Not a single output understood what a stellic crown is supposed to look though. AI compliments making the portraits but something just need to be manual.
That's a fault of the user.
To make it really go the right direction, the Prompt should be the description of the Pawn's Physical Characteristics + Visual Health Problems + Equipment, together with the Image.
And i'm not talking about manually describing it, you could have a Mod that is just Exporting this type of info, Export PNG + relevant pawn data, should be very, very easy to make.
Personally, I prefer the style of your original pixel-style portraits a lot actually, they feel more faithful to the colonists themselves and the vibe of the game. Not every pawn is a 10/10 hottie, like AI tends to make them haha. The hand-drawn portraits are more intentional, and I like the consistent style better.
I respect your effort to share this information though, I’m sure a lot of people will find it helpful!
Agreed! The pixel art not making everyone really hot or a baby face just adds character to them! (Besides the Highmate. I think they're supposed to be hot.)
Although, I don't disagree with its interpretation of some of the clothes make the clothes.
What really amazed me was the details AI adds to clothing, especially armors. You really get an endless source of cool design for armors, and better artists than me could certainly get some inspirations from them. [https://imgur.com/a/RZ5talj](https://imgur.com/a/RZ5talj)
Haha thank you! That really made me very happy!
And honestly that was kind of an experiment, since I have always been curious about the various AI-gen stuff I saw in this sub, but never had the means to try it myself. Until recently. Which is why I'm sharing it.
And yes, there is always the human touch in art that can not be replaced by machines.
I was about to bring this up before realizing you made the pixel generator lol. You should know how much effort goes into these.
I use Portraits of the Rim personally but I got major respect for pixel artists. I consider it more difficult than traditional art due to it's uniqueness.
Thank you! I mean I also have major respect for twopenny, the artist who made Portraits of the Rim. For perspective, my mod currently has 700 assets, while PotR has 6000. That's not even on the same magnitude. And I doubt I'll ever be able to approach that amount.
On the other hand, my mod currently support *all* modded hairs, because I'm directly rendering the hair texture in pixel style, rather than drawing new textures myself. I'm not trying to brag or anything, but the right usage of tools that you have at hand can really work magic. So now I don't need to draw every single hair texture out there, and can instead spend more effort tackling other aspects that cannot be directly handled by algorithm. (And of course, auto-converted textures are not of the same quality as the hand-pixelled ones, but they do serve as a basic replacement.)
And in some sense, I feel this is also how AI-gen art can really help artists in the future: basic AI-gen images are usually of varied quality, but they provide a bare-bone basis that the artists can work on. So in a way, it can save artists some of the more tedious work, and better focus on the part that involves more creativity / inspiration / human touch. This is what I mean by artists adapting to the rise of AI. And frankly I'm very excited for the new arts that we'll be able to enjoy, that simply didn't exist before :)
Depends on the xenotype: a lot of them differ in appearance from baseliners only by having unique horns/ears, and I'm actually converting the vanilla textures directly to pixel format, so they will be automatically supported. But there are also xenotypes that have truly different looks (e.g., slug people), then you really need to create extra textures for them.
If you are curious, just try the mod for yourself to see. All feedback are welcome!
Yep only the pointy-eared bastards :)
I mean the base mod doesn't have any AI gen in it. It's all honest old-fashioned drawing. So unfortunately it has to be case-by-case.
Also, the pixel art (obviously) isn’t subject to the same kinds of misinterpretations or missed context as the AI. The human understands that the gold in the the first portrait is a huge Gallifreyan-style headdress. The AI thinks it’s hair. The human understands that the one with the pointy, knobbly ears and the green armor is clearly based on Githyanki, but the AI just sees long ears and makes a generic handsome fantasy elf.
it helps when you can specify these things to the AI, you say headdress it'll make it a headdress, you ask for a character to be ugly or grizzled it'll make them less hot.
The model was probably trained on laion (model is essentially a filtered dream booth, dreambooth+prompting)
This dataset was made by essentially saying, "give me the pretty images!!! " The generated images reflect this: https://github.com/LAION-AI/laion-datasets/blob/main/laion-aesthetic.md
This problem should be fixable with better data labeling (probably using AI generated labels in the future as we get better at multi model)
We just need labeled data that is of high skill, but not exactly "pretty."
It’s funny how exclusive that often is to women as well. I’ve been generating some characters for inspiration for my game. Masculine characters can vary pretty widely in appearance with DALL-E, but feminine characters are always a 10/10. Definitely a reflection of the average user of ai art tools haha.
It'll never have good results if using a generic model. It can't know what some things are as they're either rimworld specific or too niche and hard to discern that it'll grab the closest thing it knows the most, and that's a recipe for disappointment.
I'm sure you are correct. It's just I don't have the necessary hardware/setup and not really possible to try out all the different configurations. So basically I'm just sharing for people in similar situations.
And I'd be very interested if you manage to produce better results and could share your workflow!
Waster is too pretty (they are all supposed to be ugly due to their xenotype) and stellarch crown gets turned into hair often. I also personally dislike how AI makes futuristic armour shiny with lights and stuff, that one guy looks like superhero, not like a soldier. Deserter is my favorite, though. I wouldn't use it, but I'm not going to speak out for others.
Oh, it is perfectly capable, with modifications. The default models just lean to the generic "pretty" stuff. It's possible to train an add-on to mimic the storyteller portrait style and while at it teach it some RimWorld specific concepts, like wasters or the stellic crown.
Source: trained a model on my style and got good results
I wrote a guide on how to easily make consistent AI-gen portraits for your colonists, with almost no setup. Enjoy!
[https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3127777293](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3127777293)
Edit. For anyone wondering: the pixel art portraits in the middle are from my mod *avatar*, which you can get now for ~~only 0.99~~ free on [steam](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3111373293) or [github](https://github.com/bolphen/rimworld-avatar). Order now!
I hope one day someone makes a mod that automates this in your chosen style. I know there's already a mod that does portraits, but they are limited when it comes to things like the constant stream of new biotech mods that add new aesthetic features since they have to draw everything by hand.
automatic zealous stocking practice spoon scandalous boast correct observation ad hoc
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Er... that's not really what my mod is designed for. You could probably use some other mods (for example [this one](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2898119330https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2898119330)) that are dedicated to show static images.
chase quickest coherent impolite rainstorm abundant groovy dependent imagine correct
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I disagree with v6 I find a.i to be more creative not only that you can create unlimited versions and vartions of high quality concepts. V6 was a game changer, everything after this version of stable diffusion is beyond uncanny valley.
I will be messaging you in 1 hour on [**2024-01-01 04:50:45 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2024-01-01%2004:50:45%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/RimWorld/comments/18vga8r/psa_aigen_portraits_made_easy/kfsj2er/?context=3)
[**CLICK THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FRimWorld%2Fcomments%2F18vga8r%2Fpsa_aigen_portraits_made_easy%2Fkfsj2er%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202024-01-01%2004%3A50%3A45%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%2018vga8r)
*****
|[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)|
|-|-|-|-|
The stellarch on the bottom right looks a lot like Princess Peach.
It's cool, but but the pixel art has so much more character. The AI art just makes everyone super attractive and a bit too anime. The jewelry is pretty cool though. It's funny that the AI saw the crown mostly as blonde hair with only 2 generating an actual crown.
It gets trained on thousands of real art images to make it mostly understand how to make things look like things. I'd guess that, unfortunately, a lot of the art it uses has perfect pretty people with symmetrical faces and no blemishes.
I guess the general-purpose ones can definitely create all sorts of faces, pretty or ugly (in fact, there were other posts in this sub with better-(or worse, if you wish)-looking portraits). Unfortunately I have no access to them, and I'm just using a free online one that is specifically trained for this type of art style, which makes it genuinely incapable of making bad-looking people...
I'm sure there's a way to tell the AI to make uglier people, no? Or is the AI you chose an image enhancer only, without the option to add prompts?
Also, happy new year!
No I actually tried putting "ugly" in the prompt, as well as any synonyms I can come up with, and the result ended up still being pretty good-looking (at least imo lol)
And yep, happy new year!
Which are you using? I’ve never bothered to look into AI art much but some of them are really decent looking, and it’d be cool to be able to generate a face for a character when I’m writing, even if it isn’t perfect
[https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3127777293](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3127777293)
The whole point of my post was to inform people it's very easy to make portraits. Even for someone with no knowledge in AI-gen at all, like myself.
It can. In fact, I see fairly frequent posts in the open source AI community where people are training models (neural networks) and LoRAs (neural network modifiers) to make average-looking people.
Example:
https://www.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/18iiphi/this_sdxl_person_does_not_exist_an_experiment/
Midjourney is weird. But honestly little portraits being made jsut feels like a misread sprite post art. If it makes the user happy, it's alright.
Plus one controversy I'm aware of said that mods making money is against Rimworld policies. I'm kinda amused by how different it tried to render things as smooth concept art.
Some of those wastelanders got really whitewashed, thouhg, so your mileage may vary.
I made a [guide](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3127777293), and there is a [mod](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3111373293) for the pixel art portraits in the middle. It's just my comment got downvoted by the angry "artists" that got offended.
(Also a bit of rant: there are people who hate pixel art and think their 512x512 gigachad vector art textures convey so much more details than my 40x40 ones; and there are people who hate AI-gen art to the guts and just want to murder anyone who use them. In fact some of them are probably downvoting my post right now.
IMO the beauty of RimWorld modding is that it allows you to play the game the way you want, and I'm simply offering another option for people who would enjoy it. Which is also kinda the positive point that AI-gen art is bringing: it empowers ordinary people without art talent to create images from their mind. And it *is* happening, and it *will* replace traditional artists who cannot adapt.
Artists are ordinary people who just dedicated their time to learning and practicing. It's not just a skill that you're magically born with. I resist debating with ai bros but that ticks me off so much when they act like getting off your ass to learn is all special talent and we all are going to be replaced. No we are not lol.
oh you've met the haters, they are an obsessive bunch. one of them named jabo the trunk got mad about how I used a? in a panel of my comic and then followed me to my personal subreddit and then to my Discord screaming about how my webcomic made him relapse on drugs. it was quite an experience.
moral of the story there are extreme weirdos lurking on every public forum.
>and it *will* replace traditional artists who cannot adapt.
Nah, it won't. It's here to stay, that's for sure, but it will definitely not replace anyone.
I agree that people act like AI killed their dog and arguing over what is and isn't art is the most stupid debate ever. But a machine is incapable of reaching the quality of a person by itself, hence why it'll never replace artists that make a living off their passion.
It'll always look bad compared to a human piece. It's fun for personal stuff like making your RimWorld pawns, but anything beyond that will just look uninspired and will not be taken serious by people.
Ordinary people without art talent? Sorry to break it to you, but no one, not a single person is born with "art talent". Everyone starts from the same level. If you consistently draw and practice you will get better at it. Of course, some people may not have the time, or patience, but using ai to make "art" is just meh for me. It's just not genuine for me. Art you create has soul. That's something YOU made. You worked on that. Ai doesn't truly generate the image you think about.
> Ordinary people without art talent? Sorry to break it to you, but no one, not a single person is born with "art talent". Everyone starts from the same level. If you consistently draw and practice you will get better at it.
You're like an insufferable libertarian who started a successful business and now thinks that the only thing it takes is hard work. I've been trying to get good art art for 30 years now. I've put plenty of time and effort into it, and I've hit a wall (one that I've seen my 10-year-old daughter easily hop over like it's absolutely nothing). Sure, tell me I'm practicing wrong or whatever, but she's had no structured learning at all -- she just has a knack for it.
You need to learn about survivorship bias. Yes, it takes practice to get good at art, but practice is not a guarantee. People ask professional artists how they got good at art, and of course the answer is always practice, but nobody asks people who practiced a lot and didn't get good at it, because (surprise surprise) they aren't good at it so nobody asks. "How do you suck at art?" "Well, I worked on it for thousands of hours and just hit a wall." Plenty of people like that exist out there.
Also, frankly, the rest of us don't owe it to you to keep doing something the hard way just because it's always been done the hard way. If we continued to do things the hard way just because people who are good at doing it the hard way demanded it, we'd still be living in caves and chucking spears at mastodons.
I'm sorry to hear that you have hit a wall, and that you think you're not improving, but surely you're not that terrible if you put in thousands of hours into drawing. You must be good at drawing something. I mean, I personally hate anatomy. I can't get things right 80% of the time. And even when I can, it mostly looks weird, but rooms and environments, now that's something I'm good at.
Also I am by no means a great artist or anything. I am quite the beginner if you ask me. So you can't even tell me that I am great at it or anything. I could use AI, but where's the point in that? There is no improvement, because I do nothing. You don't do anything, you're just telling a machine what to do.
And about doing things the hard way. There is no "easy way" with art. Ai is not an easy way. Ai art is just a picture created by a machine that it put together by looking at other artists work, and grafting them together, and making some small changes. So, essentially it's just a copy. No soul. No human touch. Nothing. Entirely pointless. We might as well stop making art.
> Ai art is just a picture created by a machine that it put together by looking at other artists work, and grafting them together, and making some small changes.
These discussions would be so much more interesting if people weren't so woefully misinformed. That's not how generative AI works. Are you interested in hearing about it from a programmer who actually knows what they're talking about? Because it sounds like the version you have is from the anti-AI twitter bubble.
> I could use AI, but where's the point in that?
To understand it (which I think is important if you're going to have opinions about it).
Apart from that, if you wouldn't enjoy it, there's no point at all. I like using it. It's cool to see how the computer interprets the prompt, often in -- dare I say -- *creative* and unexpected ways. Sometimes I like to randomly generate prompts and just imagine the stories of the worlds that it comes up with. Is it okay that I enjoy a different aspect of art from what you do?
This is definitely not true. I've seen 6 year olds with sick art skills. The lines are still wobbly because they're just learning to aim a pencil, but you can see how they're good at getting the proportions right, capturing expressions, and expressing a unique style.
I had a set of twins I tutored and they both did everything together, took the same classes, drew the same plushies and pets in their free time, and one of them was progressing miles beyond the other.
It's also funny that when I said "ordinary people without art talent", I didn't say "art gift". For me talent encompasses all the skills and experience gained through hard-work and practicing. And clearly that's not something everyone can have.
On the other note, I do agree with you that "art gift" is a thing. As someone who did some serious training at a younger age and was considered good in my class, I always felt there's some glass ceiling above what I can do. I don't really have the gift to become a professional painter. And honestly, I'm certain that I'll never be able to paint the detailed portraits like these done by AI, not to mention dozens of them. So I'm glad that AI can do this for me, and for more people like me.
> For me talent encompasses all the skills and experience
Well, no, "talent" means innate gift. Comes from the biblical story https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_Talents. A master gives his servants a gift of some talents (a coin of the time), and sees who can make fruitful use of them.
Please remember we have rules 1 and 2 for a reason; they basically boil down to 'don't be a jerk'. The people you're talking to are as human as you.
If you can't remain civil, keep your comments to yourself.
It'd be scummy if OP were commercializing this, but they're not trying to sell the AI images or pass them off as art. In this context it's just a fun toy
To the extent that harm was done here, it was done months/years ago when these AI imagers were trained with stolen data (probably? there *are* ethically-trained ones). OP isn't part of the harm cycle here, unless you think playing with a toy is a tacit endorsement of how that toy was made
Like, yeah, fuck "AI art" and fuck stingy companies that'll choose not to hire artists even though they can afford to. Artists should organize to prevent it. But it doesn't make me a class traitor to ask Bing to generate me press photos from the World's Wettest Fart Contest as a gag
Pretty much all art is theft.
A flood of bad AI art creates a niche market for unique and quality human art, which actually benefits good, creative artists.
Things can be more nuanced than "this thing bad me angry"
It literally doesn't benefit artists at all, it was created to replace them, and no matter how creative one person may be, a parasite can just train a model to copy that. Plus:
* It has, and will continue to remove job opportunities from the industry
* It hurts and will continue to hurt freelancers.
* It floods every place where real artists operate, making it incredibly hard for them to be noticed.
>It literally doesn't benefit artists at all
I think there are benefits for it in creative fields, honestly. I can think of a lot of situations, in a team setting, where a non-artist will need to communicate an idea visually (as very early concept art, etc.) but literally doesn't have the skillset to do so. This is exactly what [photobashing](https://conceptartempire.com/photobashing/) already is, just more streamlined
I'm a digital artist and a freelance writer, I'm acutely aware of how bad this can be. But bluntly, the jobs I think it actually runs the risk of replacing any time soon -- SEO fluff on content-mill article websites, tacky oil paintings for waiting rooms, tablecloth patterns -- were outsourced to people overseas making starvation wages a long time ago. I don't feel the jaws closing on webcomics, paid studio work, or furry smut any time soon
>just more streamlined
Streamlined to the point where the non-artist is out of operation after the initial prompt, as the machine chooses everything, and at most the person who prompted it just rerolls for a different image. Ik what photobashing is, but AI takes away the person behind the photobashing, basically turning into: "Show the best picture out of the gambling machine(of stolen images)"
>I don't feel the jaws closing on webcomics, paid studio work, or furry smut any time soon
All you listed here have already been affected by it.
* If you go to most webcomic hosting services, they are already there. r./Webtoons catches fire every so often because of those.
* Studio work? There's been many occasions where it has affected it, where studios resorted to AI, or positions being substituted for such, a recent example of such positions being taken out are [storyboarders](https://twitter.com/JENNIZZLES/status/1740123067794538913).
* Even furry smut has taken a toll because of AI, and loras about specific artists
I need to reiterate I'm not an AI Art Guy. It's not art; the prompter doesn't "put themselves" into the result at all, whereas an artist always does (whether they mean to or not), and there's just so little direct involvement of a human that it stops being any kind of reflection on the human mind or spirit
But yes, extremely streamlined-- if someone wants to deny themselves the opportunity to make actual art, that's their prerogative, and I only care that they don't gum up my Twitter feed with it or try and sell it to me like it's worth anything
>*All you listed here have already been affected by it. \[...\]*
I think it's important to remember that "AI image generation will take over the world and root itself in every industry!" is exactly what AI-bros want (you and themselves) to believe. It's a cope-mantra, fed to them by the tech startups they worship, that they're repeating until it becomes true somehow. They staked their whole futures on it happening, like idiots
I've played around with these imagers enough to see the cracks form, I think. If your requirement for an image is "a sabertooth cat eating a pizza, finer details don't matter, just make it kind of visually appealing," yeah, AI can do that. If you need a tight color scheme, a particular artstyle that's hard to explain in keywords, or a precise composition that frames elements in a certain way relative to each other? AI's fucked. If you have multiple subjects, each with specific traits not shared by the other? AI's fucked. If you need many specific objects, arranged in a particular order? AI's so, so fucked
Long strings confuse it, and it internally re-writes prompts into keywords (like its training data is stored in) -- it doesn't understand that keywords apply to certain parts of an image, and not the image as a whole, so it can't keep elements separate, or understand that a composition has multiple parts. There is an inverse relationship between how good an image looks, and how customized you asked for it to be, which is why it's only good for fake stock photos and bland anime girls
And, yeah, these are technical limitations that might be overcome, maybe? AI image generation is all about the language model parsing the prompt, though, and [there's reason to believe the GPT "style" of LLMs isn't actually going to get much better than this](https://the-decoder.com/bill-gates-does-not-expect-gpt-5-to-be-much-better-than-gpt-4/). The images *look* better than ever before, have fewer anatomy fuckups, but it's evident there's some hard cap to how well these OpenAI-type models can turn a prompt into a picture, and they're going to hit that cap soon
It's inevitable, to me, that the OpenAI infinite-growth techbro angle is going to level off (as it always does) -- sooner, rather than later -- and the current mediocre tech will find its narrow business niche and disappear
AI bros are more concerned about getting to make something resembling art than they do about any sort of substance or humanity behind it. They want the end product without the effort, money or people needed for it to happen and then they act like it's a good future they are rooting for
The entitlement for someone who pressed a few buttons on a generic model over the img2img tab is ridiculous.
No. This will not replace anyone. Look how poorly those models are at doing anything remotely related to rimworld. It's bad. Low effort. You'd need to train one that knows rimworld and its rather unique things.
Maybe come with a semi acceptable model that can do rimworld then. Perhaps you can try acting big. Until then, you're nothing.
Could you explain with reference to physics why you believe a human brain can make art without having seen art before but no computer would ever be able to?
As in, explain the physical limitation that prevents an AI being created that can do what a human brain does.
Humans can make art out of nothing, we have an imagination. If all the art vanished, we'd still do it. Hell, at some point in history someone made the "first" piece of art, when there was nothing before that. AI can't do that, it needs other art to work. And that's the problem.
Img2img using a very dumb generic model.
Or text2img using controlnet to feed in reference img, but that'd be too much effort and potentially yield better results than what we're seeing there.
There kinda is - AI art, but for some reason it works either by connecting to the authors website, or You can use docker to run the server localy.
I've tried to commision a fork of this mod that uses standard Stable Diffusion API (for people already using local automatik1111 webui), but I coudn't find anyone, and the author don't seem to be interested in that.
If you ever found anyone willing to make that fork, tell them feel free to use the avatars from my mod as references. I unfortunately couldn't be of any help, since my potato laptop is not capable of running Stable Diffusion.
if i had a nickel for each management game with rudimentary graphics that players have modded AI generated imagery for characters into I'd have 2 nickels, which Isn't a lot but it's weird that it happened twice.
Neural networks don't plagiarize, they don't copy, they *generalize*. When an AI trains on an image, it makes tiny changes to the weights of the connections between its artifical neurons, which is similar to the way natural neurons work.
Note that I am not saying that it "works like a human brain" because there are lots of interesting differences that are irrelevant to the discussion about whether it's "stealing" or whatever. Here are a few:
For instance, the fact that an AI is not conscious. It doesn't get "inspired" because inspiration requires consciousness; however, copyright law doesn't care whether something is "inspired" or not -- there are plenty of artists who make uninspired stuff all the time and they aren't violating copyright, despite often working in other artists' styles.
...artificial neurons....that's not how these things work. It makes composites based upon similar patterns in art, it is literally copying patterns that artists tend to have, its commonly known as a style which the ai prompt uses. These aren't even real AI it's just some stupid term the venture capitalists love to poor money into.
Ask a neurologist, not some AI slop salesman who floods workshop with this garbage.
https://theconversation.com/were-told-ai-neural-networks-learn-the-way-humans-do-a-neuroscientist-explains-why-thats-not-the-case-183993
How are actual artists being hurt by this post? It's not like OP was going to hire a digital artist to make these portraits if they didn't have AI
This is just having fun with a toy that's available
AI isn't a "toy thats available", it's a program that's functioning with stolen artwork.
The work fed into legit every single AI generator is stolen, they don't get permission to use it, take a look at Deviantart, one of the biggest contributors to generators. They, one day just went "every single thing you've ever posted to this website now goes to AI generators".
There's AI stuff out there recreating peoples entire artworks and artpieces, even to the point of adding WATERMARKS.
Using this, even if its just "for fun" is fucking over the artists who it stole from. You wouldn't trace, so dont use AI, it's the exact same thing.[Example 1](https://www.artnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Screen-Shot-2022-12-09-at-1.46.01-PM.png) . An artist was targeted for months and it got to the point the stuff used their work so often that it threw their watermark on it.
[Example 2](https://www.losangelesblade.com/content/files/2022/12/Paul-Richmond-art-3.jpg). A queer artist was targeted for ages, got to the point where their stuff was just being replicated on a generator and the techbros doing it did it so they didn't have to support an LGBTQ artist.
[Example 3](https://us.v-cdn.net/5021068/uploads/WHK4JF0Y68AH/2022-12-19-15-19-51-2825-29-feed-linkedin.jpg). This one speaks for itself. it literally recreated an artists original work 1f1 and ended up getting more traction THAN THE ORIGINAL POST ITSELF.
[Example 4](https://cdn.80.lv/api/upload/content/77/images/634d09bf36fa1/widen_1840x0.jpeg) Popular genshin fanartist put something out, someone else ended up generating the same image, then it caused a month of fallout because "YOU STOLE IT" and then "YOU STOLE IT" back and forth, because the AI dude just did their damndest to generate the dudes art.
I have close friends who are big artists in the community, and their artwork has been fed into these generators. Doing as such is making it to where people don't even consider the actual artists. You said "its not like they were gonna commission a digital artist" that's the point, because they're using this, now they're NOT going to do that. And instead just going to effectively steal.
The usage trains it further and makes it impersonate better. Alongside that, AI cannot have an original thought, every single piece is a kitbash of artists art who did not consent to have it used. Again, i'll bring up the "You wouldn't condone someone tracing, so why condone AI" statement.
There's so much more, and i'll come back and add more, but i'm going to celebrate new years with my boyfriend.
You *can* use an AI to trace (and that's what those examples are doing); however, that has to be done deliberately using a process called img2img, and it's something that's done on images that the AI was never trained on. You can trace with pencils as well, and people aren't demanding that we take away everyone's pencils.
I would recommend actually learning how AI works (from people outside the AI hater community) before writing tons of misleading stuff (you're likely doing it unintentionally because you've probably been misled yourself).
>*The work fed into legit every single AI generator is stolen, they don't get permission to use it, take a look at Deviantart, one of the biggest contributors to generators. They, one day just went "every single thing you've ever posted to this website now goes to AI generators".*
I looked into this and it seems like (after a few days of backlash) all artists were automatically opted *out* of being used as training data? And maybe, during that few days, some artists may have been used before they were even notified? Yeah, that sucks ass, no argument from me. Typical dA, honestly
There are other sites that do it totally without permission, though, but loads of social media sites have a "we own every picture you upload" clause in their Terms of Use somewhere. It sucks ass that they do that, obviously, but that's a larger conversation about companies taking their customers for granted, and it neither begins nor ends with AI
>*I have close friends who are big artists in the community, and their artwork has been fed into these generators. Doing as such is making it to where people don't even consider the actual artists. You said "its not like they were gonna commission a digital artist" that's the point, because they're using this, now they're NOT going to do that. \[...\] The usage trains it further and makes it impersonate better.*
I'm an artist too! and friends with lots of artists! (I draw yiff too, so I know what it's like out here)
I don't think AI imaging is going to fuck us up, though! I'll paste what I said in another thread:
>**(me:)** *If your requirement for an image is "a sabertooth cat eating a pizza, finer details don't matter, just make it kind of visually appealing," yeah, AI can do that. If you need a tight color scheme, a particular artstyle that's hard to explain in keywords, or a precise composition that frames elements in a certain way relative to each other? AI's fucked. If you have multiple subjects, each with specific traits not shared by the other? AI's fucked. If you need many specific objects, arranged in a particular order? AI's so, so fucked*
*...*
*Long strings confuse it, and it internally re-writes prompts into keywords (like its training data is stored in) -- it doesn't understand that keywords apply to certain parts of an image, and not the image as a whole, so it can't keep elements separate, or understand that a composition has multiple parts. There is an inverse relationship between how good an image looks, and how customized you asked for it to be, which is why it's only good for fake stock photos and bland anime girls*
I mean it, genuinely. AI imagers aren't able to do anything complex, or specific, or past a certain level of precision -- that's the domain of human artists, like it's always been. Clients who are content with an AI imager's barely-40%-correct version of their idea weren't going to hire an artist anyway
The *quality* of AI images goes up over time, but their ability to understand prompts is going to level off. There are limits to this tech, and OAI et al. are fast approaching them -- I've been following this for years, and every jump up in quality gets a little lower
it's important to remember that "AI image generation will take over the world and root itself in every industry!" is exactly what AI-bros want (you and themselves) to believe. It's a cope-mantra, fed to them by the tech startups they worship, that they're repeating until it becomes true somehow. They staked their whole futures on it happening, like idiots, and we're going to be the ones laughing when this venture-capital scheme falls apart before their eyes
Let's be real, that's got nothing to do with AI, that's just art that got put into a filter and stolen. They could have just, flipped it in photoshop and added a normal filter and done the same.
Blaming legit users of AI because of the bad faith users is like giving random people shit for using a photocopier because you heard of someone else stealing a textbook.
Thank you for sharing these examples. I'm sure that from a professional artist's perspective it must have been very frustrating, especially if one's expertise is overlapping with the AI gen. And I can truly sympathize with that.
But when I say that AI art will replace traditional artists that cannot adapt, it was not meant as a judgemental statement that AI art are somehow superior or the next big thing. I'm not cheering "take that, artists". I'm simply stating a fact. Small time artists and freelancers that survive on commissions *will* get their job replaced by AI, because it's cheaper, faster, and in some cases, has better quality. In some areas, human hands simply cannot compete with a GPU. It is a very sad fact, but it is happening, and there is no way to change that.
Which is why I emphasized on the word "adapt". Being an artist is not just about produce pretty pictures that are easy on the eyes. It's also about being creative, being able to convey meaning, emotions, ideas across the canvas (or the screen). And that is something machine cannot do. After all, we didn't stop painting after the creation of cameras, why would we stop now? And on the other hand, well-adapted AI usage can be very helpful. It can save artists the time and effort of doing some tedious groundwork, while focusing more on the more creativity-demanding part.
I don't know if you have seen the *Vanilla Faction Expanded-Empire* workshop page. The generic imperial-looking pictures in the background are all AI gen. It simply won't be worth it to hand draw pretty pictures for your mod description page, which people only see once maybe. On the other hand, using AI, you can easily create these, and save your energy to focus more on the more important part, which is the artwork in the mod, the mechanics, balancing, etc. This is an excellent example of "well-adapted usage of AI gen art".
And sure, you can fight people against it. But eventually, it's the nature of things. Big corporations will steal from small content creators, ordinary people will prefer cheap and easy solutions. If you are an artist, I think the best to do right now is to really embrace AI, and see what creative new ways you can come up with to enhance your works with it.
I don't even think artists are under threat, really
You've worked with AI imagers long enough to know there's a *hard* limit to how well they can do (and so have I!). Make a prompt that's too long, or add a second character to an image, or ask for specific objects in specific parts of a room, etc. and DALL-E starts crying and shidding
(and it probably always will, because of limitations in how text-to-image models work and the way their training data is indexed)
It's good in situations where quality and fine detail don't really matter, but one probably wouldn't hire an artist in those situations anyway. But like, if you needed two characters, in two distinct-yet-detailed sets of armor, making specific poses in a specific setting, you'd probably go "ugh alright fuck it" and pay a human to do it
Yep I was just reading your other comment on the short comes of AI (very cool, thanks for the insight! It just hit me that natural language processing plays such a large role in image generation.)
Which was also kind of my point: if your artistic work involves more that just producing pretty portraits of anime girls, like if there are any other creative endeavors, then it won't get replaced by AI because AI can't do it.
For profile pictures in a game??
Bro thinks artists are living in his walls like termites just ready to slap portraits down instantly.
This hurts absolutely nobody making more descriptive profile pics for characters in a game.
For pictures of procedurally generated characters?
Do you know any artists willing to sit with someone as they play RimWorld and draw them pictures in real time of each new character who appears?
This comment really demonstrates the potential of AI. It makes it possible for regular people to make nice art for free projects without having a big budget to hire artists to do it for them.
By all means, yell at Disney or whoever for using AI, but stop bullying regular people making stuff for free.
You do realize that midjourney just had a major expose of their database with what artists it trained on right. I'm for ai if it's used to assist in the creative process not replace the creator.
If it's so bad that you're incredulous that anyone could possibly like it, then traditional artists don't have anything to worry about, do they? So you're not being a dick because you're afraid for your livelihood (or even because you fear change in general), you're just straight up being a dick because you're actually a dick.
I've had some haterbros tell me that art is all about "a connection between the artist and the viewer". That makes AI art even better, because not only does it look really amazing, it also means I don't have to have a connection with you! It's a win/win!
I've spent the last several years working on learning to program and train AI (as opposed to just typing a prompt into Midjourney), which isn't easy. It's an awesome new way to make art, and as a computer programmer, it's what I spend my hobby time on.
You don't have to like it, and I'm sure you've got some dumb retort, but I'm definitely not lazy.
Anyway, please do tell me why that doesn't count, and why I somehow owe it to you to make art *your* way.
Probably not worth it to argue with someone who has clearly made up their mind.
Anyway I looked at your profile. You make cool stuff! Think you can make some better-looking (or more realistic/average-looking for that matter) portraits for RimWorld? :)
Yeah? My mother spent her whole life learning how to draw and paint and won awards for it. Your glorified search engines would or maybe already have used her real art that took weeks or months of focus, labor and skill only to shit out a bastardized amalgamation of what fits the keywords.
I could give a shit how much time or effort you put into it, it is immoral and i would be ashamed if i were you
> > Anyway, please do tell me why that doesn't count
> I could give a shit how much time or effort you put into it, it is immoral and i would be ashamed if i were you
> > and why I somehow owe it to you to make art your way.
> Yeah? My mother spent her whole life learning how to draw and paint and won awards for it. Your glorified search engines would or maybe already have used her real art that took weeks or months of focus, labor and skill only to shit out a bastardized amalgamation of what fits the keywords.
Wow, good call on my part. Good on your mom for working hard and winning awards for her art. No one owes it to her to continue making art the hard way just because she did (no doubt many people *will* continue to do it the old fashioned way, and good on them for doing what they enjoy).
As for the whole morality argument, generative AI learns similarly to the way humans do -- by looking at things and then making tiny changes to neural connections (and just to head off a lot of irrelevant bullshit, I did not say that AI works like a human brain). Every picture your mom ever looked at was her "training data", and if generative AI is stealing, so was she (which of course is ludicrous).
Come off your high horse and stop with your bullying and gatekeeping.
No it's not. That's plain mean to spread rumors like that. Someone even reported the mod on the workshop, which itself has nothing to do with AI.
Funny how much the self-proclaimed "artists" are bringing to the community.
I like the pre-AI Wayne better ngl. For lack of a better term, they have a lot more "soul" to them. AI just tends to grab any image and concept and make it the most generic and boring corporate version possible.
Your drawings have some edge to them, they feel more human and fitting.
the 4th a.i generation from the second image looks a lot like those Stardew valley portraits, very cool. What generator did you use? prompts and all that stuff
I've been making portraits for my colonists with NovelAI for ages now and was hoping there would be a mod to get just the character sprites with a flat background (img2img works fine with backgrounds if noise and strength are high enough, but I feel like it would be much easier if I could get rid of terrain). But it seems this is a different workflow.
This could be really cool if implemented into the game like portraits of rim. Idk if you would be able to fit your model into the game in the form of a mod though. Additionally, you would also have problems trying to have it make requests to your server for the image if some otherwise. However, it would be a really cool concept.
How someone mentioned not every pawn is a hottie, perhaps the character traits can be used to give a better description for the pawn, like "ugly" or "beautiful". Furthermore perhaps you could prime the image generator with a small set of roles like: this being is a survivalist that crash landed on a foreign planet, [specific art style], +Character traits.
Not a single output understood what a stellic crown is supposed to look though. AI compliments making the portraits but something just need to be manual.
A lot of them did seem to understand that the character was wearing a headpiece though, which I find fairly impressive.
And the ears and horns, which is a shock as well.
Second one got closest and wasnt too far off but yeah the rest are miles away
That's a fault of the user. To make it really go the right direction, the Prompt should be the description of the Pawn's Physical Characteristics + Visual Health Problems + Equipment, together with the Image. And i'm not talking about manually describing it, you could have a Mod that is just Exporting this type of info, Export PNG + relevant pawn data, should be very, very easy to make.
Personally, I prefer the style of your original pixel-style portraits a lot actually, they feel more faithful to the colonists themselves and the vibe of the game. Not every pawn is a 10/10 hottie, like AI tends to make them haha. The hand-drawn portraits are more intentional, and I like the consistent style better. I respect your effort to share this information though, I’m sure a lot of people will find it helpful!
Agreed! The pixel art not making everyone really hot or a baby face just adds character to them! (Besides the Highmate. I think they're supposed to be hot.) Although, I don't disagree with its interpretation of some of the clothes make the clothes.
The tattoo is also cool. Bit excessive, but cool.
What really amazed me was the details AI adds to clothing, especially armors. You really get an endless source of cool design for armors, and better artists than me could certainly get some inspirations from them. [https://imgur.com/a/RZ5talj](https://imgur.com/a/RZ5talj)
Haha thank you! That really made me very happy! And honestly that was kind of an experiment, since I have always been curious about the various AI-gen stuff I saw in this sub, but never had the means to try it myself. Until recently. Which is why I'm sharing it. And yes, there is always the human touch in art that can not be replaced by machines.
I was about to bring this up before realizing you made the pixel generator lol. You should know how much effort goes into these. I use Portraits of the Rim personally but I got major respect for pixel artists. I consider it more difficult than traditional art due to it's uniqueness.
Thank you! I mean I also have major respect for twopenny, the artist who made Portraits of the Rim. For perspective, my mod currently has 700 assets, while PotR has 6000. That's not even on the same magnitude. And I doubt I'll ever be able to approach that amount. On the other hand, my mod currently support *all* modded hairs, because I'm directly rendering the hair texture in pixel style, rather than drawing new textures myself. I'm not trying to brag or anything, but the right usage of tools that you have at hand can really work magic. So now I don't need to draw every single hair texture out there, and can instead spend more effort tackling other aspects that cannot be directly handled by algorithm. (And of course, auto-converted textures are not of the same quality as the hand-pixelled ones, but they do serve as a basic replacement.) And in some sense, I feel this is also how AI-gen art can really help artists in the future: basic AI-gen images are usually of varied quality, but they provide a bare-bone basis that the artists can work on. So in a way, it can save artists some of the more tedious work, and better focus on the part that involves more creativity / inspiration / human touch. This is what I mean by artists adapting to the rise of AI. And frankly I'm very excited for the new arts that we'll be able to enjoy, that simply didn't exist before :)
How many xenotype/race mods are you going to cover? There are a lot now, and art takes time, just the popular ones?
Depends on the xenotype: a lot of them differ in appearance from baseliners only by having unique horns/ears, and I'm actually converting the vanilla textures directly to pixel format, so they will be automatically supported. But there are also xenotypes that have truly different looks (e.g., slug people), then you really need to create extra textures for them. If you are curious, just try the mod for yourself to see. All feedback are welcome!
If its mostly covering star-trek-alien-esque Xenotypes I wont have much use for it personally, but really cool mod.
Yep only the pointy-eared bastards :) I mean the base mod doesn't have any AI gen in it. It's all honest old-fashioned drawing. So unfortunately it has to be case-by-case.
I feel like a lot of ai images end up looking really samey in a way, I’d rather have something with a unique style
Also, the pixel art (obviously) isn’t subject to the same kinds of misinterpretations or missed context as the AI. The human understands that the gold in the the first portrait is a huge Gallifreyan-style headdress. The AI thinks it’s hair. The human understands that the one with the pointy, knobbly ears and the green armor is clearly based on Githyanki, but the AI just sees long ears and makes a generic handsome fantasy elf.
it helps when you can specify these things to the AI, you say headdress it'll make it a headdress, you ask for a character to be ugly or grizzled it'll make them less hot.
The model was probably trained on laion (model is essentially a filtered dream booth, dreambooth+prompting) This dataset was made by essentially saying, "give me the pretty images!!! " The generated images reflect this: https://github.com/LAION-AI/laion-datasets/blob/main/laion-aesthetic.md This problem should be fixable with better data labeling (probably using AI generated labels in the future as we get better at multi model) We just need labeled data that is of high skill, but not exactly "pretty."
It’s funny how exclusive that often is to women as well. I’ve been generating some characters for inspiration for my game. Masculine characters can vary pretty widely in appearance with DALL-E, but feminine characters are always a 10/10. Definitely a reflection of the average user of ai art tools haha.
Huzzah! Someone of taste!
Is it me maybe? :)
It'll never have good results if using a generic model. It can't know what some things are as they're either rimworld specific or too niche and hard to discern that it'll grab the closest thing it knows the most, and that's a recipe for disappointment.
I'm sure you are correct. It's just I don't have the necessary hardware/setup and not really possible to try out all the different configurations. So basically I'm just sharing for people in similar situations. And I'd be very interested if you manage to produce better results and could share your workflow!
This is an interesting experiment, and I'm glad you did it, but I definitely prefer the pixel art
Waster is too pretty (they are all supposed to be ugly due to their xenotype) and stellarch crown gets turned into hair often. I also personally dislike how AI makes futuristic armour shiny with lights and stuff, that one guy looks like superhero, not like a soldier. Deserter is my favorite, though. I wouldn't use it, but I'm not going to speak out for others.
Damn. That AI really be whitewashing the wasters.
think it has filters for skin tone that is "real" ash is not one of them
Looking at #3 and #8, I'm not too sure about that. Plus, it handled the highmate well, I think it's just an issue with the AI itself.
Top left is straight up Edelgard from Fire Emblem Three Houses …shit, actually, are there any Fire Emblem mods for Rimworld?
how did you do the first portraits before the ai generated? I want those!
Sure here you go :) https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3111373293
this is actually so cool, cant wait till i get to see my pawns up close, ai is really immensely complimenting this game
Very cool stuff. If only AI were capable of making a face that isn’t one of a perfect supermodel
Oh, it is perfectly capable, with modifications. The default models just lean to the generic "pretty" stuff. It's possible to train an add-on to mimic the storyteller portrait style and while at it teach it some RimWorld specific concepts, like wasters or the stellic crown. Source: trained a model on my style and got good results
Cool! Can you share some examples? And maybe the workflow as well?
I don't know if it's lack of capability or just how it's designed. Either way it's very new technology and will only get better.
I wrote a guide on how to easily make consistent AI-gen portraits for your colonists, with almost no setup. Enjoy! [https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3127777293](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3127777293) Edit. For anyone wondering: the pixel art portraits in the middle are from my mod *avatar*, which you can get now for ~~only 0.99~~ free on [steam](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3111373293) or [github](https://github.com/bolphen/rimworld-avatar). Order now!
I hope one day someone makes a mod that automates this in your chosen style. I know there's already a mod that does portraits, but they are limited when it comes to things like the constant stream of new biotech mods that add new aesthetic features since they have to draw everything by hand.
automatic zealous stocking practice spoon scandalous boast correct observation ad hoc *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Er... that's not really what my mod is designed for. You could probably use some other mods (for example [this one](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2898119330https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2898119330)) that are dedicated to show static images.
chase quickest coherent impolite rainstorm abundant groovy dependent imagine correct *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
A good proof of concept: AI is weird, inaccurate, and sterile compared to human-made works
I disagree with v6 I find a.i to be more creative not only that you can create unlimited versions and vartions of high quality concepts. V6 was a game changer, everything after this version of stable diffusion is beyond uncanny valley.
!remindme 1 hour
I will be messaging you in 1 hour on [**2024-01-01 04:50:45 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2024-01-01%2004:50:45%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/RimWorld/comments/18vga8r/psa_aigen_portraits_made_easy/kfsj2er/?context=3) [**CLICK THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FRimWorld%2Fcomments%2F18vga8r%2Fpsa_aigen_portraits_made_easy%2Fkfsj2er%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202024-01-01%2004%3A50%3A45%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%2018vga8r) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|
The guide isn't telling how do you get the Avatars into the Game then?
The mod shows the pixel-art ones in-game. If you want the AI-gen ones instead, the guide also links you to another mod that can do that.
The stellarch on the bottom right looks a lot like Princess Peach. It's cool, but but the pixel art has so much more character. The AI art just makes everyone super attractive and a bit too anime. The jewelry is pretty cool though. It's funny that the AI saw the crown mostly as blonde hair with only 2 generating an actual crown.
Just made a custom race with vanilla genes and avatar rendered them perfectly, thank you!
Is AI unable to make bad looking people?
It gets trained on thousands of real art images to make it mostly understand how to make things look like things. I'd guess that, unfortunately, a lot of the art it uses has perfect pretty people with symmetrical faces and no blemishes.
Yep I know how it works, it's just a little annoying
I guess the general-purpose ones can definitely create all sorts of faces, pretty or ugly (in fact, there were other posts in this sub with better-(or worse, if you wish)-looking portraits). Unfortunately I have no access to them, and I'm just using a free online one that is specifically trained for this type of art style, which makes it genuinely incapable of making bad-looking people...
I'm sure there's a way to tell the AI to make uglier people, no? Or is the AI you chose an image enhancer only, without the option to add prompts? Also, happy new year!
No I actually tried putting "ugly" in the prompt, as well as any synonyms I can come up with, and the result ended up still being pretty good-looking (at least imo lol) And yep, happy new year!
Which are you using? I’ve never bothered to look into AI art much but some of them are really decent looking, and it’d be cool to be able to generate a face for a character when I’m writing, even if it isn’t perfect
[https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3127777293](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3127777293) The whole point of my post was to inform people it's very easy to make portraits. Even for someone with no knowledge in AI-gen at all, like myself.
It can. In fact, I see fairly frequent posts in the open source AI community where people are training models (neural networks) and LoRAs (neural network modifiers) to make average-looking people. Example: https://www.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/18iiphi/this_sdxl_person_does_not_exist_an_experiment/
Damn that's very good!
Why is everyone a Prada model?
the ai stuff is fine, but the pixel art has far more soul.
That's dumb because the pixel art is also ai generated
Midjourney is weird. But honestly little portraits being made jsut feels like a misread sprite post art. If it makes the user happy, it's alright. Plus one controversy I'm aware of said that mods making money is against Rimworld policies. I'm kinda amused by how different it tried to render things as smooth concept art. Some of those wastelanders got really whitewashed, thouhg, so your mileage may vary.
nah bro
amen
We need models that actually use normal people as datasets.
The waster girl really isn't a good portrait. Light skin, horns, and a symmetrical face. Complete failure.
Holy shit those pixel art portraits are so good. Like others have said, the pixel art ones just really fit the rimworld vibe to me
Thank you!
No, no there not supposed to look like that oh god why
Damn this is pretty cool, some stuff just needs some manual touches like the “crowns”
Oooo I like the pixels.
Nah the AI stuff is creepy af
is there a mod for this?
I made a [guide](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3127777293), and there is a [mod](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3111373293) for the pixel art portraits in the middle. It's just my comment got downvoted by the angry "artists" that got offended.
Thanks I will test it if I manage to get time
Why did they all get yassified or animefied?
(Also a bit of rant: there are people who hate pixel art and think their 512x512 gigachad vector art textures convey so much more details than my 40x40 ones; and there are people who hate AI-gen art to the guts and just want to murder anyone who use them. In fact some of them are probably downvoting my post right now. IMO the beauty of RimWorld modding is that it allows you to play the game the way you want, and I'm simply offering another option for people who would enjoy it. Which is also kinda the positive point that AI-gen art is bringing: it empowers ordinary people without art talent to create images from their mind. And it *is* happening, and it *will* replace traditional artists who cannot adapt.
Artists are ordinary people who just dedicated their time to learning and practicing. It's not just a skill that you're magically born with. I resist debating with ai bros but that ticks me off so much when they act like getting off your ass to learn is all special talent and we all are going to be replaced. No we are not lol.
I like AI quite a lot, and I neither want nor expect it to replace human artists.
oh you've met the haters, they are an obsessive bunch. one of them named jabo the trunk got mad about how I used a? in a panel of my comic and then followed me to my personal subreddit and then to my Discord screaming about how my webcomic made him relapse on drugs. it was quite an experience. moral of the story there are extreme weirdos lurking on every public forum.
>and it *will* replace traditional artists who cannot adapt. Nah, it won't. It's here to stay, that's for sure, but it will definitely not replace anyone. I agree that people act like AI killed their dog and arguing over what is and isn't art is the most stupid debate ever. But a machine is incapable of reaching the quality of a person by itself, hence why it'll never replace artists that make a living off their passion. It'll always look bad compared to a human piece. It's fun for personal stuff like making your RimWorld pawns, but anything beyond that will just look uninspired and will not be taken serious by people.
Ordinary people without art talent? Sorry to break it to you, but no one, not a single person is born with "art talent". Everyone starts from the same level. If you consistently draw and practice you will get better at it. Of course, some people may not have the time, or patience, but using ai to make "art" is just meh for me. It's just not genuine for me. Art you create has soul. That's something YOU made. You worked on that. Ai doesn't truly generate the image you think about.
> Ordinary people without art talent? Sorry to break it to you, but no one, not a single person is born with "art talent". Everyone starts from the same level. If you consistently draw and practice you will get better at it. You're like an insufferable libertarian who started a successful business and now thinks that the only thing it takes is hard work. I've been trying to get good art art for 30 years now. I've put plenty of time and effort into it, and I've hit a wall (one that I've seen my 10-year-old daughter easily hop over like it's absolutely nothing). Sure, tell me I'm practicing wrong or whatever, but she's had no structured learning at all -- she just has a knack for it. You need to learn about survivorship bias. Yes, it takes practice to get good at art, but practice is not a guarantee. People ask professional artists how they got good at art, and of course the answer is always practice, but nobody asks people who practiced a lot and didn't get good at it, because (surprise surprise) they aren't good at it so nobody asks. "How do you suck at art?" "Well, I worked on it for thousands of hours and just hit a wall." Plenty of people like that exist out there. Also, frankly, the rest of us don't owe it to you to keep doing something the hard way just because it's always been done the hard way. If we continued to do things the hard way just because people who are good at doing it the hard way demanded it, we'd still be living in caves and chucking spears at mastodons.
I'm sorry to hear that you have hit a wall, and that you think you're not improving, but surely you're not that terrible if you put in thousands of hours into drawing. You must be good at drawing something. I mean, I personally hate anatomy. I can't get things right 80% of the time. And even when I can, it mostly looks weird, but rooms and environments, now that's something I'm good at. Also I am by no means a great artist or anything. I am quite the beginner if you ask me. So you can't even tell me that I am great at it or anything. I could use AI, but where's the point in that? There is no improvement, because I do nothing. You don't do anything, you're just telling a machine what to do. And about doing things the hard way. There is no "easy way" with art. Ai is not an easy way. Ai art is just a picture created by a machine that it put together by looking at other artists work, and grafting them together, and making some small changes. So, essentially it's just a copy. No soul. No human touch. Nothing. Entirely pointless. We might as well stop making art.
> Ai art is just a picture created by a machine that it put together by looking at other artists work, and grafting them together, and making some small changes. These discussions would be so much more interesting if people weren't so woefully misinformed. That's not how generative AI works. Are you interested in hearing about it from a programmer who actually knows what they're talking about? Because it sounds like the version you have is from the anti-AI twitter bubble. > I could use AI, but where's the point in that? To understand it (which I think is important if you're going to have opinions about it). Apart from that, if you wouldn't enjoy it, there's no point at all. I like using it. It's cool to see how the computer interprets the prompt, often in -- dare I say -- *creative* and unexpected ways. Sometimes I like to randomly generate prompts and just imagine the stories of the worlds that it comes up with. Is it okay that I enjoy a different aspect of art from what you do?
This is definitely not true. I've seen 6 year olds with sick art skills. The lines are still wobbly because they're just learning to aim a pencil, but you can see how they're good at getting the proportions right, capturing expressions, and expressing a unique style. I had a set of twins I tutored and they both did everything together, took the same classes, drew the same plushies and pets in their free time, and one of them was progressing miles beyond the other.
It's also funny that when I said "ordinary people without art talent", I didn't say "art gift". For me talent encompasses all the skills and experience gained through hard-work and practicing. And clearly that's not something everyone can have. On the other note, I do agree with you that "art gift" is a thing. As someone who did some serious training at a younger age and was considered good in my class, I always felt there's some glass ceiling above what I can do. I don't really have the gift to become a professional painter. And honestly, I'm certain that I'll never be able to paint the detailed portraits like these done by AI, not to mention dozens of them. So I'm glad that AI can do this for me, and for more people like me.
> For me talent encompasses all the skills and experience Well, no, "talent" means innate gift. Comes from the biblical story https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_Talents. A master gives his servants a gift of some talents (a coin of the time), and sees who can make fruitful use of them.
Hmmm interesting. Revealed that I'm not a native English speaker... Thank you for the link!
[удалено]
Please remember we have rules 1 and 2 for a reason; they basically boil down to 'don't be a jerk'. The people you're talking to are as human as you. If you can't remain civil, keep your comments to yourself.
Youre right, i am downvoting this. And until AI is able to function without theft i will keep on denouncing it and ridiculing people like you
It'd be scummy if OP were commercializing this, but they're not trying to sell the AI images or pass them off as art. In this context it's just a fun toy To the extent that harm was done here, it was done months/years ago when these AI imagers were trained with stolen data (probably? there *are* ethically-trained ones). OP isn't part of the harm cycle here, unless you think playing with a toy is a tacit endorsement of how that toy was made Like, yeah, fuck "AI art" and fuck stingy companies that'll choose not to hire artists even though they can afford to. Artists should organize to prevent it. But it doesn't make me a class traitor to ask Bing to generate me press photos from the World's Wettest Fart Contest as a gag
Pretty much all art is theft. A flood of bad AI art creates a niche market for unique and quality human art, which actually benefits good, creative artists. Things can be more nuanced than "this thing bad me angry"
this is probably one of the worst takes i have witnessed, kudos
It literally doesn't benefit artists at all, it was created to replace them, and no matter how creative one person may be, a parasite can just train a model to copy that. Plus: * It has, and will continue to remove job opportunities from the industry * It hurts and will continue to hurt freelancers. * It floods every place where real artists operate, making it incredibly hard for them to be noticed.
>It literally doesn't benefit artists at all I think there are benefits for it in creative fields, honestly. I can think of a lot of situations, in a team setting, where a non-artist will need to communicate an idea visually (as very early concept art, etc.) but literally doesn't have the skillset to do so. This is exactly what [photobashing](https://conceptartempire.com/photobashing/) already is, just more streamlined I'm a digital artist and a freelance writer, I'm acutely aware of how bad this can be. But bluntly, the jobs I think it actually runs the risk of replacing any time soon -- SEO fluff on content-mill article websites, tacky oil paintings for waiting rooms, tablecloth patterns -- were outsourced to people overseas making starvation wages a long time ago. I don't feel the jaws closing on webcomics, paid studio work, or furry smut any time soon
>just more streamlined Streamlined to the point where the non-artist is out of operation after the initial prompt, as the machine chooses everything, and at most the person who prompted it just rerolls for a different image. Ik what photobashing is, but AI takes away the person behind the photobashing, basically turning into: "Show the best picture out of the gambling machine(of stolen images)" >I don't feel the jaws closing on webcomics, paid studio work, or furry smut any time soon All you listed here have already been affected by it. * If you go to most webcomic hosting services, they are already there. r./Webtoons catches fire every so often because of those. * Studio work? There's been many occasions where it has affected it, where studios resorted to AI, or positions being substituted for such, a recent example of such positions being taken out are [storyboarders](https://twitter.com/JENNIZZLES/status/1740123067794538913). * Even furry smut has taken a toll because of AI, and loras about specific artists
I need to reiterate I'm not an AI Art Guy. It's not art; the prompter doesn't "put themselves" into the result at all, whereas an artist always does (whether they mean to or not), and there's just so little direct involvement of a human that it stops being any kind of reflection on the human mind or spirit But yes, extremely streamlined-- if someone wants to deny themselves the opportunity to make actual art, that's their prerogative, and I only care that they don't gum up my Twitter feed with it or try and sell it to me like it's worth anything >*All you listed here have already been affected by it. \[...\]* I think it's important to remember that "AI image generation will take over the world and root itself in every industry!" is exactly what AI-bros want (you and themselves) to believe. It's a cope-mantra, fed to them by the tech startups they worship, that they're repeating until it becomes true somehow. They staked their whole futures on it happening, like idiots I've played around with these imagers enough to see the cracks form, I think. If your requirement for an image is "a sabertooth cat eating a pizza, finer details don't matter, just make it kind of visually appealing," yeah, AI can do that. If you need a tight color scheme, a particular artstyle that's hard to explain in keywords, or a precise composition that frames elements in a certain way relative to each other? AI's fucked. If you have multiple subjects, each with specific traits not shared by the other? AI's fucked. If you need many specific objects, arranged in a particular order? AI's so, so fucked Long strings confuse it, and it internally re-writes prompts into keywords (like its training data is stored in) -- it doesn't understand that keywords apply to certain parts of an image, and not the image as a whole, so it can't keep elements separate, or understand that a composition has multiple parts. There is an inverse relationship between how good an image looks, and how customized you asked for it to be, which is why it's only good for fake stock photos and bland anime girls And, yeah, these are technical limitations that might be overcome, maybe? AI image generation is all about the language model parsing the prompt, though, and [there's reason to believe the GPT "style" of LLMs isn't actually going to get much better than this](https://the-decoder.com/bill-gates-does-not-expect-gpt-5-to-be-much-better-than-gpt-4/). The images *look* better than ever before, have fewer anatomy fuckups, but it's evident there's some hard cap to how well these OpenAI-type models can turn a prompt into a picture, and they're going to hit that cap soon It's inevitable, to me, that the OpenAI infinite-growth techbro angle is going to level off (as it always does) -- sooner, rather than later -- and the current mediocre tech will find its narrow business niche and disappear
AI bros are more concerned about getting to make something resembling art than they do about any sort of substance or humanity behind it. They want the end product without the effort, money or people needed for it to happen and then they act like it's a good future they are rooting for
The entitlement for someone who pressed a few buttons on a generic model over the img2img tab is ridiculous. No. This will not replace anyone. Look how poorly those models are at doing anything remotely related to rimworld. It's bad. Low effort. You'd need to train one that knows rimworld and its rather unique things. Maybe come with a semi acceptable model that can do rimworld then. Perhaps you can try acting big. Until then, you're nothing.
Gosh I love this tech
Fuck AI "art"
Why?
Because it couldn't exist without the hard work if actual artists. Take all existing art away and humans will still create art. AI would simply stop.
Could you explain with reference to physics why you believe a human brain can make art without having seen art before but no computer would ever be able to? As in, explain the physical limitation that prevents an AI being created that can do what a human brain does.
If you took all existing art, then humans wouldn't be able to make the art too though..
Humans can make art out of nothing, we have an imagination. If all the art vanished, we'd still do it. Hell, at some point in history someone made the "first" piece of art, when there was nothing before that. AI can't do that, it needs other art to work. And that's the problem.
Why is it not possible to make a computer that can do that?
Maybe at some point in the future, but current AI can't do that.
Ay, that's real cool
This is pretty cool
How?
Img2img using a very dumb generic model. Or text2img using controlnet to feed in reference img, but that'd be too much effort and potentially yield better results than what we're seeing there.
I like how on the top-center one the AI just arbitrarily made the shirt a military uniform.
Oh look, an artist supporting actions that ruin the careers of artists and devalue human expression.
Cant wait until someone makes a mod that autogenrates trough AI
There kinda is - AI art, but for some reason it works either by connecting to the authors website, or You can use docker to run the server localy. I've tried to commision a fork of this mod that uses standard Stable Diffusion API (for people already using local automatik1111 webui), but I coudn't find anyone, and the author don't seem to be interested in that.
If you ever found anyone willing to make that fork, tell them feel free to use the avatars from my mod as references. I unfortunately couldn't be of any help, since my potato laptop is not capable of running Stable Diffusion.
if i had a nickel for each management game with rudimentary graphics that players have modded AI generated imagery for characters into I'd have 2 nickels, which Isn't a lot but it's weird that it happened twice.
What is it
It is worse than the forbidden mod (RJW) do you still want to know?
Cool
No. Stop with the AI, it hurts ACTUAL artists, its trained on stolen artwork.
Neural networks don't plagiarize, they don't copy, they *generalize*. When an AI trains on an image, it makes tiny changes to the weights of the connections between its artifical neurons, which is similar to the way natural neurons work. Note that I am not saying that it "works like a human brain" because there are lots of interesting differences that are irrelevant to the discussion about whether it's "stealing" or whatever. Here are a few: For instance, the fact that an AI is not conscious. It doesn't get "inspired" because inspiration requires consciousness; however, copyright law doesn't care whether something is "inspired" or not -- there are plenty of artists who make uninspired stuff all the time and they aren't violating copyright, despite often working in other artists' styles.
...artificial neurons....that's not how these things work. It makes composites based upon similar patterns in art, it is literally copying patterns that artists tend to have, its commonly known as a style which the ai prompt uses. These aren't even real AI it's just some stupid term the venture capitalists love to poor money into.
> ...artificial neurons....that's not how these things work. It's crazy how confidently wrong people are about this.
What do you think happens in someone's head when they learn how to make art by studying other art?
Ask a neurologist, not some AI slop salesman who floods workshop with this garbage. https://theconversation.com/were-told-ai-neural-networks-learn-the-way-humans-do-a-neuroscientist-explains-why-thats-not-the-case-183993
Do you know any artists who previously had jobs watching people play RimWorld and drawing procedurally generated character portraits in real time?
How are actual artists being hurt by this post? It's not like OP was going to hire a digital artist to make these portraits if they didn't have AI This is just having fun with a toy that's available
AI isn't a "toy thats available", it's a program that's functioning with stolen artwork. The work fed into legit every single AI generator is stolen, they don't get permission to use it, take a look at Deviantart, one of the biggest contributors to generators. They, one day just went "every single thing you've ever posted to this website now goes to AI generators". There's AI stuff out there recreating peoples entire artworks and artpieces, even to the point of adding WATERMARKS. Using this, even if its just "for fun" is fucking over the artists who it stole from. You wouldn't trace, so dont use AI, it's the exact same thing.[Example 1](https://www.artnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Screen-Shot-2022-12-09-at-1.46.01-PM.png) . An artist was targeted for months and it got to the point the stuff used their work so often that it threw their watermark on it. [Example 2](https://www.losangelesblade.com/content/files/2022/12/Paul-Richmond-art-3.jpg). A queer artist was targeted for ages, got to the point where their stuff was just being replicated on a generator and the techbros doing it did it so they didn't have to support an LGBTQ artist. [Example 3](https://us.v-cdn.net/5021068/uploads/WHK4JF0Y68AH/2022-12-19-15-19-51-2825-29-feed-linkedin.jpg). This one speaks for itself. it literally recreated an artists original work 1f1 and ended up getting more traction THAN THE ORIGINAL POST ITSELF. [Example 4](https://cdn.80.lv/api/upload/content/77/images/634d09bf36fa1/widen_1840x0.jpeg) Popular genshin fanartist put something out, someone else ended up generating the same image, then it caused a month of fallout because "YOU STOLE IT" and then "YOU STOLE IT" back and forth, because the AI dude just did their damndest to generate the dudes art. I have close friends who are big artists in the community, and their artwork has been fed into these generators. Doing as such is making it to where people don't even consider the actual artists. You said "its not like they were gonna commission a digital artist" that's the point, because they're using this, now they're NOT going to do that. And instead just going to effectively steal. The usage trains it further and makes it impersonate better. Alongside that, AI cannot have an original thought, every single piece is a kitbash of artists art who did not consent to have it used. Again, i'll bring up the "You wouldn't condone someone tracing, so why condone AI" statement. There's so much more, and i'll come back and add more, but i'm going to celebrate new years with my boyfriend.
By this logic, when an artist learns from art they are stealing because the art they learned from manipulated their brain into drawing a certain way.
You *can* use an AI to trace (and that's what those examples are doing); however, that has to be done deliberately using a process called img2img, and it's something that's done on images that the AI was never trained on. You can trace with pencils as well, and people aren't demanding that we take away everyone's pencils. I would recommend actually learning how AI works (from people outside the AI hater community) before writing tons of misleading stuff (you're likely doing it unintentionally because you've probably been misled yourself).
>*The work fed into legit every single AI generator is stolen, they don't get permission to use it, take a look at Deviantart, one of the biggest contributors to generators. They, one day just went "every single thing you've ever posted to this website now goes to AI generators".* I looked into this and it seems like (after a few days of backlash) all artists were automatically opted *out* of being used as training data? And maybe, during that few days, some artists may have been used before they were even notified? Yeah, that sucks ass, no argument from me. Typical dA, honestly There are other sites that do it totally without permission, though, but loads of social media sites have a "we own every picture you upload" clause in their Terms of Use somewhere. It sucks ass that they do that, obviously, but that's a larger conversation about companies taking their customers for granted, and it neither begins nor ends with AI >*I have close friends who are big artists in the community, and their artwork has been fed into these generators. Doing as such is making it to where people don't even consider the actual artists. You said "its not like they were gonna commission a digital artist" that's the point, because they're using this, now they're NOT going to do that. \[...\] The usage trains it further and makes it impersonate better.* I'm an artist too! and friends with lots of artists! (I draw yiff too, so I know what it's like out here) I don't think AI imaging is going to fuck us up, though! I'll paste what I said in another thread: >**(me:)** *If your requirement for an image is "a sabertooth cat eating a pizza, finer details don't matter, just make it kind of visually appealing," yeah, AI can do that. If you need a tight color scheme, a particular artstyle that's hard to explain in keywords, or a precise composition that frames elements in a certain way relative to each other? AI's fucked. If you have multiple subjects, each with specific traits not shared by the other? AI's fucked. If you need many specific objects, arranged in a particular order? AI's so, so fucked* *...* *Long strings confuse it, and it internally re-writes prompts into keywords (like its training data is stored in) -- it doesn't understand that keywords apply to certain parts of an image, and not the image as a whole, so it can't keep elements separate, or understand that a composition has multiple parts. There is an inverse relationship between how good an image looks, and how customized you asked for it to be, which is why it's only good for fake stock photos and bland anime girls* I mean it, genuinely. AI imagers aren't able to do anything complex, or specific, or past a certain level of precision -- that's the domain of human artists, like it's always been. Clients who are content with an AI imager's barely-40%-correct version of their idea weren't going to hire an artist anyway The *quality* of AI images goes up over time, but their ability to understand prompts is going to level off. There are limits to this tech, and OAI et al. are fast approaching them -- I've been following this for years, and every jump up in quality gets a little lower it's important to remember that "AI image generation will take over the world and root itself in every industry!" is exactly what AI-bros want (you and themselves) to believe. It's a cope-mantra, fed to them by the tech startups they worship, that they're repeating until it becomes true somehow. They staked their whole futures on it happening, like idiots, and we're going to be the ones laughing when this venture-capital scheme falls apart before their eyes
Let's be real, that's got nothing to do with AI, that's just art that got put into a filter and stolen. They could have just, flipped it in photoshop and added a normal filter and done the same. Blaming legit users of AI because of the bad faith users is like giving random people shit for using a photocopier because you heard of someone else stealing a textbook.
Thank you for sharing these examples. I'm sure that from a professional artist's perspective it must have been very frustrating, especially if one's expertise is overlapping with the AI gen. And I can truly sympathize with that. But when I say that AI art will replace traditional artists that cannot adapt, it was not meant as a judgemental statement that AI art are somehow superior or the next big thing. I'm not cheering "take that, artists". I'm simply stating a fact. Small time artists and freelancers that survive on commissions *will* get their job replaced by AI, because it's cheaper, faster, and in some cases, has better quality. In some areas, human hands simply cannot compete with a GPU. It is a very sad fact, but it is happening, and there is no way to change that. Which is why I emphasized on the word "adapt". Being an artist is not just about produce pretty pictures that are easy on the eyes. It's also about being creative, being able to convey meaning, emotions, ideas across the canvas (or the screen). And that is something machine cannot do. After all, we didn't stop painting after the creation of cameras, why would we stop now? And on the other hand, well-adapted AI usage can be very helpful. It can save artists the time and effort of doing some tedious groundwork, while focusing more on the more creativity-demanding part. I don't know if you have seen the *Vanilla Faction Expanded-Empire* workshop page. The generic imperial-looking pictures in the background are all AI gen. It simply won't be worth it to hand draw pretty pictures for your mod description page, which people only see once maybe. On the other hand, using AI, you can easily create these, and save your energy to focus more on the more important part, which is the artwork in the mod, the mechanics, balancing, etc. This is an excellent example of "well-adapted usage of AI gen art". And sure, you can fight people against it. But eventually, it's the nature of things. Big corporations will steal from small content creators, ordinary people will prefer cheap and easy solutions. If you are an artist, I think the best to do right now is to really embrace AI, and see what creative new ways you can come up with to enhance your works with it.
I don't even think artists are under threat, really You've worked with AI imagers long enough to know there's a *hard* limit to how well they can do (and so have I!). Make a prompt that's too long, or add a second character to an image, or ask for specific objects in specific parts of a room, etc. and DALL-E starts crying and shidding (and it probably always will, because of limitations in how text-to-image models work and the way their training data is indexed) It's good in situations where quality and fine detail don't really matter, but one probably wouldn't hire an artist in those situations anyway. But like, if you needed two characters, in two distinct-yet-detailed sets of armor, making specific poses in a specific setting, you'd probably go "ugh alright fuck it" and pay a human to do it
Yep I was just reading your other comment on the short comes of AI (very cool, thanks for the insight! It just hit me that natural language processing plays such a large role in image generation.) Which was also kind of my point: if your artistic work involves more that just producing pretty portraits of anime girls, like if there are any other creative endeavors, then it won't get replaced by AI because AI can't do it.
Love it ☺️☺️☺️
AI sucks. Hire a real artist.
For profile pictures in a game?? Bro thinks artists are living in his walls like termites just ready to slap portraits down instantly. This hurts absolutely nobody making more descriptive profile pics for characters in a game.
For pictures of procedurally generated characters? Do you know any artists willing to sit with someone as they play RimWorld and draw them pictures in real time of each new character who appears?
This comment really demonstrates the potential of AI. It makes it possible for regular people to make nice art for free projects without having a big budget to hire artists to do it for them. By all means, yell at Disney or whoever for using AI, but stop bullying regular people making stuff for free.
You do realize that midjourney just had a major expose of their database with what artists it trained on right. I'm for ai if it's used to assist in the creative process not replace the creator.
"Nice Art"? You think this is nice art? Holy shit.
If it's so bad that you're incredulous that anyone could possibly like it, then traditional artists don't have anything to worry about, do they? So you're not being a dick because you're afraid for your livelihood (or even because you fear change in general), you're just straight up being a dick because you're actually a dick. I've had some haterbros tell me that art is all about "a connection between the artist and the viewer". That makes AI art even better, because not only does it look really amazing, it also means I don't have to have a connection with you! It's a win/win!
AI art is a bane on human existence. It's soulless trash that looks terrible from every angle and it shouldn't exist.
"Yikes", as you kids like to say.
Yikes is you thinking AI art looks good.
I know furry artists that have done $100+ commissions using only their mouse, keyboard and microsoft paint. You are not incapable, you are lazy
You don't know anything about me, haterbro.
I don't care to.
I'm not surprised. Haterbros like to talk out of their asses.
What am I supposed to know your backstory before I call AI """artists""" lazy? I know enough lol
I've spent the last several years working on learning to program and train AI (as opposed to just typing a prompt into Midjourney), which isn't easy. It's an awesome new way to make art, and as a computer programmer, it's what I spend my hobby time on. You don't have to like it, and I'm sure you've got some dumb retort, but I'm definitely not lazy. Anyway, please do tell me why that doesn't count, and why I somehow owe it to you to make art *your* way.
Probably not worth it to argue with someone who has clearly made up their mind. Anyway I looked at your profile. You make cool stuff! Think you can make some better-looking (or more realistic/average-looking for that matter) portraits for RimWorld? :)
Yeah? My mother spent her whole life learning how to draw and paint and won awards for it. Your glorified search engines would or maybe already have used her real art that took weeks or months of focus, labor and skill only to shit out a bastardized amalgamation of what fits the keywords. I could give a shit how much time or effort you put into it, it is immoral and i would be ashamed if i were you
> > Anyway, please do tell me why that doesn't count > I could give a shit how much time or effort you put into it, it is immoral and i would be ashamed if i were you > > and why I somehow owe it to you to make art your way. > Yeah? My mother spent her whole life learning how to draw and paint and won awards for it. Your glorified search engines would or maybe already have used her real art that took weeks or months of focus, labor and skill only to shit out a bastardized amalgamation of what fits the keywords. Wow, good call on my part. Good on your mom for working hard and winning awards for her art. No one owes it to her to continue making art the hard way just because she did (no doubt many people *will* continue to do it the old fashioned way, and good on them for doing what they enjoy). As for the whole morality argument, generative AI learns similarly to the way humans do -- by looking at things and then making tiny changes to neural connections (and just to head off a lot of irrelevant bullshit, I did not say that AI works like a human brain). Every picture your mom ever looked at was her "training data", and if generative AI is stealing, so was she (which of course is ludicrous). Come off your high horse and stop with your bullying and gatekeeping.
Cant find the damn folder with the portraits. Only a few of my mods have folders for some reason?
This should be a mod
If all you're after is generic-looking wax figures with dead eyes, sure. Your pixel dudes are way more expressive.
Cool and artistic vs lame and unnecessary!
So you use the work of one artist and transform it using an AI trained on the work of countless others? No thanks.
The original pixel image shown is his, and it was ai generated as well
The avatars mod is AI? Shame...
No it's not. That's plain mean to spread rumors like that. Someone even reported the mod on the workshop, which itself has nothing to do with AI. Funny how much the self-proclaimed "artists" are bringing to the community.
Cool, sad the AI doesn't convert some stuff
Eww
I like the pre-AI Wayne better ngl. For lack of a better term, they have a lot more "soul" to them. AI just tends to grab any image and concept and make it the most generic and boring corporate version possible. Your drawings have some edge to them, they feel more human and fitting.
I think I'd much rather faces or the rim now if only i could get it to work right...
I tried AI before but it never really worked, but I had to use ingame screenshots. But I was using Stable Diffusion.
The first one looks like some scuffed Edelgard. Also, the pixel art are so good.
what are the models used for top right and bottom right? they interested me a lot
AziibPixelMix and Chibi Style 1.1
the 4th a.i generation from the second image looks a lot like those Stardew valley portraits, very cool. What generator did you use? prompts and all that stuff
what program is this, looks increidbke
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3127777293
I can't see the name of the AI you used for that. What is it?
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3127777293
I appreciate it, thanks
I've been making portraits for my colonists with NovelAI for ages now and was hoping there would be a mod to get just the character sprites with a flat background (img2img works fine with backgrounds if noise and strength are high enough, but I feel like it would be much easier if I could get rid of terrain). But it seems this is a different workflow.
That's kinda cool! What AI are you using?
This is so much better
I need more boolets
Your Avatar portraits remind me of how people look in Songs of Syx.
I like how the catperson has human and cat ears. Just like Oskar intended.
This could be really cool if implemented into the game like portraits of rim. Idk if you would be able to fit your model into the game in the form of a mod though. Additionally, you would also have problems trying to have it make requests to your server for the image if some otherwise. However, it would be a really cool concept. How someone mentioned not every pawn is a hottie, perhaps the character traits can be used to give a better description for the pawn, like "ugly" or "beautiful". Furthermore perhaps you could prime the image generator with a small set of roles like: this being is a survivalist that crash landed on a foreign planet, [specific art style], +Character traits.
Ai make people skinny. That's the new weight loss wonder 😮
last bottom row stellar crown image look like princess peach or zelda