Paying for AI art

[Kalamos]

i personally don't "coerce" but simply point out that, if you HAVE to pay money, you might as well pay someone who is talented instead of a moron that types shit on a search bar.
i don't have the resources to "follow through" so, if i can't make it on my own, i just suck it up and live without it.
i prefer digital drawing mainly because i'm a messy drawer, so with pen and paper i'd punch a hole through the page after 5 minutes -_-

You called it "stolen art".
You framed AI generated art as theft.

And the whole "pay real artists" argument is moot.
People love AI art because it is, or feels, free and almost instantaneous.

I don't think people who love or use AI really think things through, or that deep.
They just way to have fun with their new toy.

Major producers are a whole different matter.
They are trying to cut out the middle men - artists, dubbers, actors, writers and so on - because they want more money for themselves and the stockholders.
I am not sure I'd put them on the same level of people who just want their daily dose of fetish, whatever the source.

 

[Bohemianne]

Here's my take on AI art: One might get the exact fantasized output (paid or not), but there will always be this void of missing the homemade craftsmanship in the art itself.

 

[Axel flame]

You called it "stolen art".
You framed AI generated art as theft.

And the whole "pay real artists" argument is moot.
People love AI art because it is, or feels, free and almost instantaneous.

I don't think people who love or use AI really think things through, or that deep.
They just way to have fun with their new toy.

Major producers are a whole different matter.
They are trying to cut out the middle men - artists, dubbers, actors, writers and so on - because they want more money for themselves and the stockholders.
I am not sure I'd put them on the same level of people who just want their daily dose of fetish, whatever the source.

the thing that makes me scratch my head is that AI was marketed as the tool that would let you avoid those pesky artists and their outrageous prices (how DARE they value their time and effort?) and then spawned countless patreon users that want to get PAID to type in stuff you want. why pay someone else if AI was supposed to give everyone the power to do whatever they wanted?

 

[BlueLine7045]

the thing that makes me scratch my head is that AI was marketed as the tool that would let you avoid those pesky artists and their outrageous prices (how DARE they value their time and effort?) and then spawned countless patreon users that want to get PAID to type in stuff you want. why pay someone else if AI was supposed to give everyone the power to do whatever they wanted?

I missed 90% of this conversation and don't plan on reading through pages of it, but I agree with you. These are the questions that need to be asked.

At the end of the day though, if AI art is getting monetary support, it is going to increase vastly. You can't even go on Deviantart now without their home page being loaded with AI created art. I personally don't have an issue with people messing around with AI tools, but I'm not paying them money for it either. The few artists I do pay with a Patreon subscription don't use AI.

I was actually more against generative AI a little while ago, but had a lot of fun using AI to help me write tickling stories, so they're fun to play with. I just wouldn't try to capitalize off of it. But apparently others are. If someone chooses to give them money, that's on them.

 

[Kalamos]

the thing that makes me scratch my head is that AI was marketed as the tool that would let you avoid those pesky artists and their outrageous prices (how DARE they value their time and effort?) and then spawned countless patreon users that want to get PAID to type in stuff you want. why pay someone else if AI was supposed to give everyone the power to do whatever they wanted?

I suspect that AI generated art was a byproduct of object recognition for self-driving cars, drones, and so on.
Since AI was learning how to recognize stuff, as a side effect it became capable to also reproducing it.

Being able to bypass "those pesky artists" is becoming fairly evident now.
I can't avoid AI art on Deviantart - they could add an option to filter it out from searches, since they give you an option to mark it when submitting - and it's becoming most of what I see posted now on TMF.

Honestly, a traditional artist might wonder why they should bother spending time drawing art the slow traditional way.
With AI anybody could literally flood the forum with eerily similar images, and people would gush over it, without knowing or caring how it was made.

And I am a mediocre artist anyway, so AI is not "stealing my job"; it was never my first source of bread.
If it were, I'd probably be pissed.

 

[Axel flame]

I suspect that AI generated art was a byproduct of object recognition for self-driving cars, drones, and so on.
Since AI was learning how to recognize stuff, as a side effect it became capable to also reproducing it.

Being able to bypass "those pesky artists" is becoming fairly evident now.
I can't avoid AI art on Deviantart - they could add an option to filter it out from searches, since they give you an option to mark it when submitting - and it's becoming most of what I see posted now on TMF.

Honestly, a traditional artist might wonder why they should bother spending time drawing art the slow traditional way.
With AI anybody could literally flood the forum with eerily similar images, and people would gush over it, without knowing or caring how it was made.

And I am a mediocre artist anyway, so AI is not "stealing my job"; it was never my first source of bread.
If it were, I'd probably be pissed.

yeah, Ai took over mainly because of "petty revenge". it was never about giving everyone the power to do stuff, it feels like it's more a situation like "talentless hack wants to one-up a guy that spent years practicing a craft".
i myself mainly draw for a hobby but i too would be pissed if people stole my work and fed it to an AI, which is why i despise the whole thing, even if it doesn't touch me directly.
my main gripe, tho, is with people calling themselves "artists" and saying they have talent when all they do is type a prompt and call it a day.
good thing is, those people can't copyright their work because, technically, they are not making it

 

[Kalamos]

yeah, Ai took over mainly because of "petty revenge". it was never about giving everyone the power to do stuff, it feels like it's more a situation like "talentless hack wants to one-up a guy that spent years practicing a craft".
i myself mainly draw for a hobby but i too would be pissed if people stole my work and fed it to an AI, which is why i despise the whole thing, even if it doesn't touch me directly.
my main gripe, tho, is with people calling themselves "artists" and saying they have talent when all they do is type a prompt and call it a day.
good thing is, those people can't copyright their work because, technically, they are not making it

Yeah, I got the same "petty revenge" vibes here.
It's not about "making art democratic".
It's about getting back at artists who dared ask for money to draw "your favorite's celebrity's nasty smelly feet".

Some people feel like they cut out the pesky middleman - the artist - and they can now get all the Velmas, the Daphnes, the Jinxes that they crave for.
Without paying or even having to wait for an artist to draw them.

Sure, you sometimes get floating feathers and extra toes.
But since many people tend to watch stuff on a tiny screen, when sitting on a toilet, those oddities don't really matter.

AI is impressive, but it also went to show that our creativity wasn't all that unique and creative, after all.
At least for the average viewer.

 

[Axel flame]

Yeah, I got the same "petty revenge" vibes here.
It's not about "making art democratic".
It's about getting back at artists who dared ask for money to draw "your favorite's celebrity's nasty smelly feet".

Some people feel like they cut out the pesky middleman - the artist - and they can now get all the Velmas, the Daphnes, the Jinxes that they crave for.
Without paying or even having to wait for an artist to draw them.

Sure, you sometimes get floating feathers and extra toes.
But since many people tend to watch stuff on a tiny screen, when sitting on a toilet, those oddities don't really matter.

AI is impressive, but it also went to show that our creativity wasn't all that unique and creative, after all.
At least for the average viewer.

yeah, pretty much. the sad part is that it will all come crashing down once the novelty aspect of it fades.
Once that happens all those ai tech-bros will start accusing each other of "stealing" (it has happened already if i'm not mistaken) but i doubt they'll find someone to defend them or back them up. after all, all ai crap looks the same: Soulless and cheap.

 

[LisaLisaJam]

I enjoyed reading everyone's thoughts and opinions.
Let's use this AI picture for example.

1. Do you like it?
2. Does it cover the feelings of a person looking for tickling fetish?
3. How many minutes or hours would you guess it took to make?
4. Do you think it became a fully finished piece of art by only typing words into a description window?
5. Does it look completely unrealistic (as far as face, body, activity)?

 

[Kalamos]

I enjoyed reading everyone's thoughts and opinions.
Let's use this AI picture for example.

1. Do you like it?
2. Does it cover the feelings of a person looking for tickling fetish?
3. How many minutes or hours would you guess it took to make?
4. Do you think it became a fully finished piece of art by only typing words into a description window?
5. Does it look completely unrealistic (as far as face, body, activity)?

1 - No, but it's not my fetish.
2 - Does it work for a fetishist? Depends on that person's fetish. They are not all cut from the same cloth.
3 - Depends on the tools you used; if you entered a prompt it took a few minutes, depending on the generator.
4 - Depends on the generator - some are pretty picky on adult contents - and if you added feathers in a separate program.
5 - Depends on your definition of realistic. It's a clearly digital picture of a floating person.

You probably cannot produce a "one size fits all" solution.
Different people will have different kinks, and consider some styles a turn off.
Some people dislike anime, some feel 3D is soulless, some will think nothing of sketches.
Some will find you cheeky for asking how to better supplant conventional artists.

Even when using AI, I try to style my prompts so they reflect my tastes in style and composition.
What I've seen so far is usually devoid of flair.

 

[LisaLisaJam]

1 - No, but it's not my fetish.
2 - Does it work for a fetishist? Depends on that person's fetish. They are not all cut from the same cloth.
3 - Depends on the tools you used; if you entered a prompt it took a few minutes, depending on the generator.
4 - Depends on the generator - some are pretty picky on adult contents - and if you added feathers in a separate program.
5 - Depends on your definition of realistic. It's a clearly digital picture of a floating person.

You probably cannot produce a "one size fits all" solution.
Different people will have different kinks, and consider some styles a turn off.
Some people dislike anime, some feel 3D is soulless, some will think nothing of sketches.
Some will find you cheeky for asking how to better supplant conventional artists.

Even when using AI, I try to style my prompts so they reflect my tastes in style and composition.
What I've seen so far is usually devoid of flair.

Tickling scenarios are not your fetish?

 

[Kalamos]

Tickling scenarios are not your fetish?

That's a specific tickling scenario.
Not all tickling scenarios are my fetish.
We got feuds between armpit, navel and feet guys.
Now we even got palate and nostrils; not every tea is everybody's cup of tea.

Also, tickling has been my side job for 20+ years.
After a while it lost some charm for me.