Thread replies: 45
Thread images: 7
Thread images: 7
>>
>>2789812
Impressive...but can it draw a complete doujin and write the "story"?
>>
>>2789812
Can someone explain what the fuck I'm looking at?
>>
>>2789825
A neural network drawing birds from a text description.
>>
>>2789828
The stage 2 birds look like distorted photos. Are all of these not based on any single photos, but rather a sort of average of a ton of photos?
>>
>>2789831
yes they use tons of photos, but it's not an average really
See pic, it got both open and closed wings
>>
>>2789812
>It can only draw birds and flowers so far
Its NOT. GONNA. MAKE IT.
>>
>that chicken scratching
not gonna make it
>>
>>2789821
>Impressive...but can it draw a complete doujin and write the "story"?
At this point scriptwriting has become even dumber than mechanically reproducing visual art
heck maybe computers will make better stories than we ever will
>>
I'm retarded so excuse me if I'm missing something but how are those drawings? Looks like it mashes some photos together based off of a description (which is still incredible) but I don't see the drawing aspect of it.
>>
>>2789875
It's like if you could draw with your mind with no arms/fingers involved.
It's over, humans are finished
>>
>>2789875
>Looks like it mashes some photos together based off of a description
Well, that's exactly what it is. Yet another "revolutionary" program that will make artists obsolete by being able to do google image searches and mash them together or apply filters on top of it.
>>
>>
File: eggthief.jpg (596KB, 800x1146px) Image search:
[Google]
596KB, 800x1146px
>>2789879
>"Xbox, draw me a picture of Birds, emotion: angry. Story: eggs stolen. Mood: funny. Style: kinda cartoonish, but not too much, you know what I mean!"
>>
File: the future.jpg (62KB, 452x418px) Image search:
[Google]
62KB, 452x418px
>>2789899
>"Understood, Batman. Beginning painting process."
>>
>>2789812
Not gonna make it.
>>
>>2789932
Underrated post
>>
>>2789812
I guess photobashers are now obsolete.
>>
>so far
Is it an ai that's studying vector loomis?
>>
>>2789828
Apparently it even went as far as drawing the birds dropping in stage II. Impressive!
>>
>>2789812
>Teaching machines how to draw from the imagination is cheaper and way more productive than teaching machines how to build a car.
You're too retarded if you think machines will ever replace artists instead of wagecucks.
>>
>>2790070
Dude, you don't understand how fast is the progress in this field. Two years ago this shit was science fiction.
>>
>>2789900
kek
>>
File: frjtyrfj.png (241KB, 1400x798px) Image search:
[Google]
241KB, 1400x798px
>>2790085
It still is. The whole problem was never "machines can't create art" (you could make a computer create fractal art with 1960 LISP), it was "it's never going to look good". And guess what, it's still utter shit. It's like those interactive AI bots which learn when you speak to them. Unless you achieve artificial conscience, the best you can expect is some lucky accident here and there. It's never going to be more than low tier photobash.
>>
>>2789832
Ooh, it's not so great with wings
>>
>>2789832
Kek some of these look like the mass production Eva series. Spooky.
>>
>>2790105
That's strange, Yayification asks the question, but TayTweets answers to ExcaliburLost
i don't know how tweeter works, though, since i never used it.
>>
>>2790145
ExcaliburLost is Yaifications. TayandYou is TayTweets.
>>
>>2789812
>tfw already better than me
What a load of bull
>>
>>2789841
REKT!
>>
>>2789832
what happens if you type "A work in progress mercenary"
>>
>>2790667
nothing, it's trained only on birds and flowers
>>
>>2790085
Dude, 30 years ago half of the shit you have in your house was considered science fiction.
It's a cool science project, and looks like a glimpse to the future, but do you think digital painting will ever replace traditional painting, just as much as this will ever replace creative humans?
>>
>>2791829
>do you think digital painting will ever replace traditional painting
but it did
>>
>>2792222
Not that guy, but he used a pretty shitty example. Digital painting vs traditional painting was just a change in medium. The process how to create art is still mostly the same in the sense that we have to use our brains and hands to physically draw, only now on a tablet and not on a canvas or paper. This change is comparable to computers replacing typewriters for authors. It's mostly a quality of life upgrade that makes certain tasks easier and is better suited for a production environment.
The change from traditional to digital in the entertainment industry is not even 1/100th of a technological leap compared to going from where we currently are to sentient AI creating art.
>>
>>2789828
How can you be so sure that it's not just a search engine?
>>
>>2792236
because it's not?
>>
bump
it's over, artists are finished
>>
>>2795075
If Art can be created by machines then the only other actionable occupations are engineering and maintenance
>>
>>2792222
that's why people stopped going to art galleries and kim jung gi is famous, right? art is not like going from a vcr to a blu ray player, there's room for all aspects of art and technology has only helped make it easier to market traditional work or learn about it along with the improvements in art programs and digital work. it's basically a win win for everyone.
>>
>>2795075
>human photocopiers easily btfo by toasters
>mfw master race cartoonist
>>
>mfw they make an algorithm that generates free porn based on a checkbox list of fetishes and franchises
>all the shitty porn peddlers will starve to death
>>
>>2796140
>you were born too early to explore space
>you were born just in time for generative porn
>>
>>2789812
concept artist's gonna lose their jobs to computers before blue collar workers.
better start learning landscaping or carpentry before is too late
Thread posts: 45
Thread images: 7
Thread images: 7