Remember that thread a few years ago where some guy was trying to Photoshop a picture of a woman to look like she was made out of stone? Dozens of anons took a stab at it and all of them fucking sucked, even ones made by seasoned designers.

This was made by ChatGPT in less than 3 (THREE) minutes. Point being it's so fucking over for this field it's not even funny.
>it even gave her some pokey nipples when I didn't even ask it to

BOW TO YOUR AI OVERLORDS NOW!!!

original for reference

also
>inb4 some sperg nitpicks a few things like the strands of hair
nothing that even your grandma couldn't touch up with som app if they really cared enough (most people don't)

>>460845
>...
>Anonymous
>07/19/25(Sat)15:11:09 No.460845
> also
> >inb4 someone with eyes points out how remarkably shitty this one is too and all I can do is REEEEEEEEEEEEE

>>460845
https://willrobotstakemyjob.com/graphic-designers
>Moderate Risk (41-60%): Occupations with a moderate risk of automation usually involve routine tasks but still require some human judgment and interaction. The number of 'Graphic Designers' job openings is expected to rise 2.5% by 2033

>>460843 (OP)
But it's not the same pose and looks different to the person?

>>460846
>sperg starts sperging like clockwork
Most people don't give a fuck + the tech gets better every day. Let's see your hand-made take (I already know it's gonna look as bad as all the ones from the old thread in 2019 or whatever)

>>460848
doesn't matter, even with slight inaccuracies it looks vastly better than anything that was hand-made on this board

>>460849
it seems more like another tool for designers

>>460849
>calls any and all critique of actual inconsistencies in the results "sperging"
>claims all previous non AI efforts "fucking sucked" but won't actually show them because he'd have to defend doing EXACTLY the same kind of critique he calls "sperging"
> demands to see more non AI results so he can sperg out on them

>>460843 (OP)
>Dozens of anons took a stab at it and all of them fucking sucked, even ones made by seasoned designers
> it's so fucking over

>it's not the same pose and looks different to the person

>people don't give a fuck
>doesn't matter

>>460849
>>460843 (OP)

>doesn't matter, even with slight inaccuracies it looks vastly better than anything that was hand-made on this board

topkek
bases his assumptions about the use of designers as a profession on what people upload to the weaving forum.

what even is your metric? would a human also be allowed to co tribute an image with different pose and even person if you are fine with the AI doing it? did anyone try?

your whole argument is shaky

>Can I commission you to make a picture of my pet.
Sure I will use AI
>But it doesn't look like my pet.
WHY ARE YOU SPERGING.
That's what you sound like man.

>>460843 (OP)
>>460844
It looks nothing like the original