• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

How long before AI is used to draw comics?
0

Started by malvin,

26 posts in this topic

grapeape

grapeape

Posted
Posted

Yes I read this article also. I found myself unable to take sides. The snob artists who feel like they got gamed. The goof ball who "created' the masterpiece by putting an inordinate amount of intensive labor lol into the project. However, in its wake the AI painting judged by simple, intuitively measured standards, comes off spectacularly. They will correct this "injustice" by creating separate categories for AI art in the future.

Where AI could really shine would be MTG and Fantasy art card work. Ultimately, I'm  going to treasure what a human being of flesh and blood is able to conjure up with heart and soul and execute on canvas, more than what AI will create.

But I've got a feeling if these two fellas were around they'd give the AI art....

At the Movies (TV Series 1986–2010) - IMDb

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KirbyCollector

KirbyCollector

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 9/4/2022 at 10:21 AM, Hockeyflow33 said:

With some of the bland, soulless art already in modern books it might be an improvement

Hear, hear, perhaps AI would know how to compose a cover... anything is better then the "static poses done in the vague, non-descript sorta manga" style

image.thumb.png.0b35db6ad8a04829844fafa728b5189f.png

Edited by KirbyCollector
Link to comment
Share on other sites
AndyFish

AndyFish

Posted
Posted

It is already happening, but like working digitally the work is going to be differentiated based on the skill of the creator-- in the above example of comic art being shown (the one in BW specifically) the layouts are clumsy and the lettering is amateurishly placed.  In art school 200 years ago I had a professor tell me if digital camera's had been around Michelangelo would have used them.  Will AI be a tool actual artists use to create masterful work or will amateurs play artist?  I think there will be a little of both.  But all the whining in the world is not going to stop technology.   I've long been on the boat that CGI is ruining movies, I'm no longer seeing SFX artists create an image using an actual camera and a variety of techniques, I'm watching the results of a technician punching in keystrokes, and what is created looks like a video game to me, and there is nothing more boring than watching someone play a video game.

Take the 70s James Bond film THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN, not a classic by any means, even in the Bond Cannon, but there's a scene where a car is jumped from one broken bridge over to another and it spins in mid air before making a perfect landing-- there were NO TRICKS used to create this effect other than a stunt driver making it.  Today it would be CGI-- but back then it was actually done and because it was there was nothing fake about it.

But what do I know?  These Marvel movies are one step away from being complete CGI Animated films and they are still pretty popular.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Will_K

Will_K

Posted
Posted (edited)

As Andy mentions, AI is (will be) a tool.  Just as digital coloring is a tool.  The tool is only as good as the person that's using it. 

People may not remember it now but when comics started being digitally colored, they looked terrible. 

Some shlub getting a book colored wasn't the same as it looking good.  The same went for digital tools when they started being used to manipulate pics in print advertising.

Edited by Will_K
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Taylor G

Taylor G

Posted
Posted
On 9/5/2022 at 10:08 AM, AndyFish said:

Take the 70s James Bond film THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN, not a classic by any means, even in the Bond Cannon, but there's a scene where a car is jumped from one broken bridge over to another and it spins in mid air before making a perfect landing-- there were NO TRICKS used to create this effect other than a stunt driver making it.

Mad Max: Fury Road was done without CGI because George Miller also hates it.  He even wanted to do it without color.

Dune shows how CGI can be done well, when you start paying careful attention to sources of light and the light being reflected back (e.g. use of sand screen instead of green screen).  No doubt, with Marvel underpaying their CGI suppliers, they will continue to be lowest common denominator, it's what they do.  

As with any technology, there's room for careful and artistic touches, and room for sloppy rush jobs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tth2

tth2

Posted
Posted
On 9/6/2022 at 10:11 PM, Taylor G said:

No doubt, with Marvel underpaying their CGI suppliers, they will continue to be lowest common denominator, it's what they do.  

As with any technology, there's room for careful and artistic touches, and room for sloppy rush jobs.

Marvel movies are the equivalent of fast food--tasty but at the end of the day just empty calories.  So I can't scrutinize a Marvel movie closely enough to care! lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites
malvin

malvin

Posted
  • Author
Posted
On 9/6/2022 at 3:48 PM, BCarter27 said:

To all the new AIs out there...

01001001 00100000 01100001 01101101 00100000 01100001 01110110 01100001 01101001 01101100 01100001 01100010 01101100 01100101 00100000 01110100 01101111 00100000 01110010 01100101 01110000 00100000 01111001 01101111 01110101 00101110

Nah, the AI's will have their own AI reps! No dirty humans required!

Malvin

Link to comment
Share on other sites
alxjhnsn

alxjhnsn

Posted
Posted

It's not just art.

Surgery

The impact of recent automation advances is not limited to artists losing skills.
Check out this article on robotic assisted surgery and its impact on training new surgeons! Not only will artists lose physical skills using their AI assistants, but so do surgeons or, at least, those training to become surgeons.
 
Programming
Similar things are happening in programming. Software development was considered "safe," but that may not be true for long. [It's not just video game artists that have to worry, but the coders as well.
 
Counter Sales
Of course, it's not just high skill positions that have this issue:
 
SciFi
Of course, the topic reminds me of a bunch of SciFi stories with Wall-E perhaps the most recent, that boiled down to "What do you do with all the people when the work is automated?"
Idle hands may or may not be the Devil's workshop, but lots of bad things happen when there are lots of idle minds and hands.
 
 
Link to comment
Share on other sites
tth2

tth2

Posted
Posted
On 9/7/2022 at 8:38 AM, alxjhnsn said:

Surgery

The impact of recent automation advances is not limited to artists losing skills.
Check out this article on robotic assisted surgery and its impact on training new surgeons! Not only will artists lose physical skills using their AI assistants, but so do surgeons or, at least, those training to become surgeons.

I've been told that the main medical specialty that will be replaced by AI first is radiology.  In fact, it's already happening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nexus

Nexus

Posted
Posted
On 9/6/2022 at 7:11 AM, Taylor G said:

Mad Max: Fury Road was done without CGI because George Miller also hates it.  He even wanted to do it without color.

There's quite a bit of CGI in FURY ROAD:

That's just a taste. Very liberal use of CGI throughout.

Just saw THE ROAD WARRIOR on the big screen again a couple of weeks ago. I try to catch that in the theater every chance I get. Appreciate it more and more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Taylor G

Taylor G

Posted
Posted (edited)

Someone did some digging into the images that were used to train some of the AI image generation software.

Looks like there are plentiful examples of copyright and privacy violation.

Even if you can get some images removed (using GDPR for privacy, if you live in the EU), what do you do about the software that has already been trained on this data?

The artists whose images are most commonly used are......Stan Lee, Alan Moore and Warren Ellis. :insane:

ETA Fixed the link.

Edited by Taylor G
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dr. Balls

Dr. Balls

Posted
Posted (edited)

I read this article and it's bothersome to me.

I was a traditional artist for many years, went to school as an illustrator - and ultimately changed my focus to Graphic Design in order to get a full-time job to pay the bills. In that, I started working in digital art (as an aside to my day job at an ad agency) back in 1995 and worked in that genre for nearly 20 years. I was at the beginning of the argument of people saying it's not "real" art. I had to either deal with or fight against this idea - as I would sometimes spend up to 40 hours working on a piece. I used photography (mine and stock), scanography, hand-illustrated elements, etc, so there was some sense of tactile integration of things intermixed with assemblage on the computer - it required advanced skills of Photoshop and Illustrator as well as some practical drawing skills as well.

This AI version of art created with human-input seems to have as much personal artistic expression as going to a frozen yogurt shop and picking your favorite toppings. Sitting in front of a computer thinking about what does or doesn't work, and then inputting that thought process is not artistic. It's a form of deductive reasoning to what compositionally is effective or not. Having your prescription dialed in at the eye doctor by saying which letter looks sharper is not a creative process.

"Which background looks better, the right or the left?"

"Left"

"Which planetary body looks better, the right or the left?"

"Right"

There is no forethought to the process. It's being presented with options and the "artist" chose to try it out, accept it or discard the result. Doing this 4,000 times does not constitute as "artistic expression". I fully admit that creating digital art required less hand skills than painting the same style of illustration by hand. Using a computer also allowed me to add/remove elements that did/did not work in a way that was much easier than traditional art. But I still had to collect, photograph or draw things to put my artwork together. It required me to visually plan out and execute the story I wanted to tell - this is the basis for art. It tells a story in some fashion and I don't agree that AI will ever have that ability, or understand that need to tell a tale. A computer, no matter how advanced, will never have the ability to be inspired by a story, a visual or an experience, apply previous memories, feelings and philosophies to put forth their own take on an artistic expression. A computer will not be able to have abstract thoughts and turn them into a representational articulation. That requires the element of the human brain that can't be replicated even in the craziest, outlandish science fiction.

Someday, it may want to ask things like "Why am I alive?" or "Why isn't the air conditioning on?" - while they could signify sentience, there's no passion to those questions. There's no soul behind the query. AI is a tool - super advanced, yes, but nothing more. This "artist" used a super advanced tool to assemble his work, it doesn't matter if it was AI or not. There's no passion from the computer or the assembler behind the piece - it's just the result of moving things around for 30 hours.

Edited by Dr. Balls
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Will_K

Will_K

Posted
Posted

So far, it looks like any image created by AI is a one off.  And AI is "trained" using existing images.  Side note: you can really mess up an AI by including eff'ed up scenarios (in this case, images) into the mix.

So maybe AI can create a cover illustration.  But let's say we want to see a Superman story drawn by Leonardo da Vinci (or Charles Schulz for that matter).  How would that work ?  You load up every image drawn or painted by da Vinci.  Then you load up images (like those model sheets) of Superman, his villains and every supporting character.  You program human anatomy (e.g. elbows only bend one way).  Let's say you go by the "Marvel method".  There's a very loose outline of a story.  How does the AI pace the story?  What about panel layout, # of panels per page, splash pages, 1/2 splashes... establishing shot, medium shot, close up shots... leaving room for lettering balloons and captions.  I guess it could be done.  But it may not be pretty.  Then you go with the more traditional method (full -script)... then what ??

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rick2you2

Rick2you2

Posted
Posted

Just out of curiosity, does anyone know if AI is being used already for backgrounds which are somewhat repetitive? It wouldn’t surprise me, and I wouldn’t be offended. Some artists use assistants for backgrounds, so I don’t know if there is much of a difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
0
Go to topic listing