I'm not an artist. If I sketch something, and have an ai upscale it for me, is it still slop, vs just asking it to do everything?

The first image is your artwork.

It represents your slow but steady progress in your hobby. It may not be what you want yet, but it is still a stepping stone on your journey.

The second image is a compilation of your artwork and the stolen efforts of millions of unpaid artists, their works unceremoniously ripped away from them and sold as a tech company's product without any compensation to them for aiding building such a machine. It isn't art.

Keep at it, yo. Art is a frustrating hobby at times, but enjoy the learning.

The example you provided isn't upscaling. Upscaling is the act of interpolating pixels to increase the resolution of a bitmap image. What you've done is had the AI color and shade in your sketch.

Frankly, it's clear from the sketch that you have some great foundational skills. I don't really understand why you would stop halfway and let a computer steal the learning and practice opportunity from you. It's like a carpenter building a piece of furniture and just stopping before sanding and painting it.

Still slop, sorry amigo! (Probably not what you want to hear, but I'm just being real...)

If I sketch something, and have an ai upscale it for me

That's not an accurate description of what you did, is it?

You didn't simply "upscale" your drawing. You had AI turn a rough sketch into an inked, colored and shaded but otherwise incomplete piece.

I like to think I poured my heart and soul into it.

Yeah, I'm sure you like to think that...

But in reality you did part 1 of a 4 part process and told a computer to do the rest. I don't know how long you spent on your initial sketch, but in the end you relied on a gimmicky shortcut (based on the exploitation of other people's stolen art... stuff that they REALLY poured their heart and soul into before it was unceremoniously ripped off by mega-corporations) to do at least 75% of the work. I'm being brutally honest, but at best you can only really think of it as being 25% yours.

Again, is this slop? I am not an artist. I drive a forklift real good, that's my skillset.

Am I being too harsh? Why am I telling you this?

Here's the thing you need to understand...

If you made that original sketch then you ARE an artist. Sure you don't feel like you're as good as you want to be (no artist EVER does, by the way), but you are already 10000x more of an artist than someone who writes some text and gets an AI to slop out some generic shit.

The composition and sketch is the hardest part and you already did it. Linework (if that's your style) is basically just tracing. Coloring is as easy as doing a kids coloring book. Shading can be a puzzle, but you'll get it in time if you keep the light coming from the same direction.

You spent some time doing the hard part, liked how it looked, and then instead of just cracking on with the next part, you got lazy, turned your brain off and fed it to the instant gratification machine, turning it into slop. Taking your hands off the wheel entirely, you know?

And for what?

Now you have a "pretty picture", but you didn't learn a damn thing about taking your art from sketch to lines, or coloring, or shading. And to make matters worse, you can't even point to the picture and say "hey look at that, I MADE THAT", like you can with the sketch.

In the end, I'm gonna call it slop. Ethical problems aside, AI generated slop art is a dime a dozen these days. I don't see any value in it at all. I think you have more talent for art than you know, and I hope that you keep it up and try to approach your work with more pride as a human being making something cool by hand.

What the AI did isn't something you can't do with practice. Besides, you probably wouldn't have put the belt buckle on the back of the pants. Believe in yourself and work at it.

First. You are an artist. You make actual real art and have skills. Your sketch is pretty good as well.

That isn't just upscaling, it colored it in too. If it just upscaled it'd be different.

Yeah, it generated everything that wasn't the monochrome silhouette. That is AI generated

If you can do a rough sketch this good then yes you are an artist.

Just finish your own art. You already did the hard part.

brother/sister/sibling, that's a neat sketch. You have potential. People from Uni have started with a similar skill level and are now fucking smashing their artwork. I understand that arts are mentally hard at times, when you feel nothing works and you don't improve fast enough. Give yourself some credit.

Now you are saying you'll be using the output for your book. Is it important to you, that it is 100% your work? Is it important to you to not misrepresent your skills? Then declare that and how AI was used. Will you monetize said book? Then there are a few legal things to consider (in Germany for example anything an AI generates for you is per definition not your creation and cannot be copyrighted by you. If you make changes to the image/text/video before publishing you can at least secure some rights on it)

I am not going to rate it as slop or not. If you need an illustration, and you need it now, who am I to tell you that this is not a legit tool, no matter how I myself feel about it.

First of all it's your hobby and you can do whatever you want forever. That being said if you want to improve your skills you won't get there by relying on shortcuts. Drawing is 10% talent and 90% practice as are many creative skills. There are great tutorials out there to teach you about proportions, perspective, lighting and so on. And the most important thing is persistence. Draw everything you want to and try not to care too much about the outcome. If you stay at it then sooner or later you will be able to draw all sorts of things just like you imagined them without even thinking about it.

Lemmy largely is very anti AI art. You're basically going to a vegan convention and asking "Is it ok if I have a little meat? As a treat?"

Hey @glitchdx@lemmy.world,

First, I think your sketch is great!! I'd encourage you too feel pride in it, because you did it! I bet it's better than you could do a year ago, and honestly a lot of people could never do that much (including me). So keep running with it.

Second, you said you are genuinely trying to get better at art. So keep putting your efforts where your mouth is by continuing to practice, and not taking any shortcuts to the finish line just to get a finished product. Shortcuts don't make you better, grinding does.

Finally, is it slop, yes, but I'm a bit more lax on your question about using ai-slop than some others. By example I mean:

• If your goal was simply to make (with a LLM assist) some cool looking desktop background for your own personal use it whatever. Go for it, enjoy! But don't go sharing it saying 'look what I did,' cause you didn't, fully.
• If your goal is to publish something (& you mentioned 'your book'), esp to sell it, I personally would take no pride in sharing something a slop-bot was used to get it out the door, nor would I appreciate it being shared with me. And I'd love for you to feel pride in every aspect of your personal projects.
  • And if you've got a vision for a project, and you're worried it'll never happen without help, I get that. But while it could be hard, maybe you could search for another artist whose style you like (there is a LOT of starving ones right now) to partner up with you. Maybe you commission them, maybe you become co-owners of this project, etc, but ultimately it becomes a project two+ people could be proud of! 🥳
    • And if you get to that finish line the way a creative should, I'll honestly be super stoked for you. So let me be first in line to pre-order the fruits of your labor. I believe in you! Keep us posted.

Honestly your sketching is quite solid, you've obviously got a decent knowledge of anatomy. All you need is some color theory and some practice, which AI will rob you of.

Alternately you could pay a real artist to color and finish your sketches, this is how comics and many other works are traditionally done.

If you use AI, I would definitely disclose that in the description of the book, and as a consumer I would certainly be turned off by that fact. The fact that you're using it to enhance your own art absolutely makes it better, but the finished product still isn't really your art any more.

Who cares what other people think? Do you, unapologetically.

That's not "upscaling". That's having the AI color it in for you. Like a comic artist who has a colorer (person that literally does that).

Upscaling just makes the image bigger (resolution-wise). It uses the same exact technology as regular AI image generation though 🤷

There's degrees to everything. AI haters are at the point where they're arguing with digital artists over what counts as art and it's getting insane.

This probably isn't the answer you want to hear, but yes, I still consider it slop.

Not everyone is an artist, and that's okay. Just do your best, and even the worst chicken-scratch doodles are better than what any AI craps out.

My opinion is different from most other comments here. AI is a tool. If it gets the job done exactly the way you intended it, there is no problem in using it. In my opinion, it's only slop if it's generated mindlessly and without care. In your case, you gave very specific constraints. If the result is exactly what you intended it to be, if you can get behind it 100%, it is your art, it is not slop. I think people need to reflect on their definition of art a bit. There was a time when people claimed using Photoshop made your art unworthy. The new tool is now AI. Just because it makes creating something so easy doesn't mean a tool is not "allowed" in art. Actually, anything is allowed in art, there are no rules.

Your sketch is essentially a highly detailed prompt. If you want to be an artist, stick with what you can do and use practice and repetition to get better. You're already far better at drawing than you think you are.

If you insist on using AI to finish out what you sketch, then it becomes a product of AI and everything that comes with that. It is no longer your own work.

If you are using AI to do things you cannot do yourself, you’re not an artist- and it’s slop.

Instead. Do it yourself and keep doing it poorly until you do it better. Then poof: an artist emerges.

First of all, your skills may not be where you want them yet, but you made art (and it’s pretty good besides; drawing is hard), you are an artist. An artist early in your journey, so think of all the aspiring art students that make just terrible stuff while they learn, and be happy you aren’t doing it for a career while improving. :)

That said, I don’t really see what the AI added to it. Sure it colored it in, but you could have done that too, and it would have been another chance to hide some of the blemishes that you don’t care for, and give it more of your own personality. The personality is the art, as much as the thing that gets made.

It doesn’t have to be perfect to be progress. Keep drawing, keep drawing the sorts of things you want to get good at, and think about how you’d like to color them, and just try it out, use crayons, colored pencils, markers, or maybe a digital image editing program. I’m sure there are some good free open source programs for that. You don’t get good without lots of practice, so train those muscles to do the fine motor skills you want them to do, and train your brain to think about what colors would be best for what you are trying to depict (something AI can never really do for you).

If you like the ai stuff for yourself, enjoy it, but personally I’d be put off by it being used in a book. Even bad art that’s hand made is better than AI, imho.

Unfortunately, yes.

You're looking at AI upscaling as a shortcut to the end result you want: your book. But from experience, jumping to the end of something robs you of the joy and accomplishment of doing the hard work to get there.

Instead ask if the book really needs illustrations. If it does, wouldn't taking the time to do them right be better? It would also give you more time to revise the other aspects of it.

If this is something you're passionate about, don't douse water on that fire by cheating to the end. If it's not something you're passionate about, why do it in your free time to begin with? If you think you'll somehow make money off it, you'll have plenty more hurdles to go through that can't be AI'd away. If it's just a passion project, use that fucking passion.

I understand the intense desire to just be great at something without putting all the effort in. But there really are no shortcuts to this shit. The main advantage that other people have over you on this is that they started earlier, so they have more time put into it already.

Seems the community is calling it ai assisted.

Plus there's professional tools now that do it automatically for you in a similar way. So imho if it's free of errors. I wouldn't call it slop

I think it’s more like a police sketch: it might help you clarify an image you have in your head and communicate it to others, but there's generally more to art than that (just like conveying an idea through a pastiche of song lyrics isn’t poetry).

Were you on some sort of deadline? That’s the only reason I can think of that you would allow AI to steal this opportunity for you to grow and improve your skills.

Why stop at the halfway point and let the machine steal the fun? I mean art is hard and challenging but also fun to make... you are right there; the rendering doesn't have to be professional level. I encourage you to give it a go.

Being slop or not is not the issue, the real question is is it morally correct. To me it depends on your usage, are you generating stuff for yourself? Then it doesn't matter. Are you generating stuff to communicate to the artist you're hiring your intended vision of the thing, or building a mood board or similar? Then it's probably okay in my book. Are you using the generated image for something or selling it? Then it's wrong.

I would, at minimum, disclose the use of exactly what AI did for you if you were to sell your art.

I would also assume that anything you put into an AI model is now being absorbed by that model, so now your art is copied and available for the AI to replicate. That's something most artists aren't OK with.

Wanted to applaud you for being vulnerable, putting your work out there, and facing the tough answer, especially when it wasn't what you wanted to hear. Shows a lot of character.

Id say dont be lazy. Its a slippery slope. Better to not use it at all if you even have to question it as cheating.

That and its blatant theft. Every llm company should be being sued to the moon and back.

Side question:

How do you pronounce your username?

You can certainly use it as a learning tool, and do your own color and shading over it. It's likely not perfect, so you might be able to improve on it. I wouldn't try to sell AI shaded art, though.

Back in the early days of animation, the animation process involved an animator who would draw the scenes frame by frame and then hand them over to a team of colorers to color.

This is not so different. You conceptualised the scene and handed off the colouring to the AI. So it isn't really slop.

I wouldn't consider this slop.

Let's compare this to photography. If you use a camera to take a picture of something, sure, the machine is doing most of the work, but the photographer is playing a vital role in this.

Now there are photographers that spend a lot of time composing a shot. They'll mess around with shutter speed, aperture size, ISO, zoom, depth of field, etc. They'll also figure out the subject matter and may add some other elements to it. Afterwards they'll make adjustments to the picture with something like Lightroom or Darktable, and maybe touch up some things with Photoshop.

Then there are people that take pictures with their phone of a computer screen showing something cool happening in a game and post it on Reddit.

On one end of the spectrum I would consider the photo to be art, on the other I would consider it to be slop. However, there are many degrees between one end of this spectrum to the other.

With AI tools it's not much different. The machine is doing a lot of the work, but how much of it is guided, reshaped, or directed by a human? With Image Generating tools you can tweak the seed, the steps, the cfg, the sampler, denoise, etc. You can choose the base model, add multiple LoRAs and embeddings, or train your own if you're looking for a certain style.

Then you have users that go to ChatGPT, type in a prompt and have ChatGPT do everything else.

Like photography, on one end of the spectrum I would consider it art, on the other I would consider it slop.

But this all begs the question, what is art? How do you draw the line between what art is, and what it is not?

I don't count upscaling as slop, most of the time.

FSR and DLSS for doing it real time are kinda garbage tho. Makes a static scene look great; but the moment there is motion, it's a blurry pixellated mess of shit. I hate when I can't turn that shit off.

This didn't just upscale tho. It colorized and shaded your line art. It sloppified it. I'm sure you could color and shade it better on your own, judging by how good the sketch is. I honestly don't know if I can believe you're not an artist.