this post was submitted on 19 Nov 2023
159 points (97.0% liked)
Asklemmy
43866 readers
1571 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Art. I'm not judgy against people doing it, but I always see all these people with advanced modification tools and using them to make their art "better", like photoshop contrast tools and color stuff, when to me, if my art is good it's good. I got eighth place in an art contest once, yet I know (without really complaining about it though) that I would've gotten second place if people hadn't put steroids into their sunsets.
What irks me a little is those same artists who use the metaphorical steroids are in the campaign against AI art, and I'm like dude, there are people from whom it would be more fitting to hear complaints from. Say what you want about AI art, I'm not going to severely invalidate the arguments from either side themselves, but considering the actual critics involved, it's at least 90% hypocrisy from the "anti" side, and you'll have seen me having said this since day one.