• mechoman444@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    9 days ago

    Just for the sake of comparison. This was made by chatgpt.

    Of course art is very subjective but boy did it come close.

    Edit: guys. I know you don’t like AI. But if you’re not willing to be objective about the fact that is just a COMPARISON keep your bile to yourself.

    • Emma_Gold_Man@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      47
      ·
      edit-2
      10 days ago

      I would say exactly the opposite - it proves the point. The sameness of the two dogs and the lack of the corresponding marriage ceremony in the background rob the image of most of its significance, and the background is a copy that wouldn’t exist if the original hadn’t existed.

      • mechoman444@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 days ago

        This was more of a technical demo than anything else. The real issue I had was that the movie is still under copyright and I had a find a prompt that would allow it to make that much. But I wanted it be as identical to the original as possible to see if it could replicate the soul of the original.

        It’s not there I would agree, there is a certain… Flavor missing but it’s very close.

        More so I would agree that llms will not be able to ever replicate individual human nuance especially in art.

        • ChexMax@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          9 days ago

          I really disagree. The lines and content are similar but the soul is completely lacking. This looks like it’s been simplified so much so it could be a coloring book or something. The soul from the plants is totally gone , the coloring of the windows, I look at the generated version and understand completely what I’m looking at, but I feel nothing. P

          • mechoman444@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 days ago

            Yes. Like I said art is extremely subjective, your personal a bias is playing a role. And it is lacking soul absolutely there’s almost a metallic quality to it.

            Once again I generated the picture for the sake of comparison. Technically it’s very close to the original. More importantly because it’s an llm it’s missing nuance.

    • Sundray@lemmus.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      10 days ago

      When 101 Dalmatians is in the training data, I’m not sure ChatGPT deserves that much credit for its style 😆

        • Sundray@lemmus.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          9 days ago

          I don’t recall saying anything about copyright 🤔 . You appear to be trying to have an argument with a different comment 👍

          • mechoman444@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            9 days ago

            I might very well be. I repair appliances for a living and my AC went out in the car so I’ve been roasting driving from work order to work order my brain is like a roast duck right now.

    • Wolf314159@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      9 days ago

      This is garbage. What are you on about? It is art as an affection. Style as an algorithm. It’s got no sense of balance or intent. It looks like what it is, a copy that doesn’t actually understand what made the original great.

      • mechoman444@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 days ago

        Again art is very subjective. Your own personal bias place role to how much you like or dislike that particular picture however from an absolutely technical standpoint it’s very close to the original not quite there but close.