D&D General DALL·E 3 does amazing D&D art

[Jfdlsjfd]

A bit of both I think. Especially when it comes to local installs of AI art tools.

Bing and ChatGPT have had people put in content filters to moderate what they deliver and to ensure results.

This content filters only matters when you prompt for something that would trigger them. They don't refuse to produce an image outright. Their not-so-secret sauce is that they rewrite the prompt you type into a flowery prose the image-making model was trained on, adding a lot of details where there is none. Among those details are often description of clothes.

In a local install, you can get the same results if you actually describe what the person is wearing in your prompt. If you just prompt "a woman wearing plate armour", it will default to what it associates with woman in plate armour, which may be the raw base material. If you describe some elements of clothes, it can be better or worse. I once mentionned a steampunk inventor wearing overalls and the end result was a character... wearing only overalls. Which isn't what I had in mind, but was exactly what I asked for, so I can't blame the AI. If I ask with a more complete description, I tend to get images like what was posted above to illustrate ChatGPT generations.

Over in the Bing and ChatGPT world - they've got very strong filters so you at least won't break into the 'weird' unless that was your goal.

And even if it's your goal, because it labels mild elements as 'weird'. Half the models out there can't make a decent Michaelangelo's David statue.

 

[dave2008]

There is a lot of art I don't care for personally, but can appreciate how others might. There is little artwork in 2024 that I can understand how people would like it at all. But as they say, one man's gargabe is another man's treasure.

Wow that is interesting (and thank you for the response). I know art is subjective, but IMO, the 2024 core books have objectively the best, most talented artwork (in total) of any core books. Are there some images that could be better or that I don't like - yes. Are there some images from older editions as good or better - yes. But if I take any editions PHB, DMG, & MM and compare their art, in total, to the 2024 PHB, DMG, and MM I think the 2024 books are well above every editions except maybe 5e14 (but still above that).

Everybody is different!

Can you give a few examples of some images you can't understand why people would like them?

For me, if I go classic, I can't really understand why people like Erol Otus's work. I am mostly the same with Tony D's 2e work (though it is, IMO, technically much better I just don't like his style from that time for D&D). The 1e MM, my favorite bestiary of all time, has a lot of art that is technically inferior to what I can myself draw. So it has nostalgia value, but really isn't that good IMO (2e MC is basically the same, but more consistent). Of the classic OG D&D artist (Elmore, Easley, Caldwell, & Parkinson) I like them all, and they have a strong nostalgia value, but they all have issues and, like all artist, the quality of their work varies. I probably like KP's work the best.

 

[Kichwas]

In a local install, you can get the same results if you actually describe what the person is wearing in your prompt. If you just prompt "a woman wearing plate armour", it will default to what it associates with woman in plate armour, which may be the raw base material. If you describe some elements of clothes, it can be better or worse. I once mentionned a steampunk inventor wearing overalls and the end result was a character... wearing only overalls. Which isn't what I had in mind, but was exactly what I asked for, so I can't blame the AI.

I find that even with this many LorA are over trained with unrelated elements so mismatches seep in all too often. They can hyperfocus on one thing you described and remove all other elements, then force that one thing in a certain direction. Even when I do describe all of the other things.

With many amatuer trained loRas more detail can also lead to many errors where it gets confused and starts putting random things on the screen.

The professional sites avoid that mistake 'most of the time', but it can still be an issue sometimes.

 

[Kichwas]

For me, if I go classic, I can't really understand why people like Erol Otus's work. I am mostly the same with Tony D's 2e work (though it is, IMO, technically much better I just don't like his style from that time for D&D). The 1e MM, my favorite bestiary of all time, has a lot of art that is technically inferior to what I can myself draw. So it has nostalgia value, but really isn't that good IMO (2e MC is basically the same, but more consistent). Of the classic OG D&D artist (Elmore, Easley, Caldwell, & Parkinson) I like them all, and they have a strong nostalgia value, but they all have issues and, like all artist, the quality of their work varies. I probably like KP's work the best.

I find the new stuff is better in a technical sense. But Erol Otus had more 'emotional punch' in his rougher sketches than any tRPG artist before or after him.

His work tends to feel full of drama, action, motion, etc.

The only appeal I ever felt for Elmore was when I was a teenager he drew the best 1980s version of a waifu. Over and over again. The model appears in retrospect to be the same woman throughout. But when I was teenager in the 80s that problem wasn't as important to me.

New work can have amazing technical detail, but be as forgettable to me as the latest MCU blockbloster. All the flash is there, but it doesn't add up to any emotion.

 

[Scribe]

There is a lot of art I don't care for personally, but can appreciate how others might. There is little artwork in 2024 that I can understand how people would like it at all. But as they say, one man's gargabe is another man's treasure.

Some of the DMG was decent, but of the PHB I can think of exactly 1 piece I liked lol.

 

[Kichwas]

This was my intro to RPGs:

And that cover is still one of the best pieces of fantasy art I've come across. Despite not being a 'technical masterpiece' in the blockbuster sense - it grabbed me and hooked me on the concept the moment I saw it.

I've seen a lot of RPG art over the years. I've yet to 'see' Eros Otus work. Instead I feel it.

Then again, I can sit through a rewatch of a Kurosawa movie - not remember any detail but come away with a million stories in my head and talk about them for decades, but a Kurtzman film just bounces off me the moment I finish my popcorn.

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

I was going to comment that there are many hollywood blockbusters films for each Kurosawa movie, but many people call MCU films some form of art, and in your edit you chose the same two examples

 

[dave2008]

I find the new stuff is better in a technical sense. But Erol Otus had more 'emotional punch' in his rougher sketches than any tRPG artist before or after him.

His work tends to feel full of drama, action, motion, etc.

Well that is obviously subjective. I get no emotional punch from his work and never did. The basic rulebook cover, IMO, feels very stiff and emotionless. Pretty much the opposite of how you see his work! I really don't like Elmore's dragon in the read box cover, but that image has much more drama, dynamism, and emotion than Erol's cover IMO.

 

[overgeeked]

This was my intro to RPGs:

View attachment 403986

And that cover is still one of the best pieces of fantasy art I've come across. Despite not being a 'technical masterpiece' in the blockbuster sense - it grabbed me and hooked me on the concept the moment I saw it.

I've seen a lot of RPG art over the years. I've yet to 'see' Eros Otus work. Instead I feel it.

Same. Otus is my gold standard for fantasy art. His piece in the Cthulhu section of Deities & Demigods is amazing.

When I use the B/X cover piece as my avatar I center the doorway in the background because as much as the action in the foreground grabs my attention, I’m obsessed with that doorway. It’s like an itch I can’t scratch. I need to know what’s beyond that door. The mystery has lived in my head rent free since I first saw it in 1981.

 

[dave2008]

Same. Otus is my gold standard for fantasy art. His piece in the Cthulhu section of Deities & Demigods is amazing.

When I use the B/X cover piece as my avatar I center the doorway in the background because as much as the action in the foreground grabs my attention, I’m obsessed with that doorway. It’s like an itch I can’t scratch. I need to know what’s beyond that door. The mystery has lived in my head rent free since I first saw it in 1981.

I don't feel it - but I am glad it moves you!