undefined | Better HN

0 pointsthot_experiment2y ago0 comments

Man I know it's pointless for me to argue but it's just like... it's wild to me that people make these comments. Do my comments give the impression that I am unaware of what drawing and painting are? I have spent thousands of hours painting and drawing.

Photography isn't gonna be painting or drawing either, it's still art that affords the artist an enormous amount of control. This is the "meme" I'm talking about. The way you talk about AI art is what's making me go AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

> typing some text and pressing 'generate', iterating, or doing layering and photobashing

It's such a self report, you have no idea what is going on, you are quick to discount it without any understanding. We are still in the infancy of the space and people are fixated with these idiotic reductive arguments. Prompt -> image is the tiniest fraction of what's possible with this technology. I wish I was better at communicating how fucking epic the set of possibilities that this opens up is, I'm sure we will see it eventually. It frustrates me to no end that people are so blind to it.

0 comments

pxoe2y ago

it's not the "unaware" part, it's the 'endless possibilities' (snake oil) part. ai ppl looooove to draw clouds and expect everyone to buy into that shit, yet it's not that hot. it'll always be just an app, unfortunately. it's reductive but that's just its limitation and confines.

thot_experimentOP2y ago

This sort factually incorrect dogmatic screed from a position of complete ignorance, this is why I find the discourse so frustrating and why I dismissively call it a meme. Look into ControlNets, look into Deforum, look into programmatic loopback, LoRa training, model alchemy; and that's just some of what's available TODAY in a field that's moving faster than most anything else.

You're someone looking at Amiga DPaint in 1986 and claiming to understand the limitations and confines of digital art. It's absurd.

pxoe2y ago

does that change that "it's an app", "it's a thing", "it's a program", "it's an intermediary"? no.

technobabble just doesn't change some fundamentals.

lancesells2y ago

> It's such a self report, you have no idea what is going on, you are quick to discount it without any understanding. We are still in the infancy of the space and people are fixated with these idiotic reductive arguments. > I'm sure we will see it eventually

If your basis for your art is about the hot new tool, or a tool in the future then it's just novelty. Generative AI is incredible from a technological perspective, as was Photoshop before it, but neither of them are ushering in some profound new wave of art.

> fucking epic the set of possibilities that this opens up is

Most great art and great design is built on constraints. My suggestion in using these magical tools is to reduce your possibilities to find something that speaks true to yourself.

thot_experimentOP2y ago

> Photoshop

> didn't usher in a profound new wave of art

How can you claim that with a straight face?

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

pxoe2y ago

thot_experimentOP2y ago

You're someone looking at Amiga DPaint in 1986 and claiming to understand the limitations and confines of digital art. It's absurd.

pxoe2y ago

does that change that "it's an app", "it's a thing", "it's a program", "it's an intermediary"? no.

technobabble just doesn't change some fundamentals.

lancesells2y ago

> fucking epic the set of possibilities that this opens up is

Most great art and great design is built on constraints. My suggestion in using these magical tools is to reduce your possibilities to find something that speaks true to yourself.

thot_experimentOP2y ago

> Photoshop

> didn't usher in a profound new wave of art

How can you claim that with a straight face?

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse