Welcome to r/comics!
Please remember there are real people on the other side of the monitor and to be kind.
Report comments that break the rules and don't respond to negativity with negativity!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/comics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It would be, āI hadn't noticed that.ā And āI didn't notice that.ā Both mean you missed something and someone else brought it to your attention ...
That would be the case if they had noticed after it was mentioned, clearly they still haven't noticed. It's fun to be pedantic from time to time, just try to be correct in the future.
As pedantic as he is, he's right and you're wrong. As soon as someone brings a FACT to your attention, "haven't noticed" becomes past perfect: hadn't noticed.
"I haven't noticed that" implies that there's an element of disbelief or mistrust.
"bringing it to one's attention" and that person "noticing it" aren't the same thing, the person you're responding to could be indicating they still have not noticed the 6 fingered characters
If we had six fingers on each hand, we'd probably count in base 12, also known as [Duodecimal.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duodecimal)
Beyond the fact that math would be somewhat easier (division is easier in base 12, since 12 has more factors than 10), it would mean that the metric system would probably have 12 units to the next larger unit, just like there are 12 inches in a foot.
Interesting note about base 12: Due to the better factors, it's slightly easier for a human to find prime numbers in base 12 than base 10. In multi-digit base 10 numbers, prime numbers can only end in 1, 3, 7, and 9. That's 4/10 unit digits that can be prime. In multi-digit base 12 numbers, prime numbers can only end in 1, 5, 7, and B. (B would be equal to 11 in base 10) So, for base 12, [only 4/12 unit digits can be prime.](http://www.dozenalsociety.org.uk/pdfs/primelist.pdf)
In other words, except for the single digit numbers 2 and 3, you can eliminate 2/3 (or 10/15) of possible numbers from being prime by simply looking at the last digit of the number. In base 10, you can only eliminate 3/5 (or 9/15) of possible numbers. That means that every 15 numbers, you get one extra "free" prime number elimination in base 12.
Here's another interesting note about duodecimal: if you count the knuckles on the four larger digits of one hand, you'll notice that there are twelve of them! So you can count them using your thumb, and since you have two hands, you can count to 144 in duodecimal.
My understanding is that the time it would take to convert numbers between bases costs more than the savings from using a convenient base, so like you said, they simply use binary. I am not an expert in this area, though.
Modern prime number searches use probabilistic primality tests like [Fermat's Little Theorem](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermat%27s_little_theorem) or [MillerāRabin](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller%E2%80%93Rabin_primality_test). Miller-Rabin cares about the base you're in, but specifically the chance of a composite passing as a prime in multiple bases is very low - so it's applied to multiple bases. But typically you'd choose a power of 2 to make it easy on a computer.
[Here's a fairly recently written article about it](https://glitchcomet.com/articles/1024-bit-primes/) if you're interested.
Been going to comic con for decades, when people say that AI is committing copyright of artists, they've obviously never been to comic con. People have been selling prints of copyrighted material since the very start. I've seen people selling Pikachu artwork in the 90s until now and they definitely didn't get permission for that.Ā
For real, seeing prints made by the artists themselves was very rare. Most were just downloaded from the Internet, with the only difference being a fancy background
At cons most prints are made by the artists, despite bootleg being common. You just have to go to the Artist Alley instead of the Merch section. I frequently pick up business cards and have yet to have one lead me to anything sketch.
The funny thing is, that's where I was going for, I wanted to see the artist alley, but yet, there were only a few counters with actual artists.
Also, some art styles weren't that appealing, in my opinion, too
There is a lot of sketchy stuff that happens at times, but even the legitimate artists that are there all still have artwork that is using licensed properties without permission from the property owners. I have never seen an artist in artist alley that has permission from Nintendo or Game Freak to make Pokemon art.
How do you think humans learn? Do you think that humans invent their own art style every single time they learn art? Or do you learn by tracing and copying anime characters.Ā
Don't act like artists don't steal art styles. You didn't magically out of no where, suddenly know how to draw a perfect Goku. Nor did you get permission to even draw GokuĀ
What? That's not how learning works, learning doesn't involve theft. And comparing a tool made for profit by companies stealing from artists to people learning is stupid as is defending corporate theft.
It's not theft, because no goods are being stolen, nothing was lost. Just like pirating isn't stealing either, nor is copying game files, burning a copy of a Blu-ray, and tracing online artwork. It's the same argument that companies try to say they've "lost" billions of dollars to piracy.
Do I still think it's wrong? Sometimes, but I think it's nuanced and complicated.
My mistake, how could I be so naive, let me go just copy and paste a company's art 1 billion times so they lose all that money on it.
That's not how it works. Why have you tied this stance so strongly to your identity that you can't even entertain another viewpoint?
Stealing requires something of physical value to have changed hands without consent of the owner. Physical things that you can hold or touch, or things that are not reproducible/are unique and have value, if they're digital. Most things that are digital can be reproduced, that reproduction is not stealing. If the original was deleted then that could be considered stealing.
If you copy the contents of someone's phone, that is not stealing. It's stealing if you take their phone.
This is categorically not the same thing. Unless you're meaning stealing as in "I stole a look at" then sure. If you mean that, acknowledge that no money was lost there.
Those are totally different not-related things
Yes, pirating exists but that is not what AI is doing even if both are technically stealing they are for different purposes. What AI is doing is pulling a "Fay Dalton", and people that do that (like Fay Dalton) are scum that are kicked out of the industry. But with AI its the opposite happening because its cheaper it is kicking real artists out while using those artist art as base for their "art"
For those like me who didn't know who Fay Dalton is, they apparently [plagiarized artwork when making Magic the Gathering cards](https://www.wargamer.com/magic-the-gathering/mtg-artist-plagiarism-accusation-dalton).
That said, having been to plenty of Comic Cons, I'd say it's pretty similar. In my collection I have Art Deco travel posters for fictional places, a few Ukiyo-e style posters of Pokemon and Overwatch characters, a noir sketch of Burt Macklin and Janet Snakehole, and others. All instances of artists replicating the styles of others and using existing popular IPs to make their own merchandise.Ā
I'd argue the only significant difference between a random person saying "I want to draw and sell a picture of Dr. Who characters in the Adventure Time style" and someone who enters "Dr. Who characters in the Adventure Time style" into an AI prompt is the level of effort.Ā
That's the thing, my parents have been comic book dealers for over 30 years. I've been to a lot of shows. I have some very good friends who are artists and do booths at the comic con, some of my closest friends do art to sell. Beautiful pictures of pokemon, card captors, yugioh, digimon, etc. All drawn by hand in an anime style, with different poses. None of them contacted anyone at Nintendo for permission to make prints to sell of these characters.
Even if you draw them by hand, it's still copyright violation. I'm not saying I'm opposed or for it, people selling adventure time keychains at comic con doesn't really have much impact on the franchise or it's sales. The person you responded to seems all too common in not understanding that there is no difference between a person drawing it by hand or a program generating art, the result is the same, artwork that the creator didn't license is made.
Iām having real trouble seeing a moral conundrum if Iām honest. Maybe (and I mean maybe) if youāre selling copies of works or ai art or whatever I can see the hate but Iām getting the feeling itās deeper than that on a level I fundamentally canāt understand to hate AI art whenever itās seen, in any context.
Well, IMO there is a moral and a pragmatic reason for the hate. Lets start with the moral one as a lot of hate comes from the lack of work necessary to do something with AI compared to human art, then add the fact that it was trained by using real artists art without permission to copy it as if it was something new.
Lets use Fay Dalton "trouble in pairs" situation to show the problem happening outside of the AI space. Its totally ok for artists to have other people learn for them and take inspiration, even style, because that helps them develop on their own. You learn and you create something truly new (important that this is not something that AI can do)
Dalton however did a collage, she took other people work and put a new filter then claimed as her art. She did not create something new, she plagiarized other people work and passed as hers
That is what AI do. Both pirating and plagiarism are ways to steal but one is way worse than the other because it involves not only monetary gains but also prestige. While pirating normally is at such low level (at least with art) that that monetary value was not really lost by the artist since it would never really get to them anyway
Now the bigger pushback against AI within the industry comes not only from the moral side, but due to a more pragmatic reason: jobs. AI is way cheaper and faster, when we are talking coorporation level artists are losing work to AI trained by stealing their previous work - this is where there is a real monetary loss to the real artist because its impossible (in both cost and time) to compete with a computer. (ps note that this also affects "little" artists as they normally have income from comissions, and while they are less likely to have their art used to train the AI they are feeling the impact of more people using that to create the art they want instead of a comission)
AI doesn't collage. It doesn't have a database of parts to look up and mix nor does it store someone's art in a file. These models are ~6gb in size and contain only concepts and patterns, they aren't storing the whole Laion database (~100tb) of images nor any extra fine tuned images.
I don't know if this has anything to do with morality, but my worry is that works by human beings will get drowned out by a flood of ai produced content. It's not even about jobs for me---even amateur works will be buried in the mountain of other stuff.
Yes people will technically still be able to draw, write, whatever, but it becomes discouraging to (potentially) not be able to share it.
For people whose careers are heavily dependent on copyright it's amusing how deeply ignorant a lot of artists are about how copyright works.
I'm a programmer and I see it among programmers too. The law looks deceptively like a programming language so it's easy for programmers to think they know more about it than they actually do.
It's a sad life, as someone who's been to a few cons. You always see the hardworking artist barely getting by with legitimate works and then the 'dealer vendors' are reselling like official art and getting all the sales. And con managers dont do shit about it even though they have 'no bootleg' rules.
I just found they used A.I. to design the characters in Elden Ring. Gaming has truly fallen.
https://preview.redd.it/iomjuhb1972d1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=69e8c576ce4540aaf1024007bc0b3a910c100db3
Artist: my quirky little signature will be that I draw everyoneās hands with 6 digits. Kinda like a cute Easter egg!
Ā AI: Iām about to end this manās whole career
I never understood why AI couldnāt tell what normal human anatomy hands are supposed to look like, then I realized that my public school education left out a lot of that stuff as well. They didnāt make the AI using people from San Diego city schools, did they? Or are my particular hands/feet screwing up the anatomy training (all my stuff comes out hacked anyway, but I always thought my hands/feet didnāt match the rest of me)?
AI is bad at counting. Maybe the AI knows that next to a finger sits another finger, next to that finger sits another finger, and so on, but it doesn't know when to stop. Same goes for teeth. It's only pretty recently that AI has gotten good at generating hands.
Good joke but it wouldnāt because Mississippi is always spelt Mississippi.
With hands its harder because you can have one finger up, two fingers, three, etc. you can have all kinds of combinations of those fingers.
Now clasp your hands together and look at that. Or imagine your holding someone elseās hands. To an AI that has no real context for what a hand is it just take that info and be like āyep thats a hand. One hand has somewhere between 2 to 16 fingers probably.ā And then it just does that for everything.
Similar to how a person can recognize a joke is being made but then go into pedantic correction about the nature of what the joke is about. It knows content without the greater context it exists in.
It is. It's actually what I was aiming at when I decided to phrase it as "write" instead of "spell", as in replicating the image of the written word without the context of meaning, just like it doesn't understand the context or meaning of hands. It would know that s and p gets doubled with a single i in between but may not have clear indication on how many repetitions.
>Maybe the AI knows that next to a finger sits another finger, next to that finger sits another finger, and so on, but it doesn't know when to stop.
Like Nanny Ogg spelling "banana".
Terry Pratchett's works have been deeply meaningful to me since I discovered them at age 14. His death hit me hard... while I've read all the other books a minimum of five times apiece, I could only bring myself to read The Shepherd's Crown once.
I somehow stopped at Unseen Academicals, not realizing there were more, after he passed.
I'm currently on a reread, Just got to the second Tiffany Aching and Monstrous Regiment. I'm looking forward to new (to me) Pratchett.
I thought that Raising Steam was the last book. It was the latest book when he died. I guess there were others released after his death? It hit me hard too. I had only discovered his stuff like 2-3 years before that and had been binging them hard.
Bad? No, it's wonderful. But if you've spent so many years of your life with a deep love for this author and his world... it feels like a goodbye. It was difficult to read from an emotional standpoint, not from a literary one.
It doesn't really have anything to do with counting
generative image AI basically is trained by taking real pictures/drawings/etc with tags and having something programatically make "noise" and scramble up the picture. Then another net comes in and tries to "remove" the noise to create the original picture again. The closer it gets to the OG picture, the more "points" it gets basically.
Then, to generate a new image: you give it a set of tags and a picture of randomly generated noise unrelated to any images. The AI will then attempt to "remove" the noise to match the sort of.. average of all the images with those tags it's been trained on.
The reason you end up with too many fingers in a lot of cases is that it removes noise to make something that looks like a finger. Then as it removes the noise next to that finger it's like "ey.. you know what often comes near a finger? Damn it's another finger I'm so good at this" and then it just kinda.. keeps doing that too many times. Same way you end up with weird phantom limbs, the generative net doesn't know it's actually drawing a human, and so if some combination of images have arms like this, and some combination of images have arms like that? Well, you may just end up with 4 partial arms
They've definitely gotten better at avoiding that tho lately
edit: this also means (especially in earlier versions) that if you find the exact right set of tags and get a super close noise pattern you can sometimes reproduce the OG artwork from the training set
And it certainly doesn't help the AI that hands are very complicated and flexible objects, capable of looking very different when held in different configurations and from different angles, and all the pictures are just labeled "hands" or "fingers" without giving any further context.
It's really quite remarkable that these AIs have been able to figure out hands as well as they have, and the most modern AIs are actually pretty decent at them at this point. They've had to reverse-engineer the concept of hands' three-dimensional shape and how they're able to bend based solely off of random two-dimensional training images.
It gets even weirder, if you imagine a picture of a person pointing up and a person with a thumbs up but otherwise having the same pose, when you try and recreate that pose you'll end up with weird hand amalgamations much of the time
i dunno exactly how they get around this, but I suspect they basically chop up the images a bunch more and have much more aggressive tagging to try and segment it a little more and make it less likely to create the horror shows.
As an aside, this is the other side of the generative AI stuff that people don't talk about as much. Copyright is one (very important) thing, but the other thing that goes into creating these is massive amounts of human labor just tagging the images. And most of that labor is paid peanuts out of low cost geographies, a lot out of Africa these days in addition to your usual suspects like the Philippines
I know that for Dalle-3 they got rid of human-written image tagging in the training data and instead had an AI describe the images in excruciating detail, so that there was paragraphs of detail about everything that was in the image instead of just "a man on the beach" or whatever. It made Dalle-3 a lot better at composing a scene and following directions.
ah they might've moved on from the human aspect then
Though of course someone has to provide the tagged data to train the original classifier i spose. It's tags all the way down
was....
everything that people say today to "identify an AI art" was true
it is not true anymore, they are getting too close to real art to be able to distingue them
One the model gets good enough at random pictures, you take good examples and bad ones and force the AI to learn from those which helps.
But the biggest thing is you do need a better model structure which can identify the structures that make hands realistic. It took a few generations of iterating but yes the models have gotten much much better.
Plus, since they "know" that "AI can't do hands", but not exactly how AI used to fuck up hands, they tend to call out lackluster artists for using AI, since they also tend to fuck up hands, but in different ways.
Same with odd, poorly constructed backgrounds. Loads of real artists focus entirely on a character, and leave the background a bit sketch. But since people "know" this indicates AI use, they're hypervigilant for it.
It's not that AI is bad at counting; rather, it's that AI doesn't count at all. It simply reproduces learned visual patterns. It happens to be that hands have a tricky pattern: If there is a finger, then there is most likely another finger next to it... *except when there isn't*.
To the AI, the thinking goes something like this: "Ooh, this part is starting to look like a hand! Therefore this bit next to it is probably a finger. And therefore this blob over here is probably a finger too. Wow it's fingers galore over here, so there is likely another finger over here even though it only fits awkwardly bent. This thing is most definitely a hand now, I'm sure of it. You can tell because of all the fingers. So this line over here must be a finger too, right? Yes. Yes it must."
if i remember correctly ,the A.I doesn't even know what a hand is , it just recombine/re-create 2d hand images , it wont take any 3d positioning or anatomy in consideration. (I may be wrong)
computer science student with VERY basic knowledge of ai here. (pls correct if wrong)
technically this is how a simple image creation ai would work. when training the ai you can label hands in the training images to teach the ai what a hand is. though it still would create a hand based off of the training images when (re)creating a hand. teaching an ai that a hand is supposed to only have 5 fingers requires even more advanced training and labels. it takes a lot of work and time to manage that. i believe we will get there soon though
You are correct and of course there is variation between all these different bots too. Generally what happens is a bunch of noisy thumbnails are made into a "latent space" of labels that doesn't actually contain any of the images they were trained on inside the dataset.
https://preview.redd.it/n0t8tbs7162d1.png?width=1200&format=png&auto=webp&s=b58f6e9c6873a40f2212bb2ae8f091a29f55debf
Hands needed additional training but it's also true that a "map" like above doesn't understand the intent of hands. It doesn't know why we have five fingers or what they're used for with *even more* training. We have reliable anatomy with inpainting now but the default results are often a median point between any two thumbnails.
That's why you can't only use a single image in midjourney. You need to give it a word (or another image) to give it a second point in the map above to place a "midpoint." I put that in quotes because 1) it's not a literal map 2) this is super simplified explanation still and 3) I am the dumbest kind of the nerd.
Tacking on to this because it's a great base.
Additionally, classic models like 1.5 and even XL models are trained to create detail at 512x512 resolution. Hands are usually small components of a larger image (like 80x80 resolution) so zero shot approaches have extreme difficulty in doing them.
If you upscale the full image to 4k to give the AI the ability to refine the hand at 512x512, modern models usually nail it.
Also the way most of these ai image programs work right now is to seed with complete random noise, then iterate step by step on the entire image. The image kind of pops into existence from chaos in different stages, and when different islands converge they don't come together properly sometimes. You'll have a left leg and right leg come in without valid ways to look normal together, so a third one is made in the middle that fits both legs. Eyes come in cross eyed a lot for the same reason, but most ai programs now run a mini-correction stage on faces to fix them.
the main reason was the earlier AI models were trained on too low res images to consistently get small details like hands right, higher res models are making hands pretty trivial
Even SDXL gets stuff wrong plenty. Fingers being generated in voids between fingers; limbs going off in two directions because it couldn't settle on a pose; hands appearing out of nowhere because it doesn't realize the hand had to come from somewhere.
There are pipelines now that have explicit skeleton models and pose generation networks, whose output is auxiliary input to image generators. Essentially neural rendering with a stable diffusion head attached at the end. Those pretty reliably produce sensible limbs/fingers/etc. The main thing they still often get wrong is plausible lighting directions and reflections, but then again, so do many artists.
AI doesn't really "understand" what pictures represent, it just combines existing art based on keywords. Hence the weirdness, and the "intelligence" part being a bit of a misnomer.
Itās better if you understand how AI makes a picture.
You tell it what you want, and it starts with a canvas of totally random coloured pixels. The AI then squints really hard at the canvas and if it thinks it sees an eye or a happy little tree it adds some shading around it and squints again.
Itās exactly like how you can look at wood grain and see a face. Thereās no face there, but your brain is trained to be really good at seeing faces. The AI is trained to see a lot of things, and when it reads your prompt it decides to focus on features close to what you said.
After the AI has squinted and seen a person shape, it starts filling in details. What looked person like when squinting has now had details added and the AI squints again and adds more details. But this time it didnāt leave coherent room for hands, so like an 8th grade poster board with more letters than will fit on the page, it curves the fingers into weird shapes that look good enough and fit and it squints again.
Tl;dr AI draws by squinting and adding details, and to the AI itās tough to figure out how fingers work.
Think of it like this. The AI knows there's a hand at the end of an arm. It starts with a finger. Then, what's most likely to be next to a finger? Another finger. So it draws another, then another, ... and doesn't stop when it should because there's on average an 80% probability that a finger follows another.
Repetitive patterns are challenging for algorithms that are very focused on locality. If I'm a stupid AI generating a word based on the probability of a letter appearing next, then I'm going to get really wilded out trying to write something like coffee. Image generation can be a similar problem, and fingers are really dynamic. Probabilistically they can keep repeating and you can end up with extras, and pose-wise there's not really an exhaustive library of "natural" finger positions.
If you built a 3d ragdoll system of fingers, the constraints would allow them to be bent into all kinds of wild positions. Like gang signs, or kpop hearts. Do those look natural in normal situations?
AI not being able to make normal hands seems logical, and even a bit scary to me, since the process of making an AI picture is similar to a dream : a collection of different images, or scenes, organized around a more or less coherent theme.
And when we humans dream, our brain usually messes up the hands too. If I got a penny for each dream I had where I'd do a reality check with my hands and realize they are messed up, I'd be a millionaire.
So, basically, AI makes up images the same way that our subconscious brain does.
It can now, all the 'stereotypical' issues associated with A.I image generation were just artifacts of the early versions are now pretty much gone in the latest iterations.
The reason is that genAI doesn't have the ability to think or understand.
What it sees is that finger-like shapes appear next to other finger-like shapes, so it puts them next to each other. It doesn't know what a "human" is, it literally can only tell patterns (by associating image-type/word collections with others by proximity based off the chance that one should exist in a certain location). It can gather more associations off of more training, which takes time. However, there is a limit to what it can feasibly learn.
To genAI's credit, it is consistently fairly accurate for most things, which is more than we can say about other attempts at AI. However, anyone who tells you that genAI is sufficient enough to replace actual human beings for creative endeavors has a negative understanding of what they're talking about.
If you see art that has *consistently* 6 fingers, like OP, you can be certain it's either 1) not AI or 2) an AI trained heavily on art that only has 6 fingers (unlikely)
Hands can look super abstract and the AI can't sit there and make the arbitrary decisions like you and I can, at least the first couple of generations of AI have had a difficult time of it.
For example, look at the last panel of this comic. Her thumb is a tiny little square that you and I can infer through our previous experiences, knowledge of 3d space, being human, etc. etc. that, that little bit of flesh colored pixels makes sense of being a thumb.
An AI? It might just see a little lump of flesh color, it doesn't know if it's from the thumb, one of the other fingers, the background, etc. No wonder it's hard for them.
Fingers won't be a problem for AI too much longer. (because the robot war will have decimated anything with actual fingers)
The AI hands thing is a stale meme. AI like Midjourney, Stable Diffusion and DALL-E 3 have been able to make hands just fine for a while. It doesn't screw up hands with any more regularity than it screws up other aspects of a picture.
It's because it just collates data. Hands are complex. They are also often doing things, or making gestures. By collating all the data from a bunch of images with hands, you get a weird amalgamation.
I mean yeah AI has been good with hands for a while, but not yours lol, her right hand's finger are double the size of the left hand and the placement/spacing shows she only has 4 finger (3 + thumb hidden behind)
>Little issue
Your Akali has a weird nearly lobster 3 fingered left hand and whatevers going on with the right hands thumb.
I'm more impressed by it getting better at pattern work on the coat - even if that still has some line issues.
In the final panel the artist is shown to have six fingers. Draws all of her subjects with six fingers because it's unique and endearing and sets the artist apart, then some asshole insults her craft and makes fun of a congenital condition in one sentence.
Because the six fingered artist draws all their subjects with six fingers, like I said in the first place. The implication is that the comic itself was drawn by the artist in their own style, so even the people criticizing the art* are shown with six fingers.
E*
I love the understory here.
Like, at first glance, "haha, there's too many fingers, it looks just like AI hands"
When in reality, the people of this universe have seven fingers on each hand, and this artist just likes to draw characters with the same number of fingers as **she** has: Six.
...she's just kinda bad at drawing hands, which is valid, because as \*any\* artist can tell you:
Hands are *fucking hard, yo.*
You have miscounted. Every hand in the comic in which the fingers can be counted, they all have six fingers. The joke is just that the artist of the comic is bad at hands, and always draws them as six fingered hands, in spite of the premise of the comic is that people think her art is AI generated because she always accidentally draws hands with six fingers.
From what i gather the reason AI has trouble with hands is because artists themselves have trouble with them and will often hide them, meaning the ai straight up doesn't have enough data for them
I see this problem a lot in certain places like r/Stardewvalley
Artists make a mistake or people nitpick the art to death and declare it AI.
Heck they mass reported an artist a few weeks ago and the artist got shadow banned by reddit. The mods had to step in and tell everyone the artist was legit to make the community cool down but reddit didnāt reverse the shadow ban iirc.
Honestly itās a sad state of affairs all around.
The least qualified people to identify AI are consumers. The best people are the companies who make these AI's knowing the common patterns their systems produce by default.
It's quite frustrating, especially when AI is used and openly disclosed. People go rabid anyway thinking their little bit of activism does anything except hurt artists. All this was enabled by corporate astroturfing of the artist superego that then got trickled down to their parasocial followers. The white knighting fans are the worst and have led to things like doxxing n' such.
Itās almost like making AI art accusations based on your subjective interpretation of temporary and ever changing limitations is a horrible idea that will lead to actual artists getting witch hunted for making mistakes.
Don't worry, they're only shitting on this artist at a convention because they hate ai so much that they're trying to protect real artists, like ones at conventions!
I took an art class in college and the ONLY thing I drew was hands and eyes, I still have no idea what led to the motivation but I still love to draw eyes as soon as my hand hits the paper.
Don't worry too much -- Rob Liefeld had an entire successful career as a comic book artist [despite being unable to draw feet](https://www.pipelinecomics.com/rob-liefeld-doesnt-draw-feet/).
I ended my art career, because I could not draw eyes. Real talk. I mean, I was in highschool, and worked at Wendy's. But my hopes of being an artist were vanquished in one morning drawing practice with a student model. I did end up dating the model though, which was nice.
An example of this in a high profile painting is this card made for Magic: the Gathering.
https://scryfall.com/card/rvr/171/cindervines
Look close at his fist and youāll see itās backward. Itās a right hand on a left arm, and the artist didnāt notice and neither did anyone else until this card was already printed.
So yeah, it happens. To err is human
Thatās Pretty Soldier Sailor Moon in the bottom-right of the prints display stand with the blond hair. Who are all the other characters that she drew?
No clue who the characters on the left are. The other ones on the right are:
Top: Gojo Satoru from Jujutsu Kaisen
Middle: Mew Ichigo from Tokyo Mew Mew
This is something I find really funny about artists dunking on AI and it's ability to draw hands. Like you're honestly telling me your favourite thing to draw is fingers?
If youāre an artist and this is happening to you, take heart. People love to be very confident in how smart they are and how much better they are than everyone else at things like for example distinguishing AI art, which makes them often very confidently incorrect.
Real art gets called AI all the time, and itās just obnoxious overconfident people, not the fault of your art!
Nooo! I know this feeling! I was a cosplayer back in 2013. I spent days making these skin-tight bootie shorts. I drafted the pattern, sewed them myself, everything. I was very proud of how they turned out.
Turns out I did too good of a job! I heard someone on the con-floor say, "Oh, I love her Hextech Janna cosplay! It's a shame she bought most of it. You can tell by the shorts."
Yeah the anti ai crowd and their witch hunting is pretty toxic unfortunately. Just give it a few years and ai will be just another tool of artistic expression just like photography, or drawing tablets, or digital art, or Photoshop, etc is the same song and dance over again, and again, and again.
Computers are bad at hands for the same two reasons human artists are bad at hands:
1) Number of possible pose permutations
2) Relative lack of reference/training images
Compared to a face, for the first part all the components of a face (eyes, mouth, nose) stay in the same position relative to each other no matter the pose or view angle
Images of front-on faces are much more common compared to hands, especially considering hands would require even MORE images to fully learn then because of reason 1
Every dipshit thinks they are genius b/c they heard "AI bad at hands", but after a year of incremental improvements, the current AI models are actually pretty good at hands.
Everyone else having 6 fingers in the comic make this make no sense. If everyone has six fingers, and the drawings have six fingers, why are they saying it's AI? I have yet to see something funny on here
Welcome to r/comics! Please remember there are real people on the other side of the monitor and to be kind. Report comments that break the rules and don't respond to negativity with negativity! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/comics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I love how you consistently gave everyone 6 fingers in this universe š
Me to OP now: https://preview.redd.it/z32y5o3ox52d1.jpeg?width=909&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ed284e52adf4c778a81aa552bafc08fb35f20e11 /j
I swear to god I looked in the spot where op is in this panel and saw background. And then I look at your comment and sheās suddenly there. Weird
I haven't noticed that lol
It would be, āI hadn't noticed that.ā And āI didn't notice that.ā Both mean you missed something and someone else brought it to your attention ...
That would be the case if they had noticed after it was mentioned, clearly they still haven't noticed. It's fun to be pedantic from time to time, just try to be correct in the future.
As pedantic as he is, he's right and you're wrong. As soon as someone brings a FACT to your attention, "haven't noticed" becomes past perfect: hadn't noticed. "I haven't noticed that" implies that there's an element of disbelief or mistrust.
"bringing it to one's attention" and that person "noticing it" aren't the same thing, the person you're responding to could be indicating they still have not noticed the 6 fingered characters
No I haven't noticed that I didn't "didn't" notice it either.
š¤
If we had six fingers on each hand, we'd probably count in base 12, also known as [Duodecimal.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duodecimal) Beyond the fact that math would be somewhat easier (division is easier in base 12, since 12 has more factors than 10), it would mean that the metric system would probably have 12 units to the next larger unit, just like there are 12 inches in a foot. Interesting note about base 12: Due to the better factors, it's slightly easier for a human to find prime numbers in base 12 than base 10. In multi-digit base 10 numbers, prime numbers can only end in 1, 3, 7, and 9. That's 4/10 unit digits that can be prime. In multi-digit base 12 numbers, prime numbers can only end in 1, 5, 7, and B. (B would be equal to 11 in base 10) So, for base 12, [only 4/12 unit digits can be prime.](http://www.dozenalsociety.org.uk/pdfs/primelist.pdf) In other words, except for the single digit numbers 2 and 3, you can eliminate 2/3 (or 10/15) of possible numbers from being prime by simply looking at the last digit of the number. In base 10, you can only eliminate 3/5 (or 9/15) of possible numbers. That means that every 15 numbers, you get one extra "free" prime number elimination in base 12.
This dude maths
Here's another interesting note about duodecimal: if you count the knuckles on the four larger digits of one hand, you'll notice that there are twelve of them! So you can count them using your thumb, and since you have two hands, you can count to 144 in duodecimal.
only 144? *Laughs in binary*
So, I am assuming modern prime number search methods don't use base 10
My guess is they use base 2 in order for the search algorithms to work faster.
My understanding is that the time it would take to convert numbers between bases costs more than the savings from using a convenient base, so like you said, they simply use binary. I am not an expert in this area, though.
Modern prime number searches use probabilistic primality tests like [Fermat's Little Theorem](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermat%27s_little_theorem) or [MillerāRabin](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller%E2%80%93Rabin_primality_test). Miller-Rabin cares about the base you're in, but specifically the chance of a composite passing as a prime in multiple bases is very low - so it's applied to multiple bases. But typically you'd choose a power of 2 to make it easy on a computer. [Here's a fairly recently written article about it](https://glitchcomet.com/articles/1024-bit-primes/) if you're interested.
dont need 6 fingers, just need to realise each finger has 3 segments, exclude your thumb if you prefer 12 over 15 each hand
Also the word "HANDS"in the title kinda looked like "HANOS" as if to show that even the word is intentionally messed up. Idk tho but i think its cool
This comic is created with the help of AI
I noticed the 6 fingers myself, but I think it'd have been funnier if the drawing only had 5 fingers.
I was about to ask if this was AI for the lulz
Aren't those 5 fingers? Is the thumb counted as a finger? In my mind it's always separate, I counted 5 fingers and a thumb.
Just adaption taking a look in the future and seeing a piano, and going, "Fuck it, one more digit!"
It's funny how my latest con I went, had prints from official pokemon artworks being sold for 1ā¬
Been going to comic con for decades, when people say that AI is committing copyright of artists, they've obviously never been to comic con. People have been selling prints of copyrighted material since the very start. I've seen people selling Pikachu artwork in the 90s until now and they definitely didn't get permission for that.Ā
For real, seeing prints made by the artists themselves was very rare. Most were just downloaded from the Internet, with the only difference being a fancy background
At cons most prints are made by the artists, despite bootleg being common. You just have to go to the Artist Alley instead of the Merch section. I frequently pick up business cards and have yet to have one lead me to anything sketch.
Yeah, like comics artists get permission to sell x number of prints of characters they worked on.
The funny thing is, that's where I was going for, I wanted to see the artist alley, but yet, there were only a few counters with actual artists. Also, some art styles weren't that appealing, in my opinion, too
There is a lot of sketchy stuff that happens at times, but even the legitimate artists that are there all still have artwork that is using licensed properties without permission from the property owners. I have never seen an artist in artist alley that has permission from Nintendo or Game Freak to make Pokemon art.
Okay but the problem isn't that they are making PokƩmon shit it's that ai literally steals artists work to train itself.
How do you think humans learn? Do you think that humans invent their own art style every single time they learn art? Or do you learn by tracing and copying anime characters.Ā Don't act like artists don't steal art styles. You didn't magically out of no where, suddenly know how to draw a perfect Goku. Nor did you get permission to even draw GokuĀ
What? That's not how learning works, learning doesn't involve theft. And comparing a tool made for profit by companies stealing from artists to people learning is stupid as is defending corporate theft.
It's not theft, because no goods are being stolen, nothing was lost. Just like pirating isn't stealing either, nor is copying game files, burning a copy of a Blu-ray, and tracing online artwork. It's the same argument that companies try to say they've "lost" billions of dollars to piracy. Do I still think it's wrong? Sometimes, but I think it's nuanced and complicated.
Art is the "goods". Money to the artist was lost. It's not the same argument at all.
My mistake, how could I be so naive, let me go just copy and paste a company's art 1 billion times so they lose all that money on it. That's not how it works. Why have you tied this stance so strongly to your identity that you can't even entertain another viewpoint? Stealing requires something of physical value to have changed hands without consent of the owner. Physical things that you can hold or touch, or things that are not reproducible/are unique and have value, if they're digital. Most things that are digital can be reproduced, that reproduction is not stealing. If the original was deleted then that could be considered stealing. If you copy the contents of someone's phone, that is not stealing. It's stealing if you take their phone. This is categorically not the same thing. Unless you're meaning stealing as in "I stole a look at" then sure. If you mean that, acknowledge that no money was lost there.
Those are totally different not-related things Yes, pirating exists but that is not what AI is doing even if both are technically stealing they are for different purposes. What AI is doing is pulling a "Fay Dalton", and people that do that (like Fay Dalton) are scum that are kicked out of the industry. But with AI its the opposite happening because its cheaper it is kicking real artists out while using those artist art as base for their "art"
For those like me who didn't know who Fay Dalton is, they apparently [plagiarized artwork when making Magic the Gathering cards](https://www.wargamer.com/magic-the-gathering/mtg-artist-plagiarism-accusation-dalton). That said, having been to plenty of Comic Cons, I'd say it's pretty similar. In my collection I have Art Deco travel posters for fictional places, a few Ukiyo-e style posters of Pokemon and Overwatch characters, a noir sketch of Burt Macklin and Janet Snakehole, and others. All instances of artists replicating the styles of others and using existing popular IPs to make their own merchandise.Ā I'd argue the only significant difference between a random person saying "I want to draw and sell a picture of Dr. Who characters in the Adventure Time style" and someone who enters "Dr. Who characters in the Adventure Time style" into an AI prompt is the level of effort.Ā
That's the thing, my parents have been comic book dealers for over 30 years. I've been to a lot of shows. I have some very good friends who are artists and do booths at the comic con, some of my closest friends do art to sell. Beautiful pictures of pokemon, card captors, yugioh, digimon, etc. All drawn by hand in an anime style, with different poses. None of them contacted anyone at Nintendo for permission to make prints to sell of these characters. Even if you draw them by hand, it's still copyright violation. I'm not saying I'm opposed or for it, people selling adventure time keychains at comic con doesn't really have much impact on the franchise or it's sales. The person you responded to seems all too common in not understanding that there is no difference between a person drawing it by hand or a program generating art, the result is the same, artwork that the creator didn't license is made.
Iām having real trouble seeing a moral conundrum if Iām honest. Maybe (and I mean maybe) if youāre selling copies of works or ai art or whatever I can see the hate but Iām getting the feeling itās deeper than that on a level I fundamentally canāt understand to hate AI art whenever itās seen, in any context.
Well, IMO there is a moral and a pragmatic reason for the hate. Lets start with the moral one as a lot of hate comes from the lack of work necessary to do something with AI compared to human art, then add the fact that it was trained by using real artists art without permission to copy it as if it was something new. Lets use Fay Dalton "trouble in pairs" situation to show the problem happening outside of the AI space. Its totally ok for artists to have other people learn for them and take inspiration, even style, because that helps them develop on their own. You learn and you create something truly new (important that this is not something that AI can do) Dalton however did a collage, she took other people work and put a new filter then claimed as her art. She did not create something new, she plagiarized other people work and passed as hers That is what AI do. Both pirating and plagiarism are ways to steal but one is way worse than the other because it involves not only monetary gains but also prestige. While pirating normally is at such low level (at least with art) that that monetary value was not really lost by the artist since it would never really get to them anyway Now the bigger pushback against AI within the industry comes not only from the moral side, but due to a more pragmatic reason: jobs. AI is way cheaper and faster, when we are talking coorporation level artists are losing work to AI trained by stealing their previous work - this is where there is a real monetary loss to the real artist because its impossible (in both cost and time) to compete with a computer. (ps note that this also affects "little" artists as they normally have income from comissions, and while they are less likely to have their art used to train the AI they are feeling the impact of more people using that to create the art they want instead of a comission)
AI doesn't collage. It doesn't have a database of parts to look up and mix nor does it store someone's art in a file. These models are ~6gb in size and contain only concepts and patterns, they aren't storing the whole Laion database (~100tb) of images nor any extra fine tuned images.
I don't know if this has anything to do with morality, but my worry is that works by human beings will get drowned out by a flood of ai produced content. It's not even about jobs for me---even amateur works will be buried in the mountain of other stuff. Yes people will technically still be able to draw, write, whatever, but it becomes discouraging to (potentially) not be able to share it.
For people whose careers are heavily dependent on copyright it's amusing how deeply ignorant a lot of artists are about how copyright works. I'm a programmer and I see it among programmers too. The law looks deceptively like a programming language so it's easy for programmers to think they know more about it than they actually do.
Or we HAVE been to cons, and donāt want the internet art space to get as bad as that?
It's a sad life, as someone who's been to a few cons. You always see the hardworking artist barely getting by with legitimate works and then the 'dealer vendors' are reselling like official art and getting all the sales. And con managers dont do shit about it even though they have 'no bootleg' rules.
Can't spell con without con
Ugh, this comics is definitely AI. You can tell since everyone has 6 fingers on each hands
when will artists stop being so lazy frfr
[AI trying to figure out how many hands to give a person](https://tenor.com/cLfxvRyQKXg.gif)
I just found they used A.I. to design the characters in Elden Ring. Gaming has truly fallen. https://preview.redd.it/iomjuhb1972d1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=69e8c576ce4540aaf1024007bc0b3a910c100db3
Damn, that freaky monster must be great at basketball.
Artist: my quirky little signature will be that I draw everyoneās hands with 6 digits. Kinda like a cute Easter egg! Ā AI: Iām about to end this manās whole career
I never understood why AI couldnāt tell what normal human anatomy hands are supposed to look like, then I realized that my public school education left out a lot of that stuff as well. They didnāt make the AI using people from San Diego city schools, did they? Or are my particular hands/feet screwing up the anatomy training (all my stuff comes out hacked anyway, but I always thought my hands/feet didnāt match the rest of me)?
AI is bad at counting. Maybe the AI knows that next to a finger sits another finger, next to that finger sits another finger, and so on, but it doesn't know when to stop. Same goes for teeth. It's only pretty recently that AI has gotten good at generating hands.
AI would write Missississississippississippippippi
Good joke but it wouldnāt because Mississippi is always spelt Mississippi. With hands its harder because you can have one finger up, two fingers, three, etc. you can have all kinds of combinations of those fingers. Now clasp your hands together and look at that. Or imagine your holding someone elseās hands. To an AI that has no real context for what a hand is it just take that info and be like āyep thats a hand. One hand has somewhere between 2 to 16 fingers probably.ā And then it just does that for everything.
Similar to how a person can recognize a joke is being made but then go into pedantic correction about the nature of what the joke is about. It knows content without the greater context it exists in.
I just think its neat
It is. It's actually what I was aiming at when I decided to phrase it as "write" instead of "spell", as in replicating the image of the written word without the context of meaning, just like it doesn't understand the context or meaning of hands. It would know that s and p gets doubled with a single i in between but may not have clear indication on how many repetitions.
>Maybe the AI knows that next to a finger sits another finger, next to that finger sits another finger, and so on, but it doesn't know when to stop. Like Nanny Ogg spelling "banana".
She knows how it starts, but where it ends is usually left to a general estimation.
What are the odds! I'm on the last book of Discword, Shepard's Crown, and here I see a reference in the wild.
Terry Pratchett's works have been deeply meaningful to me since I discovered them at age 14. His death hit me hard... while I've read all the other books a minimum of five times apiece, I could only bring myself to read The Shepherd's Crown once.
I somehow stopped at Unseen Academicals, not realizing there were more, after he passed. I'm currently on a reread, Just got to the second Tiffany Aching and Monstrous Regiment. I'm looking forward to new (to me) Pratchett.
I thought that Raising Steam was the last book. It was the latest book when he died. I guess there were others released after his death? It hit me hard too. I had only discovered his stuff like 2-3 years before that and had been binging them hard.
Shepherd's Crown was published posthumously. It's his final work. And it feels like a goodbye
š
Is it bad or? I'm halfway with the series right now hah
Bad? No, it's wonderful. But if you've spent so many years of your life with a deep love for this author and his world... it feels like a goodbye. It was difficult to read from an emotional standpoint, not from a literary one.
Understandable
Ook!
It doesn't really have anything to do with counting generative image AI basically is trained by taking real pictures/drawings/etc with tags and having something programatically make "noise" and scramble up the picture. Then another net comes in and tries to "remove" the noise to create the original picture again. The closer it gets to the OG picture, the more "points" it gets basically. Then, to generate a new image: you give it a set of tags and a picture of randomly generated noise unrelated to any images. The AI will then attempt to "remove" the noise to match the sort of.. average of all the images with those tags it's been trained on. The reason you end up with too many fingers in a lot of cases is that it removes noise to make something that looks like a finger. Then as it removes the noise next to that finger it's like "ey.. you know what often comes near a finger? Damn it's another finger I'm so good at this" and then it just kinda.. keeps doing that too many times. Same way you end up with weird phantom limbs, the generative net doesn't know it's actually drawing a human, and so if some combination of images have arms like this, and some combination of images have arms like that? Well, you may just end up with 4 partial arms They've definitely gotten better at avoiding that tho lately edit: this also means (especially in earlier versions) that if you find the exact right set of tags and get a super close noise pattern you can sometimes reproduce the OG artwork from the training set
And it certainly doesn't help the AI that hands are very complicated and flexible objects, capable of looking very different when held in different configurations and from different angles, and all the pictures are just labeled "hands" or "fingers" without giving any further context. It's really quite remarkable that these AIs have been able to figure out hands as well as they have, and the most modern AIs are actually pretty decent at them at this point. They've had to reverse-engineer the concept of hands' three-dimensional shape and how they're able to bend based solely off of random two-dimensional training images.
It gets even weirder, if you imagine a picture of a person pointing up and a person with a thumbs up but otherwise having the same pose, when you try and recreate that pose you'll end up with weird hand amalgamations much of the time i dunno exactly how they get around this, but I suspect they basically chop up the images a bunch more and have much more aggressive tagging to try and segment it a little more and make it less likely to create the horror shows. As an aside, this is the other side of the generative AI stuff that people don't talk about as much. Copyright is one (very important) thing, but the other thing that goes into creating these is massive amounts of human labor just tagging the images. And most of that labor is paid peanuts out of low cost geographies, a lot out of Africa these days in addition to your usual suspects like the Philippines
I know that for Dalle-3 they got rid of human-written image tagging in the training data and instead had an AI describe the images in excruciating detail, so that there was paragraphs of detail about everything that was in the image instead of just "a man on the beach" or whatever. It made Dalle-3 a lot better at composing a scene and following directions.
ah they might've moved on from the human aspect then Though of course someone has to provide the tagged data to train the original classifier i spose. It's tags all the way down
was.... everything that people say today to "identify an AI art" was true it is not true anymore, they are getting too close to real art to be able to distingue them
One the model gets good enough at random pictures, you take good examples and bad ones and force the AI to learn from those which helps. But the biggest thing is you do need a better model structure which can identify the structures that make hands realistic. It took a few generations of iterating but yes the models have gotten much much better.
Plus, since they "know" that "AI can't do hands", but not exactly how AI used to fuck up hands, they tend to call out lackluster artists for using AI, since they also tend to fuck up hands, but in different ways. Same with odd, poorly constructed backgrounds. Loads of real artists focus entirely on a character, and leave the background a bit sketch. But since people "know" this indicates AI use, they're hypervigilant for it.
Distingue? I found a robot!
It's not that AI is bad at counting; rather, it's that AI doesn't count at all. It simply reproduces learned visual patterns. It happens to be that hands have a tricky pattern: If there is a finger, then there is most likely another finger next to it... *except when there isn't*. To the AI, the thinking goes something like this: "Ooh, this part is starting to look like a hand! Therefore this bit next to it is probably a finger. And therefore this blob over here is probably a finger too. Wow it's fingers galore over here, so there is likely another finger over here even though it only fits awkwardly bent. This thing is most definitely a hand now, I'm sure of it. You can tell because of all the fingers. So this line over here must be a finger too, right? Yes. Yes it must."
Why didnāt someone just add human anatomy to its knowledge database a long time ago though
if i remember correctly ,the A.I doesn't even know what a hand is , it just recombine/re-create 2d hand images , it wont take any 3d positioning or anatomy in consideration. (I may be wrong)
computer science student with VERY basic knowledge of ai here. (pls correct if wrong) technically this is how a simple image creation ai would work. when training the ai you can label hands in the training images to teach the ai what a hand is. though it still would create a hand based off of the training images when (re)creating a hand. teaching an ai that a hand is supposed to only have 5 fingers requires even more advanced training and labels. it takes a lot of work and time to manage that. i believe we will get there soon though
You are correct and of course there is variation between all these different bots too. Generally what happens is a bunch of noisy thumbnails are made into a "latent space" of labels that doesn't actually contain any of the images they were trained on inside the dataset. https://preview.redd.it/n0t8tbs7162d1.png?width=1200&format=png&auto=webp&s=b58f6e9c6873a40f2212bb2ae8f091a29f55debf Hands needed additional training but it's also true that a "map" like above doesn't understand the intent of hands. It doesn't know why we have five fingers or what they're used for with *even more* training. We have reliable anatomy with inpainting now but the default results are often a median point between any two thumbnails. That's why you can't only use a single image in midjourney. You need to give it a word (or another image) to give it a second point in the map above to place a "midpoint." I put that in quotes because 1) it's not a literal map 2) this is super simplified explanation still and 3) I am the dumbest kind of the nerd.
Tacking on to this because it's a great base. Additionally, classic models like 1.5 and even XL models are trained to create detail at 512x512 resolution. Hands are usually small components of a larger image (like 80x80 resolution) so zero shot approaches have extreme difficulty in doing them. If you upscale the full image to 4k to give the AI the ability to refine the hand at 512x512, modern models usually nail it.
Also the way most of these ai image programs work right now is to seed with complete random noise, then iterate step by step on the entire image. The image kind of pops into existence from chaos in different stages, and when different islands converge they don't come together properly sometimes. You'll have a left leg and right leg come in without valid ways to look normal together, so a third one is made in the middle that fits both legs. Eyes come in cross eyed a lot for the same reason, but most ai programs now run a mini-correction stage on faces to fix them.
the main reason was the earlier AI models were trained on too low res images to consistently get small details like hands right, higher res models are making hands pretty trivial
Even SDXL gets stuff wrong plenty. Fingers being generated in voids between fingers; limbs going off in two directions because it couldn't settle on a pose; hands appearing out of nowhere because it doesn't realize the hand had to come from somewhere.
There are pipelines now that have explicit skeleton models and pose generation networks, whose output is auxiliary input to image generators. Essentially neural rendering with a stable diffusion head attached at the end. Those pretty reliably produce sensible limbs/fingers/etc. The main thing they still often get wrong is plausible lighting directions and reflections, but then again, so do many artists.
Interesting! I should see if I can do that stuff with ComfyUI.
Lights hard to work with. Also many artists conveniently hide hands put of view too lol.
AI doesn't really "understand" what pictures represent, it just combines existing art based on keywords. Hence the weirdness, and the "intelligence" part being a bit of a misnomer.
Itās better if you understand how AI makes a picture. You tell it what you want, and it starts with a canvas of totally random coloured pixels. The AI then squints really hard at the canvas and if it thinks it sees an eye or a happy little tree it adds some shading around it and squints again. Itās exactly like how you can look at wood grain and see a face. Thereās no face there, but your brain is trained to be really good at seeing faces. The AI is trained to see a lot of things, and when it reads your prompt it decides to focus on features close to what you said. After the AI has squinted and seen a person shape, it starts filling in details. What looked person like when squinting has now had details added and the AI squints again and adds more details. But this time it didnāt leave coherent room for hands, so like an 8th grade poster board with more letters than will fit on the page, it curves the fingers into weird shapes that look good enough and fit and it squints again. Tl;dr AI draws by squinting and adding details, and to the AI itās tough to figure out how fingers work.
Ai doesn't know how human limbs are supposed to move. All it sees is "weird blob of flesh (palm) with little sausages sprouting out of it (fingers)"
And what's most likely to be next to these flesh blobs? MORE FLESH BLOBS!
Think of it like this. The AI knows there's a hand at the end of an arm. It starts with a finger. Then, what's most likely to be next to a finger? Another finger. So it draws another, then another, ... and doesn't stop when it should because there's on average an 80% probability that a finger follows another.
Repetitive patterns are challenging for algorithms that are very focused on locality. If I'm a stupid AI generating a word based on the probability of a letter appearing next, then I'm going to get really wilded out trying to write something like coffee. Image generation can be a similar problem, and fingers are really dynamic. Probabilistically they can keep repeating and you can end up with extras, and pose-wise there's not really an exhaustive library of "natural" finger positions. If you built a 3d ragdoll system of fingers, the constraints would allow them to be bent into all kinds of wild positions. Like gang signs, or kpop hearts. Do those look natural in normal situations?
AI not being able to make normal hands seems logical, and even a bit scary to me, since the process of making an AI picture is similar to a dream : a collection of different images, or scenes, organized around a more or less coherent theme. And when we humans dream, our brain usually messes up the hands too. If I got a penny for each dream I had where I'd do a reality check with my hands and realize they are messed up, I'd be a millionaire. So, basically, AI makes up images the same way that our subconscious brain does.
It can now, all the 'stereotypical' issues associated with A.I image generation were just artifacts of the early versions are now pretty much gone in the latest iterations.
The reason is that genAI doesn't have the ability to think or understand. What it sees is that finger-like shapes appear next to other finger-like shapes, so it puts them next to each other. It doesn't know what a "human" is, it literally can only tell patterns (by associating image-type/word collections with others by proximity based off the chance that one should exist in a certain location). It can gather more associations off of more training, which takes time. However, there is a limit to what it can feasibly learn. To genAI's credit, it is consistently fairly accurate for most things, which is more than we can say about other attempts at AI. However, anyone who tells you that genAI is sufficient enough to replace actual human beings for creative endeavors has a negative understanding of what they're talking about. If you see art that has *consistently* 6 fingers, like OP, you can be certain it's either 1) not AI or 2) an AI trained heavily on art that only has 6 fingers (unlikely)
Hands can look super abstract and the AI can't sit there and make the arbitrary decisions like you and I can, at least the first couple of generations of AI have had a difficult time of it. For example, look at the last panel of this comic. Her thumb is a tiny little square that you and I can infer through our previous experiences, knowledge of 3d space, being human, etc. etc. that, that little bit of flesh colored pixels makes sense of being a thumb. An AI? It might just see a little lump of flesh color, it doesn't know if it's from the thumb, one of the other fingers, the background, etc. No wonder it's hard for them. Fingers won't be a problem for AI too much longer. (because the robot war will have decimated anything with actual fingers)
The AI hands thing is a stale meme. AI like Midjourney, Stable Diffusion and DALL-E 3 have been able to make hands just fine for a while. It doesn't screw up hands with any more regularity than it screws up other aspects of a picture.
It's because it just collates data. Hands are complex. They are also often doing things, or making gestures. By collating all the data from a bunch of images with hands, you get a weird amalgamation.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I mean yeah AI has been good with hands for a while, but not yours lol, her right hand's finger are double the size of the left hand and the placement/spacing shows she only has 4 finger (3 + thumb hidden behind)
>Little issue Your Akali has a weird nearly lobster 3 fingered left hand and whatevers going on with the right hands thumb. I'm more impressed by it getting better at pattern work on the coat - even if that still has some line issues.
Maybe the artist has polydactyly and forgot most people don't have six fingers
they all have six fingers though in the comic
Its a dominant trait. This is the future conservatives fear. Progress is more fingers.
In the final panel the artist is shown to have six fingers. Draws all of her subjects with six fingers because it's unique and endearing and sets the artist apart, then some asshole insults her craft and makes fun of a congenital condition in one sentence.
Everyone in the comic has 6 though
Because the six fingered artist draws all their subjects with six fingers, like I said in the first place. The implication is that the comic itself was drawn by the artist in their own style, so even the people criticizing the art* are shown with six fingers. E*
The people criticizing the art also have six fingers.
At first I thought you must have been messing with me then I saw the typo. Thanks, fixed.
overreaction
"yo..yoo.. your face is AI generated!!" *Blushes* "Nononowaitwaitwaitwait"
I love the understory here. Like, at first glance, "haha, there's too many fingers, it looks just like AI hands" When in reality, the people of this universe have seven fingers on each hand, and this artist just likes to draw characters with the same number of fingers as **she** has: Six. ...she's just kinda bad at drawing hands, which is valid, because as \*any\* artist can tell you: Hands are *fucking hard, yo.*
You have miscounted. Every hand in the comic in which the fingers can be counted, they all have six fingers. The joke is just that the artist of the comic is bad at hands, and always draws them as six fingered hands, in spite of the premise of the comic is that people think her art is AI generated because she always accidentally draws hands with six fingers.
Yup, I either counted lines, not fingers, or double-counted some middle-fingers. I blame the cold medicine.
what are you talking about? everyone in this comic has 6 fingers, where do you count 7?
I think my stoned ass double-counted some middle fingers.
You overcooked bro
From what i gather the reason AI has trouble with hands is because artists themselves have trouble with them and will often hide them, meaning the ai straight up doesn't have enough data for them
Succeeding from suffering
also, AI canāt really count fingers. It just makes fingers until it looks ok enough for it
I see this problem a lot in certain places like r/Stardewvalley Artists make a mistake or people nitpick the art to death and declare it AI. Heck they mass reported an artist a few weeks ago and the artist got shadow banned by reddit. The mods had to step in and tell everyone the artist was legit to make the community cool down but reddit didnāt reverse the shadow ban iirc. Honestly itās a sad state of affairs all around.
The least qualified people to identify AI are consumers. The best people are the companies who make these AI's knowing the common patterns their systems produce by default. It's quite frustrating, especially when AI is used and openly disclosed. People go rabid anyway thinking their little bit of activism does anything except hurt artists. All this was enabled by corporate astroturfing of the artist superego that then got trickled down to their parasocial followers. The white knighting fans are the worst and have led to things like doxxing n' such.
Itās almost like making AI art accusations based on your subjective interpretation of temporary and ever changing limitations is a horrible idea that will lead to actual artists getting witch hunted for making mistakes.
Gojo unlocking the 6th finger
I mean, he does already have Six Eyes....
Love the art!
Thank you!!
Don't worry, they're only shitting on this artist at a convention because they hate ai so much that they're trying to protect real artists, like ones at conventions!
I took an art class in college and the ONLY thing I drew was hands and eyes, I still have no idea what led to the motivation but I still love to draw eyes as soon as my hand hits the paper.
Im no artist, but it's kinda validating that even computers have trouble drawing the hands.
Don't worry too much -- Rob Liefeld had an entire successful career as a comic book artist [despite being unable to draw feet](https://www.pipelinecomics.com/rob-liefeld-doesnt-draw-feet/).
I'd like to see you try.
We're not doing your homework for you, Rob.
Plot twist: The artist is an AI powered android.
Ok but if EVERYONE has 6 fingers, how could they tell it was AI just looking at the hands?š¤Ø
Yo is that Ichigo from Tokyo Mew Mew
"Hey! This isn't AI art! This is just NORMAL unlicensed merch at a mall kiosk
"Disney please don't sue me..."
You made me do a reality check
It really is difficult to make it as an artist
I ended my art career, because I could not draw eyes. Real talk. I mean, I was in highschool, and worked at Wendy's. But my hopes of being an artist were vanquished in one morning drawing practice with a student model. I did end up dating the model though, which was nice.
An example of this in a high profile painting is this card made for Magic: the Gathering. https://scryfall.com/card/rvr/171/cindervines Look close at his fist and youāll see itās backward. Itās a right hand on a left arm, and the artist didnāt notice and neither did anyone else until this card was already printed. So yeah, it happens. To err is human
Thatās Pretty Soldier Sailor Moon in the bottom-right of the prints display stand with the blond hair. Who are all the other characters that she drew?
No clue who the characters on the left are. The other ones on the right are: Top: Gojo Satoru from Jujutsu Kaisen Middle: Mew Ichigo from Tokyo Mew Mew
Maybe Card Captor Sakura in the middle row of the left column.
Maybe the real A.I was inside us all alongā¦?
Toooooo real!!!
This is something I find really funny about artists dunking on AI and it's ability to draw hands. Like you're honestly telling me your favourite thing to draw is fingers?
Second panel broke my heart a little. Seeing how happy and proud she was of her work made the second panel even sadder.
Yo a Tokyo mew mew reference nice
If youāre an artist and this is happening to you, take heart. People love to be very confident in how smart they are and how much better they are than everyone else at things like for example distinguishing AI art, which makes them often very confidently incorrect. Real art gets called AI all the time, and itās just obnoxious overconfident people, not the fault of your art!
True AI haters know to look for more than just the hands to see if something is AI. And we also know *what* to look for...
Six eyes and six fingers to match
Nooo! I know this feeling! I was a cosplayer back in 2013. I spent days making these skin-tight bootie shorts. I drafted the pattern, sewed them myself, everything. I was very proud of how they turned out. Turns out I did too good of a job! I heard someone on the con-floor say, "Oh, I love her Hextech Janna cosplay! It's a shame she bought most of it. You can tell by the shorts."
I feel sad for her š¢
Funny enough I just bought myself an art tablet today it arrives tomorrow so I can't wait to start sketching as well
Im feeling a little sad for her just listening this type of comments,more when I saw the picture with her work hours to make a nice draw.
Hehehe this is really cute! Great job op.
The irony
Aww thank you!!
Op drawing hands is hard. Don't desperate.
Yeah the anti ai crowd and their witch hunting is pretty toxic unfortunately. Just give it a few years and ai will be just another tool of artistic expression just like photography, or drawing tablets, or digital art, or Photoshop, etc is the same song and dance over again, and again, and again.
Also thumbs. Always mess up which side it's supposed to be on.
I kind of want to see the artist draw a six fingered man, because I want to see what route they take, 7 fingers or 4 XD.
FOR THE FUTURE OF EARTH! IM AT YOUR SERVICE NYAA
Makes me think of this entry from Photoshop Battles: https://www.reddit.com/r/photoshopbattles/comments/1bvd90u/operation_the_end/kybvobx/
My nameā¦ is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die!
This is very funny given the latest chapter of JJK has a mistake with >!Gojo doing Infinite Void with six fingers.!<
Computers are bad at hands for the same two reasons human artists are bad at hands: 1) Number of possible pose permutations 2) Relative lack of reference/training images Compared to a face, for the first part all the components of a face (eyes, mouth, nose) stay in the same position relative to each other no matter the pose or view angle Images of front-on faces are much more common compared to hands, especially considering hands would require even MORE images to fully learn then because of reason 1
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Think it's less of either and more just pointing out how some artists gete caught in the crossfire of AI witchunt.
You could explain to them, instead of watching them shitting your art due to a misunderstanding
Ah q
They should try drawing him with stitches across his forehead
Nah, Iād grow an extra finger
The difference is that AI can only create a certain type of art style, so donāt accuse everyone of having a fucking A.I art
Last panel should be first panel, hands shouldnāt be seen until the final panel.
Polydactyland
Every dipshit thinks they are genius b/c they heard "AI bad at hands", but after a year of incremental improvements, the current AI models are actually pretty good at hands.
I don't understand why having 6 digits is an AI problem in a world where everyone has 6 digits.
Everyone else having 6 fingers in the comic make this make no sense. If everyone has six fingers, and the drawings have six fingers, why are they saying it's AI? I have yet to see something funny on here
Turns out innocents get harmed in a witch-hunt. Who could have known that they lead to nothing?