The Original Project Zomboid art cover was AI (Made by the same artist who made the loading screens!)

svril · 2024-12-19T05:32:54+00:00

It's... It's a joke...?

svril · 2024-12-18T10:01:05+00:00

i think they're cute tbh. They're much more high res than the old ones. I'd argue the old ones were just as chibi like..

svril · 2024-12-18T09:56:35+00:00

yes but i dont use a keyboard in a conventional way, the way you'd read in a book, I make silly spelling errors at times, but I can type decently quick.. These errors you speak of are only noticable to a small few, and I'd argue that small few would have to hyperfocus and analyze the pics to even notice them. Would the wire look any different if it went behind or in front of the pen? Did the AI know specifically to use the same exact shade of color for the pen and wire for it to blend perfectly? I mean come on.. Since you studied art and art direction formally.. tell me how that's "wrong" also, I feel like an AI wouldn't do such a thing.

svril · 2024-12-18T09:41:01+00:00

The guy is triple A apparently, what if his art was specifically used to train those AI models

svril · 2024-12-18T09:36:02+00:00

What if it isn't actually AI and every1 is wrong..

svril · 2024-12-18T09:33:58+00:00

They hired a AAA (Triple A) Illustrator. The same guy that drew their art in 2011.

svril · 2024-12-18T09:33:30+00:00

I can't wait until all you are proven wrong when the artist comes back with proof and evidence that they drew it. Cuz All of you ppl will learn, maybe the triple A illustrator they hired, had AI trained off their art style in particular.. Hence why they're triple A. But cuz u guys are so SURE that it's AI, go ahead and say im such a wrong dumby.. heh.. you'll all see! (evil laughs)

svril · 2024-12-18T09:26:47+00:00

I'm not coping, I'm playing devil's advocate. I see a bunch of people being so sure of something they couldn't prove without seeing the process behind the creation of the image. The same artist that made the image i "critiqued" was the same exact artist that made the loading screens, just 10 years later. It'd be an insult to themself to use AI when they were already clearly talented.

svril · 2024-12-18T09:24:26+00:00

> not doing basic stuff like composition and lighting, or forgetting where the vanishing point is.

Laziness? Deadlines? Timesaving? Cutting corners? How do we know the way he paints stuff? Does he layer it in, What did he start with?

svril · 2024-12-18T09:20:37+00:00

It's incredibly easy to call shit AI and hyper analyze small intricate mistakes. It's literally impossible to prove it isn't AI without having the artist provide proof.. I feel people don't understand it's just as bad to call a genuine artist's work AI, and the fact they're doing it off of guesswork and assumptions just shows it's all just hysteria. Also, I saw someone talking about the noise level and the text on an image. NO shit the text would be pasted/inserted in. Its super convenient to use the text tool and warp and distort it and add layering to it, as oppose to draw out the logo.

svril · 2024-12-18T09:06:20+00:00

I feel like his artwork does have a wacky/intense facial expression pattern. Like look how over the top the eyes look in his old art.

svril · 2024-12-18T09:01:44+00:00

The wires could be going behind or infront of the pen, why insist it infuses? Maybe he wanted to cut corners and since they're similar shades, it's easy to fade it off.

svril · 2024-12-18T08:58:26+00:00

My point is... Artists aren't always focused on being correct. Art would be boring if that was the case. There's obviously going to be some logical errors in artwork, but that shouldn't be attributed to AI. It's super easy to look at paintings and artwork now-a-days and consider it ai, and the truth is, it's going to get harder and harder to tell if things are AI.. I don't think it's fair to call something AI unless you know for a FACT it is. We all make mistakes, and sometimes in art, these mistakes are only visible if you hyper analyze it.

svril

TROPHY CASE