The virtues of A.I. art

[LargoKitt]

I make no pretense that A.I. art generated by my prompts is by me. That said, it seems to be a possible source of high-quality erotic images. It can be real and explicit and yet not require any real human to disrobe or perform a salacious act. It can be imaginative and fanciful. Yes, A.I. art is stealing jobs from illustrators. Yes, it can 'sample' real humans for its images. But if it is created as A.I. art and has both aesthetic and erotic value, isn't it a good contribution to this genre? It certainly beats the adolescent smutty line drawings that were a fixture of this site. Might erotic art be one place where A.I. art is very welcome?

Your 'yays' and 'nays'?

 

[AwkwardMD]

Nay

 

[THROBBS]

Nay.

The imagery may (likely) gets many folk off.
It is simply derivative.

Any A.I. imagery is not "art". it is imagery.

And is nort allowed on LIT any way.

 

[Nynah]

Yes, A.I. art is stealing jobs from illustrators.

isn't it a good contribution to this genre?

These statements are diametrically opposed to each other. AI "art" is not a "contribution" because it is built on theft. It has no "virtue" or "value". It is slop and it actively makes the world a worse place to exist.

 

[PennyThompson]

It certainly beats the adolescent smutty line drawings that were a fixture of this site.

I don't think I agree. AI images are slick and smooth, but they're all so samey, so obviously the statistical average of the labor of human artists, or the images of human models, but with the individual human nuances scrubbed away.

I like freckles and wrinkles and imperfections, and no, not the statistically simulated versions of those things either. And I like pencil smudged and brush strokes and wobbly lines.

Not everyone is a great artist (I'm certainly not) but human effort has aesthetic and emotional value to me. Even the drawings of dicks and boobs

 

[THROBBS]

Even the drawings of dicks and boobs

EVEN the dicks and Boobs!!!???


cool.

heehee

 

[tantrablack]

In my opinion, one should not generalize categories and then judge about them. One should examine the rules of the game, gather knowledge around the subject, and then examine the future perspectives of the field. Ai is as good or bad as the prompts you type in, and there are thousands of new LLMs every Month, and each differs in its abilities and specifications. AI is yet at the very beginning of its existence, and if you carefully craft your prompt and learn by the way others shape visuality with language, then you will perceive: AI can be art. AI usually does not mean that you simply press a button and mutually generate an ugly image, but it rather means to carefully select your context, your perspectives, your references to artist, designer and scenery. It means, for example, to describe an image with words, optimize the prompt manually and then tell the AI it should first optimize, then convert the text to a JSON prompt for a visual AI. It is also possible to finetune the prompt with the parameters given in the JSON section.
I did not use AI so far for erotic images, but in my opinion the possibilities are already pretty widespread in the field and will induce branches like an eternally growing tree. I also love to paint with oil colors and I draw a lot and I love handwriting concepts, stories and fantasies.
What my core concerns are : Sex displayed with mere visuality lacks the feelings of the real thing, although the future might have some methodical turns ....
erotic greetings
tantrablack

 

[THROBBS]

In my opinion, one should not generalize categories and then judge about them. One should examine the rules of the game, gather knowledge around the subject, and then examine the future perspectives of the field. Ai is as good or bad as the prompts you type in, and there are thousands of new LLMs every Month, and each differs in its abilities and specifications. AI is yet at the very beginning of its existence, and if you carefully craft your prompt and learn by the way others shape visuality with language, then you will perceive: AI can be art. AI usually does not mean that you simply press a button and mutually generate an ugly image, but it rather means to carefully select your context, your perspectives, your references to artist, designer and scenery. It means, for example, to describe an image with words, optimize the prompt manually and then tell the AI it should first optimize, then convert the text to a JSON prompt for a visual AI. It is also possible to finetune the prompt with the parameters given in the JSON section.
I did not use AI so far for erotic images, but in my opinion the possibilities are already pretty widespread in the field and will induce branches like an eternally growing tree. I also love to paint with oil colors and I draw a lot and I love handwriting concepts, stories and fantasies.
What my core concerns are : Sex displayed with mere visuality lacks the feelings of the real thing, although the future might have some methodical turns ....
erotic greetings
tantrablack

nope.
It is still not, and likely will never be.
No matter how "creative" you feel your prompts are.
The prompts (the concept) is yours and may be quite creative, but the net result is not by your hand, by your sweat and practice.

It is simply making some selections from a fancy vending machine.
Punching in A-12 + G-3 and getting a Milkyway and bag of Doritos does not make you a chef.

 

[LargoKitt]

I like the fact that the contributors here are rooting for the fallible human quality of visual creations. Erotic art and photography with a conscious effort to create beauty, or to create excitement in the image itself is really admirable. However, this website isn't famous for its literary qualities. I would argue, and I invite repostes, that most authors here aren't striving for high literary quality. A good many are, but one has to hunt a bit. When I looked at the erotic art here I was consistently disappointed that more artists hadn't made more of an effort. Funny how rare even art class life session quality stuff was. And there was lots of 'art' generated by apps like Poser, especially for 'illustrated' stories, that was more generic than most A.I. art. Computer assisted comic book style, manga, and that 'Disney' technique. Meanwhile, I'd love to have my art back here. It is totally inexplicable why a site can have graphic written descriptions of every kind of sex act but shies away from a pencil drawing of a nipple.

 

[LargoKitt]

These statements are diametrically opposed to each other. AI "art" is not a "contribution" because it is built on theft. It has no "virtue" or "value". It is slop and it actively makes the world a worse place to exist.

I guess one also must ask if the writing on Literotica is 'art'.

 

[AwkwardMD]

Counterpoint: does being provocative make you "interesting" or "just an asshole"

 

[cw5523729]

Counterpoint: does being provocative make you "interesting" or "just an asshole"

Who says it has to be one or the other?

I feel strongly that I am both interesting and an asshole.

 

[PennyThompson]

your references to artist, designer and scenery.

Saying "Draw me a picture that looks like what @THROBBS draws," does not make me an artist, it makes me a client for a plagiarist

 

[Nynah]

AI usually does not mean that you simply press a button and mutually generate an ugly image, but it rather means to carefully select your context, your perspectives, your references to artist, designer and scenery.

This is a flowery, gussied up way of saying "these are the parameters on how I want you to steal from human artists". Trying to conflate prompt generation with the creation of actual art is disingenuous and frankly insulting to real artists.

 

[SteelPoint]

I guess one also must ask if the writing on Literotica is 'art'.

Must one? Art, in the immediate visual sense accepted on this board, writing is certainly not.

Art as (used to be) presented here appeals directly to the mind via the eyes.

Writing is a creative process which appeals via a commonly-accepted visual code rendition of sound. As such it is one stage further from presenting an image or idea to the oberver... but it could be said to be the more advanced medium as it allows that observer to form their own versions of the creator's original concepts.

 

[THROBBS]

Saying "Draw me a picture that looks like what @THROBBS draws," does not make me an artist, it makes me a client for a plagiarist

You could just say, "Draw me like one of your French girls."

 

[Obeylily]

no i disagree.nothing can beat temperature of the body pressed against eachother and dirty talks from how you both feel and vibe

 

[LargoKitt]

You could just say, "Draw me like one of your French girls."

I honor the fact that human artists are 'amateurs', even if they are professionals. That is, humans create out of the 'love' of creation. Machines follow formulas based on human experience. No love involved. So a fine piece of erotic art expresses the love for human experience and the creative process and the medium. OTOH, a lot of smutty images are not art. (Though I will concede that even a crude image of a dick and balls scratched into a restwoom stall might excite and inspire someone.) Likewise, some 'stories' are clichéd copies of boring smut, and some are inspired evokations of the human erotic experience. 'Eye of the beholder' and all that jazz.

 

[LargoKitt]

Counterpoint: does being provocative make you "interesting" or "just an asshole"

Ask the president. He's an expert on that.

 

[THROBBS]

I honor the fact that human artists are 'amateurs', even if they are professionals. That is, humans create out of the 'love' of creation. Machines follow formulas based on human experience. No love involved. So a fine piece of erotic art expresses the love for human experience and the creative process and the medium. OTOH, a lot of smutty images are not art. (Though I will concede that even a crude image of a dick and balls scratched into a restwoom stall might excite and inspire someone.) Likewise, some 'stories' are clichéd copies of boring smut, and some are inspired evokations of the human erotic experience. 'Eye of the beholder' and all that jazz.

I'd never suggest that all smutty images created by hand are "art". Some folk say that any/every image made by anyone is "art". I contest that — If that were the case – then there is no "bar" for "art" (other than human made). I say that there needs to be at least some measure of competency (the standard is another debate) and some intent AND context (society, time frame...). ALL human made imagery is "expression", but that is not enough to qualify as "Art".

A parallel is dance or music. We (society) does not consider one a "dancer" just because one dances. One is not a "musician" just because one plucks a guitar (or belts out a song). This may seem nitpicking, but words do matter.

And further more — A.I. is not "Art" no matter how "Slick" the product is.