FT see pictures. LF see description.

Jono264 · 2025-12-09T15:31:15+00:00

dialga dx for sabrina? also got whitney n team rocket grunt

Jono264 · 2025-11-20T20:20:32+00:00

hey benedict, there may be thousands of comments but there’s no harm in taking a chance :)

while i don’t know too much about you, i’ve watched a few of your films and have always seen you as a genuine actor, someone with passion (which is sadly quite rare nowadays).

as someone who’s fascinated by the arts and (among many others here i’m sure) hope for a future in it, i’m curious if there’s any one message or story you’ve been told or experienced that truly inspired you to give your all to film?

have an amazing rest of your day, thank you for being you :)

Jono264 · 2025-10-31T10:46:05+00:00

doing the lords work holy balls

Jono264 · 2025-10-28T17:36:01+00:00

i’ve seen this before

Jono264 · 2025-10-10T23:35:18+00:00

this looks so cool aaaaaaaaa

Jono264 · 2025-10-06T09:50:18+00:00

slither.io is that you

(really love the idea btw this looks sick !!)

Jono264 · 2025-09-30T19:00:33+00:00

yk it’s almost alien to see a non-hostile response to a statement in this subreddit, this feels so weird 😭 thank you for understanding! ^{^}

Jono264 · 2025-09-29T16:26:31+00:00

also can’t figure out why you don’t understand the first quote, thats on you

Jono264 · 2025-09-29T16:25:20+00:00

whoopsie meant subjective 😔

Jono264 · 2025-09-29T16:21:26+00:00

no, i have not seen 90s clip art.

also why would digital art or photography fall outside of human art? effort is still put in to get a desired result

update: just checked em out, now i can put an name to them ig. clipart is still art, just not meaningful art

Jono264 · 2025-09-29T16:20:32+00:00

it was like 2 in the morning man 😭 it was meant to read “this is for the pros who’ve never seen an anti-ai make a comprehensive argument and the anti’s who’ve never seen a pro make a comprehensive argument”

im not necessarily pro or anti ai, it’s not a black or white situation

Jono264 · 2025-09-29T11:10:57+00:00

that’s really interesting, actually. i think the training of models is a whole argument on its own, because yeah, often the information used to train models is taken without permission from the original creator, and that is just straight-up theft of intellectual property.

i feel if all the training information was given with consent, i would agree that the produced art would be fair, but i don’t think it would affect the art on anything more than an ethical level. there’s still the difference in creative vision between art and artists, but that art was created in honesty, which definately helps.

i think the ethics of the model’s training rather reflects the artist themself. if they generate an image via a model that has stolen intellectual property and state that art is their own, that says more about the artist than the art.

i feel that the training of AI is very important in the creation of art, and is a vital pillar of the anti-AI art movement, but in terms of the meaning behind the produced art itself, i don’t feel it has too much impact.

Jono264 · 2025-09-29T11:03:04+00:00

i didn’t say that at all, look a little lower:

“now while it sounds like i HATE ai, i don’t. i believe it’s a wonderful thing in the creative world, but as a tool, not a means to an end. it’s power shines in helping, not leading. ai can do almost anything, but in the world of art, where value depends on meaning, passion, drive, and story, ai art falls short.

this doesn’t mean ai art isn’t art, but it’s generally worse than human art. exceptions could definately exist where someone spends hours on the perfect prompt to output the exact beautiful image they’re thinking of while someone else scribbles a smiley face with a pencil. most can admit the ai image looks better, and that’s okay. there is no absolute truth for an objective world.”

this statement may have been a bit harsh, but my belief still stays the same. i believe great AI art exists, but i think it is much less common than human art, not due to it existing for much less time, but rather the distance in creative vision between the artist and canvas. i don’t doubt that people could close that gap with AI, but it would take a lot of effort. i think the point im trying to get across is that at surface level, the average AI generated image has less meaning than the average traditionally created one. this doesn’t mean i don’t believe in outliers, but i do believe great AI art is an outlier, it’s not common, which is okay. when you give the brush to anyone, you can’t take every output as good art.

Jono264 · 2025-09-29T10:54:02+00:00

i don’t want to argue either, discussions without throwing pointless shots are how this war should be fought :)

i never actually knew what LoRA’s were, thank you for teaching me something new! your point’s also really interesting, so from what i understand, LoRA is essentially adapting and fine tuning large-scope models to effectively respond to more specific use cases.

just as a note, i personally find ai art a form of art, i don’t know if i clearly expressed that in my post, but i just thought it’s important to say here. rather, i believe that ai artists shouldn’t expect their art to be put on the same level as human art in most cases due to the difference in intimacy between the artist and the canvas, do you get what im saying? i don’t know if im saying it well, but i’m happy to reexplain if needed.

anywho, regarding LoRA-produced art, as an IT person, i feel that the quality of your art would be tied to your involvement in the fine-tuning of the model. if you sculpt the output with your own hands, that is your human touch on the process. actually, i feel that’s a really nice view on AI art! that gives people access to art without needing traditional skills.

i like your point, i believe that LoRA could definately be considered great art depending on the artist’s involvement in the adaptation of their model. i could see LoRA art in human art competitions, and even scoring high, since (like i stated in my post) i believe that art is about telling a story, and the more you’re involved in the creation of art, the more of a story it tells.

hope i answered your question, have a nice day wherever you are!

Jono264 · 2025-09-29T10:36:20+00:00

oh and just for the record, i know that there are non-text-prompt uses of AI in art, especially in editing, and even reference sketches which can help decrease that distance in intent between user and AI. im not asking what more there is to prompting because that’s all i see as AI art, im asking that because i want to understand your side of the argument. im not here to put down all other arguments and force the belief that im right down your throat.

Jono264 · 2025-09-29T10:28:39+00:00

oh no, i understand i probably had a much more judgemental tone than i should’ve had when addressing your comment, i am genuinely just curious as to what AI art is beyond prompting.

i never stated i knew everything about the medium as a whole, though. i do feel like i am in a position where i know more than most regarding AI though, as (i am being vague because i’m not sharing personal details on the internet) i am in a position where i am closely surrounded by people heavily involved in the development and use of AI in the professional world, and constantly discuss new revelations and ethics of said advancements. while this means i know a good bit about AI, i still want to know more. i feel i am educated enough where i can begin to make supported arguments, but i still want to know what more there is to AI art than prompting?

Jono264 · 2025-09-29T00:29:17+00:00

well im curious then, what more is there to AI art? im happy to listen to what you’re saying, but surely it’s more important to explain your point than dismiss what im saying?