Thread 8718493

I'd like to take a moment to adress an issue that has risen in just a few short years: The overwhelming amount of generic AI porn slop.

Just yesterday I went looking for some Rule 34 material, and... well, the whole site was filled to the brim with generic AI slop.
And it's all so... soulless. It's PAINFULLY generic, each scene barely any different from others.
The ease of generating AI porn has caused multiple issues. Amongst these are the drasticly increased amount of porn depicting children/underage kids (those wankers have hard time finding material, so they pump it out with AI in massive quantities) which I object to on moral grounds. The ease of producing that material is going to be a big issue in society and legal grounds in the future, which we will have to have a talk over eventually. But that's a whole can of worms of it's own. Another issue is the whole deepfake thing; making porn out of real people, which I also object to. It genuinely ruins lives.

But the thing that irks me personally is the boring similarity of all these pictures. Sure, AI can get that shiny skin down easier than a real artist, but it also means everything looks the GOD DAMN SAME!
There used to be a sort of ART in generating quality porn. Sure, there was a lot of poor quality crap, but at least there was effort put into it. Even if it was poorly and unskilledly drawn, someone cared enough to take time making it. Nowdays the fact that you can just pump out ENDLESS amount of AI generated porn and ...well, it seems to drown out all the good stuff. I hate going through dozens of pages of AI slop just to find that one picture that isn't soulless.

Welcome to the future. Enjoy your stay.

>>8718493 (OP)
>don't know how to filter AI
>complains it's all AI
I have no problems with my rule34 partaking, so I'm convinced it'skill issue, you deserve it.

>>8718493 (OP)
I rarely see it cause I just filter it.

>>8718493 (OP)
There is a reason it all looks the same its because there's a lot of 1girl in void poses or sex positions that are just reused all over everywhere to draw reference from. As soon as you try to make the girl do something interesting the AI has a brainfart and devolves a couple years.

>>8719804
That was the case in 2023 but AI can very easily do common sex poses now. It can't do interesting compositions/fight scenes and shit like that though sure.

It's a shame, really. I have actually seen some genuinely good a.i porn out there.

The biggest strength it has is people can more easily create images/videos of some of the more niche or specific kinks (including pedo shit, unfortunately).

It could be a great tool for padding out some of the less popular tags but the problem is the sheer amount of low effort slop.
A.i """art""" can be generated in a fraction of the time it takes a real artist to make something, without moderation it completely suffocates all tags and genres it's posted to. Most of it is uninspired generic garbage, but even if some is worthwhile and well made it's overall becoming a blight on most porn sites.

>>8718493 (OP)
>anon still looks for materials as if it's still the late 2000's when there are plenty of ways to filter them out, or you can just straight up gen your own shit (cope because not even AI can save shitters like you)
Actual skill issue.

>>8721409
I mean, there's objectively extreme amount of aislop dumped to the internet now. It's easy to filter out most of it on boorus but you still see really low-quality slop posted here and there. It's absolutely possible to make it look pretty appealing but most of the AI users shit out ugly greasy shit and call it a day and the good-looking stuff is buried beneath all the samey slop.

>>8721424
Hey I don't complain when the objectively garbage Western artworks in general or from drawthreads breaches containment. To me nothing really changed because half of the shit that gets posted on this site was already low quality and tasteless anyways. Like I said, it's an actual skill issue when you think tools like Google became bad because of AI when in reality it was already showing signs of it being trash years prior.

Also the fact that you're still complaining about shiny skin is enough of an indication that you don't actually experiment or gen your own shit or are genuinely too retarded to even use AI properly. Either way in like a decade you're still going to be making the same exact seethe threads or trying desperately to discourage AI posting(but all it really does is derail the discussion when people are already enjoying shit), and I'm not about to babysit a literal mouth-breather so goobye.

>>8721448
70iq seething retard with no reading comprehension, kek.

>>8721451
you lost, retard.

>>8718493 (OP)
>The overwhelming amount of generic AI porn slop
which only exists because the datasets always contain 20 thousand sakimichan/"""realistic"""/gook """realistic""" (sakimichan but more gookish) sameface sameshading pics
with a healthy sprinkle of robutts
if anything it should've made you aware of just how much normies love that shit and how big the market for it really is

Why you imply that ai cunny is bad? If anything, it's actually good for society. If people can easily generate good quality loli porn they'll be less interested in the real thing so the industry will collapse and less children will be abused.

>>8722164
Half the pedos they arrest for CSAM also have loli porn in their collections. It doesn't give them a healthy outlet for their child rape fantasies, it just inflames their evil urges.

>>8722321
That's obviously a severe selection bias, and furthermore incorrectly assumed causation from mere correlation.

And you know it, you liar.

>>8722164
nah, if anything it leads to more depravity, to the real thing.

you said it, half. So there is maybe a half not watching the real porn cause they have Ai generated. Watching any is both bad and sad and I also dont understand why it is happening/part of humans.
Anyway he is just writting correctly that he doesnt support because of ethical reasons, which is understandble. So what does the "many dont watch the rape, because they have AI even has to do with the topic.

>>8722465
found the pedophile

>>8718493 (OP)
Putting AI art tools in the hands of low effort "artists" has done irreversible damage to the internet.

>cannot stop making 100+ generated pics of the same fucking pose like its mcdonalds
>most don't know basic anatomy
>most have adhd so they never check their shit
>some have the gall to sell AI art for money, unfortunately bottom of the barrel people are actually paying for them
>AI "artists" themselves gets mad if you try to correct their basic mistakes

I have seen decent AI stuff but it doesn't matter when theres too many shitty ones to get through.

>>8724462
yeah that heap of dung is not worth digging through for that one good kernel of corn, blacklisting AI is the only sanity preserving response

>>8724462
>>8724596
This is something I'm curious about, anyone know any names of AI uploaders who actually do edit their images and curate them instead of uploading a pack of 100 random pieces of trash?

>>8718493 (OP)
You can filter it with just a click

>>8721309
AI art is fine when you're prompting it for yourself and keeping it to yourself. It's fine if you share the occasional image that is the cream of your crop. Maybe something about that one is a bit novel, or you did a good amount of post-processing work to really clean things up.

AI art is not fine when some pajeet prompts:
>1 girl, best quality, amazing quality, insane rez, beutiful grl with big bobba and vagene, sexy yes
and uploads all 9000 generations.

>>8724462
Someone actually sent me a private message once at the start of the AI image craze because they wanted to commission some AI images from me. Ultimately I didn't take him up on his offer in part because I didn't know what a fair price would be. Honestly any price felt like it would be ripping the guy off. I don't know if I should be proud for not supporting that transaction or feel dumb for not parting an idiot from his money.

>>8718493 (OP)
The problem is less pumping it out and more that these porn obsessed morons also feel the need to upload the generic shit en mass everywhere non stop! There needs to be separate sites for this shit instead of having it now infect and now already outnumber the non-AI content on gallery sites. Make your AI slop all you want but keep it separate is my wish.

>>8725438
Bro, there's fuckers making $1000+ per month on Patrion generating this shit.

>>8725609
I don't think that I could live with myself if I were fleecing people like that.

>>8725923
I'd just think of it as natural selection at work. Parting stupid people of their money does the world a service, less money to spend on orange man.

What I don't understand is how sadpanda is getting spammed with this generic shit all the time but after trying it out for myself (local env) I quickly generated stuff that's much more superior to their piece of shit gen they often pay for(!)
I hate ai for many more fundamental reasons, I can also admit a few people are doing pretty nice stuff with it (and I could be one of them, if I lost my morals overnight), but I have no idea what the 99% of ai spammers are thinking, their stuff is so fucking bad, they're at level 0 of proooompting and they still pretend to be artists. I hate them more than ever.

>>8718493 (OP)

you do know boorus and r34 sites have a one-click filter option to omit slop while browsing?

>>8724462
>>8724596
>>8724842

Maybe AIfags are trying to do those CG Sets. If they are then it is very boring. Too many of them has no context at all, generic pin ups that do nothing, and usually background makes no sense. Maybe AI has limitations or the AI user just lack imagination?

A actual artist can do CG set with minimal poses, minor variants(usually pinup, sex, creampie, etc) and still be fun to look then whatever AIfags chugs out.

I've seen decent AI CG sets but again they are hard to find that I just don't bother.

I've found a few decent AI works, but it's like rooting through a huge pile of shit. One thing I think would help is a requirement to tag whether there is text or no text. Trying to create an actual story indicates the creator is trying to put in some minimum amount of effort.

>>8718493 (OP)
I strongly disagree about all art. You can't stop me from imagining something. You can't stop me from drawing it.


I also personally expect one day for us to be able to depict anything we can daydream, including other people's voices.
And that like our own thoughts, it shouldn't be policed or suppressed, even if we choose which forums are valid for each kind of content.
I can imagine your mom doing a backflip lamding in a split while Robin Williams and Steve Irwin duet a power metal ballad about friendship intil the moon with Hitler's face explodes.
It exists now, in my mind.
It exists now, in your mind.
Maybe not 1:1, but that is where art would come in, asymptotically getting closer and closer to accurate with each draft. AI lets us get it really close, but we could get that close with artistic effort eventually anyway.
I just think there is nothing more sacred than your own mind and ability to express it, even if nobody is listening or wants to listen.

>>8728718
most of the time the text is the worst cringe though, I don't think that would help much

>>8718493 (OP)
For what its worth, the presence of AI slop among NSFW arts on the internet serves as a motivation for me to get better at drawing. I'm currently undertaking studies in an art degree for the express purpose of drawing porn. There are other things that I'd like to draw in my future career's lifetime, but /h/, of all places, serves as the catalyst for my current path and what I want to create.

Even if its going to take me way too long to learn how to successfully draw art fitting for /h/
Even if its going to take me away from contributing to /h/ threads for too long
I'm going to keep trying over and over again, just because I want to make people happy. A single comment saying "Hey this is pretty good" for a mere edit back in 2021, was enough to set me on to this path. And I will keep working for that same appraise again and again.

I don't know if I'm ever going to finish pic related. But I was able to draw what I got here 1 year and a half after I sat down and started learning how to draw (again). Maybe... you can join me in learning how to fight back against the AI slop, 1 illustration at a time. Or root for those who are trying to do so. I don't really have a name, yet, but just know that an aspiring artist student was here and acknowledged all that you had to say. Maybe one day I'll get good enough to come back here and draw for drawthreads as a side thing.

>>8724462
Just like mcdonald's it's what the people actually want, and so it thrives. Despite the negative press covfefe, their business is booming while everyone else seethes. Top kek.

>>8728662
Most artists don't do CG sets and do the exact same pinup shit you're complaining about. Why is this always the quality of arguments?

>>8728772
The problem has always been the flooding. Even if the image is good, when there's 1000 of them it gets old fast. This is what happened when Spain sailed to the new world and destroyed their economy with all the fucking gold. They just need to learn moderation.

Demand is reflected in the results of what you see. The argument that something is "soulless" always cracks me up because people who claim they can tell if art has soul get completely destroyed the moment someone uses AI to produce something other than the semi realistic way it produces something by default and they can't tell if a human made it or not.

Honestly this is my first time browsing this board, and frankly most of the things people post here look like absolute trash. If AI is soulless and half the shit I see posted here supposedly isn't soulless garbage made by some dude who just learned how to draw last year than I hope art continues to lose it's soul.

Most people can't even distinguish whether something is AI or not these days, and it's only going to keep getting better. Digital art was also shat on by artists much in the same way AI is now shat upon. So that being said here's a fun little test.

Is this picture AI generated? Let's see how many of you get it right

>>8733633
AI. That gloss and deadfish eyes fool nobody

Beats paying over 200$ on Skeb these days...
Lots of big shot OG artist dish out slop work anyway, if you going to pay for slop AI is way more cheaper.

Seriously, one of the artist I used to adore using AI and trace over to make his art now days in his Fantia, after I found out about that, I gave 0 shit no more...

>>8733633
>The argument that something is "soulless" always cracks me up because people who claim they can tell if art has soul get completely destroyed the moment someone uses AI to produce something other than the semi realistic way it produces something by default and they can't tell if a human made it or not.
That's the point, the soulless AI is instantly recognizable even from the thumbnail. That said, a lot of artists produce soulless art too (sakimichan anyone). It's just that 99% of AI is soulless slop whereas for artists it's kinda the opposite.

If you can fool people like you claim, congratulations you're the 1%. Though not with the pic you posted.

>>8733633
My personal opinion is that AI lowers the standards for both creators and consumers. It's designed to put out way more output than your input, as opposed to digital art where your input can be extremely high, approaching 1:1 ratio with the output. You can probably assume that an artist having to make their own canvas, pigments and paints and thinking about the scenes would probably be expected to put in the same input as output, perfect 1:1 ratio. A digital artist, with custom made brushes and 3D models that can be acquired from the Internet, substantially reduces that input load, but they still got a lot of fine control over the details down to the smallest pixel.

I have yet to see a demonstration of generative AI letting you have that same fine control over your entire illustration. And you need a good eye to rectify things. At best, you mix whatever AI gives you and you edit the rest in art programs. At worst, relying on AI wholesale, it'd just regenerate things over and over until you accept the final result, which may still not be perfect.

I really don't think AI is compatible with the consumers and creators who demand that fine control over the output. It's designed to put out more than what you put in.

And yea, that pic of yours is AI. The eyes were enough to give it away.

don't forget all the nigger/blacked shit

>>8718493 (OP)
Completely agree, I find myself in this process whenever I bother giving ai a chance.

>Intrigued by one picture
>looks through it
>Enjoys its for a few pictures
>Eyes starts to glaze over as all the pictures have this unexplainable sameness to it
>Starts to skips massive chunks of it
>Closes set feeling "meh"

I basically have to REALLY like the character in question for me to stick around, and even then I find myself bored by the quality after a while.

>>8728662
>Maybe AI has limitations

Pretty much this one. AI can barely do any complex poses, scenarios, and kinda what you said about image sets.

To add to this, I have seen a few AI doujins that are actually nice but those are mainly made by japanese. The rest is cringe shit devoid of any storytelling, bad composition, and bad dialogues by AI westfags.

>>8733633
It's like this, I know a chess bot can give me a "better" game than my friends, but I still want to play against my friends.

We want to share things with each other. Even if a computer can do it the same or better. Let us be stupid in peace.

>fantia spotlight is an AI slop "artist"
lol

>>8733633
>Honestly this is my first time browsing this board, and frankly most of the things people post here look like absolute trash.
This coming from the average retard who will think a piece of artwork is good because it has "nice coloring", even if it has the worst anatomy/perspective errors you've ever seen, is hilarious.

I just like having fun

>>8733633
You can easily tell it's AI from the eyes alone.

>>8720701
good afternoon saar! give us your civitai page please for the virtual bobs and bagene

>>8733692
>>8733679
>>8733670
>>8739774

I came back to /h/ for the first time in nearly a week to jack off and what do I see? Look, it's a bunch of retards that proved my point for me. Thank you, I didn't think this waste of space thread would still be up

The picture I posed was in fact NOT AI. For all of your bitching about how "soulless" AI is you can't even distinguish a normal artist with a generated AI image. It's especially funny how many of you imbeciles just parroted what the first person claimed was proof, the eyes. Did it not occur to any of you that this was gatcha character slop or some generic anime girl with multi colored eyes?

Pic related is the original before I cropped out the watermark, here is a link to the artists Patreon:
https://www.patreon.com/cw/YamiKaze

>>8747234
Dude are you blind? That is so obviously an AI slopper patreon.

>>8747234
I sincerely hope you are joking

>>8747234
We're you dropped at birth? This is AI. Google results via Saucenao says it.
And the scary part is we're becoming complacent to it