General

Ai images

Avatar
Letters And Numbers   United States
Joined 1 year
administrator
FAMGM:
Is it just me, or is anyone else getting sick of seeing AI images of fat people?

I’ve enjoyed a few when I first saw them, because it’s fun to imagine an actual human having those proportions, but my objections are:

(1) from the point ot view of feedist discourse: it’s getting really repetitive, it’s already unoriginal, and some forums are just awash with it like it’s actually worth something.

(2) from the point of view of feedist culture: I can see that some feedists, who’ve discovered a love for their shape after years of feeling inadequate, are going to feel that even as feedes/gainers/bb-whatevers that they’ll never attain the unrealistic proportions of AI;

(3) purely aesthetically: it ignores the subtle things that can be appreciated in a fat body, like the way overhang just starts at the hip, in a softly forming bulge that spills over itself, in favour of overt disproportion.

LoraDayton:
Thank you especially for #2. As a non-gaining feedee, I am constantly reminded how my body isn't good enough by both feedists and vanilla people. I'm too fat or not fat enough. Of course as someone who also adores FA/feedist and inflation/expansion artwork, of course there are things I like to see visualized that simply can't happen IRL. But especially the traditional portrait model style of AI images that can easily be done IRL, yeah, those bother me big time.

But more importantly, AI "art" is theft, pure and simple. There is no ethical application of AI "art" if you are not the original artist regenerating/revisualizing your own work. Die mad about it, my mind will never be changed on this. There are practical applications for AI in other mediums, but art and writing ain't it.

I have used some AI generators for visualizing ideas for reference (eg having something to look at so I can write and describe it) but only when I couldn't find another reference image. And I would never pass it off as "art" I created.


The definition of art is subjective. I wouldn’t call anything I make art either, but I also don’t make all the rules. Critics said Warhol wasn’t an artist at first, now there are museums dedicated to him. People still say he isn’t an artist! Mostly silly people, imo, but there it is! Art is subjective. Andy would be fascinated with AI art if he was still alive. And he’d probably be first in line to say that it’s in its infancy and there are still big questions to answer, and that it’s important to answer those questions.

The barrier to entry to be a photographer is the lowest it’s ever been in human history. At one point only the wealthy could afford cameras, and now nearly everyone has one and takes dozens of pictures a day, almost none of which are art. But there are still artists who make art with cameras, even with iPhones. Even with Polaroids. Even with Game Boy Cameras. It’s just a tool. It doesn’t mean that everything made with a camera is art, but art can be made with a camera. I don’t think AI is any different. And again, I would never call myself an artist, no matter what medium I’m using.

For the record, I’m not sure if I would call most pornography art. Maybe some is, maybe a lot of it is, but it’s not an automatic for me (unless everything is art, which twist my arm…). So the idea of soulless AI fetish images that try to be photorealistic and fail … I wouldn’t call that art in every context either. But I could come up with some ideas to make art out of uncanny valley AI creepy people, maybe. It just wouldn’t necessarily be the same way those images were intended to be seen. Does that make sense?
1 year

Ai images

Avatar
Letters And Numbers   United States
Joined 1 year
administrator


And why is it theft? If I "order" a generic, realistic pucture of a horse in a meadow, who did not get paid? I could take a photo myself.
On the other hand, creating and publishing pictures with ie landmarks, people or buildings, then someone could have sold that pic.


There are a million fair use and copyright questions that AI brings up, they’re being argued over in courtrooms as we speak, and artists have organized to protect the rights of creators. It will be interesting to see how things adapt over the next few years. At least in the US, when you look at the Supreme Court case from this year with the estate of Prince suing the Warhol estate over fair use questions, the court wants to side with the original image holders. It will be interesting to see.
1 year

Ai images

Avatar
Munchies   United States
Joined 3 years
FAMGM:
Is it just me, or is anyone else getting sick of seeing AI images of fat people?

I’ve enjoyed a few when I first saw them, because it’s fun to imagine an actual human having those proportions, but my objections are:

(1) from the point ot view of feedist discourse: it’s getting really repetitive, it’s already unoriginal, and some forums are just awash with it like it’s actually worth something.

(2) from the point of view of feedist culture: I can see that some feedists, who’ve discovered a love for their shape after years of feeling inadequate, are going to feel that even as feedes/gainers/bb-whatevers that they’ll never attain the unrealistic proportions of AI;

(3) purely aesthetically: it ignores the subtle things that can be appreciated in a fat body, like the way overhang just starts at the hip, in a softly forming bulge that spills over itself, in favour of overt disproportion.

LoraDayton:
Thank you especially for #2. As a non-gaining feedee, I am constantly reminded how my body isn't good enough by both feedists and vanilla people. I'm too fat or not fat enough. Of course as someone who also adores FA/feedist and inflation/expansion artwork, of course there are things I like to see visualized that simply can't happen IRL. But especially the traditional portrait model style of AI images that can easily be done IRL, yeah, those bother me big time.

But more importantly, AI "art" is theft, pure and simple. There is no ethical application of AI "art" if you are not the original artist regenerating/revisualizing your own work. Die mad about it, my mind will never be changed on this. There are practical applications for AI in other mediums, but art and writing ain't it.

I have used some AI generators for visualizing ideas for reference (eg having something to look at so I can write and describe it) but only when I couldn't find another reference image. And I would never pass it off as "art" I created.

X_Larsson:
Why is #2 such big a problem with AI? Both morphing and certain drawing techniques can yield quite convincing results.
Same goes for other kinds of industrialized production, where coexisting products do not compete. See my above examples in the earlier post. We have still have manually produced products that we could buy a century ago. Clothes, furniture, floor rugs and oriental mats, cuttlery, garden items, food, toys, sport goods etc.

And why is it theft? If I "order" a generic, realistic pucture of a horse in a meadow, who did not get paid? I could take a photo myself.
On the other hand, creating and publishing pictures with ie landmarks, people or buildings, then someone could have sold that pic.


This article goes into this in detail.
forbes.com/sites/bernardmarr/2023/08/08/is-generative-ai-stealing-from-artists/

But the gist is that AI art, which is generative AI, cobbles together bits of existing art to make a picture without the artists' permission or giving credit.

As for number two, it's been scientifically proven that unrealistic, idealized beauty standards warp people's body expectations. It's the same reason why people get mad at the Kardashians for their heavily edited and airbrushed photoshoots. Or how some men feel anxiety about their penis size because they think men should have 10 in penises.
1 year

Ai images

Avatar
Letters And Numbers   United States
Joined 1 year
administrator
[b]
As for number two, it's been scientifically proven that unrealistic, idealized beauty standards warp people's body expectations. It's the same reason why people get mad at the Kardashians for their heavily edited and airbrushed photoshoots. Or how some men feel anxiety about their penis size because they think men should have 10 in penises.


But that’s hardly a problem exclusive to AI art. Before AI, photoshop was the boogie man for that, and it was still just shorthand for society pushing unrealistic beauty standards. I mean half the time when I make people with AI they look like terrifying monsters with fucked up faces and limbs bending the wrong way.

You could argue that in the 17thC, Reubens’ portraits of women promoted unrealistic body standards. Less wealthy women couldn’t afford to eat enough food to be plump.
1 year

Ai images

Avatar
Munchies   United States
Joined 3 years
Letters And Numbers:
If I have neuropathy and can’t draw the way I want to, but can use AI to express myself visually, I might think it’s very democratizing. It’s a tool, which isn’t inherently bad or inherently good. If people are using it to fuck over other people, that’s a human problem with human solutions.[/quote]

Um ...
What?

This has never been an issue. Tons of artists have been making art for generations with all sorts of medical issues.

brainandlife.org/articles/four-artists-talk-about-how-their-neurologic-conditions-affect-their

There's a famous illustrator, Tom Yendell, who was born without arms. So he paints with his toes. He paints better than I, an able-bodied person, could hope.

There are scores of different ways of making art spanning cultures, centuries, and mediums. And people are trailblazing new stuff all the time. There's always a way to express yourself other than "the computer made it for me."
1 year

Ai images

Avatar
Munchies   United States
Joined 3 years

As for number two, it's been scientifically proven that unrealistic, idealized beauty standards warp people's body expectations. It's the same reason why people get mad at the Kardashians for their heavily edited and airbrushed photoshoots. Or how some men feel anxiety about their penis size because they think men should have 10 in penises.

[b]Letters And Numbers:
But that’s hardly a problem exclusive to AI art. Before AI, photoshop was the boogie man for that, and it was still just shorthand for society pushing unrealistic beauty standards. I mean half the time when I make people with AI they look like terrifying monsters with fucked up faces and limbs bending the wrong way.


I mean ... I drew a parallel to Photoshop.
1 year

Ai images

Avatar
Letters And Numbers   United States
Joined 1 year
administrator
Letters And Numbers:
If I have neuropathy and can’t draw the way I want to, but can use AI to express myself visually, I might think it’s very democratizing. It’s a tool, which isn’t inherently bad or inherently good. If people are using it to fuck over other people, that’s a human problem with human solutions.

Munchies:
Um ...
What?

This has never been an issue. Tons of artists have been making art for generations with all sorts of medical issues.

[img]https://www.brainandlife.org/articles/four-artists-talk-about-how-their-neurologic-conditions-affect-their[/img]

There's a famous illustrator, Tom Yendell, who was born without arms. So he paints with his toes. He paints better than I, an able-bodied person, could hope.

There are scores of different ways of making art spanning cultures, centuries, and mediums. And people are trailblazing new stuff all the time. There's always a way to express yourself other than "the computer made it for me."[/quote]

100 years ago there wasn’t indoor plumbing most places. This is a new tool. Times change. Something will come along after AI art, too, and people will get upset about it and then things will normalize.
1 year

Ai images

Avatar
Letters And Numbers   United States
Joined 1 year
administrator

As for number two, it's been scientifically proven that unrealistic, idealized beauty standards warp people's body expectations. It's the same reason why people get mad at the Kardashians for their heavily edited and airbrushed photoshoots. Or how some men feel anxiety about their penis size because they think men should have 10 in penises.

[b]Letters And Numbers:
But that’s hardly a problem exclusive to AI art. Before AI, photoshop was the boogie man for that, and it was still just shorthand for society pushing unrealistic beauty standards. I mean half the time when I make people with AI they look like terrifying monsters with fucked up faces and limbs bending the wrong way.

Munchies:
I mean ... I drew a parallel to Photoshop.


Do you think the Photoshop software is a bad thing? Or is it just a tool that can be used for good things and for bad things, like any other tool?
1 year

Ai images

Avatar
Munchies   United States
Joined 3 years
Letters And Numbers:
If I have neuropathy and can’t draw the way I want to, but can use AI to express myself visually, I might think it’s very democratizing. It’s a tool, which isn’t inherently bad or inherently good. If people are using it to fuck over other people, that’s a human problem with human solutions.

Munchies:
Um ...
What?

This has never been an issue. Tons of artists have been making art for generations with all sorts of medical issues.

brainandlife.org/articles/four-artists-talk-about-how-their-neurologic-conditions-affect-their

There's a famous illustrator, Tom Yendell, who was born without arms. So he paints with his toes. He paints better than I, an able-bodied person, could hope.

There are scores of different ways of making art spanning cultures, centuries, and mediums. And people are trailblazing new stuff all the time. There's always a way to express yourself other than "the computer made it for me."

Letters And Numbers:
100 years ago there wasn’t indoor plumbing most places. This is a new tool. Times change. Something will come along after AI art, too, and people will get upset about it and then things will normalize.


That's not even what I said. I said that there are plenty of pre-existing mediums to choose from, and people are trailblazing new stuff all the time. In other words, there are ways to make art where you can express yourself without putting prompts into an image generator and hope it spits out something you like.

A new artist or an artist with limitations may not have the ability to make something exactly the way they want it. But at least they have control. They can improve their skills over time or even find new ways of doing something they struggled to do.

You can't do that with AI art. You have very limited control over what it makes. You can play around with the prompt, but it's ultimately up to the machine.
1 year

Ai images

Avatar
Munchies   United States
Joined 3 years

As for number two, it's been scientifically proven that unrealistic, idealized beauty standards warp people's body expectations. It's the same reason why people get mad at the Kardashians for their heavily edited and airbrushed photoshoots. Or how some men feel anxiety about their penis size because they think men should have 10 in penises.

[b]Letters And Numbers:
But that’s hardly a problem exclusive to AI art. Before AI, photoshop was the boogie man for that, and it was still just shorthand for society pushing unrealistic beauty standards. I mean half the time when I make people with AI they look like terrifying monsters with fucked up faces and limbs bending the wrong way.

Munchies:
I mean ... I drew a parallel to Photoshop.

Letters And Numbers:
Do you think the Photoshop software is a bad thing? Or is it just a tool that can be used for good things and for bad things, like any other tool?


I have no idea why you are focusing on this. Two people made a comment. Another person didn't understand it. I explained.

That said, Photoshop isn't inherently theft, unlike AI art. It's gotten so bad that artists - some of whom use Photoshop - are turning to programs like Glaze to prevent art theft.

aimeecozza.com/what-is-glaze-and-how-can-it-help-protect-against-ai-scraping/
1 year
12345