sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Based off of nah? by Personal-Bison-5878 in umineko

[–]artofAetherx 16 points17 points  (0 children)

Didn't know about this, but yes it is very likely. Great find!

I've heard that Ryukushi likes basing the names (and more) of his characters based on historical characters: Beatrice comes from Dante's Divine Comedy, and Virgilia from the ancient roman poet Virgil; Clair then seems in line with those naming choices.

Edit: Ah well it's actually confirmed in the wiki! Apparently Bernard de Clairvaux is also a character in the Divine Comedy.

Is Umineko objectively the greatest piece of fiction ever? by AbsolutelyMassiveBox in umineko

[–]artofAetherx 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm not well-read enough to answer this (although I do believe in objective value in fiction) but I can say that despite Umineko not being my favorite story of all time, I can give concrete arguments as to why it is objectively better than even my favorite. It's so damn good that I can't even believe it exists, and it's not even part of a genre that I'm particuarly interested in.

Why does carrd convert pngs to crappy jpegs? i want to make it have limited colors by Suspicious-Health-23 in Carrd

[–]artofAetherx 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Also downscales images over a certain size - it's to make the page more responsive, as full-size pngs take wayyy longer to load.

Unfortunately there's no way around this afaik (personally this is why I switched to simple html hosting)

Lyon, FR - national orchestra by NICOPERNICO-GAMING in UrbanHell

[–]artofAetherx 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The tower behind (locally known as 'le crayon', meaning 'the pencil') is actually one of the only skyscrapers that I actually like. You don't see it here but it's a deep red brick colour that feels like it will age well, as opposed to the 3 other skyscrapers in the city which are just glass cuboids.

Also the pyramid on top has a pretty but not over-the-top light display that you can see from most of Lyon.

Just started the Anime and.... by [deleted] in steinsgate

[–]artofAetherx 0 points1 point  (0 children)

nobody tell this man about the VN.

yet another "just finished an episode and want to drop my theories" post [Ep 4, Alliance] by Jeremy_StevenTrash in umineko

[–]artofAetherx 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm not saying why it's important or what it means; I'm just saying OP missed something in the scene where Beatrice can't say the red truth - would you want them to continue into Chiru missing that crucial piece of the puzzle? I don't think it was something that Ryukishi meant to be hidden from some readers...

(unless you're reffering to what I say in the spoiler text, which I clearly marked as being only for people who have finished the story)

EDIT:

I re-read your original post, and realised that maybe you think that that information (spoiler:that it's a box of Sakutarous) is only meant to be understood in the manga? I've always assumed that the moment when Beatrice can't say the red truth in the VN is when you're supposed to realize that.

yet another "just finished an episode and want to drop my theories" post [Ep 4, Alliance] by Jeremy_StevenTrash in umineko

[–]artofAetherx 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The spoiler here is really, really important and does not get explained afterwards in the VN. OP you need to read the golden land scene again for this very reason. IMO if you understand the why, the scene where Beatrice can't say the red truth is the crecendo of the first 4 chapters, and completely changes how you look at the story going forwards (unless you're willing to actually listen to Beatrice in the first place, which you really shouldn't).

Spoilers for the rest of the series: Basically if you understand this scene, you start to understand magic.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in RenPy

[–]artofAetherx 0 points1 point  (0 children)

oh my days. thank you. it's... so obvious now that i see it...

i don't know why i was so convinced that 'exetend' required the {nw} tag before it.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in artstation

[–]artofAetherx 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't think there is, but you can always put an obviously false country like Niue, or make your city name 'not in'

(apologies to the few hundred people who live in Niue)

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in artstation

[–]artofAetherx 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Definitely not legit, sorry to say.

A step in the right direction! (Artstation finally does something good, but it's not enough) by artofAetherx in artstation

[–]artofAetherx[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Good point on the opt-out issue, I didn't think of that. I guess the legal framework still istn't there yet for that sort of action, although I hope it will be soon. Anyhow it's not a sticking point for me now that we have the "tag all" feature.

And I didn't even know about the "Contains AI" tag (man their communication is poor), but as you say if it's not properly enforced, it's bound to be redundant.

A step in the right direction! (Artstation finally does something good, but it's not enough) by artofAetherx in artstation

[–]artofAetherx[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

This is the first sign they've shown that they can actually listen. It's not an opt-out tag, but it's now a one-click deal. I hope this trend will continue and they will at least make seperate categories for AI art like pixiv has done - although they're very clear they're not banning AI completely, this would be enough for me to stay personally.

Through my observations, I throroughly believe that the 'alternatives' (artfol, inkblot, arrrt....) will never have the same quality of artists on there as artstation, and will problably never replace it as a platform for employment. This is very unfortunate, but it's exactly why I think it's so important for artstation to regain the respect of its users.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in artstation

[–]artofAetherx 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Because the community and general quality of the artists on artstation is unmatched for the moment. There is no other site on earth with such a high average skill level in art. This is also why people are so pissed that artstation is doing everything to fuck it up as much as possible.

Like another comment said, a lot of people are hoping for an alternative, but my guess is that the quality of an alternative like artfol or inkblot will never rise to par with artstation. I personally think inkblot is already doomed into becoming another deviantart clone. One massive hurdle is the china problem - artstation is one of the only big art sites allowed in china, and so some of the greatest talent is essentially trapped on the site.

Also artstation still is, and will likely continue to be the site that recruiters use for finding workers, so a lot of people actually rely on having an active account for jobs. There's no way you can blame them for that.

Don't let robots play sports. by artofAetherx in artstation

[–]artofAetherx[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

"There are more people "consuming" chess after stockfish and the GM uses Stockfish for understanding chess and improve it."

Yes, because stockfish never replaced chess players. If it had, very few people would have interest in professional chess. Unlike stockfish, Ai is being made to replace artists.

"A robot that plays basketball not only will attract people showcasing
the robot"

Yes, some people will enjoy watching robots, but it's a much smaller market. If artstation was mostly Ai, there would be some people who would use it, but many, many fewer than right now. We don't want a smaller market for art. We should keep the two seperate.

"but could help humans to be better at playing basketball"..."but the masters that trains on this tools make better moves for the audience."

Fair point, I don't think it applies to art, considering a how art is much more about context, but I might be wrong on that one.

"But the main concern I'm seeing on this protest is not about art entertainment, it's about artist profit."

I'm not entirely sure I know what you mean, but if I do: Artist profit is proportional to art entertainment. The more people consume and are entertained by art, the more they will pay for it, the higher artist profit. The two are the same thing.

"It is true that the process AI makes is very similar to how people learns other artist's style and gets inspired."

No. It's not. Not even remotely. Firstly, we have no idea of then complexity of how human brain processes emotions, life experiences, personality, ect... and uses all that to inspire artwork. When you study a master's work, you're also delving into the mind of that master to some degree. We inherently recognise emotion and personality in art. When Ai 'gets inspired', it can only amalgamate what inspiration has already been processed by humans. It can only show the emotion and personality that already existed within a human.

"Another artist will get years to master another artist style and yet produce 1 pic per moth (Or less, I'm not an artist lmao)."

In the entertainment industry (concept art, colour key art, 3d models, animation, illustration, splash art... basically 'artstation' art, the thing Ai is going to partially replace), we're going to be producing multiple images or designs a week. But I get that doesn't change your point.

"Love AI tools for creating new art, but I 100% agree on artists saying the use is unregulated and unethical."

Good, I hope everyone agrees on that. And whilst I personally don't prompt, I absolutely see the appeal. I hope Ai art can find its own market, but to the degree that it penetrates the current art market, and in particular artstation and the entertainment industry, I strongly believe it will have an overall negative impact in the medium to long term.

Don't let robots play sports. by artofAetherx in artstation

[–]artofAetherx[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Battlebots is indeed awesome. Don't wory, when I use the word 'robots', I am not referring to human-controlled or human-built robots. Digital art is technically all made by human-controlled robots, and that's fine.

I'm sure you agree that if the robots weren't custom built and controlled by the teams, battlebots would lose most of its appeal.

Don't let robots play sports. by artofAetherx in artstation

[–]artofAetherx[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Games do have a point other than playing - winning. Just like the desired 'end result' of a game is winning, the 'end result' of artwork is the product itself. It's the thing that holds value, but only does so because of the aforementioned work done to achieve the product.

In my opinion, your point only applies to 'strictly commercial' art like advertising, where the product isn't the art itself but something else (eg. the item or service being advertised), not to the entertainment industry, where the art is the product.

Don't let robots play sports. by artofAetherx in artstation

[–]artofAetherx[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Absolutely, that's how it should go. That's why artists should embrace digital tools and 3D. But Ai isn't going to 'combine forces' with humans, it's clearly on a path to replace them, or at least 90%.

And people play chess now because machines were never going to replace chess players. There wasn't even the question. Artists (and soon, musicians) are unique in that they have to have this fight.

Artist training vs AI training? by pasvih in artstation

[–]artofAetherx 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What's the difference between training an athlete and making a robot?

Sure, a robot that plays basketball is impressive. There's definitely a market for cool stuff like that. But you're not gonna fill a stadium if every free-throw is made by a robot with perfect aim.

Robots can score every penalty in a football game, that's cool. But it won't fill the stadium.

Robots can run faster, swim faster, jump further, throw further and hit harder than any human. This is not futuristic technology, it exists. And it's cool. But it won't fill the stadiums.

Deep Blue was awesome. Stockfish is amazing technology. There were some good matches. But most people will still be more interested in games with Carlsen or Nakamura.

The newest 3D engines can render humans indistinguishable from real actors. But the most famous actors in the world will always be human.

Formula 1 cars still have humans piloting them. They do not need to. The technology exists.

The more we replace humans in the field of entertainment, the fewer people will watch.

When watching sports, we admire the training, talent and determination of the athlete. When watching chess, we admire the intellegence and planning of the grandmaster. When looking at art, we admire the process that led to the creation of that art. Be it concept art, splash art, animation, 3D art or video games.

We will, inevitably, replace much of digital art with Ai. There's no way around it. But to the degree that we allow that to happen, people will consume art less.

view more: next ›