCENE killed art.Technique being utterly disregarded in favour of FEELING killed art.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      lol, the funny part is that the only fine art that will survive the ai apocalypse is the 'look at my deep idea' type art.
      thank you for putting the final nail in the coffin of muh technique

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *