21–30 of 130 posts
really the space for 16x16 sprites with AI has not been done very well so far
16x24 sprites end up looking a lot nicer though.
[flagged]
I’m not an expert in this space, but I’ve been buying human-made sprites from https://itch.io/game-assets Does anyone else have any good recommendations?
https://streamable.com/k5iny8 (2day expiry)
Pretty much any character or animation.
I don't feel compelled to share unless anyone in the relevant industry wants to collab, in favor of supporting human artists.
[flagged]
If your work is of so low quality that an algorithm that only generates "shitty art" (by popular consensus) puts you out of work, then you don't deserve to get paid for your "art." It's Schrödinger's art: it's really bad and good at the same time, good enough to put artists out of work. People don't get paid for work that machines can do. It's not a novel concept.
It's been trained on some of the best artwork. Various artists have been told their artwork looks like AI, meanwhile it's actually the other around. Already in the app stores there are many games full of AI art that the average person without an artist's eye probably can't see the difference compared to something a human made.
I think art is very different from other jobs, it's more like the soul of humanity. When we look back through time, we mainly look at the art and what it can tell us, only a niche portion of people will care about the other things.
If we let machines do everything, even create our culture and art, what is left for us? Just to be consumers?
[flagged]
If your work is of so low quality that an algorithm that only generates "shitty art" (by popular consensus) puts you out of work, then you don't deserve to get paid for your "art." It's Schrödinger's art: it's really bad and good at the same time, good enough to put artists out of work. People don't get paid for work that machines can do. It's not a novel concept.
> People don't get paid for work that machines can do. It's not a novel concept.
Thank you! I'm sick of sounding like an apologist. This is simply the science of economics.
>> No shame in proudly presenting a tool with "putting people out of work" as a feature.
I am so tired of this type of attitude. I've read this endlessly and it does a whole lot of nothing for nobody.
This isn't putting anyone out of work. The games simply would not be made in the first place.
Someone might not pursue game dev because they can't build the art for it themselves. Now they have options.
>> Lovingly handcrafted artwork is what I like in video games [...]
Then you go buy that thing and stop dunking on people for making tools.
Give those artists you care about your money. Let the rest of us enjoy the new tools and the work created with them.
You don't weep for all the i18n experts when someone makes a nice open source datetime library. So stop doing it here.
Software engineers constantly have to learn new things and adapt. The artists will do the same.
If they actually start using the tools, maybe they can start making games and movies and things of a scale and scope they could never have done before.
The things you can accomplish with video models are downright impressive:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tAAiiKteM-U
Someone told me, "But you didn't hire any hard-working stop motion animators."
Yes, that's right. Because it never would have been made before. Because stop motion animating a 4-minute Superman fandom short didn't make economic sense.
The privacy pages and legal pages don't link. They all return to the homepage. Without them I am hesitant in uploading my concept art from my project for testing. Otherwise it is a cool concept and I would potentially look in to if it turns out you don't go all evil villain and claim ownership over the sprites. Enabling a preview set of sprites without having an account would do no harm neither. But creating an accou…
Curious idea, but doesn't seem to working for me. It's been sitting in "Your job is in queue" state for 10 minutes, and that's it. Reloaded the page just now and it just reset itself.
When your request finish it'll send you an email notification.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you seriously think doctors are losing their jobs due to ai advances, you need to check your sources. Most likely, more people will need medical attention.
Of course they're going to lose their job. ChatGPT is already replacing a bunch of requests that would otherwise be at a walk-in clinic. AI is being shown to be a better diagnostician in many cases than physicians. AI is rapidly reducing the need for radiologists. You think in 20 years you have more doctors than today? Please.
Expert systems have been able to diagnose many illnesses better than doctors for decades but they have replaced precisely zero doctors for many reasons, but the biggest is that they can’t accept liability for their recommendations.
No company will ever release a consumer medical product that doesn’t tell 99% of patients they should check with their doctor.
Also do you have any idea how many times my wife has said something to friends and family like “no you don’t need to go to the ER, you can wait and if their fever doesn’t go away in X days see their pediatrician during normal hours. It’s likely a virus and nothing can be done anyway”, only to have that person take their child to the ER because they want a doctor to look at their kid and tell them face face that nothing is wrong.
A phone call with an expert they know isn’t enough to replace an in person visit. ChatGPT will never be enough.
As far as radiologists go, they haven’t been replaced yet despite people saying it would happen for years. And they are in a unique position where people never actually see them.
But even if all image reads are done with AI, they can always retrain as interventional radiologists.