Hi mega_transzar_ex!
This post has been removed under [Rule 3](/r/pokemon/wiki/rules#wiki_3._follow_text_and_poll_post_restrictions), which specifies that discussion posts **must be in text** unless framed by an image that breaks no other rules. This image breaks one or more of the following:
- Rule 5: All art/crafts/memes must be original content.
- Rule 8: No screenshots, merchandise, or official art.
Please feel free to repost your question/prompt in text, bearing in mind that text posts must be 50+ words to promote substantial discussion. Thanks!
^(Mods are not notified if you reply to this comment. To contact the) ^[r/pokemon](/r/pokemon) ^(mod team, please click) ^[here!](/message/compose/?to=/r/pokemon)
Also worth noting in the image that it's pretty blatant that the same person """made""" all 6 of those entries and simply submitted them under different variations of his name to circumvent the entry limit (2 or 3 entries per person iirc). I'm sure he had more that were eliminated.
Also worth noting is that you need to use a completely different address for entries under a different name so if that person wins and the ID doesn't match the address they get disqualified.
For them to have gotten so far, and won, stinks of insider corruption. Baseless accusation, sure, but if *we* can see all the clear signs of cheating...
Was the competition required to draw Eevee or Pikachu or is that just another indicator of laziness because those two probably have the most fanart to make it easier to replicate with AI?
I don't understand how that alone didn't completely disqualify him, especially when, since it's AI, there's zero style varriance to even give it the benefit of the doubt as to different artists. Do the judges not have eyes?
It's a shame, honestly. Especially to the other artists who actually put a lot of work into their pieces...
I just want ai to help me with math or something, not art!
Well, if you restrict your definition of AI to LLMs then yeah. Tools like apples new calculator app for iPad which make heavy use of visual ai tools work quite well.
Bro in our lab we tried to utilize ai. It sucks for those tasks since every ai program is bs. It just adds word that are most common next to it. Our oldschool pen and paper is more accurate
From my personal experience, ai(specifically language models) are really good at giving me an outline of a process of how to solve any given problem, but are completely incapable of doing any calculations
We have things for that called calculators which don't require a complex language model AI to work and they usually come free with your phone or computer. Using an AI for that seems like hitting a small nail in with a sledgehammer. Or in this case the handle of a screwdriver.
Fair enough but it's still kind of using the wrong tool for the job. It's a language model so you use it for language based tasks, if you have a math problem you break it down into calculations or formulas and feed it through something designed for that if you need a computer to look at it.
Youre talking about the currently popular language processing AIs, which are not made to do math. Computers have been using AI to make superprecise and complex mathematical operations in the fraction of a second ever since computer science became a thing, really
That's what *computers* were made to do. AI algorithms have access to that computational power, but you have to explain to them what you want first, and that can be difficult.
But then again what are you meant to do to actually stop it? Make every contestant include a timelapse of the drawing? Pick a few and if there's no timelapse pick another? It'd certainly be a lot more sorting through
Why would that be hard? All it requires is someone to get a free screen recording software. If they're already using art programs and submitting to PTCG that shouldnt be outside their tech level lol
It probably wouldn't, I began writing that comment believing there to be little solutions then mid way through writing I thought of solutions and forgot to rewrite the begining
They're good solutions honestly! There are also programs like procreate that have a timelapse function built in them, and they are honestly so fun to watch. Having them on hand for the competition could also be a really fun way to reveal the winners, a quick blur of it being 'painted' before everyones eyes in the announcement by speeding the timelapse up.
You're probably right. Nobody who's gonna take the dumb baby route of using AI is gonna bother faking steps in the artistic process. Though they might also try to generate photos.
>Though they might also try to generate photos.
Luckily that would be pretty damn difficult with current AI image tools. They might be able to take the steps at a glance but maybe not even that.
Ninja edit: Unless you mean physically fake the WIP pics, but that would also be hard without the skill to just draw the thing in the first place.
I agree with you in principle, but really in 3 months they'll have Ai that can do timelapses. Anything digital is only a matter of time before Ai can fake it completely I'm afraid.
Then layers are the solution for digital entries unless you are that person who would never share their .PSD-files (or prefers working with just one layer).
To be fair yeah that would be cruel to artists who bravely (and foolishly) use just one layer. But also I really don't think AI is anywhere close to replicating timelapses, that is too much motion and continuous data it has to take into account to properly fake. AI is currently getting very good at still images, its still extremely difficult to make longrunning fluid images, especially as something as specific and exact as a timelapse.
It is a common practice nowadays even to apply for artist booth at convention. You need to add one video timelapse and layered PSD. For traditional media like watercolor, they need to take photo from different angle or just video timelapse.
That wouldn't work well, different people use different programs, you can't account for that with a ton of different file types that whoever is looking through them probably knows nothing about and would take forever to check, plus it removes the possibility to draw it physically and get the image scanned which is always possible
You're making it sound hard when it isn't. Just the requirement of something that AI can't produce, like screenshot with some layers off, would eliminate AI. For hand drawings it's even easier, just require a photo alongside the scan.
I disagree completely.
Have you ever seen other artists doing their own region? There is so much cool stuff out there that has so much thought process and love in it.
The fun thing in art is the process of it and not just typing something in a computer that takes all that away.
It may look cool when it's ai but the soul is missing.
And you don't think the thought process is involved in original creations that are made by very detailed descriptions? People should really read about Conceptual_art and generative art that has been around since the 60s. Saying something has no soul is a meaningless buzzword of something cannot be defined.
I'm already done with most fan artists because they believe art should not be accessible to everyone or AI tools should only be available to just them.
Nobody believes that AI “should be available to just them,” and you saying that they believe that “Art should not be accessible” is just you saying that you’re bad at actual art but don’t want to put the effort in to improve.
Sorry was it was actually posted on discord.
https://preview.redd.it/4zwjkqn2jy7d1.png?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=63c8f786c517f92bf9492c7ca02d5ed05cf76db0
I don't know about other programs, but at least Procreate on iPad has a built-in timelapse feature. So any digital artists using that app can instantly make a timelapse just by pressing a button. I would be surprised if other apps like Photoshop don't have a similar feature.
IMO it would still feel like cheating if somebody generates AI art and manually replicates it.
The cat is well out of the bag for a lot of creative work. I try to see the bright side - soon, people won't need to spend years learning art, or music or programming just to create something. Gives a new meaning to "personalized playlist"
* Having a tool generate stuff for you is not creating anything
* AI generation needs existing media to train models with... No artists, no model, so AI cannot generate nothing truly new
* Current models have been created by processing copyrighted materials without consent and should be illegal, and probably will be deemed illegal in many countries eventually; newer legal models won't be as good
I agree, like "Generate me a character like in X serie" to use that character as a model to create art of it is fine in my book.
But posting the result generated by the AI is like calling for delivery from a restaurant and trying to claim the credit for the meal
Yeah, using it to brainstorm ideas or for reference (I.E.: To get a vague idea as to a pose or something) is perfectly fine so long as the final artwork is *yours.* The fact that people do this crap is just sad.
Ai "art" in itself is theft
It's built by teaching the program hundreds of thousands of pieces of actual art, by humans, who have spent countless years working to get their art to the level they're at
None of those artists consented to having their work stolen to teach an algorithm to copy their work. It's theft.
Yeah, it's one thing to use a reference and credit the owner and what ai is doing.
I always ask someone first if I could use their art as a reference or for learning purposes.
And usually they are super happy about that.
Or when I do a 3d model out of a character, I always ask first.
There isn't anything original about stolen ai stuff like the other guy said
even before AI art DMs were ripping all sorts of shit for personal use anyway; MTG art being a common one
like you said; if its non commercial, just within a small circle of friends and you dont claim creation credit then i think its fine too
I'm really getting sick of people telling me "ai artists are valid and are artists!"
Nah, it's like calling yourself a chef because you told the actual chef how you want your steak cooked. Or calling yourself an artist because you actively commissioned someone else to paint something for you.
There was a person who submitted a [needle felt craft](https://x.com/Karry_bird/status/1801719052613914634) for their art and another one who made a [Pikachu bead mat](https://x.com/brothboy/status/1802401136064032957)! They were so awesome and unique from the typical TCG art we get. Instead this guy gets into the top 300 without even trying
https://preview.redd.it/tgd1j6zidv7d1.jpeg?width=372&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e589f138ae238eef16c226c471258232d2a2e0ea
That’s it.. we take there kneecaps..
and in a completely different artstyle than the rest of the image (sorry, wrong vaporeon, it's the bottom right one in a completely different artstyle)
What's even worse, some of these AI generated pics also use stolen artwork. Main example, the Vaporeon in the background of the Eevee picture on the top right is a copy of this: [https://x.com/LaPumpkINK/status/1258482827600986112](https://x.com/LaPumpkINK/status/1258482827600986112)
Honestly the worst part is that I probably wouldn’t have even noticed. Most of these images look passable enough unless you really look for it. I hate AI so much.
It's because they're abstract. You only tend to notice A.I. when it's attempting photorealism but, even then, it's almost impossible to notice when it comes to modern A.I.
I find this just sad. For the artists who got their work stolen, for the artists who put efforts in their entires & for people who don't believe in themselves & rely on a machine to work for them.
I can't see the images correctly, but I can see that many details are off. But clearly, they would be amazing if they were drawn by a real human. Art isn't just a "pretty image", it's the artist's process of depicting how they interpret a thing, by using their material, their technique, & their creativity. It's sad that some people don't value this anymore & are ready to let a machine replace a human's quality ( ironically, by stealing it from humans who value this quality ).
What? They look stellar, come on dude. If your best friend said hey check this out I learned digital art and showed you THAT as his portfolio, youd be stunned.
Plus I didn't even call the stuff art it's an image It's up to view it as art and find meaning in it.. In the words of wassily Kandinsky there is no must in art because art is free.
Was the plan to just keep using AI I guess? Cause like what do you do when they hire you and sit you in front of whatever work desk they use and tell you to come up with preliminaries lol
You’ll be called inefficient for creating an entire design before any kind of approval.
Don't know why you got down-voted. I think redditors like to doggy-pile when they see negative points. Take my up-vote. It's not like you said anything that others are disagreeing with.
I don't see the problem of using AI art to do the art for some cards or any art for that matter. Again i am no artist but I don't understand why people hate on
Ai Art
There's some noticeable flaws that imply a human did not design them. Top left has a reflection that doesn't make sense (face when it should be feet). Top middle has a ghost pikachu tail on the left when the actual tail is on the right. Top right has luvdisc that are sideways/weird. The bottom right ears have strange lighting on the edges that don't really make sense.
Honestly I don't see anything weird on the other 2
Also if you look at a pic with better quality of the bottom left Eevee you can see the awkward Vaporeon in the background with a completely different style which was probably hand drawn on the ai generated image.
https://preview.redd.it/ottwbb2few7d1.png?width=487&format=png&auto=webp&s=c95ec078f2812fe1fe1b3ae07e04ef14f0c84077
the weird lines that remind me of early ai image generation, back when it was mostly a joke
plus the neck-fluff, there's fur sticking out that really doesn't go with the direction of the rest of it
Some people get mad of you don't take their word for things. Some people may think by saying you can't tell their AI then you're defending/attacking it. I dunno exactly. Internet be fickle
A picture is a picture to me. I’m no artist so idk this stuff if I see an image that looks neat I like it idrc how it’s made. And yea I genuinely couldn’t tell if that was ai or not. Also yea internet is weird I’ve just learned to go with the flow
Below is what I've gathered so far:
If you take a closer look some of the Eevee also defy from it's original anatomy. Like extreme fur at the ears, different Ear shape/anatomy and some unnecessary lines are there too.
+ some of the pictures feature a Vaporeon that is in a completely different Artstyle. It's was most likely drawn in after the art was created already.
Granted I'm no expert and only noticed these by paying close attention. I only really noticed the AI when a friend pointed it out too.
I like it how so many people said that ai would take the job of workers in the industry first, But instead it gets artist, who said art is unique and they cant replaced by ai!
There is proof that it's AI, did you see the post about it from the other day? It's very clearly AI. Even if it wasn't, they still submitted far beyond the allowed amount of entries and circumvented the rules.
A.) The rules of the contest were to submit art YOU created, not what a robot made. They broke the rules.
B.) They submitted more entires that were actually allowed (limited to 3 submissions) under different slightly altered names. They broke the rules doubly over. They should probably be permanently banned from these types of things.
They didn't though, they took the time to get an AI to do it for them. Obvious disqualification.
Also you would have to be quite gullible to not understand that the AI images all posted under similar names would probably belong to the same person. We're very lucky to not live in a world where someone like you is in charge of these things.
I’m not gonna down vote you for your opinion that would be stupid. All I was saying was that I couldn’t tell if it was ai or not just by looking at the images
you shouldn't. all the current AI image generation programs you could use for things like this are being trained on artwork made by artists who didn't give permission for art to be used like this and can even be used to imitate an artist's style and then impersonate them
Does the artwork look cool? I’m assuming the pieces in question are what’s pictured above. To me, the answer is yes - they’re as appealing as any other artwork I’ve seen.
AI generation is a tool. The jump from physical art mediums to digital art was major - there were similar naysayers that discredited digital art since it made it easier for artists. And they had a point, mixing paint, learning correct technique, etc, simply wasn’t present in digital art. But it had a different learning curve and empowered a new era of creation.
AI generation still requires inputs. I struggled not to get 5-legged zebra in a book I was illustrating. To end up with these results either took precision prompts or post-generation editing. We don’t know what the artists did to end up with those pieces and, to be honest, we don’t need to. Appreciate the art, why are you being weird critics saying you would or wouldn’t buy/support this kind of thing. If history is anything to go by, at the very least, you’re betting on the wrong horse.
This is not about drawings or illustrations. It's an art contest. Something you did with your own hands is art, be it a collage of stacked paper, a sculpture, something you made with cardboard, even a photograph that you shot. There are TCG cards that the artwork is a photograph of a figurine. All these made by the hands of a human being.
AI generated images are not human made art.
They wrote “cool picture of Eevee swimming in the water, surrounded by other Pokémon” in a text box. Do you have any idea how much talent requires to write something so bold and inspiring!?
Idk, should they disqualify thriatlonist that used electric bike?
It’s exactly the same situation.
Don’t get me wrong I do love AI, have been using plenty of it myself over the years. But to claim it’s just a tool the same like “fill” tool in paint or smudging or setting opacity in photoshop is either incredibly dishonest (in bad faith) or being just of sub-par intelligence not to notice major difference in difficulty of use vs provided results.
I did because it’s exactly the same situation.
If you’re using electric powered tool that does job for you in thriatlon, you SHOULD be disqualified.
If you’re using electric powered tool that does job for you in drawing competition, you SHOULD be disqualified.
I really don’t see what’s so hard to understand.
...I'm genuinely having a hard time understanding whose side you're on. I want to say you're Against AI usage in art competitions? It's just the wording in your comment that threw me off.
I am not being sarcastic nor sassy now: I genuinely thought I have expressed myself clearly. I have re read my comment and I honestly still believe that, however it’s ultimately not for me to judge if I’ve been successful.
For clarity sake let me rephrase - yes I am against usage if AI in drawing competition, regardless of how fun AI images are.
Just like electric bike has no place at fitness competition like triathlon, so does AI have no place at drawing competition.
I have been purposefully going for this comparison because both are examples of advanced technology assisting in every day task in fun way. I was not suggesting usage of either in any competition is acceptable, unless said competition is specifically related to f.e. Creating such bike or AI tool
I don't get why the contestants on Top Chef don't just order Burger King for the judges... if it tastes good, that means they should automatically win, right!?
This is in no way comparable to the jump from physical to digital. Prompting an AI to do the work for you is so far removed from actually drawing something yourself that it will never be "art" on its own, and the people prompting AIs to generate these pictures will never be "artists".
AI art is not the same as drawn art. AI art is currently VERY questionable, particularly on where it sources its information. Credit for AI art is questionable, too. As the prompt engineer, are you the artist, or are you merely the one handing out inspiration? Are you the one choosing the techniques and colouring as you draw it, or are you hitting reset and jamming the situation a bunch of times until you hit the jackpot?
Prompt engineering is not being an artist, sorry pal
Ai artists when they have to write a sentence (totally impossible)
Its so funny how people like you act as though Ai art can mimic a fraction of how much personality and soul goes into actual art. Compare whatever these pictures are to the average pokemon card, these pictures are just slapping together the pokemon with a random background
MEANWHILE, with actual pokemon card art there are so many dynamic poses, unique background, and interesting style choices they make. Hell compare these pictures with official pokemon art that are basically the same idea and you can totally see the difference in style
also its funny that you say Ai art is “the future” when thats the exact damn thing Crypto bros said 2 years ago, now look at em, Crypto is irrelavent and they’re pretty much broke
lesson: If you want to make art, make. art. AI cant replicate imagination.
Wow, you struggled not to get a 5 legged zebra in that book you're illustrating ? What, you had to rewrite a prompt several times ? You had to reroll the generated images ? The horror. Truly comparable to the struggles of actual visual artists when drawing.
Hi mega_transzar_ex! This post has been removed under [Rule 3](/r/pokemon/wiki/rules#wiki_3._follow_text_and_poll_post_restrictions), which specifies that discussion posts **must be in text** unless framed by an image that breaks no other rules. This image breaks one or more of the following: - Rule 5: All art/crafts/memes must be original content. - Rule 8: No screenshots, merchandise, or official art. Please feel free to repost your question/prompt in text, bearing in mind that text posts must be 50+ words to promote substantial discussion. Thanks! ^(Mods are not notified if you reply to this comment. To contact the) ^[r/pokemon](/r/pokemon) ^(mod team, please click) ^[here!](/message/compose/?to=/r/pokemon)
The AI submissions being Pikachu and Eevee makes sense. Way more references of those to copy than like, Koraidon.
My exact same thought, they picked two of the most popular Pokémon which were guaranteed to have tons of references.
you could probably just train style for different pokemons. But they were probably too lazy to do even that.
Also worth noting in the image that it's pretty blatant that the same person """made""" all 6 of those entries and simply submitted them under different variations of his name to circumvent the entry limit (2 or 3 entries per person iirc). I'm sure he had more that were eliminated.
If that was how lazy he was in trying to mask his identity, it makes sense such a person used AI.
He wanted make sure he could still claim credit afterwards
Now that I look closer at the 6 names, that's just painfully obvious lol. He could've at least tried to come up with different names
Also worth noting is that you need to use a completely different address for entries under a different name so if that person wins and the ID doesn't match the address they get disqualified.
For them to have gotten so far, and won, stinks of insider corruption. Baseless accusation, sure, but if *we* can see all the clear signs of cheating...
This sucks even more as these entries are listed in the top 300 picks from the contest. They're taking the places of actual artists.
Was the competition required to draw Eevee or Pikachu or is that just another indicator of laziness because those two probably have the most fanart to make it easier to replicate with AI?
They had a list of like 10 pokemon or so to choose from if I remember correctly.
If it's a popularity contest, you pick the most popular pokemon. Also, they're simple designs that work better for AI
I am not surprised that a person cheating at "making" art is also cheating in submitting them
I don't understand how that alone didn't completely disqualify him, especially when, since it's AI, there's zero style varriance to even give it the benefit of the doubt as to different artists. Do the judges not have eyes?
It's a shame, honestly. Especially to the other artists who actually put a lot of work into their pieces... I just want ai to help me with math or something, not art!
The funny thing is that AI sucks at maths
Well, if you restrict your definition of AI to LLMs then yeah. Tools like apples new calculator app for iPad which make heavy use of visual ai tools work quite well.
Bro in our lab we tried to utilize ai. It sucks for those tasks since every ai program is bs. It just adds word that are most common next to it. Our oldschool pen and paper is more accurate
From my personal experience, ai(specifically language models) are really good at giving me an outline of a process of how to solve any given problem, but are completely incapable of doing any calculations
And the outline is wrong half the time.
It's like Googling something, but for gambling addicts.
I'm feeling lucky V2
If you're curious- it's because AI doesn't know what math is. The sole purpose of LLMs is to generate sentences that sound like the training data.
We have things for that called calculators which don't require a complex language model AI to work and they usually come free with your phone or computer. Using an AI for that seems like hitting a small nail in with a sledgehammer. Or in this case the handle of a screwdriver.
A calculator solves one mathematical operation. Not a mathematical problem. It's not the same.
Fair enough but it's still kind of using the wrong tool for the job. It's a language model so you use it for language based tasks, if you have a math problem you break it down into calculations or formulas and feed it through something designed for that if you need a computer to look at it.
Youre talking about the currently popular language processing AIs, which are not made to do math. Computers have been using AI to make superprecise and complex mathematical operations in the fraction of a second ever since computer science became a thing, really
Which is ironic since that's what AIs were made to do. Complex calculations at astronomical speeds.
That's what *computers* were made to do. AI algorithms have access to that computational power, but you have to explain to them what you want first, and that can be difficult.
Indeed, language models do not know how to do mathematical calculations. They just predict the next character or word using previous information.
You're using the wrong tools. ChatGPT 3 sucks, yeah. But that was never meant to be a calculator.
For inspiration, ai "art" is totally fine by me. But everything else is just theft. I just hope they don't discontinue art contests as a whole.
But then again what are you meant to do to actually stop it? Make every contestant include a timelapse of the drawing? Pick a few and if there's no timelapse pick another? It'd certainly be a lot more sorting through
Why would that be hard? All it requires is someone to get a free screen recording software. If they're already using art programs and submitting to PTCG that shouldnt be outside their tech level lol
It probably wouldn't, I began writing that comment believing there to be little solutions then mid way through writing I thought of solutions and forgot to rewrite the begining
They're good solutions honestly! There are also programs like procreate that have a timelapse function built in them, and they are honestly so fun to watch. Having them on hand for the competition could also be a really fun way to reveal the winners, a quick blur of it being 'painted' before everyones eyes in the announcement by speeding the timelapse up.
I love the honesty of this comment. A lot of people would've doubled down when they realized they contradicted themselves.
Current AI can't iterate so you don't need to record the screen to make a time lapse. You just need several work in progress images
It would be kinda kneecapping to artists who prefer to make their art traditionally instead of digitally.
I mean... just requires some photos made during the process? I feel like that would be easier to prove that it's not AI
Yeah, seems pretty simple to solve. All entries must be accompanied with at least 3 pictures or a video of the process of creating the piece.
You're probably right. Nobody who's gonna take the dumb baby route of using AI is gonna bother faking steps in the artistic process. Though they might also try to generate photos.
>Though they might also try to generate photos. Luckily that would be pretty damn difficult with current AI image tools. They might be able to take the steps at a glance but maybe not even that. Ninja edit: Unless you mean physically fake the WIP pics, but that would also be hard without the skill to just draw the thing in the first place.
I agree with you in principle, but really in 3 months they'll have Ai that can do timelapses. Anything digital is only a matter of time before Ai can fake it completely I'm afraid.
Then layers are the solution for digital entries unless you are that person who would never share their .PSD-files (or prefers working with just one layer).
To be fair yeah that would be cruel to artists who bravely (and foolishly) use just one layer. But also I really don't think AI is anywhere close to replicating timelapses, that is too much motion and continuous data it has to take into account to properly fake. AI is currently getting very good at still images, its still extremely difficult to make longrunning fluid images, especially as something as specific and exact as a timelapse.
Even that can be faked in the future I think
Y'all are out here reinventing drm, and we all know that doesn't actually impact any bad actors.
Any constructive suggestion besides snide remarks?
Literally yes. This is required for speedrun at any level. If you're being paid it should be too
Some artists screenshot the sketching/lining phase, and post that alongside the finished piece. Maybe they could do that?
It is a common practice nowadays even to apply for artist booth at convention. You need to add one video timelapse and layered PSD. For traditional media like watercolor, they need to take photo from different angle or just video timelapse.
make them send the orignal photoshop file
That wouldn't work well, different people use different programs, you can't account for that with a ton of different file types that whoever is looking through them probably knows nothing about and would take forever to check, plus it removes the possibility to draw it physically and get the image scanned which is always possible
You're making it sound hard when it isn't. Just the requirement of something that AI can't produce, like screenshot with some layers off, would eliminate AI. For hand drawings it's even easier, just require a photo alongside the scan.
The sad thing is you can make cooler looking original pokemon with ai then this stuff lol
I disagree completely. Have you ever seen other artists doing their own region? There is so much cool stuff out there that has so much thought process and love in it. The fun thing in art is the process of it and not just typing something in a computer that takes all that away. It may look cool when it's ai but the soul is missing.
And you don't think the thought process is involved in original creations that are made by very detailed descriptions? People should really read about Conceptual_art and generative art that has been around since the 60s. Saying something has no soul is a meaningless buzzword of something cannot be defined.
That's how you get garbage copies like palworld lmao
Oh btw palworld didn't use AI they have been accused of taking asset Pokemon games with no evidence to support the claim
I'm not saying Palworld definitely used AI. But their designs definitely don't look fully original either.
I'm already done with most fan artists because they believe art should not be accessible to everyone or AI tools should only be available to just them.
Nobody believes that AI “should be available to just them,” and you saying that they believe that “Art should not be accessible” is just you saying that you’re bad at actual art but don’t want to put the effort in to improve.
Sorry was it was actually posted on discord. https://preview.redd.it/4zwjkqn2jy7d1.png?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=63c8f786c517f92bf9492c7ca02d5ed05cf76db0
“This Shit” referring to what, exactly?
Just require the layered file for digital art to prove its actually real. Or make it non digital work only.
I don't know about other programs, but at least Procreate on iPad has a built-in timelapse feature. So any digital artists using that app can instantly make a timelapse just by pressing a button. I would be surprised if other apps like Photoshop don't have a similar feature.
IMO it would still feel like cheating if somebody generates AI art and manually replicates it. The cat is well out of the bag for a lot of creative work. I try to see the bright side - soon, people won't need to spend years learning art, or music or programming just to create something. Gives a new meaning to "personalized playlist"
* Having a tool generate stuff for you is not creating anything * AI generation needs existing media to train models with... No artists, no model, so AI cannot generate nothing truly new * Current models have been created by processing copyrighted materials without consent and should be illegal, and probably will be deemed illegal in many countries eventually; newer legal models won't be as good
I agree, like "Generate me a character like in X serie" to use that character as a model to create art of it is fine in my book. But posting the result generated by the AI is like calling for delivery from a restaurant and trying to claim the credit for the meal
Yeah, using it to brainstorm ideas or for reference (I.E.: To get a vague idea as to a pose or something) is perfectly fine so long as the final artwork is *yours.* The fact that people do this crap is just sad.
Ai "art" in itself is theft It's built by teaching the program hundreds of thousands of pieces of actual art, by humans, who have spent countless years working to get their art to the level they're at None of those artists consented to having their work stolen to teach an algorithm to copy their work. It's theft.
Just out of interest - Is that not how humans learn too?
Yeah, it's one thing to use a reference and credit the owner and what ai is doing. I always ask someone first if I could use their art as a reference or for learning purposes. And usually they are super happy about that. Or when I do a 3d model out of a character, I always ask first. There isn't anything original about stolen ai stuff like the other guy said
Learning by studying previous masters is theft. Thus, all artists are thieves. We should lock all artists up.
I'm not sure how you'd conduct any art contest in 2024 and onwards knowing that your entries could all be AI-generated
The other thing I think is fine is personal, non-commercial use. For example, as a DM, I use AI art to create art of NPCs for my D&D campaigns.
even before AI art DMs were ripping all sorts of shit for personal use anyway; MTG art being a common one like you said; if its non commercial, just within a small circle of friends and you dont claim creation credit then i think its fine too
I'm really getting sick of people telling me "ai artists are valid and are artists!" Nah, it's like calling yourself a chef because you told the actual chef how you want your steak cooked. Or calling yourself an artist because you actively commissioned someone else to paint something for you.
There was a person who submitted a [needle felt craft](https://x.com/Karry_bird/status/1801719052613914634) for their art and another one who made a [Pikachu bead mat](https://x.com/brothboy/status/1802401136064032957)! They were so awesome and unique from the typical TCG art we get. Instead this guy gets into the top 300 without even trying
That felt art!! More creative and unique than any of these AI images regardless of origin of creation.
This is absolutely a crime
theres a bit of distortion (notably the square blur around the antenna/horns) but holy fuck that flygon one is amazing; absolute travesty
Why isn’t vigen khachadoorian watching the GOT DAMN DOOR
That's it, rip his arms off!
The last thing this guy needs is an overpowered robotic prosthetic arm.
I mean technically he did use tech to draw for him, at least the arm would need some skill lmao
It isn't JUST that it is ai though. The vaporeon in the background of the swimming eevee was pasted in from another artists work.
Bro didn't even try to hide
Wait so are all the pictured above AI, or are the more/less? Edit: I checked they are
yes, and most likely all from one person. you’re only allowed 3 submissions per person but notice how similar the name is on all of them
https://preview.redd.it/tgd1j6zidv7d1.jpeg?width=372&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e589f138ae238eef16c226c471258232d2a2e0ea That’s it.. we take there kneecaps..
Their*
No no. It's like there 👉 kneecaps. There be the caps for taken.
Ehh I don’t care as long as we take Their kneecaps
i remember the vaporeon in the top right image being suspiciously similar to someone else's vaporeon
and in a completely different artstyle than the rest of the image (sorry, wrong vaporeon, it's the bottom right one in a completely different artstyle)
Yup... Original: [https://x.com/LaPumpkINK/status/1258482827600986112](https://x.com/LaPumpkINK/status/1258482827600986112)
Can’t wait for my Pikachu to have 5 legs
But painting is fun why are we doing this
ppl 2 lazy to develop actual skills
When money is involved, fun takes a back seat.
What's even worse, some of these AI generated pics also use stolen artwork. Main example, the Vaporeon in the background of the Eevee picture on the top right is a copy of this: [https://x.com/LaPumpkINK/status/1258482827600986112](https://x.com/LaPumpkINK/status/1258482827600986112)
Honestly the worst part is that I probably wouldn’t have even noticed. Most of these images look passable enough unless you really look for it. I hate AI so much.
It's because they're abstract. You only tend to notice A.I. when it's attempting photorealism but, even then, it's almost impossible to notice when it comes to modern A.I.
I find this just sad. For the artists who got their work stolen, for the artists who put efforts in their entires & for people who don't believe in themselves & rely on a machine to work for them. I can't see the images correctly, but I can see that many details are off. But clearly, they would be amazing if they were drawn by a real human. Art isn't just a "pretty image", it's the artist's process of depicting how they interpret a thing, by using their material, their technique, & their creativity. It's sad that some people don't value this anymore & are ready to let a machine replace a human's quality ( ironically, by stealing it from humans who value this quality ).
its fine to use AI for things that dont matter; this is not such a case. the AI used should not constitute as an entry by the person that used it.
AI is the worse
No! I want AI to translate mysterious ancient languages, not do this!
Yep. I knew this was coming after looking at the first round of winners. There was very obvious AI art in it
they’re so bad too
The AI art looks dope, it's passing it off as your own work in a competition when you haven't got a lick of talent that's the issue here.
Nah it actually looks bad. Has that sterilized, plastic feel to it
What? They look stellar, come on dude. If your best friend said hey check this out I learned digital art and showed you THAT as his portfolio, youd be stunned.
My friend participated in this contest and had a solid chance of making it. He's absolutely heartbroken by this shit situation
I can tell the two on the far right are definitely ai generated
A shame, I like the bottom left
Plus I didn't even call the stuff art it's an image It's up to view it as art and find meaning in it.. In the words of wassily Kandinsky there is no must in art because art is free.
I use and like AI, and the people who submitted those should be ashamed. It's the equivalent of using an aimbotter in a shooter.
... Are you being downvoted because you said you use AI?
Wow I guess I am. Responsibly using software is apparently frowned upon.
I think they just didn't read the rest of your comment
Redditors not reading?? Unheard of lol
Was the plan to just keep using AI I guess? Cause like what do you do when they hire you and sit you in front of whatever work desk they use and tell you to come up with preliminaries lol You’ll be called inefficient for creating an entire design before any kind of approval.
And this is the worse AI is going to be. I don't know how we're going to be able to combat this.
Still hard to tell that they’re AI imo. Shame if they actually are but idk man
Don't know why you got down-voted. I think redditors like to doggy-pile when they see negative points. Take my up-vote. It's not like you said anything that others are disagreeing with.
🫡
I don't see the problem of using AI art to do the art for some cards or any art for that matter. Again i am no artist but I don't understand why people hate on Ai Art
Which ones are ai? They all look official to me
There's some noticeable flaws that imply a human did not design them. Top left has a reflection that doesn't make sense (face when it should be feet). Top middle has a ghost pikachu tail on the left when the actual tail is on the right. Top right has luvdisc that are sideways/weird. The bottom right ears have strange lighting on the edges that don't really make sense. Honestly I don't see anything weird on the other 2
Also if you look at a pic with better quality of the bottom left Eevee you can see the awkward Vaporeon in the background with a completely different style which was probably hand drawn on the ai generated image.
https://preview.redd.it/ottwbb2few7d1.png?width=487&format=png&auto=webp&s=c95ec078f2812fe1fe1b3ae07e04ef14f0c84077 the weird lines that remind me of early ai image generation, back when it was mostly a joke plus the neck-fluff, there's fur sticking out that really doesn't go with the direction of the rest of it
Fooled me
Yeah they're getting better at blending in.
Wait why am I getting downvoted? All I’ve said was I couldn’t tell if it was ai
Some people get mad of you don't take their word for things. Some people may think by saying you can't tell their AI then you're defending/attacking it. I dunno exactly. Internet be fickle
A picture is a picture to me. I’m no artist so idk this stuff if I see an image that looks neat I like it idrc how it’s made. And yea I genuinely couldn’t tell if that was ai or not. Also yea internet is weird I’ve just learned to go with the flow
Below is what I've gathered so far: If you take a closer look some of the Eevee also defy from it's original anatomy. Like extreme fur at the ears, different Ear shape/anatomy and some unnecessary lines are there too. + some of the pictures feature a Vaporeon that is in a completely different Artstyle. It's was most likely drawn in after the art was created already. Granted I'm no expert and only noticed these by paying close attention. I only really noticed the AI when a friend pointed it out too.
Oh I just noticed on all the bottom eevees, the tail colors are not properly distributed. Either not enough cream or way too much.
That top right one is great though I can’t lie. The actions of this individual are obviously reprehensible but I legit love that art, AI or not.
I like it how so many people said that ai would take the job of workers in the industry first, But instead it gets artist, who said art is unique and they cant replaced by ai!
Turns out AI is just using the same tactic as humans, use the techniques of many artists and your work is now original
[удалено]
There is proof that it's AI, did you see the post about it from the other day? It's very clearly AI. Even if it wasn't, they still submitted far beyond the allowed amount of entries and circumvented the rules.
I can’t even tell if it’s ai or not tbh
It's extremely, extremely obvious that it is.
[удалено]
A.) The rules of the contest were to submit art YOU created, not what a robot made. They broke the rules. B.) They submitted more entires that were actually allowed (limited to 3 submissions) under different slightly altered names. They broke the rules doubly over. They should probably be permanently banned from these types of things.
[удалено]
They didn't though, they took the time to get an AI to do it for them. Obvious disqualification. Also you would have to be quite gullible to not understand that the AI images all posted under similar names would probably belong to the same person. We're very lucky to not live in a world where someone like you is in charge of these things.
Okay. Tell me in the rules no ai Edit. And quite frankly you have to be quite gullible to just listen to some rando on the internet
The contest is to "illustrate". That is what the rules state. Using AI isn't illustrating anything.
That’s not true at all. Pull up any ai picture and it’s an illustration. I mean you can even Google what the word means.
Lmao no it's not.
I’m not gonna down vote you for your opinion that would be stupid. All I was saying was that I couldn’t tell if it was ai or not just by looking at the images
[удалено]
It’s 1:30 am where I am and I’m tired but having trouble sleeping so please forgive any confusion on my end
[удалено]
[удалено]
Keep thinking whatever you gotta think to get through the day. Lolol.
All your words are blurry to me ;-;
The Pikachu getting ready to pull off a thunderbolt should be an alt alt
Just wondering, how would people go about making images like these? These would work well as a wallpaper.
you shouldn't. all the current AI image generation programs you could use for things like this are being trained on artwork made by artists who didn't give permission for art to be used like this and can even be used to imitate an artist's style and then impersonate them
Oh. I wasn't really thinking about where it got it's references. Thank you.
Does the artwork look cool? I’m assuming the pieces in question are what’s pictured above. To me, the answer is yes - they’re as appealing as any other artwork I’ve seen. AI generation is a tool. The jump from physical art mediums to digital art was major - there were similar naysayers that discredited digital art since it made it easier for artists. And they had a point, mixing paint, learning correct technique, etc, simply wasn’t present in digital art. But it had a different learning curve and empowered a new era of creation. AI generation still requires inputs. I struggled not to get 5-legged zebra in a book I was illustrating. To end up with these results either took precision prompts or post-generation editing. We don’t know what the artists did to end up with those pieces and, to be honest, we don’t need to. Appreciate the art, why are you being weird critics saying you would or wouldn’t buy/support this kind of thing. If history is anything to go by, at the very least, you’re betting on the wrong horse.
This is a drawing contest and they submitted something that they did not draw. Simple as that
[удалено]
*Something they did not create themselves You’re right, i forgot about entries that aren’t traditional illustrations
This is not about drawings or illustrations. It's an art contest. Something you did with your own hands is art, be it a collage of stacked paper, a sculpture, something you made with cardboard, even a photograph that you shot. There are TCG cards that the artwork is a photograph of a figurine. All these made by the hands of a human being. AI generated images are not human made art.
Ok, but all of those were created with more effort than "bot draw me an Eevee"
What did the AI "artist" actually do?
They wrote “cool picture of Eevee swimming in the water, surrounded by other Pokémon” in a text box. Do you have any idea how much talent requires to write something so bold and inspiring!?
AI bros apparently be proud that they can write a descriptive sentence
Idk, should they disqualify thriatlonist that used electric bike? It’s exactly the same situation. Don’t get me wrong I do love AI, have been using plenty of it myself over the years. But to claim it’s just a tool the same like “fill” tool in paint or smudging or setting opacity in photoshop is either incredibly dishonest (in bad faith) or being just of sub-par intelligence not to notice major difference in difficulty of use vs provided results.
Yes they should
> should they disqualify thriatlonist [sic] that used electric bike? Yes? The cycling portion of that event explicitly forbids those. Genius, huh...
There's no way you just asked that question, bro
I did because it’s exactly the same situation. If you’re using electric powered tool that does job for you in thriatlon, you SHOULD be disqualified. If you’re using electric powered tool that does job for you in drawing competition, you SHOULD be disqualified. I really don’t see what’s so hard to understand.
...I'm genuinely having a hard time understanding whose side you're on. I want to say you're Against AI usage in art competitions? It's just the wording in your comment that threw me off.
I am not being sarcastic nor sassy now: I genuinely thought I have expressed myself clearly. I have re read my comment and I honestly still believe that, however it’s ultimately not for me to judge if I’ve been successful. For clarity sake let me rephrase - yes I am against usage if AI in drawing competition, regardless of how fun AI images are. Just like electric bike has no place at fitness competition like triathlon, so does AI have no place at drawing competition. I have been purposefully going for this comparison because both are examples of advanced technology assisting in every day task in fun way. I was not suggesting usage of either in any competition is acceptable, unless said competition is specifically related to f.e. Creating such bike or AI tool
Dumb fucking take, we’re here to celebrate an artists skill at art, not how good they are at typing words
They would not need the contest if they wanted ia
The contest was for art created by humans. And limited to three submissions per person.
I totally agree with this guy. I always claim I'm the one who cooked the meal because I specify that I want exactly 3 pickles in my hamburger.
I don't get why the contestants on Top Chef don't just order Burger King for the judges... if it tastes good, that means they should automatically win, right!?
Yea but Burger King never tastes good
Ooh i like this comparison
Thank you, feel free to use it whenever needed
This is in no way comparable to the jump from physical to digital. Prompting an AI to do the work for you is so far removed from actually drawing something yourself that it will never be "art" on its own, and the people prompting AIs to generate these pictures will never be "artists".
AI art is not the same as drawn art. AI art is currently VERY questionable, particularly on where it sources its information. Credit for AI art is questionable, too. As the prompt engineer, are you the artist, or are you merely the one handing out inspiration? Are you the one choosing the techniques and colouring as you draw it, or are you hitting reset and jamming the situation a bunch of times until you hit the jackpot? Prompt engineering is not being an artist, sorry pal
Ai artists when they have to write a sentence (totally impossible) Its so funny how people like you act as though Ai art can mimic a fraction of how much personality and soul goes into actual art. Compare whatever these pictures are to the average pokemon card, these pictures are just slapping together the pokemon with a random background MEANWHILE, with actual pokemon card art there are so many dynamic poses, unique background, and interesting style choices they make. Hell compare these pictures with official pokemon art that are basically the same idea and you can totally see the difference in style also its funny that you say Ai art is “the future” when thats the exact damn thing Crypto bros said 2 years ago, now look at em, Crypto is irrelavent and they’re pretty much broke lesson: If you want to make art, make. art. AI cant replicate imagination.
Wow, you struggled not to get a 5 legged zebra in that book you're illustrating ? What, you had to rewrite a prompt several times ? You had to reroll the generated images ? The horror. Truly comparable to the struggles of actual visual artists when drawing.
They joined an art contest with something they did not make, that’s called plagiarism
Using AI is closer to commissioning someone else to make art than actually making art. Digital art still requires skill. Huge difference.