Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Krita AI Diffusion

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 279 posts

Re: Krita AI Diffusion

#171

Post by __loam »

dthul wrote: post #59
vouaobrasil wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is absolutely ridiculous and short-sighted. AI is a tool that is and always will make the creation of art less a matter of the expression of the human soul. What techies NEVER understand about art is this: that art is not just the end product for the artist but something they use to express THEMSELVES. UNLIKE other tools, AI makes creative decisions. No other tool has done this, and moreover, its primary purpose…

That sounds like a very Luddite view. Why wouldn't artists be able to use AI selectively to automate "boring" tasks (such as filling the sky of an image with clouds) while still retaining overall artistic control?

Stop using a group of people who was slandered and murdered by ultra wealthy factory owners as a derogatory term.

Re: Krita AI Diffusion

#172

Post by bee_rider »

makeitdouble wrote: post #120
hutzlibu wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"As far as I know there's a sizeable number of devs who don't intend to ever rely on copilot" Is that really a thing? I mean, I also don't want to rely on Microsoft and therefore also not on Copilot, but not using AI tools in general out of principle is probably a very rare minority. I simply would prefer my own local LLM. But in the thread linked above I read "AI never had and never will have it’s place in art." And…

In an ideal world I'd choose stacks with not enough boilerplate to warrant copilot. I had my share of auto generation with enterprise Java stacks, and tried as hard as I could to move to stacks where what we write is concise and relevant (rails is the closest I came to this, not perfect but clearly going in the right direction). I think AI has its place, but I also hope to be lucky enough to not have to use it. Illus…

Yeah these Copilot type tools shouldn’t help much if a language is well-designed, or a project is structured in a fashion that doesn’t require a ton of boilerplate. If we’re doing things well, we’ll only have to tell the computer something once, right?

If it is possible to guess what we’re going to write, then we aren’t transmitting much information to the computer.

Copilot seems to be very popular though.

Re: Krita AI Diffusion

#173

Post by Fraterkes »

orbital-decay wrote: post #167
Fraterkes wrote: post #162

A theoretical nice thing about Krita and art in these past decades was that you could be an 18 year old with some ok drawing skills, a thinkpad, a secondhand wacom tablet and a version of krita, and the internet, this wonderful innovation, could enable you to make some money as an artist. If the future expectation is that artists all have 2000 euro graphics cards, I think that will really make art a lot less democrat…

That's not the expectation at all; a lot of work is being done to make it run on underpowered hardware. SD in particular runs on a 8-years-old potato, albeit slowly and with limitations, despite originally barely fitting into 10GB VRAM. >A theoretical nice thing about Krita and art in these past decades was that you could be an 18 year old with some ok drawing skills, a thinkpad, a secondhand wacom tablet and a versi…

Sure, the part about everyone just pirating photoshop is absolutely tue (it comes out to be the same thing though, you can't pirate hardware). My point is the gap in potential quality and art output between photoshop on a powerful pc an a pirated copy of ps on a thinkpad is pretty small: you need a lot of ram to produce 4k art, but a thinkpad is fine for most comissions. The gap is obviously a lot larger with ai: you yourself mention that sd (just one of the models people are currently using) runs slowly and with limitations. If the expectation becomes that you deliver 100 4k permutations on a certain theme, the time it takes to achieve that from a human labor standpoint will be similar, but the time that takes to render wise will vary orders of magnitude based on your resources. Not to mention that a workflow with a realtime refresh rate is qualititavely different frome one that runs 0.1fps.

Re: Krita AI Diffusion

#174

Post by orbital-decay »

__loam wrote: post #166
raincole wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think at one point Krita will fork to two apps because of this exact reason. AI-based tools are clearly the next step of painting apps (to me at least, but I can't be the only one who believes in this). I think in 3~5 years an painting app without AI generation feature is just like a painting app without pen pressure today. It's still usable, you can make great art with it if you have the skill, but it will be so o…

I think you don't know a lot of people in the art community if you think this. Good to see Krita standing with the people who actually use their tools.

I worked with 2D artists for 5 years, and the actual attitude is much more mixed than it might appear from listening to the vocal folks. Eventually most will accept this as another tech-heavy field like 3D CGI, especially when these tools will start to give more usable results in the hands of skilled artists. (they mostly don't, yet)

Re: Krita AI Diffusion

#175

Post by Matumio »

elaus wrote: post #25
shultays wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh, I wasn't aware Krita was a thing. As a software engineer that rarely needs image editing Gimp was my go to software. Why there is a second open source image editing software now?

I think it's totally fine and normal for multiple OSS tools existing in the same space. Krita is almost 20 years old and is more focused on painting than on image editing – but personally, I use it for both, liking the UI much more than that of GIMP.

Back in those days, GIMP was just barely usable for painting, and Krita was mainly good for crashing. Both have come a long way since then. GIMP is still mainly an "image manipulation" program. It got better at painting, too, but you probably want to give Krita a try for that.

Re: Krita AI Diffusion

#176

Post by throwaway30230 »

At this point it seems pointless to even bother to try given that AI will generate all possible artwork within a couple years.

I mean. Say you get "good" at using this. What's the life expectancy at any kind of creative outlet you could have that would support you? I mean if we're talking this is fun as a toy, yeah ok. I could see that. But as a job? When everyone can paint no one is paid for it.

I suppose that we could all go back to paying people who can physically lift things or wait on tables, but that's about it.

I want to use this, but then I just think "Holy shit, what if I get good at this and then get my hopes up like I did with React? What am I going to do, sell artwork that anyone can make for next to nothing on the internet?" I believe I could probably come up with some cool paintings, but the question is "why"? Everyone else on the internet will generate all the possible content it's possible for me to come up with anyway, so why does it matter?

And if that makes me care about "money" then yeah, I care about money. So what?

All of that being said I'm now going to draw a latex glad ninja being molested by a demon. Also I'm broke and living in a homeless shelter. But I can get a supercomputer to make me draw sexy girls so I have that going for me.

Re: Krita AI Diffusion

#177

Post by LoganDark »

throwaway30230 wrote: post #176

At this point it seems pointless to even bother to try given that AI will generate all possible artwork within a couple years. I mean. Say you get "good" at using this. What's the life expectancy at any kind of creative outlet you could have that would support you? I mean if we're talking this is fun as a toy, yeah ok. I could see that. But as a job? When everyone can paint no one is paid for it. I suppose that we co…

Never underestimate the number of kinks out there

Re: Krita AI Diffusion

#178

Post by kzrdude »

vonjuice wrote: post #69
ben_w wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mm. Possibly, but not necessarily. I have a suspicion that art is to humans as fancy tails are to peacocks: the difficulty is the point. I believe this is why we have art galleries proudly displaying oil paintings of fruit bowls, but don't do this for random food snapshots. It's also why photographs as a category were initially dismissed (in an era that had come to praise extreme realism in paintings), but when photo…

We have art galleries displaying things like empty canvases or toilet bowls that make a statement, it's definitely not about difficulty. The fact is that the debate about what art is is part of what makes art art, it escapes definition because part of the spirit of art is rebelling against definition.

We can't judge all of the art sphere just from the worst examples. Think of people who judge software by our worst examples (crypto scams, I don't know)?

Re: Krita AI Diffusion

#179

Post by zamadatix »

makeitdouble wrote: post #91
raincole wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think at one point Krita will fork to two apps because of this exact reason. AI-based tools are clearly the next step of painting apps (to me at least, but I can't be the only one who believes in this). I think in 3~5 years an painting app without AI generation feature is just like a painting app without pen pressure today. It's still usable, you can make great art with it if you have the skill, but it will be so o…

Is it that different from how we view Github copilot ? As far as I know there's a sizeable number of devs who don't intend to ever rely on copilot, and I would expect the a similar trend in the drawing community with amateurs and pros not specially anti-AI, but not wanting to have a random generator meddle with their art.

Has anyone found out what the "sizable number" actually looks like? Is it sizable as in "13% of devs, 35% in niche areas like HN, say they are against it wholesale" or sizable as in "3% of devs can make a lot of noise, especially in nice areas, when it's something they care about"? Even 0.1% of devs would be quite sizable by number but still irrelevant in context of why one group's opinion is like another.

Of those that don't ever intend to rely on something like copilot - is the majority because "I can code better without it in the current capabilities" or a principled matter about the technology wronging them in some way?

Re: Krita AI Diffusion

#180

Post by lock-the-spock »

throwaway30230 wrote: post #176

At this point it seems pointless to even bother to try given that AI will generate all possible artwork within a couple years. I mean. Say you get "good" at using this. What's the life expectancy at any kind of creative outlet you could have that would support you? I mean if we're talking this is fun as a toy, yeah ok. I could see that. But as a job? When everyone can paint no one is paid for it. I suppose that we co…

Maybe a nice analogy are the old trades: knitting, weaving, ceramics, glass blowing, woodworking, ... Still down for pleasure and a niche audience.
Post reply on HN