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

[ezo]

have you ever considered that maybe perhaps machines taking people's jobs is a BAD thing?

No. It is not a matter of morals (which is the discussion of Good vs. Bad). It is called progress and has been around forever. You are not going to change it. People have adapted to this for centuries and will continue to do so.

and that contributing to it is reprehensible?

So, you don't use any modern convenience? That phone or laptop or whatever you're using (and the development of the Internet that goes with it) helped displace someone from some job at some point in history.

'm not going to 'get over it'. absolutely fuckinf deplorable of you to tell real artists to 'embrace it'.

Your choice. You can continue to swim upstream if you like. It is too bad you took such a tone, however.

really goes to show how little you know.

I actually know quite a bit about it. It is called reality and I face it daily.

i do not give a naughty word whether or not this is a personal attack because i frankly do not respect you. thanks!

I don't respect you either. Why should I? I don't know you or what sort of person you are? Given your respones I doubt I would even if I did know you.

I can, however, be civil to you--which appearantly you cannot be so thank you and good-bye.

Disagreement and debate can stay civil.

Agreed. As with the rest of your post.

 

[Morrus]

have you ever considered that maybe perhaps machines taking people's jobs is a BAD thing? and that contributing to it is reprehensible? i'm not going to 'get over it'. absolutely fuckinf deplorable of you to tell real artists to 'embrace it'. really goes to show how little you know. i do not give a naughty word whether or not this is a personal attack because i frankly do not respect you. thanks!

And I don't respect people who ignore the rules of my house, especially when they agreed to them as recently as Thursday. You won't be posting again in this thread. I suspect you won't be posting here at all for much longer.

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

Your choice. You can continue to swim upstream if you like.

The reason I am talking about image making and not artists is that AI is irrelevant to artists. They can still create art as much as they want, nothing was taken from them. They can still take their pencils and draw an absolute masterpiece. So continuing to swim upstream is a viable solution for art.

What has changed is market conditions, and the ability to make a living of selling art, with the added competition of cheap AI-produced images. The effect of which can't be compared between countries (it's a political problem) but also is strange because in my country, art faculties are actively discouraging people to enroll, saying things along the lines of "Please don't, you won't find a job in art". And they have been doing this for long before the AI technology emerged. Isn't the same everywhere else? Studying art didn't have high expectation of making money out of it, and the example from the 19th century tend to show that tortured artists aren't anything news. I think we may be overestimating the impact on commissionned art being replaced by AI, given the relatively recent nature of it (it needed the Internet to make supply and demand meet, so it can't be that old) and the limited scope of it.

 

[ezo]

The reason I am talking about image making and not artists is that AI is irrelevant to artists. They can still create art as much as they want, nothing was taken from them. They can still take their pencils and draw an absolute masterpiece. So continuing to swim upstream is a viable solution for art.

What has changed is market conditions, and the ability to make a living of selling art, with the added competition of cheap AI-produced images. The effect of which can't be compared between countries (it's a political problem) but also is strange because in my country, art faculties are actively discouraging people to enroll, saying things along the lines of "Please don't, you won't find a job in art". And they have been doing this for long before the AI technology emerged. Isn't the same everywhere else? Studying art didn't have high expectation of making money out of it, and the example from the 19th century tend to show that tortured artists aren't anything news. I think we may be overestimating the impact on commissionned art being replaced by AI, given the relatively recent nature of it (it needed the Internet to make supply and demand meet, so it can't be that old) and the limited scope of it.

"Jobs" in creating art has always been difficult for most. The "Struggling Artist" is not a cliche for no reason, after all.

Hand-created art can work side-by-side with digitial art, and both can work side-by-side with AI-created art IMO.

Artists who create physical work, and to a lesser degree digitial art, will always be in demand. I know I can get better "quality" art from a real-life artist and if I had a commerical product, I would find real-life artists who could create the vision I am looking for. In the meantime, AI art fills a very useful role and most definitely has a place IMO.

Do I think AI art is at the point of "They took 're jobs!" yet? No, not really; at least not if you are "good" as an artist. Will it reach that point someday? Not entirely. Only the best artists will excel against AI art as it continues to improve.

My point was simply an artist can embrace AI, they way many embraced digitial art, and work with it and use it for themselves to their betterment, or they can choose not to. If they choose not to and aren't "great" artists... they will probably be bitter that "It took 're jobs!" when in reality it didn't; they probably were not skilled or talented enough to earn the job anyway. And even if they had, would the customer be happy with their work? Who knows.

All I know is, as someone who draws (by hand--I've never embraced digital art really) I am decent, but no where near good enough to make a living at it! With AI, I can produce better results, quickly, and if I don't like something I can try another prompt to get something better.

I also am an amateur photographer, and it reminds me of decades ago when "digitial" vs. "film/analog" was the issue.

We have movies, but there are still plays. We have recorded music, yet people still enjoy live shows. If anything, a great artist will find their work even more prized for being "human" in the long run compared to AI. Will there be as many people who want to buy it? Probably not, just like movies hurt the theatre industry. And streaming has hurt the movie theatre business. I still see a play once in a while, and go to the movies about once a month, but I watch movies at home daily.

 

[AnotherGuy]

Personally, I feel I'm very much a hypocrite in this regard in that I admire and respect artists and want them to thrive and yet this tool is so useful to someone like me who does not have the necessary skills to create such beautiful artwork.
My grandfather and father both had the talent.
My grandfather was responsible for the large cinema posters back in Cairo, Egypt before Nasser took over.

And I'm very much a hypocrite in the same way I love animals and yet am not a vegan.

 

[Cergorach]

have you ever considered that maybe perhaps machines taking people's jobs is a BAD thing?

Says the person typing on a computer... How many 'jobs' were taken by computers and automation, many. Advances in technology changes jobs people do and how they do it. The printing press took a lot of 'jobs' of people transcribing books by hand, but would you rather live without printed books?

Especially in online RPG pdf books people were already using a LOT of clipart, either from large corporate suppliers or from smaller shops, or even just using public domain art (stuff with expired copyrights). Thus already not paying artists for their art. Most players and DMs never even considered paying someone else to draw their characters/maps. Most just picked appropriate images from existing books or the Internet.

I've been professionally trained to draw (for artistic and commercial purposes), I even liked to draw when I was a kid. These days when I draw something, it's sporadic, because the the time it takes vs the 'payout' is not worth it imho. I wouldn't want to do that for half a dozen characters/monsters! AI allows me to do more in less time, not taking anyone's job, because I wasn't going to pay for that in the first place.

Also there's a misconception! There's (fine) art vs illustration. Illustration is the commercial 'mass production' side of things, and no offense to illustrators, it shows. It's not that weird, illustrators are trained to produce X in Y amount of time, because time=money. It's just like a carpenter, they produce work in the most efficient way possible. Sure there are exceptions, but they are few and far between... Almost everything related to pnp RPG 'art' in RPG products is illustrations.

I didn't become an Illustrator, I work in IT (computers), for the last two decades I've been working on making IT jobs obsolete. And you know what, every time I make jobs obsolete, new jobs show up. It's only the IT people that refuse to learn new things that have a real problem. The last ~15 years I've been working on making my own IT job obsolete for each project as an IT contractor. And when I've done so, I'm happy to leave for the next job.

Every time you behave like a donkey's behind, we'll create a bunch of new AI images, just to spite you and another budding artist dies one the vine... cackles evily Ahem... You're preaching to the wrong crowd, we've already made up our minds, in a very offensive way. If you did so in person, how do you think people would react...

And if you think that people are now missing 'art' without a 'soul', I would argue that illustrations are already that and even if you disagree, people tend to prefer cheap (IKEA) furniture over 10x+ expensive custom made furniture. Why? Because most people can't afford custom work and many that do, don't even see the value in doing that.

 

[Kannik]

As someone who works in a creative industry, I get the fraughtness and potentials for generative AI. Especially given it's speed -- it took ages for refrigerators to displace ice cutters, or photography to supplant many portrait painters, while gen AI is both developing rapidly and instantly available at scale. This will be very rough for many -- especially given that it was trained on their very work without permission or compensation. And given what we've seen what corporation thinking tends to produce when it comes to the arts, beyond economically we'll all likely be losing something as a community.

Which is why, for my own self, I will not use gen AI in any of my commercial works (and will factor into my choice whether something I want to purchase has used it). In what I publish/have published, stuffing them with more and more art would be great, but I won't do that with gen AI. I'll stick to CC or CC0/Public Domain works and rare commissioned pieces.

When it comes to what I create at home for our games, had gen AI not been available I would have either done an image search for illustrations others have posted, kitbashed something myself, or gone without. It hasn't been my MO to buy a lot (or to need to buy a lot), though I have bought some map and etc packs. But 90% of the time I haven't had the drive or need to. So in these situations if I whip something up with gen AI it isn't necessarily a loss for artists (though I still do wish they were being compensated for their works having been used to train the models).

I've also commissioned art for myself (for non-commercial purposes), and loved it every time. My profile pic is from a comission! (And to be clear I comissioned more than just the head )

 

[ezo]

Some "camp" battle maps I made for the other thread:



Most aren't great by any means, but they work if you just need a quick camp map for an encounter or side-quest.

Cheers.

 

[ECMO3]

As requested by another poster, here is a Fey Grove I created as a Bastion for one of my PCs (Fey Wanderer Ranger).

 

[ezo]

Yeah, AI sucks...

Good work @ECMO3!