HOME | DD
RobotCatArt — Is it CHEATING to let an AI color your art?
Published: 2017-01-28 04:50:44 +0000 UTC; Views: 28432; Favourites: 264; Downloads: 0
Redirect to original
Description
/* Journal Clean-Up */ body div#devskin12898934 * { background:none; padding:0; margin:0; border:none; font-family:'Open Sans', sans-serif; } body div#devskin12898934 .gr { padding:0!important; margin-bottom:-3px; } body div#devskin12898934 .gr-top img, body div#devskin12898934 .gr1, body div#devskin12898934 .gr2, body div#devskin12898934 .gr3 { display:none; } body div#devskin12898934 a.external:after { display:none; } body div#devskin12898934 .user-symbol { font-size:0.7em; margin-left:2px; } /* Normal Thumb Styling */ body div#devskin12898934 .shadow-holder { vertical-align:middle; margin:3px; } body div#devskin12898934 .shadow-holder img { padding:10px; background:#fff; margin:1px; } body div#devskin12898934 img.lit { display:none; } body div#devskin12898934 .shadow-holder:hover { padding:0!important; } body div#devskin12898934 .embedded-deviation img, body div#devskin12898934 .embedded-freeform-deviation { padding:10px; background:#fff; width:97%; } body div#devskin12898934 .embedded-deviation img:hover { } /* Normal Lit Thumb Styling */ body div#devskin12898934 .lit { margin:1px; width:180px; height:160px; box-shadow:none; -moz-box-shadow:none; -webkit-box-shadow:none; background:#fff; } body div#devskin12898934 q { margin-left:-15px; font-weight:normal!important; } body div#devskin12898934 q strong { margin:10px 0; } body div#devskin12898934 q img { border:none!important; outline:none!important; } /* Big Gallery Code */ body div#devskin12898934 .big .shadow-holder { display:inline-block; width:80px; height:80px; overflow:hidden; } body div#devskin12898934 .big .shadow-holder img { max-width:none; margin:-1px 0 0 -1px; padding:0px; } body div#devskin12898934 .big .lit { width:200px; height:200px; } body div#devskin12898934 .big .shadow-holder:hover img, body div#devskin12898934 .big .shadow-holder:hover .lit { background:#fff!important; } /* Mini Gallery Code */ body div#devskin12898934 .mini .shadow-holder { display:inline-block; background:#fff; width:80px; height:150px; overflow:hidden; } body div#devskin12898934 .mini.wide .shadow-holder { display:inline-block; background:#fff; width:150px; height:80px; overflow:hidden; } body div#devskin12898934 .mini .shadow-holder img { padding:0px; max-width:none; margin:-1px 0 0 -1px; } body div#devskin12898934 .mini .lit { width:170px; height:150px; } /* Journal Top */ body div#devskin12898934 .gr-box { background:url('https://fc07.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2013/244/4/7/whitecustom_by_simplysilent-d6kp6dh.png'); } body div#devskin12898934 .gr-top { background:#5f4848; padding:70px 0 40px 0; text-align:center; } body div#devskin12898934 .gr-top h2 { background:#ff5075; } body div#devskin12898934 .gr-top h2, body div#devskin12898934 .gr-top h2 a, body div#devskin12898934 .commentslink { text-transform:uppercase; text-align:center; letter-spacing:2px; padding:5px 20px; font-size:15px; display:inline-block; margin:0 auto; color:#fff; } body div#devskin12898934 .gr-top h2:hover { padding:5px 40px; background:#ffa53a; } body div#devskin12898934 .timestamp { display:block; color:#fff; padding:5px; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:2px; } /* Journal Text */ body div#devskin12898934 .text { padding:50px 6%; } body div#devskin12898934 .text, body div#devskin12898934 .content { font-family:'Open Sans'; font-size:14px; } body div#devskin12898934 .left, body div#devskin12898934 .right { width:48%; } body div#devskin12898934 .right { float:right; } body div#devskin12898934 .left { float:left; } body div#devskin12898934 b { color:#3f4848; } body div#devskin12898934 .text a { color:#ff5075; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:none; } body div#devskin12898934 .text a:hover { color:#ffa53a; } /* Box and Square Headings */ body div#devskin12898934 h1, body div#devskin12898934 h2 { text-transform:uppercase; font-weight:normal; font-size:14px; font-weight:bold; font-family:'open sans'; } body div#devskin12898934 h1 { letter-spacing:2px; color:#fff; padding:10px; text-align:center; background:#ffa53a; } body div#devskin12898934 .text h2 { padding-left:10px; letter-spacing:1px; margin:5px 0 -5px 0; border-left:20px solid #ffa53a; } body div#devskin12898934 h1:hover, body div#devskin12898934 h2:hover { font-weight:bold; } body div#devskin12898934 .p1 { background:#ff5075; } body div#devskin12898934 .b1 { background:#5f4848; } body div#devskin12898934 .g1 { background:#9fce54; } body div#devskin12898934 .p2 { border-left:20px solid #ff5075!important; } body div#devskin12898934 .b2 { border-left:20px solid #5f4848!important; } body div#devskin12898934 .g2 { border-left:20px solid #9fce54!important; } body div#devskin12898934 blockquote { padding:10px 3%; background:rgb(95, 72, 72); background:rgba(95,72,72, 0.1); } body div#devskin12898934 .clear { clear:both; } body div#devskin12898934 ul, body div#devskin12898934 ol { margin-left:30px; } body div#devskin12898934 ul li { list-style:square url('https://fc09.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2013/271/e/3/bulletbrown_by_simplysilent-d6oci8y.png'); } /* Journal Bottom */ body div#devskin12898934 li .f, body div#devskin12898934 li.f.a { background:transparent; } body div#devskin12898934 .list li { font-size:10px; } body div#devskin12898934 .list img { display:none; } body div#devskin12898934 .f.list { position:absolute; bottom:20px; color:#fff; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:2px; } body div#devskin12898934 .bottom { background:#5f4848 url('https://fc09.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2013/271/1/5/squares_by_simplysilent-d6oci96.png') no-repeat 97% 45px; padding:50px 0; } body div#devskin12898934 .commentslink { background:#9fce54; bottom:40px; font-weight:bold; padding:8px 20px; } body div#devskin12898934 .commentslink:hover { text-decoration:none; background:#ff5075; padding:8px 40px; } /* Credits */ body div#devskin12898934 .credit { position:absolute; bottom:20px; font-size:10px; right:3%; color:#fff; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:2px; } body div#devskin12898934 .credit a, body div#devskin12898934 .credit { color:#fff; text-decoration:none; } body div#devskin12898934 .credit a:hover { text-decoration:underline; color:#ff5075; }
Instagram |Twitter |Facebook |Tumblr
So in case you haven't been in the loop, in the past 24 hours or so, Someone released a tool that uses a neural network to color anime lineart. You can find it here:
paintschainer.preferred.tech
It just takes a jpg image and starts the coloring process for you, depending on the quality of your input image and contents, the results could range from meh to pretty amazing. Of course, you can specify colors and tweak it even further, and a lot of people have posted some really great looking results:
I have no doubt many people will use this to some effect or another. In fact, I think if this tool was released two years I might not have even bothered trying to seriously learn to color, since it'd be so convenient in comparison and my focus was more on making manga. There's a lot of people who stick with pencils and pens, but find digital hard to get into, or traditional colors too messy. This tool would allow them to finally get to see their own works in color. Others might put it in their digital workflow, or let it take over their digital coloring completely.
The question is, would this be considered cheating?
To answer that question, we'd have to examine what are some cases that can be considered cheating right now. The one that most people immediately think of is probably tracing. Generally most people can agree tracing is cheating, especially if you present it as your own work. The next one that comes up a lot is copying. However, already we're starting to get into a grey area. All fanart is basically copying the design and ideas of a popular franchise, so a lot of copying is already accepted. The times where drama seems to flare up is when the copy is too close to a well known work of another artist or official merchandise, such as copying the entire composition in addition to the characters. Some popular artists have ran into a bit of trouble when passing these 'studies' off as their own work, but it seems as long as you reference your source and don't try to profit off of it, its acceptable.
However, this tool doesn't really fall into the former 2 categories, but instead its more comparable to a photoshop tool or shortcut. For example, many artists use custom brushes to make their workflow much faster. Why draw every strand or rock crack when your brush takes care of the grunt work for you? Or the use of applying existing photo textures, a very common and accepted technique. Photobashing is straight up taking photos and cutting them up and putting them into your composition, and using layers, filters, and color adjusters, in combination with some digital painting touchup to make a completely new work, and is considered standard practice in the concept art industry.
So back to our original question. Is using this filter cheating, or is some level of use okay? I mean, if someone straight up says they colored it, but used the tool 100%, then I'd consider that cheating, but if they disclose they used the tool to color it, then it would it be okay? What if they used it, but then altered it by hand in addition to the AI coloring, like in photobashing, or altered it significantly so it becomes more or a reference? Would it be okay for them to say they painted it? Or they'd have to disclose they used it in some way during the coloring process?
I can already see a few uses I might have for it. For example, it seems to be able to calculate a very aesthetically pleasing color palette, while introducing a bunch of additional hues that fit your overall color scheme. It'd be extremely useful for setting up scenes or color profiles to get really interesting colors as a base reference:
Also, someone already made a short animation with the tool:
I really do want to try my hand at animating portions of VRO, and having it be colored automatically would save so much time. Of course I'd disclose my use of it.
Right now it seems the neural network was most trained on pastel type coloring, but in the future other coloring styles would become readily available. I can easily see this tool becoming a standard filter in the next version of Photoshop or Clip Studio Paint. When it does, it'd become widespread pretty quickly, and I'm sure there will be some huge schism on the digital artist scene regarding its use.
What do you guys think? Is it cheating? Or just another tool in a digital artist's arsenal?
UPDATE
I read through everyone's comments, that sure took longer than I expected. It seems people are pretty split regarding whether using the tool is cheating or not. However, most people agree that credit should be given if you do use the tool. A few comments brought up 'collaboration', which is a viewpoint I hadn't considered. There's also the issue of commissions, which make thing a lot more complicated.
Either way, it seems like as AI become more prevalent, thinks will be shaken up in ways we might not be able to control.
Instagram |Twitter |Facebook |Tumblr
Skin by SimplySilent
Related content
Comments: 219
It seems to prefer a colour palette that is very soft and cutesy, the problem is that it seems to lend itself to a certain style. I'd rather make the colour decisions myself, I don't think an AI knows when not to look cute and when to use stronger colours. Applying colour is one thing, knowing when to apply them is another.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Mmmmmmm It depends in what you use it but, in general, I think it is an another tool
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I wouldn't consider it cheating. It's a tool for art.
I'd even go as far as to say that crediting the program shouldn't be necessary (although I recommend doing it anyway) unless it's a legal condition for using the software.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I wouldn't say it's cheating, just another tool. But everything comes down to intent and credit, like, Photoshop is amazing to draw your own creations but can just as easily be used to trace someone else's work. Painter would be awesome for quickly working out concepts or as an assist tool to quickly fill in colors of a student animation film. Yes it's stylized but really not that different from adding a watercolor texture in my opinion. Still have to give the program something to work with and know how to get the best out of it. It's a highly impressive program but I can see the "traditional vs digital" conversation will get a new life if a version of Painter gets mainstream within the workplace
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
If it were just base colours it would be no more cheating than using the fill tool is, but it's clearly stylised/shaded. If you're going to use this then claim it fully as your own work... yeah, that's 100% cheating.
It depends really if you're calling it 'art' or if it's art for a purpose, like animation or commercial purposes.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Just another tool bro, just another tool. Don't deny the process used and it's all good to go. I know I can, and maybe you can, look back to days when we though stuff like 3D bases and photobash was a cheat.
I think what we feel the most is simply an aversion to drastically new processes, but that change is inevitable. So long as one person isn't violating the content rights of another, no harm is done if everything is honest.
How much an individual values or appreciates different methods however, is still ones individual right.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Although being a computer/engineering guy - I'm fascinated by the concept - but still I wouldn't let a machine or an AI do all the work for me, but if the need arises for it - work in a synergistic manner with an AI while giving input in certain intervals. Still it can be pretty scary giving a computer the ability to be creative - but I don't think it will lead to Skynet anytime soon(not ever in my opinion).
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
For images i feel like it's cheating. While it may not look the part, I feel like it makes pieces seem so half assed and lazy. To me, it's not a good look for an experienced artist, and i don't believe beginner artists can get off the hook for using it either. It won't help you learn how to color and if you want to become an artist you really need to put effort in what you're doing. I personally think it's okay to use maybe once or twice, but if this is your default tool for coloring in your work then that's not going to help you grow as an artist.
I also think it's a bit unfair to people who genuinely enjoy creating art the way they're really supposed to lol. Letting an AI do all the work for you seems a bit insulting to people who have put hours into their art. I don't really see it as some type of "collab" either. Collabs are something both people have to put effort in, and because the one who did the other half of the work, isn't human nor is it like they spent time and had fun with it, all feeling is lost to me.
On the other hand, for animation... eh. While i'm reluctant to say so, I think it's OKAY considering the amount of time it takes to animate one thing and color the other, but i'd still give more praise and have more respect for the other person who took the time to create everything by themselves no matter how time consuming it is.
Just my opinion on the matter though.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
From a traditional art perspective, this is absolutely cheating. However, cheating is nothing new (is, in fact, the industry standard) in many professional art situations. For example, digital brushes can create textures that no real brush could manage, and greatly speed up creation time. Aaron Blaise (noted creature artist behind Disney's Beauty and the Beast, and producer of Brother Bear, among other things) takes this a step further. He uses photos of elephant skin and leaves with Photoshop's Perspective tool, to create highly realistic creature skins in a fraction of the time it would take to paint by hand. (As a side note, you might find his videos an interesting watch: www.youtube.com/watch?v=cUv8W_… ).
From the perspective of fine art, these shortcuts are cheating of the first order. That said, commercial art and fine art are two very different things. If a tool helps an artist create a concept image, a logo or a movie backdrop in hours instead of days, that's to the artist's advantage; time, after all, is money. Besides, investors and patrons in those circumstances rarely care about skilled brush-strokes or what media was used; they want to see a good-looking final product, or a working representation of the idea in the artist's head.
By contrast, fine art is (and always has been) a luxury item. Consider your reaction when you look at a skillful oil painting versus a digital one - or when a deviant posts "created using only default round brushes" in the comments of a digital work. The skill and time that goes into a piece raises its perceived value. If someone wants a piece of art as a display piece, they will always pay more for a hand-carved object than for one that is 3-D printed. Likewise with a picture that is coloured by hand instead of machine.
That being the case, I'm actually surprised that software like this hasn't been developed sooner. On one hand, it's a shame (fewer man-hours spent on art means fewer artists getting paid for those hours); on the other hand, in a society addicted to productivity, this is the expected price of progress.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
but part of the fun is picking and choosing your own colors and finding a coloring style that fits you.
I agree that it is a very convenient solution to those who are too lazy to color but I think you sacrifice that bit of satisfaction that you made it all yourself (?)
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
It seems like cheating...but I don't think it is.
I guess you could create the lineart and have it color it in if you wish...
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I'm checking it out some samples of my art.It's interesting not prefect I still have to do some work.reasonably fast.It does seem to recognize what is skin and cloths and does decently at eyes. Even without hinting at the colors you want.It' seem to know my coloring thought process match some colors close to what i'd pick.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Assuming that they didn't claim to use the tool, and that an artist doing commissioned work didn't charge you for the coloring (or charged you much less, in case it does still require touching up or editing still), I'd be okay with it. It doesn't seem like that much like "cheating" to me if handled properly.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Wow, the results are AMAZING, the software is FANTASTIC!
About the cheating, I mean, yes, it is, but I'd be OK if the artist uset it, and credit the tool, kinda like when people use Prisma
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I honestly think that this tool does really well work,and the examples are quite beautiful,but honestly i would think this could be considered cheating when someone pays you for a full art colored commission and claim they did all the coloring yourself. I actually fear some peole will do that and i hope the clients will be aware of this.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Copying is one thing. Tracing is a totally different animal. I don't care much for tracers. It can be picked up on almost immediately. As for this new program that automatically colors your work for you? It was inevitable. Time saving, yes. but a good artist will still tweak it to his or her preferences. And also will not "always" use a bot, which is what paintschainer seems to be.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
First of all that thing is friggin' awesome.
Second of all, so long as someone admits they used it, I don't see it as any different from just letting a more skilled artist color your lineart, so I don't see it as "cheating" any more than that would be, and I'm pretty sure "collabs" are generally not considered cheating. xD
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Oh wow, this is interesting!
Teaching an AI to make art is an art in its own! From a tech perspective it is certainly fascinating and very clever. I guess like all things the future looks daunting because everyone wants to know "what will become of art", but filters to make photos look like sketches and paintings have existed for years now, so I guess it would be sort of like that.
As for it's use, I don't know. I can certainly see that if someone is making a manga and doesn't want to colour it would be very useful in bringing it to life, and while I would much rather see them colour it themselves I can understand. The lineart and everything else would all be their own skill, so in a way I don't think it's much of a problem. The issue would be if they tried to claim they coloured it themself. Inevitably people will use it and claim they coloured, but to be honest, we'll catch them like we catch most people who try to pass off art as their own. It will be easy to tell once you get used to it.
Also I am guessing the skill would definitely need to be there inherently to use it. There is a big difference between an amateur artist using a filter and an experienced one using it, for example. And you would still need to know things like colour theory.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I think if the artist discloses that they used the program fully or as a guide, then it shouldn't be a problem. Coming from someone who prioritizes general life events (work, family, and school) over creativity and tends to procrastinate, I can see this being a handy tool for those who have limited time to color their art. Also, it may be good to help provide a template for coloring if you have trouble figuring out which colors would go where.
Although, I probably wouldn't use it that often if at all, but that is my own personal stubbornness and not my view of my fellow artists.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I don't really think it's cheating. It looks more like a new way of creating art to me. Like i would probably not even try to learn how to do digital art if i had this tool (because digital art is a little difficult and I'm a traditional artist and all), but because I like a challenge I would learn to do it anyway because I want the experience and skill under my artistic belt. I don't think I would use this specific tool though because pastels aren't really my thing, but all in all, it's pretty cool.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I think if you give enough effort and time and only BASE it off of something, you aren't cheating. You're just using a template for reference. Now if it's another artists work you're using as a reference, you best be giving props to said artist.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I would say so long as it is credited for helping you, then it would not be cheating.
Using it to find out a color scheme for a character or area, if you get stuck on that process, it would not be cheating.
As an assist in coloring in a quick panel or two if you are short on time, I would say that is not cheating, so long as you credit it.
However, using it to color in all of your art pieces for you would be cheating, and robbing you of the chance to get your hands on color practice for yourself.
So as a tool to help you figure out how to color whatever piece you have and to get you out of going over deadline, it would not be cheating. Using it to color in all your works would be if you try to make money off of it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
it... mostly just does people, lol. If it even bothers to spit anything out for me, everything is skin colored and doesn't use the colors I choose lol. Wouldn't probably use it anyways except for fun on some personal/concept art, but still
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Computer generated "art" has always some viseble patterns, and people will in time learn to recognise what is generated or hand colored.
I already see a pattern with above examples, its all a very water paintery coloring, and imho doesnt really add alot of affect.
Sure it can serve as a quick way to lay down a foundation, but I think really polished works will remain the need for an artists hand.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I think this is going to change a lot of how artists work, for good or bad. The first thought I had was what about the collaborations between artists, is that going to die down since you can just get this tool to take the place of a whole nother artist? Disclosing your use of it is best I think so you are as transparent as possible. I'm still kinda on the fence about using fancy brushes to do my work because I want to go through this messy process of getting better on my own but I don't look down on artists that do utilise them. I just hope that people like me aren't forced to use it in order to compete with this competition. Like that computer that writes music, it may put artists out of business if this technology gets much better.
Everyone is going to have different views on this. So you just have to use your personal judgment. I still think saying that you used it and being super transparent is best if anyone decides to use it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I don't see it as cheating, but of course, it could become a way to cheat.
Instead of practicing yourself, you could just use this tool, which could turn into a bad habit.
However, let's say a person works with serialization of a webcomic, that would certainly relief the artist a great deal.
Naturally, this are only examples, but in the end, I suppose I'm just repeating and reinforcing what you said. Like many other things in the world, it's a matter of opinion.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Not at all. The goal is to achieve a certain image and if it helps you achieve the goal faster the better. II would just think of it as another more efficient brush. It also means you can focus more time and effort on other aspects of that work and other pieces you're working on.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
If your goal is to compose something appealing or deliver your message emphasized through visual impact in general, then no, it is not cheating to have AI color your image. Of course, it means that no human being's talent or efforts are needed for that part anymore, and by making that choice, you devalue the efforts of every single human who knows how to color. I mean, a machine is able to achieve similar results way more efficiently, countless times, with few defective scenarios and no more cost than the initial investment and the electricity consumed during the computation process.
Then again, if an AI can color, there's probably one that's able to draw as well with few parameters given, as good as a human, or even better. So why would I need anybody, if everything can be achieved through purpose-built applications and machinery (in a much broader application of the principle)?
Anyway, as long as you don't claim to have put personal effort into the work done by the machine, it is not cheating (as it would be with raw tracing). Just keep in mind that the use of machines devalue the work done by humans, exactly because it can more efficiently do it instead of them. Then again, it reduces the amount of actual "art" in what you have designed, because all you need is an idea and the machine does "something like that" after a few trial-and-error cycles.
So the more something's a product, the less it's an art piece.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Idk. I might try having it test colours on characters I create so that I know what colours should be on them.
I mean it saves time for me.
Does it even work that way???
It would be cool if it does.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
It can be but you will not have the same plenty pleasure of the full control of your art
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Art is passion. If you let an ai do the job for you(like coloring), then the passion will no longer be there anymore. This is just my opinion. I respect those who think that this is better, or this is not cheating.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Its a new tool but as long as you don't let it define what you can do it's great. let it do the hard work and then you touch it up and try and hide the details that show you used it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
So far it has yet to do anything for me so It it does not work then its not cheating its a waist of time
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
That's pretty amazing!
I'm not sure if I would count it as cheating, like I can see it as something that could hinder someone
from wanting to learn to color themselves, but maybe it could be helpful with things like trying to figure out what
colors you want to use for a piece, or for people who make comics and animations.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Interesting question. Now I ain't an expert, (yet mind you, I like to think I'm well on my way.) but I know tools when I see them. This one right here quite interests me. Getting it right is probably a lot harder than it looks, and I don't think it's exactly cheating.
Whether it's as you said, custom brushes, textures and filters; or as I'm adding, gradients, routines and snaps, we're all allowed a little slack when it comes to hard work and good drawings.
Although this isn't cheating, this sure takes away a big step in the drawing process. I wouldn't rely too heavily on it, and I'd definitely give credit to the machine where it is due - same as I would a custom filter I downloaded or a brush someone else made.
Similarly, I like to take the hard way when I'm starting something I haven't done before - I throw everything I know at the project, learn a little
as I'm doing it, and I'll be ready for the next attempt in no time with everything and what I just learned.
I save the short-cuts if I know the work. When I'm faced with a challenge, it's a steady diet of "Trial and error" and winging it, with internet tutorial supplements from time to time. ^~^
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
This looks pretty cool!
All in all, I'm going to say no. Looking at the examples you posted, the end result isn't what I would consider finished or particularly impressive. This is simply another tool to (in theory) get the job done quicker, which the industry is all about. I have a feeling the people who use this would fall into two categories: (1) a professional artist or skilled hobbyist who wants to save time and plans to paint over/add on to the initial coloring the AI does, or (2) a hobbyist who doesn't have the skill and wants to see their work in color. Maybe this has potential to be used as a learning tool also?
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
nah, i don't see the difference between this and a collab.
it's just that PC-chan does the coloring, not another deviant uwu
im gonna give it a try myself now....
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Definitely cheating =.= This is just a shortcut to avoid doing it yourself (yes it is good if you don't have time to color) but it is rewarding if you do it yourself, if you just let a program color your WHOLE piece then what's the point in drawing in the first place?The photoshop bushes or adding textured/patterns is fine, cause your learning and plus doing it yourself, you are putting your soul into the painting, and then later you don't need such things or very little.While this is just a cheap shortcut.
I love technology and seeing it improve but this is just getting lazy =.='' I agree that time is precious and you want to do everything in a day, but that adds to the stress and taking shortcuts is not rewarding to you, your brain (cause you learn nothing) and your soul (the whole putting your whole being into an artwork).So I don't like this at all =.= and a decent being won't either.Learn to color, draw, put emotion into your pieces whatever it may be, if you can't after years and years, then drawing isn't for you (if it takes let's say 8 years and you haven't budged a millimeter while practicing constantly) then find something else.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
it isn't cheating but a lazy way to have your works colord i guess
even if it saves up a lot of my time i won't really enjoy drawing~
it's useful for animations tho ;v;
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
If autotune isn't cheating for musicians, I don't think this should be considered cheating for artists.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
<= Prev | | Next =>