Keep in mind, that's 6 entries that we know of because they got the winning spot, they could have submitted much more. And the amount of people would have doubted if it was AI art had this person not been a dingus and entered under a very obviously similarly named. AI makes logic error that even a 5 year old wouldn't make in their drawing and it's not just the hands. The inconsistent blobs, inability to continue something being cut off in the foreground, very advanced, but inconsistent light sources, the inability to do asymmetrical, off centered backgrounds in a 1 point perspective (The cherry blossom forest and the water dead giveaway). This is going to ruin or get large contests outright discontinued because of this.
If it means anything, even though it was only 6 of the spits, they used at least 4 names. It's safe to assume that they submitted 3 each so, AT THE LEAST they had 12, over three that honest artists had.
@@chikoritamining4437 If their goals were to nobly point out flaws, they would have been the first to speak out about the injustice they themself did. Even then the issues of morals and ethics would have been heavily questionable at best for this best case scenario. They have remained silent, and even if they eventually reveal themselves, the fact they it wasn't their initial response to show their motives leads to them being scummy at best. While I can appreciate hoping for the best in people, we can't allow dirtbags like this any leeway.
exactly as well as you dont learn the required skills if you upload ai art and claim it as your own in the end you are cheating yourself and also not allowing yourself to grow as an artist
@@hexmaniacruby These AI "artists" would never have developed the skill in the first place because they are only interested in the outcome and don't care about the process.
I agree 100%, while yes 𝙏𝙀𝘾𝙃𝙉𝙄𝘾𝘼𝙇𝙇𝙔 it’s art, I’ll never consider it as such because it wasn’t made by a real person. People can make art, AI can only follow directions. Therefore, AI Image.
@@Staarzzsorry if I come off as rude but I feel this needs to be said. There is no “technically” by definition ai images are not art. Art is defined by the “expression or application of HUMAN creative skill…” and an ai generated image is no more than a mockery of that. Or an artificial attempt at imitating art.
art is expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power. -oxford definition. So yeah its technically not an art.
AI art needs some sort of digital encrypted watermark so that it’s fully clear that it’s AI. The fact that people can get away with submitting AI as their own work is really disappointing
Yes I love this idea, it'd be best if the watermark is slightly transparent and in the middle of the image. That way people wouldn't be able to crop out the watermark
@@yv7458 There's actually already a technology that can encrypt an image in such a way that big AI modules can't use the image in its dataset. It's basically completely invisible to the human eye. So if AI image generation had an opposite technology, where the generated image has an invisible watermark and a tool that scans images for if they're AI using said watermark then you could reasonably still create AI images without losing the visuals
@@yv7458But that would create legal issues for the people who sell subscriptions to these image generators. If they automatically watermarked the outputs of their program then the majority of scumbags who use the programs would lose interest, and generally when something is watermarked it is considered copyrighted content, such as Stock Images - but AI outputs cannot legally be copyrighted because they are not classified as man-made intellectual property. The _code_ for the image algorithm itself could be potentially copyrighted, but the outputs aren't eligible and the training data is stolen from other artists who would then have even better grounds to take them to court. Existing in a grey zone where they can make vague arguments about accessibility is the most profitable path and least likely to accelerate the inevitable legal consequences of their ethical negligence.
Wow.. just wow... i really hate these kinds of people, they genuinely think they could “make” art just by prompting ai and then they would call these “theirs”, i really hate seeing people using a tool as the final product
It makes me really sad to see this. I wish there was a way to see whatever real art was stolen and fed into this shitty ai to make these images, since they were likely incredibly breathtaking. Too bad there’s no credits in ai art.
Prompting an AI accurately does take alot of skill. I can tell you this because I have 4000 hours of chat experience talking with chatGPT. Some of my prompts -- the ones that I commonly use are macroed to my G915 TKL keyboard and Naga v2 Pro mouse. I even use auto-hotkey to make it more efficient, and have my desk workspace optimized for this. My queries and how I structure my sentences are heavily refined to be concise with its basic language structure where which it interprets. Also realize that if you turn the Top_P and Temperature params down to 0 on these models, they will output consistently. At that level of determinism, these models teraparameters big spanning terabytes in memory use, beyond what you can memorize -- requires the upmost precision in not just in knowledge base, but your sentiment as well.
@@phieyl7105 look. I know you are trying to defend ai and such, but in these cases where ai is used for these kinds of events, it really boils my blood to see that a person who lets say took about an hour to prompt ai to make art got picked for an art contest while many artist who worked so compassionately on their artwork for more than that aren’t, it just breaks their compassion for all things art to see that one day in the future, we aren’t needed. We still are, but seeing alot of companies, HECK even art companies using ai just makes me so depressed.
I think more contests should go the AFK Journey art contest route. AFK was very strictly anti-ai for their big art contest and required submitters to post 3 progress shots along with their final piece. They also had actual artists judge the contest. I wish more art competition hosts actually gave enough of a shit about art to ensure the winning entries were actually art, and not ai slop.
agreed. I've also seen art contests where the artist has to submit the raw files if the art is digitally done so that if its done in like photoshop or gimp or something someone can clearly go in and look at all the lineart or whatnot.
I believe HSR did this once before too if I'm not mistaken, I did my progress then outline and lastly final piece, though I didn't win, it made me feel accomplished cause not only I don't have to worry about AI, but also because real artist is being shown rather then AI ❤
@@AgentSapphirealso all people should have to run their creation through nightshade and glaze (basically nightshade “poisons” the art so if anyone tries to throw it into AI without their consent, it will mess up the AI’s image). (Glaze prevents any style mimicry). Although with high intensity, it can change the image quality
@@water6006 people keep talking about glaze and nightshade & what they supposedly do, but have there ever been any actual demonstrations of their efficacy? don't wanna be providing image data to anything that might not actually be doing what it claims to do & possibly just collecting that data instead. it's cynical, but these kinds of things could very well be used to attempt amassing a library of art that artists provide themselves for the purposes of AI training. we have to be wary of who we're giving our image/art data to.
This is disappointing. In my opinion, AI is only good when it's used for reference or entertainment, but using it commercially is wrong because you'll just be a fraud literally profiting off others' stolen work. Remember in Pokémon Sword and Shield where they hosted a competition to get a T-shirt into the game, but all the best entries were disqualified because they were stolen so they cancelled the competition and nobody won? History is repeating itself here. Artists in the Pokémon fandom are very creative when they put their passion for the franchise into their art, it's a shame that their work is being overshadowed by cheaters and frauds that ruin everything with their dishonesty.
Thankfully we are seeing a rise in tools to help ruin any ai generated (aka stolen) art. Nightshade and glaze being two of the most popular tools. But for folk like myself who's pc is weak or draws on tablet there is art shield. It's better than nothing. Before anyone gets mad it's generative AI that we have issues with. *_Assistive_* AI is fine. Spelling and grammar check is *_assistive_* and ai art is theft.
A good update: Pokemon responded and announced that those who broke the rules would be disqualified and they’d announce new artists that would be in the top 300 in their place. They already considered it against the rules, it just flew past the radar.
I saw an artist on Twitter who has amazing art, they drew a very heartwarming art of eevee, but did not even get picked because of all the AI “art” getting picked instead. They deserved so much better, I feel so sorry for them…
@@manee2412 AI generated images have no effort put in them, they steal from various artists without their consent. Images generated from it is basically a mix of various artists’ works, specifically large and good ones, so they may look better than some art. But actual artists who spent years mastering their art are disrespected because of this. Maybe learn to respect people who put in actual work
@@crepe_loaf and why would anyone care abt that lol, if youre useless people just discard you. Before cars there used to be millions of horses roaming around, now theres barely any. womp womp
Just did a test on my own art: once you use a (chromatic) noise filter on your drawing for post render/finishing it up, then the eyedropper goes all places. But that's with visible noise, and I don't think it's visible in the first example image. Anyway my point being, it can't be 100% trusted as argument
I'm glad people are mad about this, AI art should not be a thing with how unethical and unfair it is. I hope there to be regulations at the very least with actual permissions and limited trained sources
the image you are showing at 6:20 is obviously IA generated no discussion about that, but be careful with the “eyedropper test” because when you import file from internet there are chances of them getting compressed and have some weird corruption color, which doesn’t necessarily mean it’s AI, it’s just mean it’s badly compressed
AI art looks like puke when you examine it close up. It seriously does tho... Nasty. Gross "texture", wonky, chunks of random crap that shouldn't be there. That is puke in a nutshell. I'm gonna go eat some food, then puke it on a canvas and call it AI art.
@@ElativeArt AI art has no actual texture or brush stroke, hence why the "texture" looks more like puke to me. It's trying to create a texture but it can't since the art is a mishmash of thousands of other artworks it has stolen somewhere, and it ends up looking like puke.
The worst part is that even if for some reason AI is allowed on the cards, multiple of the eevee drawings should be disqualified because they contain *actual tracing*
@@zurikamili absolutely!!! I totally agree! There's been instances at my campus where artists have used AI for contests and it's super degrading for artists like me.. needs to be a law against using it for this stuff❤
even though the images may have been made with AI art, it kind of was bothering when you pointed out the AI 'habits' on each image (color placement, shadow placement, etc). I just find it scary how easily an original piece of art can be mistaken for being made with AI. My art style largely consists of more painted work and it's just disgusting how AI can become indistinguishable from original work and vice versa :(
@@zurikamiliHopefully the guy gets declassified from the competition and they just give away the spots to actual talented people. But I really doubt it. It's incredibly saddening...
@@namkwalnot just timeline, but documentation + details that you made it, and judging the art contest with ACTUAL judges instead of making the winners random. Yes, it is fairer to mixed skill level artists to randomise winners but this video is a clear point as to why that shouldn't ever be done
@@marielcarey4288for me, I use a mix of traditional and digital, so I usually sketch in a sketchbook, then alter it digitally either the full drawing or by highlights, shading, color alterations, etc. But see, I still have the original copy traditionally, which is harder to fake. So I always keep it on hand with me, since I’ve had my work stolen and impersonated before, and I had my sketchbook as proof. Also. Layers. Always show your layers as proof. Usually this shows both the process AND proves it’s an actual art piece since it has many parts and not just a few.
I’m surprised you didn’t mention the weird light circle on the water in the second image, it looks like a reflection of the moon, but the scene is set in the day, and if it’s supposed to be the sun’s reflection, it’s not even close to where the sun is casting it’s light.
I put my digital art I made from procreate into the ai reader and it told me 99% likely made with ai😩😭 Worst insult I’ve had. It’s such a huge disappointment. Im so mad at myself and now I know I make shit artwork. 😔 I do weird splotches of colors and small white lines on my finished drawings, because it looks really pretty in my opinion. And I’m bad with spacial and perspective and small details so I guess this might be why as well.
Your artwork isn’t shit, I’m sure it’s actually wonderful! is the AI detector that is Extremely unreliable. It framed tons of legit artists Artwork already, best not to use it honestly.
This adds to my frustration that my 3 submissions didn’t get picked. The theme for this year was ‘magical moments’ and I took it literally and drew a wizard pikachu, a witch eevee, and an absol coming out of a portal. None of the ones that were picked have anything at all to do with magic. I spent hours and hours drawing the wrong thing because I thought I had to put those restrictions on it due to the theme name!
While I do agree, there's multiple definitions of "magical" there is the literal term, like magic, and there's a more abstract term, like, just generally cool or breath taking.
@@book-obsessedweirdo8677 yeah that’s my frustration. I think the theme for last year was ‘cool moments’. ITS THE SAME THING. They wanted the same thing, so WHY bother with different theme names at all? It’s confusing 😓
I don't think you necessarily drew the "wrong" thing. There's not any right or wrong in art imo ! What you drew simply did not align with their expectations, but its neither yours or theirs fault. You tried your best and hopefully had fun while doing so, and it's all that matters at the end of the day. :) Btw do you have a link to see your artworks anywhere ? As a big fan of witchy and magical aesthetics, I'd love to see what you created.
One of things I will never understand is that why people cheat to win with using AI art for art competitions, recently people use AI art for pokemon art competitions, theres me worrying about the copyright law whatever I should do fan art or not. The AI art makes me question the copyright law in detail, is copyright law is protecting artists and normal working class people? Or copyright law protects rich people and companies who manipulate people? I uninstalled Adobe products to get avoid being spied on, Adobe tricked artists inside the terms and conditions which translates to we are spying on you in private files mode and we steal your art without consent. I could not share my human art on Instagram now because I know that metaverse steals art, nowadays i post writing alot on social media and repeat written content. I think its time we need more privacy and physical buildings that gives art community a physical place to go to instead of social media uses
The 'why' is because there's a monetary prize for winning and it takes no effort to make and enter. The prize provides huge incentives to do it and the low effort means that both there is no cost to abuse it and there's no loss for them if they get caught.
@@PersonOfRandomnesss it is sad that people cheat with AI to win, I do not think it is fair to use AI art in Art competitions, I think everytime when person cheats competition with AI art I think they should have that AI art taken away from person who cheats and after AI art is taken away to be creatively ruined by human artists. It is possible to break AI images apart by human creativity. there must be way to not to be reliant on AI
AI art strips all meaning away from art. There is no backing chain-of-thought, no core idea or style, nothing. AI art is also not your work. I don't know if I would call using AI art stealing other's work (Companies do that when they train AI models, but I don't think using AI is doing that). Either way, you did not put effort into an AI generated piece, so you shouldn't be able to submit it to an art competition. At the end of the day, art competitions are there to encourage creativity and effort. If people submit images that require neither, then it defeats the entire point of the competition. On an individual scale, entering AI art into an art competition is at *LEAST* as bad as entering a commissioned piece into an art competition. It's immoral because you didn't do the work, whether or not that work actually happened.
Yeah that would be like if I entered into a kid's football club and just absolutely destroy the other kids' team. Like why do this stuff if you dont have real talents, really?
As a diehard Pokémon fan and artist, this is really sad. Like I genuinely love Pokémon but if I entered into this contest and found out some dude using AI and submitting 6 entries beat me into the top 30, I would be pissed asf.
Yeah I'd be pissed too I did see that the rules say both those things weren't allowed so if attention is brought to it, the judges and contest runners may see that and hopefully disqualify the person
There’s nothing stopping someone with no inspiration from getting these images generated and then recreating the art themselves, even replicating it, from scratch. That would be the smart thing to do…
We should go back to the good ol ‘show your work’ math class question for these events. A real artist would answer by showing their drafts and planning/Timelapse, colour schemes, references A ai prompter ain’t got shit on that even if they tried to generate their ‘work’
I tend to recognise ai mainly by the shading- like they always have backlit cell white edges with harsh lineart on the outside and then also gradients- there really is an ai art style i fear
04:34 the first image also on the left the flowers are supposed to be all the same species (the same colours of petals and leaves) but there are some with five, some with four and some with three petals. But I didn't knwo about the white parts all over the colour wheel, that is a great hint, thank you for pointing it out! 09:20 second image, also the reflections on the water are not consistent. Human artists can easily mess up reflections, but in this case the body of the pokemon has a reflection on the water, and quite accurate, while the head and the flowers don't.
@@ragnard0967 its mainly just how i feel. very low effort and steals from REAL people creating art. it just feels like an insult to artists calling images thrown together by a computer "art"
it's clear that the collaborators of these contests Don't care! they just see images 1 single look and say ''this looks nice.. this not much oooh! this looks better pick that to the top'' like they clearly are Not artists nor critics, just a bunch of random normies that the companny hired, lazy to check names lazy to notice the details because AI art looks 'good' until you give a closer look... The details are obvious and far beyond the ''amateur mistakes'' background meshed together like a fever dream, legs and hands all messed up, eyes and irises are more messed up than they look, particle effects meshing badly with the character's body, lineart are like a sticky web, Hair texture gets sticky too and it's lineart is more meshed than ever;
I will say the AI was against the rules so it's possible once brought to attention. They will realize their mistake and disqualify the person But we can only hope
@@Its_Asteria Hopes up cuz Finally they did listen! and kicked out the AI's images! Plus they will re review the arts again and choose those who deserve the spot
Most of these are hard to pick up on, especially for the untrained eye, but the color wheel thing determines it so well! Thanks for showing that, yes, no sane artist would switch between cyan and orange and purple-leaning whites in their highlights, they'd choose a layer setting and/or a single light colour, work with that, and perhaps do an orange-ish outline for a more natural effect.
Anybody unironically going "womp-womp" to complaints about people who submitting art that they didn't make to win a contest of artistry isn't a weirdo. They're an idiot, not worth the cognitive effort to even consider.
welp, there goes my chances of my art ever being on a pokemon card.. sucks, too, I would of loved to have my photography up there alongside yuka morii, my main inspiration. oh well..
Or even a Pokémon with no fluff- just subtract the obvious issues from the equation instead of praying that nobody notices. Or even better, draw the art yourself! So simple.
I tried using ai for Pokémon only for entertainment… and mostly only POPULAR Pokémon will be generated like Pikachu or Eevee or even Lucario. But some Pokémon like Dialga or Rayquaza won’t get generated. You’ll just get something cursed.
10:23 - 10:30 - Tried covering up that it's AI by adding layer effects. The equivalent of heating microwave food, mixing it with a spoon, adding unnecessary things then saying it's homemade.
If this things kept happening, why don't the art comtest host require the artist to upload the process how the artist made the art? This way it'll sort out the people who uses AI art to cheat or at least help with the judgment. I like AI art and also like drawing. I suck at background so I use AI to draw it while I paint over it by drawing my characters. The way AI art should be used is to make your raise weakness into something better so you could focus what you're best at to new heights.
@@TailsClock If I'm gonna be honest then I'd say kinda. Since an art contest let's you judge which art looks 'best' then it's only reasonable to only apply the requirement checking on the best looking ones. This saves time and also makes it easier to verify the authenticity on top rankings. This also helps if you made the process public so that even if the organizers don't give a sh*t more people would at least be more aware which ones are AI and which ones are not based on the presence or there lack of(meaning lazy AI prompting) video process(speedpaint or timelapse would be good to alsoaccomodate for the peoples lack of attention span.) Let's say the artist never gave a video on how they made it. Then it's best to immediately disqualify them and this is just to sort out the lazy AI prompters. Even it if let's say the artist is legit but didn't submit, then it's their fault for not complying. And if the AI prompter gets 'clever' by submitting a 'fake' video timelapse, then it would only be exposed if the video process is public where criticisms would surely arise.
I think a somewhat working solution for this would be to ask the artist for not only a speedpaint to be submitted but also a shorter screen recording of the person going through the layers of the artwork and pressing "invisible" on a few and then undo it to really prove that it's something that was at least made in an art program by a human. or would this not work?
If they don't have the skills to draw for the contest they could at least make a collage, tear a bunch of paper of the right colors and make the silouettes or some shit, be creative and original without submitting someone else's work (this is on the level of paying an artist to do a comission and submitting it for a contest). Oh but that'd be expecting honesty from trash people.
I know it's controversial, but I personally think it's ok to use AI art for your own enjoyment if you have an idea you want to see, and even to share that idea with others so long as you say it's AI. But to enter a contest with it? And one that specifically bans AI art at that? I mean that's literally just cheating.
Yeah I’m totally okay with personal use. My opinion with open ai like this is the same as tracing other artists. Do it personally but don’t post it or ever try to pass it off as your own. And yeah like how did Pokémon let all that ai thru 😭
@@playdoh658yes but the moment you are talking to ai you give it consent to use your answers. That's not the issue here. Training AI and AI in itself is not the bad thing, but the deliberate use of unconsentful training data is and you have to distinguish that. Also AI is not the same level of harmful to the environment than nfts at all. The processing is not even close to being as intense and complicated. It's just another computer turnt on. Then we could argue every website is the same level of bad, because it keeps servers on.
I wouldn't say your statement is controversial. A lot of people understand the usefulness of ai. And if people would use ethically trained data by using volunteers or paying people for their data, it wouldn't even be as infuriating and illegal as it is right now. But what everyone is rightfully mad about and starting to give all of AI a really bad name is people, who decide they want to break a law, that existed before (using data of copyright owners to process in a program was always illegal). All we are is mad at literal thieves and people who purposefully cheat and people who scam others, ai scams are rampant rn... It already has lead to kicking people out of jobs, and damaging us as a society in all these ways. Theft and AI has become almost synonym, that's the only reason people hate it.
I hate how AI images are getting into so many art contests and winning… like who is judging this??? Do they even look at the art pieces and analyze them or do they just take a quick glance and go “ey that looks cool, it wins”. If so, they are really bad at judging honestly:((
Art contests REALLY need to require progress shots and show proof of layers. I remember art contests on amino hosted by 15 year olds required progress shots before AI art was even a problem to deter art thieves... dude.
I agree with all of these points entirely but for those of you out there who are not sure how to detect A.I. do not go out there calling out artists for using A.I. when you’re not entirely sure. We can underestimate how bad proportions can be used in the artist community. All though it is arguable for A.I. to be an obvious thing I would still double check either way. I hate A.I. art myself which is why it is important to find the main key factors and errors found in A.I. art to make sure it is the real thing. In the video portrayed I think we all know that this is 100% A.I. and should be held accountable, and what they did was wrong. As for others we can stand together as artists and be able to pin point the doppelgängers together as a community and supposedly “catch them all” without having to shame our real artists out there for trying their best. ❤
This situation is so dumb and confusing 😓 How did multiple judges not realize that this person obviously submitted more pieces of art than they were allowed to AND how did these judges not realize they were ai??? From what I heard some of the judges were actual artist so those people should know how to tell when art is ai or not. All of this really sucks and I feel bad for the artists that should have gotten in instead of this lazy person.
Ai art doesn't exist. Ai images are not art, will never be. why because Art is product of human experience. experience feeds art, so how can a machine reproduce that? i produces image simulatiions period.
Honestly, if they really wanted to stop this issue, creating a rule for which people need to record themselves drawing the piece would erase any kind of this nonsense. A Speedpaint (especially with the person talking about their process) would be a way to show their progress instead of just “hoping” the user doesn’t use AI to generate images.
Some people suggested that the vaporeon might have been added to the original ai image because of the difference in style and quality compared to the eevee
When the attempt to hide it is so poor from Vigo, the blame has to go to the judges or organizer. This contest was a joke, so no wonder a clown won it. AI is doing a very good job of exposing bullshit contests. I knew the Pokemon games were lazily made, but I didn't know it ran this deep to the TCG side too. Don't let the Pokemon company live this shame down. We deserve better from them. "What's this blue shit?" that's called the sky... The petals closer to the "camera" being less blurry is accurate though. You're right that the crepuscular rays do look like lazily tacked on the end. But when you have this video showing evidence, and you say "This is traced." and then don't show anything to back that up, like, why not? Tracing is incredibly rare in AI art because that's a bigger time investment than just using the AI to make the Vaporeon. It makes no sense to do. So absolutely there is no chance I'm going to believe that AI art has traced art in it too without evidence. But if it really does have traced art in it too, then that all but confirms that Vigo was TRYING to break as many rules as possible. And he still won. He just exposed the Pokemon company big time. And he used AI to do that, so glad we live in this era.
same,it's so disgraceful,if people drew these instead it would look fantastic,but nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo we have fucking ai making these art and it looks horrible
1:55 with a username like that, it feels someone outside the contest orchestrated some kind of trolling but judges are so stupid and lukewarm it was able to slipped through contestants whose works are legitimate pour a soul on their works without using the ai part.
I feel like a good way to prevent AI entries is needing to send the raw art file with all the layers, right? Cause AI can generate a full image, but can't make a bunch of individual art layers to my knowledge
Honestly this is just pathetic whoever actually had the guts to enter the contest using ai is just disgusting and as an artist this just makes me mad beyond belief 😑 great video btw! :D
I know it's easy for most people to not tell the difference between AI work and genuine work. But Pokemon being a multi-million dollar company definitely could have hired people who have a keen eye on this sort of thing. People who can look closely at an image and find those inconsistencies that humans tend not to make. It really is about those inconsistencies. Especially at the higher skill level which is what these AI drawing examples tried to mimic. You don't have to be an Picasso level artist to figure these things out. Even an elementary school drawing is at the very least consistent across the picture. I know people make fun of hands a lot, but AI has been doing a better and better job at that and truth is even people mess up on hands a lot. Something I notice it mistakes a lot are shadows. Which yeah, it has no concept of depth to understand how to really place shadows. Something people figure out subconsciously. You know where shadows should and shouldn't go when drawing pretty much by 4th grade Art class. Again you may not be good at that point. But you're consistent.
on a bit of a sweeter note, i’m glad i didn’t enter because all these people would beat me in a second! all these artists who entered their work are amazing, and i say good luck to them all 😭🥺 i’ve seen some art that didn’t even get into the top 300 that looks like it’s already a freaking card. i saw this absolutely beautiful eevee one where it was sleeping and little eeveelution wisps were like circling around it and it was amazing lmao
It's already really unfortunate how very few countries are allowed to even partake, and then people just fill the thing with AI art. It's so disrespectful and stupid Also, I'd be pointing out Eevee in that one pic having different color toe beans. That's a thing that real animals can have, but I doubt pokemon would have those kinds of things (that often at least) since they're most likely going to want to keep the designs simple and all that. Maybe that's just me though lol
@@DARKINBLADE. No. Ai images, as shallowly pretty as they can appear, are fundamentally souless. The more you look at them, the worse they get, while human art will always have a certain shine and meaningfulness that ai will never be able to perfectly replicate.
@@DARKINBLADE.Anybody with the slightest amount of sensitivity to art and humanity would probably agree that from an artistic standpoint, ai images hold no value at all. So yes, coorporations can do what they want, but at the end of the day, it's the customers who decide what they wanna buy or not, and I'm pretty sure they at the very least care about that.
@@inklinggirl7754 Most people can’t even recognize AI art especially the older generation. And most corporations are soulless and care more about what costs less to create. You’re unfortunately, being far too optimistic.
Honestly I feel like most art contests should really add the rule where you must submit your art process as well while submitting your art piece. Like by this they could easily tell what's ai and what's not ai, especially with how scarily ai is getting better at making these images (by obviously stealing from so many talented artists) . It was like a year ago when we got the whole ai making images thing well known (by then, they still had distortions) but now ai can literally make videos, and art that is VERY hard to tell if it's ai or not. And you know what? This whole ai thing will grow to greater intelligence in the future.
Ai art should be banned in contests as ai steals bits and peices from other artists work. So basically you are using someone elses hard work for clout, money, etc. it needs to be banned.
sad thing is i haven't been on my reddit art feed with the ones i joined because of AI either it's ai or the shame the artist and take down there image because they think it's ai art when in reality it isn't there's been this problem to on the reddit art community it's absolutely heartbreaking despite my art being very terrible cause am a beginner i would never be caught dead using ai but only for maybe understanding poses or folds on clothes and that's even a stretch and i only do that when am really desperate other than that I go to Pinterest for clothing or pose and even they are having troubles with it being littered with ai
We are so screwed if politicians decide that using ai for their campaigns is better than requiring all ai art to have a watermark. They already are. Older people have no clue and younger generations are at risk of not immediately noticing if it gets beter at faking.
The thing about all these AI “artists” is they don’t know what makes art good; if they did, they’d be able to draw it themselves, or at least fix the glaring errors. That’s why a lot of AI images have so many errors; the people behind the image don’t know how to fix them, or even why they should.
As an artist who's my entire carrier is on being good at art it sickens me that people who suck at art are generating ai art and taking spots from people who are skilled and isnt using a robot and words to create art. Like its actually so vile its ridiculous. If you do this and you can't produce art without a machine then you should prob quit while your ahead
I swear people that post ai arts on a ART CONTEST, Should be banned from art contest forever. (I mean Posting ai art is fine but, BRO? Posting ai art in a ART CONTEST is so shameless.)
I know this is may sound rude or egotistical but I'm kinda sad that I went to see the artists that got in, and that my Koraidon art that I applied in with wasn’t in nor even shown and yet these clearly AI generated images got in somehow. Like whats even the point of these contests anymore.
really unfair how actually talented artists work their asses off for hours to work on a project and then some random person who just typed a prompt into an ai and traced shit wins immediately
it's so disgraceful that ai art is allowed for contests,if this was my art contest,whoever makes ai art would be autobanned and never allowed to enter future contests
