Should AI content have its own sub-forum?

[allyfitz]

I'm asking because I don't have an opinion but I curious what everyone else thinks. Up until recently I've almost entirely made rendered art. I've started learning stable diffusion and wasnt sure where to post it. Right now I've posted it in my rendered art thread, but that kinda feels like the wrong place for it.
Because AI images can look so real, It's somewhat a different beast from drawings, paintings, renderings. For an example of how real it can look... here's one of my recent ones: https://www.zoovilleforum.net/attachments/leashed-8-png.428943/

Right now everyone is using the Art forum, and maybe that's the best place for it to stay, but I figured I'd see what everyone else thinks.

 

[dartel]

No. It should be forbidden as most serious art sites are doing.

 

[pes]

No. It should be forbidden as most serious art sites are doing.

I would not forbid it as it does have some use.
Though I do have issues with people either training it on a single author and producing essentially identical art.
Or using it to make porn with real people like actors and so on.
I will remove any porn with real faces and even warn people for doxing attempts or attempts to defame someone by faking illegal porn with them.

 

[allyfitz]

Or using it to make porn with real people like actors and so on.
I will remove any porn with real faces and even warn people for doxing attempts or attempts to defame someone by faking illegal porn with them.

Agreed deepfaking, whether done with old school photoshop or with AI, shouldn't be allowed since there's such a stigma around zoo.

 

[Cookiecaretaker]

hey ai porn is a option for people who are good with software to do ,,artwork,, and not only the trained/talented artistic ones

there is place for both <3

 

[Goattobeloved]

Looks like an idea.
It is not a real thing, it is no "art" efford in doing it.

Still, there is quite some oddly site related content being spewed out of those twisted AI processors (plus I have some fun sering how safeties are bypassed)

Looks good to have it segregated in a subforum, where people who enjoy it can have ot all located... and those despiting it can avoid it.

 

[Cookiecaretaker]

i wouldnt lock ai artwork away in a seperate forum - its no competition only a additon to the existing art

 

[likestowatchinnc]

I voted yes. Some people have ethical or aesthetic objections to AI works which should be respected even for those of us who disagree with them. The same goes for AI created fiction. It should have its own section in the story section. Both should be separated from human created work if for no other reason that for those of us who enjoy AI work do not have to repeatedly read the arguments of those with ethical or aesthetic objections to it.

 

[likestowatchinnc]

Also if AI created images are in their own designated section then there would be less question about whether any humans presented were actually engaging in the acts depicted no matter how realistic the images appear. An watermark clearly stating that the image is AI generated would also be a good idea since nearly all of the images will eventually be posted somewhere other than ZV.

 

[likestowatchinnc]

I'm asking because I don't have an opinion but I curious what everyone else thinks. Up until recently I've almost entirely made rendered art. I've started learning stable diffusion and wasnt sure where to post it. Right now I've posted it in my rendered art thread, but that kinda feels like the wrong place for it.
Because AI images can look so real, It's somewhat a different beast from drawings, paintings, renderings. For an example of how real it can look... here's one of my recent ones: https://www.zoovilleforum.net/attachments/leashed-8-png.428943/

Right now everyone is using the Art forum, and maybe that's the best place for it to stay, but I figured I'd see what everyone else thinks.

Wow! Talk about amazing. She looks so real.

 

[allyfitz]

Looks like an idea.
It is not a real thing, it is no "art" efford in doing it.

The same argument could be said for using a 3d rendering program... to boil it down to simplicity... all you're doing with that is posing digital dick figures and clicking a button and waiting.

There is a skill to doing AI art. The fact is people only really see the final product and not the hundred or so variants you went through to get the final image that's shared. The image I shared was probably about 40 to 50 versions deep with different prompts... then taking the output and inserting that back in with different prompts.

In that way its more like working with Clay. You start with something, you then refine it in a direction you want... sometimes along the way you find you need to go backwards and take a different path... and sometimes you stumble upon a direction you didn't think of but like better than what you had thought you wanted.

If you think making photorealistic AI art is just sitting at a computer and saying "woman with collar" and getting the image you want. You're laughably wrong. I thought it was that easy... and boy did I found out I was an idiot for thinking it was that easy.

 

[allyfitz]

if AI created images are in their own designated section then there would be less question about whether any humans presented were actually engaging in the acts depicted no matter how realistic the images appear.

The problem with that is that its up to the honesty of the person posting it to say that it's not a real person.
Case in point...

Wow! Talk about amazing. She looks so real.

I could have fixed the buckle part of the image in something like photoshop and posted it in the regular photo section and people probably wouldnt have known it wasnt real.
But I'm deceitful with people... so I wouldnt do that.
But I think we all are wise enough to know that there are deceitful people on this forum.

 

[Goattobeloved]

The same argument could be said for using a 3d rendering program... to boil it down to simplicity... all you're doing with that is posing digital dick figures and clicking a button and waiting.

No. Unless 3D programs have changed a lot, you need to be GOOD at sculptimg and creating things if you work from scratch, or just want to customize or tweak something.

Different thing, if you just work on models, using them "as they are" and just pose them, right?

And even in this latest case, you may find art qualities in the same way you may find art in collages where the autor never created anything in particular in the piece, but just created an art setup.

There is a skill to doing AI art. The fact is people only really see the final product and not the hundred or so variants you went through to get the final image that's shared. The image I shared was probably about 40 to 50 versions deep with different prompts... then taking the output and inserting that back in with different prompts.

YES, that is what I mean, in the end. Giving instructions is not art. It is just giving prompts and instructions to the stubborn artist to get the piece you'd like to have.
In that sense, I feel that would put you much closer to Pope Julius II role than to Michael Angelo

In this case, the artist would be the AI, but since there is no ghosh in the machine, it is just preprogrammed setups rather than art.

If you think making photorealistic AI art is just sitting at a computer and saying "woman with collar" and getting the image you want. You're laughably wrong. I thought it was that easy... and boy did I found out I was an idiot for thinking it was that easy.

Guilty as charged

Note:
Take it as an explanation of my opinion, I am aware it could be discussed and never come to agree, but that is possibly not the point here

 

[allyfitz]

Unless 3D programs have changed a lot, you need to be GOOD at sculptimg and creating things if you work from scratch, or just want to customize or tweak something.

There are two main areas in 3d work. One is modeling which does require the skills you mention, the other is the scene construction (posing, repositioning, lighting, etc...) which does not require modeling skills. With the latter you're using the character/item assets that others have created and using them however you want to build something.
3D rendering programs usually cover both sides of the work, but as an individual you dont have to. Some people like making items and characters, other people like creating stories/scenes with the characters/items that others have made.
A painter doesn't make their own paintbrushes and paints, but they decide what to do with them to make their final product. But we wouldnt say a painter isnt an artist because they dont make their own brushes and paints. So why would we do the same when it comes to 3d work?

YES, that is what I mean, in the end. Giving instructions is not art. It is just giving prompts and instructions to the stubborn artist to get the piece you'd like to have.

So digital musicians are not artists because they aren't playing the instruments themselves and the computer is?
Hanz Zimmer, and other composers aren't artists because they are simply giving instructions to other artists?

 

[Goattobeloved]

A painter doesn't make their own paintbrushes and paints, but they decide what to do with them to make their final product. But we wouldnt say a painter isnt an artist because they dont make their own brushes and paints. So why would we do the same when it comes to 3d work?

Paintbrushes are tools. Instruct them as much as you like, they won't make the work.
I like kire the collage artist comparison, but in the end I think your concept and minecare not very different. We are just pulling the concept in our direction.

So digital musicians are not artists because they aren't playing the instruments themselves and the computer is?

Again, the computer is just a tool that needs knowledge and cretivity, it is not like "play something nice, no, put some bass and add a filter"

Crudely: If you can sit a monkey and creates something decent, you do not need to be an artist.

Sit me in front of a synth and I will create shit.
I tried AI drawings, might not get what I intended but it sure looked quite better that anything I ever draw

Hanz Zimmer, and other composers aren't artists because they are simply giving instructions to other artists?

In those cases Ibam afraid musicians are just tools.... And they'd better not show too much individual creativity while working for Zimmer

 

[allyfitz]

I tried AI drawings, might not get what I intended but it sure looked quite better that anything I ever draw

But the computer being better at you doesn't mean you're not an artist... it just means you really suck at drawling. lol

I posted a direct comparison in another thread, and I wont repost it here, but give it a read... https://www.zoovilleforum.net/threads/my-work-livingthefarmlife.84115/post-2093785

There's a lot more to getting a good image than just entering a prompt. It's not a one step process. To get something good, you have to put in a prompt, see what you get, try other prompts to get one feature right. When you get part that you like, you then take that image and start with that as your base and start adjusting it. You'll go forward and back tons of time slowly honing in on what you want. It's reminds me of working clay in one of the classes I took at uni. Sometimes you go down a path and its all wrong and you have to go backwards and start again.

If you're just using a single prompt and taking the output... then sure I'd be willing to agree that if you're not an artist. But, if you're doing dozens of revisions, taking the image into other programs to refine it and then re-inject it back into Stable Diffusion, slowly working towards an image you have in your mind... then stable diffusion isnt the artist... its simply the tool you use to make what you want to create. It's a very powerful tool, but its still just a tool nonetheless.

I guess there's a tipping point between who's the artist depending on...
a) Who is doing the creative decision of what should be created?
b) Is the person using SD as a tool or as a copy machine?
c) For the end product... who had the most control over its creation?

 

[JustFine]

If it doesn't get its own sub-forum, maybe a dedicated thread would be enough.
I am here to simply answer the question of the topic not debate the ethics, morality, or validity of AI generated content.

 

[pes]

Moved to suggestions.
@ZTHorse @Oldman @dogluver101 @FloofyNewfie
This does add a little extra work for mods to move ai threads to the potential new section. But since it is not critical or breaking any rules if it stays in the general 3d section for however long, we do not have to actively hunt for AI threads.

The section should have one rule though. NO AI ART INVOLVING FACES/NAMES OF REAL PEOPLE.
I have already deleted some posts where the op used the face of an actor to create zoo porn.
Such images have a potential to harm the person unwillingly in them.
I classify it as doxing and warning points are awarded for it.

 

[Oldman]

Moved to suggestions.
@ZTHorse @Oldman @dogluver101 @FloofyNewfie
This does add a little extra work for mods to move ai threads to the potential new section. But since it is not critical or breaking any rules if it stays in the general 3d section for however long, we do not have to actively hunt for AI threads.

The section should have one rule though. NO AI ART INVOLVING FACES/NAMES OF REAL PEOPLE.
I have already deleted some posts where the op used the face of an actor to create zoo porn.
Such images have a potential to harm the person unwillingly in them.
I classify it as doxing and warning points are awarded for it.

Ai generated content is art. No need to make another category for it.

We do however need to update the rules to include your suggestion. I believe that is definitely needed.

 

[UR20Z]

No. Like any other cartoons, it should be filed under the existing artwork/3d category.

 

[Filthydoggo]

Art and 3d fit pretty well. Even the most photo realistic will have some uhh lets say style queues that aren't to real life.. Or I suppose that depends on the person creating the ai piece. Personally I think it's pretty crazy how wide of a range AI art can be.. from furry, toony, 3d, to photorealistic.

I understand how some folks can disagree with even allowing AI art but for me it allows for story telling, or character building in a nearly photo realistic way. All of that without risk of posting actual pictures my loved ones.

 

[NaughtyMeowChan]

That's a great question. Like any thing out there, there should be an access spot for everyone. I'm pretty sure there already is an AI for it. Like our groups are small and quiet I'm pretty sure the same goes for them.

 

[FloofyNewfie]

For now, it's semi-easy to tell AI art apart from traditional art, as AI tends to make pretty obvious mistakes when generating art, such as extra digits, misshapen doggy cookies (man is it often bad with doggy cookies), double paw pads, inconsistent lighting, inconsistent coloring, missing key details, stuff like that... but it's getting more and more close to looking hand drawn every day. Sooner or later there will likely come a time where it's indistinguishable from the real deal.

But take the thread Feral Female Dogs for example. Like the majority of threads in that section of the forum, it's primarily copy/pastes of other people's work. It's not like most of the users in these sections are actually drawing these pieces of artwork in the first place. So, at least in those sections in my opinion it really doesn't matter for the most part.

Really, the only problem will be people that post crappy AI generated art and call it their own original work, instead of work made by word prompts. Could we create an AI section? Well I can't, but an admin could. I just don't know how useful it really would be in the long haul. That, and would it still be considered "AI art" if someone generates AI artwork and them throws in into Photoshop to hand touch-up the flaws? It's AI artwork, but work that's been touched up and modified by a human. Being an artist myself, I do get that AI is muddying and mucking things up, but at this point that cat is already out of the bag, and there ain't no putting it back.

 

[dartel]

call it their own original work, instead of work made by word prompts

Which is exactly what's happening. They're all "My work ...", and all being responded to with "you're so talented".

That, and would it still be considered "AI art" if someone generates AI artwork and them throws in into Photoshop to hand touch-up the flaws?

Yes. Touch up work is entirely different from creating the work from scratch. If someone adds nipples to a nippleless piece of furry art, they can't upload it to E621 with themselves tagged as the artist.

 

[pes]

Yes. Touch up work is entirely different from creating the work from scratch. If someone adds nipples to a nippleless piece of furry art, they can't upload it to E621 with themselves tagged as the artist.

I often modify dinosaur art to be more anatomically correct. Sorry guys dinosaurs are not mammals. But I am definitely not posting that as my own.

Which is exactly what's happening. They're all "My work ...", and all being responded to with "you're so talented".

They are.
They have the imagination to write:
"image of 18 year old beautiful japanese girl with small waist, legs wide open showing pussy, no clothes, big boobs, big ass, big legs, full body scene, nude, nsfw, long hair, elegant, attractive, goddess, kind, pretty, smiling, female, nice, highly detailed, bright open eyes, cityscape in background, scifi, smooth, attractive, sporty, sexy, seductive, pretty, naked, skin, nsfw, gorgeous, picture, beautiful sexy model, nude, bare, naked, perfect skin, looking at the camera, beautiful symmetrical face, sensual body, posing sexy, front view vagina"
So it basically has the complexity of your average personal ad thread.
(This example comes from a NSFW prompt browser.)

Plus they have a talent for collecting photos which their AI then chews on.
Writing AI prompts is art guys! It requires vast amounts of knowledge.

Master the Art of Writing Image Generation Prompts for AI in 5 Min

An easy-to-follow guide on how to write text prompts for AI image generators, their structure, and how to effectively use rendering keywords.

letsenhance.io

It is like writing a whole book:
- Text prompts should be at least 3-7 words long!!!
- AI prompts should include a subject (person, object, or location) and descriptors (adverbs and adjectives that describe the subject).
- Avoid using abstract concepts because they lead to inconsistent results; use concrete nouns instead.
- Aesthetic and style keywords and phrases can add the finishing touches to the rendering.

Admittedly some AI results are quite nice. Though I would not call the users artists.

The only effort needed for AI seems to be lots of computational time and lots of trial/error attempts at making it make something usable.
And from what I have seen in the AI threads "usable" is a very broad term.

 

[FloofyNewfie]

Yes. Touch up work is entirely different from creating the work from scratch. If someone adds nipples to a nippleless piece of furry art, they can't upload it to E621 with themselves tagged as the artist.

However AI is different in the sense that even though the algorithm might have utilized references from 24,000 different pieces of artwork from 1,000 different artists, the content it spits out is technically a never before seen brand new piece of artwork, and before you mention that it's stealing from others, I can tell you as an artist myself that many of my pieces have been loosely inspired by other artists in one form or another, it's how you develop your technique. But like I mentioned before, often there are noticeable problems with the artwork that it spits out. Say an AI spits out an image that's 85% what you're looking for in a piece, you add the extra 15% by correcting the errors and adding your own personal touch to it. In the end you wind up with artwork that's a little derivative like most art pieces are in one form or another, but something completely unique.

From scratch, one of my pieces takes around 4-6 hours to complete depending on complexity, as I try to go for realism. But if something can spit out an 85% done piece of artwork to my tastes in 5 minutes, and I spend an additional 1 hour to make modifications to it, it still winds up being something that is not only technically unique, but something I've invested time towards making my own.

Of course my hypothetical scenario is nothing more than a hypothetical scenario... but it does beg the question whether modified AI art with a human touch to it, could be considered "worthy" enough of being included in the furry art section of this forum, and not a section of its own. We're talking about this forum here, not e621.

 

[ZTHorse]

The subname has been updated to include AI generated content. Closed.