Yes it is!!! I'm so excited that they are finally out with the new season 😭❤️❤️❤️❤️

@@Icednitro they what

Another season of Vox Machina just came out ✨

@@Icednitro YEAAAAAAA, BINGING TIME

I think you're missing the point my friend. I appreciate the opinion though. While everything is inspired by something, stealing is not ethical. All the things you posted take emotion, experience, humanity, a love for honing the craft. AI is none of those things. Photography still involves the rule of thirds, lighting, perspective, and emotion. A specific take on the world. Digital art still requires physical drawing capabilities. Directors are also artists, like every artist- are inspired and influenced by something. So on and so forth. AI is saying "I want this to be a thing" and a machine creates it for you. I'm convinced that the only artists who defend AI are the ones that use it. And AI does not belong. It's not ethical because it steals, (not inspired by, STEALS) and it takes no effort at all.

I do recommend watching artists responding to shadiversity's defending of AI, and why we don't welcome it as a community.

@@Icednitro have you seen the announcement from adobe the other day? (unfortunately, i can't post a link in a youtube comment).

and also, as you can obviously see from the comments on this post, there is no "artist community." there are are a million communities, and a million individuals who don't belong to any community. don't use the "no true scotsman" fallacy. "no true artist in our true artist community would be okay with the existence of ai in the world." well, it exists, and it's not going away, so we artists have to deal with it. p.s. please don't use the words "stealing" or "copying" when "amalgamation" is more accurate.

@@hikarustarr It's disrespectful to pretend AI isn't stealing. Sorry you feel the way you do, but to say that it's not stealing from work that already exists is a slap in the face. I could only assume you use AI and are defending it because of that. I It takes absolutely no talent or preexisting skills to make "AI art" which it isn't art. But I'm not back and forthing with strangers. it's here to stay, but we should use it to do the actual shitty and mundane jobs so people can enjoy creating. AI shouldn't be creating for us. It should be doing our taxes and our office jobs.

Thank you so much! That means a lot! It was my love letter to the Decemberists and their conceptual storytelling! I'm happy I could do it justice with my art 🥰 Thank you for supporting me!

Thank you so much 😀

🥺❤️

Sure, Capitalism unleashed this tech upon us, but socialists and communists were quick to adopt it for their political propaganda, and their message has been that AI "democratizes art", and that we are gatekeepers. The "art has to be political" crowd is a cancer in any of its forms.

Minimum effort, maximum satisfaction? Well, I don't understand then why it's ok for artists to "accidentally find an image on pinterest" and don't even ask permission of the author of the image to basically make derivative work off of it. And the same people are whining hysterically about AI stealing their art. If those people are so righteous, go outside, touch some freaking grass, find a model, get a photo-camera, wait for the right light or go to studio and make your own light, make few dozens of photos (of which might be few will be good), and voila - you have your references. Or draw from freaking life how great masters did. Sounds like too much effort, isn't it? And those people accuse other people for looking for the easy ways out.

See, the issue with your train of thought is that in all.technicality, nothing is original, right? And you talk about finding images of Pinterest, drawing inspiration from that, and making something out of your own head.. I don't see how that's bad. Everything we create from movies, music, to physical art comes from somewhere. That's not the problem with AI, and unfortunately you are heavily missing the point. The reason AI art is not art, is because it's a slap in the face to all artists who worked so hard to cultivate their own style, and put allll their emotions, experiences, and themselves into that art. I could prompt AI to draw anything, and at the end of the day there's zero reason I should look at that image and think "wow, I'm so talented, I did so good" because I did not create it. There is no emotion, satisfaction, development, hard work that went into it. Let alone was it created solely by STEALING work from an artist that DID put in the hours, the life experience, and a piece of them- and I just completely slapped that person in the face. There literally is no difference between finding a piece of work online and claiming that you drew it, and using AI and saying you made it. This is something that clearly went right above your head. I'm assuming you aren't an artist, but if you were, I'm sure you'd be as passionate about this as we are. I do not have to credit every artist that inspires me. However, if I used their work and COPIED, even if I drew it myself- yes. We should all give credit to our sources. You are right about that. But the funny thing is literally nobody is fighting that point. Because... That's not the point. You missed the point

Man, idk how's your comment relevant to what I wrote. What does that have to do with the price of tea in China? I don't even care whether AI art is art or not. Using reference is not just finding inspiration, it's pretty common for artists to basically redraw photo without permission, slightly stylize human or subject at its best and claim it as their art. I saw even popular artists doing that. I don't talk about "inspiration" - that's not inspiration, google what derivative work is, cause while reading your comment I understood that you have no idea what it is. It doesn't matter if artist credits the source or not - they shouldn't do that in the first place without permission, crediting doesn't protect from copyright infringement and it doesn't matter whether artist sells those works or not. And creating derivative work using someone's photo is way more blatant stealing that AI companies did, they at least used imagination to do so. Btw, it's not yet known - is it stealing or not, it's for court do decide, not for some random dudes on the Internet, and the case is still going but that's irrelevant, I digress. It's only OK if you change photo "reference" almost completely, so, no one can even recognize what photo you used as reference. Don't say that everyone knows that, I saw even popular artists who don't understand that vague line between using photo as "reference" (whatever that means) and making derivative work. Stealing from photos is basically normalized in artists' community. Don't you find hypocritical that the same people are whining about stealing now? You kinda missed MY point

No..I did not miss your point. If you want to go back and reread everything I explained to you, tracing, copying, AI, "inspiration all fall under the same umbrella. What you're describing, no matter what form is called copying. C o p y I n g Which is frowned upon in any creative community. Nobody is arguing that copying is okay. (Which is relative to AI art btw) Considering it's stealing. in·spi·ra·tion noun 1. the process of being mentally stimulated to do or feel something, especially to do something creative. "Helen had one of her flashes of inspiration" Meaning they didn't copy a piece, otherwise it wouldn't be inspiration. Star bite, Ellentori, Rebecca sugar, etc all INSPIRE me. Am I going to draw characters from Steven Universe claiming I made them up as an OC? No. That's copying/stealing. Am I now inspired to create my own series that capitalizes on points that Steven universe made with my own characters, plot, and individual take on it? I could. Which would be considered being inspired. You keep repeating yourself, and I keep saying the same thing. I'm tired. If you are stylizing the human figure, nobody owns the human figure right? If someone sees a model they like and wants to use it for drawing practice, clothes, hair, pose, etc I've never seen a big artist post their art without literally posting the picture they drew from in the next slide. Because we are all smart enough to know better. Nobody is arguing that copying and inspiration are the same and it's weird that you keep pushing that narrative.

This this this

I mean, we don't really know how long the Captain was with his mother. The Mariner could have been older when the Captain left.

You are the sweetest!!! I appreciate you ❤️❤️❤️

I appreciate that! This was a while back but I was happy to make something to represent how it felt at that time. ❤️✨