Home
Artists
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register
Partychan Telegram Find&Fuck Waifus ThePornDude
Home Artists Posts Import Register

Art Contest! (Patreon)

Published:
2023-06-07 17:11:45
Imported:

Content

Hey all!

My birthday's coming up next week, and I finally got a moment of fresh air to think "Wait! I should run an art contest!"

Now, there's lots to be said about art contests. The biggest controversy around them is 'only the winners get paid'. Which is a fair complaint. So I'm trying to mitigate this by encouraging people to use AI art for the contest. Not only does it allow everyone and anyone to participate, it means that nobody is really out a huge amount of time and effort if they don't win.

Prizes: $500 of prizes for the winners. $200 to 1st, $100 to second, and $20 to 3rd-12th.

Submission: There is a new channel on discord (https://discord.gg/d9VT2Mw9ca ) - the art contest channel forum - to submit your artwork. There is no limit on the number of submissions you can make.

Judging: It'll be a combination of voting on Patreon, and my own personal taste.

Subject matter: Must be related to BTDEM

My personal taste: I like 'realistic' styles, and anime styles. Frankly, your best shot of winning are using one of those two styles.

Deadline: June 15th I'll announce the winners. It's my birthday then!

Cheers! I can't wait to see what you all come up with!

Comments

Captdeth

10m

Gopard

So let me state this cause I apparently randomly refreshed right at the time this was posted. I find the statement "only the winners get paid" a little ridiculous (I have absolutely nothing against the AI-Art-idea, its a very nice). I for example play the boardgame"Go" as a hobby, when attenting a tournament/contest we(go players) even pay to play and then spent the majority of a weekend(might go up to 2-4 days dependent on the tournament ofc) playing this game until the brain smokes... At the end... Only the winners get paid (prizes) thats generally the nature of ANY "contest/tournament/official competition". Obviously its great for the number of participants though, as you said like this a lot more people can just join and it WON'T "JUST" be people who find the entire process of creation fun and/or are confident in winning while also having the spare free time. "Rant" end, not sure this even qualifies at that, would at most be a "rant at the people who complained". :)

Anonymous

"Not only does it allow everyone and anyone to participate, it means that nobody is really out a huge amount of time and effort if they don't win." Doesnt this just inventivise actual artists to not put in much effort though? Cus high quality art takes a lot of time. Allowing ai art to win is kind of deincentivising putting a lot of effort into it. Wouldnt it be better to split the prize pools into two brackets? An ai art pool and a normal art pool?

Kris Boxall

I think AI Art is a bigger problem than rewarding people for winning an Art Contest right?

Anonymous
>>110226267

I'm sure portrait painters were saying similar things about photography 100-150 years ago. AI art makes visual creativity accesable to many more people. It is both easy to "have a go" and takes practice and skill to get something decent. It seems just like a new style to me. I wouldn't be surprised if it's accesability increases overall interest in art over the next decade or two. A gateway drug to artistic obsession.

Kris Boxall
>>110226267

AI Art relies entirely on stealing from artists and photographers by training their AI on previously created work. Prompting a machine to make something for you does not take skill.

eternalephemera
>>110226267

it’s also really not clear where the difference is between humans learning from human art and ai doing the same. but i do think this will likely be a “first they came for the artists” situation, where humanity as a whole needs to find an answer to automation, and its not clear that forcing humans to economically compete with ai is a good answer

Kris Boxall
>>110226267

In what way does it take skill? And it seems pretty clear the difference is that one is a machine and one is a human

BerciTheBeast
>>110226267

A simple or unclear prompt can result in a non-satisfactory art result, so people good at writing prompts can consistently get better results by knowing what to input go get what they want.

Katarak
>>110226267

Saying Ai is „stealing“ from artists is like saying all cubists are stealing from Picasso. Extremely few artists contribute anything *new* to the medium. The overwhelming majority iterate on other artists.

HeartHawk
>>110224957

I second a second prize pool. I kinda wanna see some cool handmade art. I can generate 10k ai images any time but I cant have even 3 people I know make art for this story by hand.

Kris Boxall
>>110226267

So you need to give clear instructions to the machine before it does all the work for you got it. And it’s stealing because it’s trained on images an artist creates, then you can prompt the machine to make you a piece of art in that artist’s style, therefore stealing from said artist.

Anonymous
>>110226267

Every artist I know was trained the same way. We don't accuse people of stealing from an artist for producing work in a similar style. People learn from experiences and direction. Now computers can too.

Gopard
>>110226267

@Kris Boxall Well, but "real artists" are also "trained on images artists created" or what exactly do you call it when teachers show you paintings/techniques from famous artists to emulate? Its exactly what AI does only in "human". Now to your other point: Have you ever actually created art using AI? If not then I'd urge you to have a go and see how "easy/simple" it is to get something good!

Gopard
>>110224957

Yeah, but 10k images... Which AI are you using that that doesn't cost an obscene amount of money? :)

Kris Boxall
>>110226267

@Simon Hughes Producing work in a similar style is fine because every human artist’s work requires original thought and time to learn skill, all these machines can do is copy.

Kris Boxall
>>110226267

@Gopard The point is when real human artists make art they don’t start by taking images from others and say I’ll copy from these images today, they have an idea then use their skill to make that idea. To the other point I haven’t made art using AI because if I haven’t made this clear by now I think it’s wrong to use it!

Gopard
>>110226267

So tell me if I were to place to pictures in front of you one "human made" and one "AI-made" do you think you could confidently tell me which is which without knowing before? And thats not when the AI is told "copy X picture" but just "paint blabla situation"? I think one wouldn't because its not just "copying", if you say it like that any "digital art" is "just copying" after all its just the respective lines of code for a colour "pasted" into pixels. AI is just much more precise when doing that! You can easily create an AI-art thats never been painted before. Just put in your "idea" for the day and there you go, the fact that "every idea there is probably has been painted once already" doesn't mean that every AI-Art is a "fake and just copying". Thats literally the same as saying "anything AI does is just copying because they use data to learn"... AI is defined to be "self-learning" this means it doesn't JUST copy existing stuff (otherwise it would NEVER create anything new or "better") but it creates NEW things. If what you were saying was true, then it wouldn't be AI thats threatening Artists but "the internet" because it would basically mean "anything I want had been made somewhere before I just need to find it", so no one needs new Art... But I doubt you actually think that, because its stupid! If someone creates Art for BtDEM using AI and it is completely unique how can you claim its all "fake and copied"?

Kris Boxall
>>110226267

I don’t know Gopard but that not really the point. I say it’s copying because AI art just generates something that is a prediction of what artwork should look like, nothing AI produces will be genuinely original. Digital art is not just copying because a human artist is doing the work.

Raivshard
>>110224957

There's a world of difference between making a whole bunch of AI images and making highly specific AI images which are both relevant to the subject matter and consistent with each other. Details matter.

Raivshard
>>110226267

Let's maybe keep the politics out of it? This is a pretty touchy subject for a lot of people.

Anonymous

"Now, there's lots to be said about art contests. The biggest controversy around them is 'only the winners get paid'. Which is a fair complaint. So I'm trying to mitigate this by encouraging people to use AI art for the contest. Not only does it allow everyone and anyone to participate, it means that nobody is really out a huge amount of time and effort if they don't win." You could just say you want to run an AI art contest instead of prettying it up like an absolute clown faced fuckhead, my man.

Colin Groh

If I train an AI on art that readers (or a specific reader) have done of Elaine, and I make the AI generate something that wins the contest, should I get the whole $500 and the artist who I based it off of get $0? Don't you think that'll disincentivize creators from making fanart of your world? I think you should seriously consider walking this back and making a contest that awards money to maybe 10 different artists, even if it's only $50 on average.

Gopard
>>110226267

How do you "know" this though? Whats the actual difference you say "its just a prediction what art should look like"? huh, but... Isn't that also what many Artist start with? "imagination" on AI is pretty hard to define, when its most likely absolutely impossible for anyone to say "this part of the picture is in fact copied from there and that picture, etc..." Yes, AI woulnd't generate a "whole new style" but thats also not what an Artist would do when the requirements are "fanart for a fantasy-webfiction" Why is it "unimaginative" to think "I wan't my characters to look like these, they did a beautiful job painting it" otherwise you could also say that almost every landscape picture comes with a blue sky and a sun, I personally feel like as long as its indistinguishable from a "real artwork" nothing about AI art is "just a fake copy". I mean the literal concept of Fanart is to take someone else's characters (be that from a book, cartoon or video-format) and "copy them". But Raivshard was right, this topic will obviously lead to nothing, so lets just stop this here. We both have differing opinions on this and thats fine.

Anonymous

Y’all, if someone wants to give people some money for making AI art on their birthday, maybe just let it fucking go. AI art isn’t going back in the bottle, the battle now is around policy making, not attacking birthday contests.

SelkieMyth
>>110224957

I was going to run it as two prize pools, and realized my timeline wouldn't work. I'm saving the second, human-only contest for later!

Jett Hardin
>>110243601

Did you even read to the prize section? I don't get what the issue with AI art is in this circumstance. I get that having a computer be able to take your livelyhood can be scary but this isn't that.

Jett Hardin

Happy birthday selkie! Yours is two days after mine!

xXM1g420Y0lO5wAG8laze1tN05c0p3Xx

Yes happy birthday selkie, ignore all these clowns that can't let other people have things without inserting their opinion. Its your birthday not theirs.