@@Ps_lati You couldn't be more incorrect. This is just the latest of many passing fads that people claim will replace artists out of ignorance or jealousy. AI Generators are limited to reproducing source material it was fed without permission. Limited by the images it stole to reproduce identical images to the original source material that match a user's prompts. It doesn't make any creative decisions or stylistic choices. It will not grow or get smarter, it's just matching prompts with image descriptions. Artists can grow, think outside the box, have new ideas never before produced, and artists have emotions that they incorporate in the pieces to connect with audiences. AI has no emotion, it can't comprehend emotion. If you actually look at the AI generated "art" posted on social media... it all looks the same and is easily identifiable. It's also despised. Artists are petitioning and removing images from any sites that are feeding A.I. generators. Also sites are forcing people to mention if AI was used in the image generation. AI "art" is already dying before your eyes. Artists are not being replaced, they are getting better at protecting their intellectual property from being stolen for use in AI generators. Anyone who collects art, gets a thrill out of connecting with the artist. Why do you think fans pay more for a signed piece with a person message? They want to show off that they met the creator, it's a powerful memory. That doesn't occur with AI, there is no emotional connection. Within 2-3 years AI generators will be a forgotten relic. And artists around the world will be pissing on the grave of AI generators with glee.
If you see it that way ai is by far better just change the ai motor while you take more than 4 hours ai not even 5 seconds it can do better things the advances from 2023 from 2024 from ai are impressive being honest ai will win
Pro artist always wins. Experience is always going to provide the better product. AI is the equivalent to mass produced goods, while an artist is a dedicated craftsman. 99/100 the craftsman creates the better product -- but at a huge price tag and time investment.
The AI one needs maybe 30 mins - 1 hr of handwork and it would be just as good. The AI I will say, looks more like the person it's supposed to be. Part of that is just sticking to the source material. Would be interesting to set the denoising strength a little higher and see what happens when it's allowed to take a few more liberties.
not good video dude u speed paint & we dont see what u did im noob make videos for noobs pro knows this tips so noobs need slow painting not 100x speed
AI vs real art like this is kinda like McDonalds vs 5 star steak. the steak is better by a million miles buti its hard to find the time and money to eat a 5 star steak. AI images are fast food, quick, cheap, but you could easily do better
@IHaveACoolSuit I think society as a whole is just gonna have to let go of this one aspiration. It hardly has had any use, especially in this day and age. The AI can literally make this work of art in seconds, and it's still passable compared to hours upon hours when you compare it to slow humans. AI's won this one, sadly.
@@kbye1784 so i guess we should ai generate all actors and movies because it technically isn't useful? big sports technically isn't useful, lets ai generate a fake recording of the super bowl, then. dude, do you still watch tv? ai can generate that shit, why would you want to see it made by people? broooo, don't tell me you watch people-made youtube videos when anyone can ai generate one. video games are "useless" by your standards, so i guess we'll just ai generate those too. i guess anything that could be used as entertainment or something fun to look at is useless. cool, cool. ai really won there, nobody could ever want to see art made with human touch and nuances. because it "isn't useful"
@IHaveACoolSuit just joshing you, lol. Sorry. Was pretty bored and was trying to ruffle some feathers :P You do make pretty good points regardless, though.
No one wins - they both look the same. I think it's because your one is made in a computer just like the AI version. i.e. the bottom one looks just as AI generated as the top. Yours would need to be crafted using physical medium like watercolours or oils to properly compare. If you're just going to copy the image in a computer then you may as well use the AI generated tool.
