>>4969887
>AI is already producing them far faster and at higher quality
They are producing faster, but I don't see them becoming higher quality unless there is some user effort or the tech becomes "really" good, it's all depends if it has already plateaued and we start getting diminishing returns or we haven't reached its peak yet but the number of AI computations needed for "indistinguishable " results are so high that the average user won't be able to reproduce.

>>4970067
Wishful thinking. AI has already not proven to create better work than handmade and the non-stop flood of less than mediocre work being spammed daily is more than enough to make anyone bitter about it.>>4970087
>Wishful thinking
its not. its very capable. you shouldnt be judging based on the shit people post on 4chan. there is often people will just gen and then post. they dont inpaint, or fix issues. they just post the first gen they make.
inpainting is the main reason why it makes faking 1000x easier. you can still do the same old style these fakes do, and then use a little inpainting to fix inconsistency quicker.
ai isnt just about making the total image. inpainting allows you to change only portions of images.
stop living in the past.
ai is a tool.>>4970087
you have to remember 4chan gives you the bottom of the barrel of users. lots of them dont even have actual graphic cards. they use free to use websites.
your judging ai based on the lowest of creators the internet has to offer. your data is shit because of that.

Traditional Celeb Fakes Thread #6

Previous >>4943167AI fakes thread >>4961074Active fakers blogs, resources, archives compendium;rentry.org/fakerycompendium(newly added: darkgabe)

< Go back

Previous >>4943167
AI fakes thread >>4961074

Active fakers blogs, resources, archives compendium;
rentry.org/fakerycompendium
(newly added: darkgabe)