Skip to main content

On Sale: GamesAssetsToolsTabletopComics
Indie game storeFree gamesFun gamesHorror games
Game developmentAssetsComics
SalesBundles
Jobs
TagsGame Engines
(3 edits)

But I think everyone should be aware of where the envelope is being pushed.

I was personally pretty taken aback by these two (and for fun note the weird signature it reproduced in the first one):

I can spot a lot of 'mistakes' but they're all kinda in the realm of human-like mistakes (repeat tea cups, strange hair physics, strange eye angle etc).

But when you see these- you gotta remember: the little quirks of the style were all made by human artists, not 'thought up' by AI. With the top image, I really wanted to know which artists it learned the cloth shading from! But I can't. No sources/no trace of who or where it learned from. Really disappointing.

(+1)

Examples of "good" AI art also demonstrate very little.  When I hire an artist (when I can afford to), it won't be to create just any good picture, it will be a complete set of specified images in a specified art style.  If I just want any good picture, I'll go to one of any number of royalty-free image sites.

As for those two images, the upper one has aspects that I like, but the eyes have the typical AI-generated uncanny valley effect.  The bottom image is more interesting, but it's also obviously a collage of existing works.  The details all look good because they were all drawn by skilled humans.

AI-generated boudoir photography shoots will be awesome. I assure you.