In order to continue DB's story in an authentic manner, Jump should create a Toriyama AI bot

[PhantomSaiyan]

I read this three times and still don't know what the hell you are saying.

Clearly just another one of those people who has no respect for the actual work that goes into art, or doesn't want to put in the effort, so they like the idea of everyone "having the same tools because look, I'm also an artist because I had a good idea and let a machine do it for me!"

[Desassina]

That was actually not what I said. Could you stop making it simplistic like that? I said that if people have access to the same tools, then what makes them an artist is the ability to create something striking that others would not have thought about, otherwise art would just be about the ability to produce something from tools that nobody has access to. In retrospect, spoiled brats in higher education systems did have access to things that I didn't, and that kind of exclusivity is not healthy. And before you talk about hard work again, note that I'm not condemning it, but applauding whoever it is that went through it and found a way to detach himself from it.

[JulieYBM]

That was actually not what I said. Could you stop making it simplistic like that? I said that if people have access to the same tools, then what makes them an artist is the ability to create something striking that others would not have thought about, otherwise art would just be about the ability to produce something from tools that nobody has access to. In retrospect, spoiled brats in higher education systems did have access to things that I didn't, and that kind of exclusivity is not healthy.

AI is not a tool for facilitating one's ability to create art, though. A pen and paper? Those are tools for creating art. A stick and mud? Those, too, are tools for creating art.

[PhantomSaiyan]

That was actually not what I said. Could you stop making it simplistic like that? I said that if people have access to the same tools, then what makes them an artist is the ability to create something striking that others would not have thought about, otherwise art would just be about the ability to produce something from tools that nobody has access to. In retrospect, spoiled brats in higher education systems did have access to things that I didn't, and that kind of exclusivity is not healthy. And before you talk about hard work again, note that I'm not condemning it, but applauding whoever it is that went through it and found a way to detach himself from it.

The "tools" you speak of are already available to everyone, it's called actually fucking doing the thing and learning. You want to create illustrations? Learn how to draw. And you know what helps in doing so? Actually liking it and having passion for it.

It's not "exclusivity", it's called earning the ability to do something, like you do for literally everything else in life. How lazy can people get?

AI is not a tool for facilitating one's ability to create art, though. A pen and paper? Those are tools for creating art. A stick and mud? Those, too, are tools for creating art.

Exactly lol before ai was a thing, I never saw an artist say "man, I love art and all, but I'd really love to have a machine that does it all for me and sucks away the most fun part of the process"

Whatever "problem" ai can "help" artists with, was never a problem that required a solution in the first place, we already had it figured out.

[Desassina]

Spoiler:

I created this image when sitting on a bar with some pen and paper. It was a fun exercise, nothing that someboy with the same will and intent could not have done, and I suppose much better than me.

Spoiler:

This got me an award in an art exposition (printed in big size). It's just some simple shapes with gradients to create an environment and mood. I don't expect an artist to enjoy it, but people and critics did, because sometimes the artist has to look past his own belly button.

I know how to go from hard work to simplicity. I was hoping for somebody to speak up and show some empathy to that position. Not to be complete assholes.

[Hellspawn28]

AI has never made a good piece of art. Anyone who says otherwise is lying.

[ThunderPX]

Anti-fascists are anti-AI and fascists are pro-AI, so that should tell you everything you need to know, I would offer.

Sadly, I have seen some people on the left use AI art to make anti-fascist and anti-capitalist stuff. People are too lazy to hire people to make art. I have done art for free for people because I'm nice, or I don't want them to use AI.

Plenty of people claim to be on 'the left', that doesn't make them actually on the left.

No True Scotsman fallacy. There's no actual correlation between political affiliation and wanting to use the theft machine. Most people just don't care because most people are dumb and lazy.

[PhantomSaiyan]

Spoiler:

I created this image when sitting on a bar with some pen and paper. It was a fun exercise, nothing that someboy with the same will and intent could not have done, and I suppose much better than me.

Spoiler:

This got me an award in an art exposition (printed in big size). It's just some simple shapes with gradients to create an environment and mood. I don't expect an artist to enjoy it, but people and critics did, because sometimes the artist has to look past his own belly button.

I know how to go from hard work to simplicity. I was hoping for somebody to speak up and show some empathy to that position. Not to be complete assholes.

What you're saying in this comment right here I don't disagree with.
I like your art as well, I think it's cool

We are not against simplicity here, that's not what we are criticizing.
Maybe there's been a general misunderstanding of our points? We are simply against generative ai, that's it. We do not see it as a "tool" like you do, and we do not think there is a need for it.

My only point is that if anyone dreams of making art, then they should just do what everyone else did and learn how to actually do it, not use machines as a crutch. Effort is required for everything in life, art shouldn't be different.

[DragonBalllKaiHD]

We can use AI as a tool, but this isn't absolutely one of them. Dragon Ball is a franchise that relies on the creative freedom from each individual to express unique storytelling and art. From Akira Toriyama, Katsuyoshi Nakatsuru, and Masaki Sato to Toyotaro, Naohiro Shintani, and Chikashi Kubota, the torch has already been passed.

Right now, we have a good mangaka to write a good DB story, because he has been trained by Toriyama. He knows how Dragon Ball works. We don't need AI.

[Ronin]

But more to the point, if you wanted more actually-authentic DB, you'd have to bring Toriyama back to life and make him draw comics again. Good luck.

Ironically, the idea of someone going to the trouble of bringing Toriyama back to life just to have him make more Dragon Ball stories for corporate interests sounds like the kind of irreverent dark joke he would write.

There's an indie film to be made here where two or three losers bring Toriyama back from the 1980s when he was still in his prime to draw new Dragon Ball for them, but all he does is sit around their apartment and play video games, build models and watch new action movies while they have to grapple with how he has a better grasp on life than they do as 30-something fans who can't move on from a children's franchise from their childhood.

Or you could make a horror film where they kill certain people and use part of Toriyama to hopefully bring him back, but create a Frankenstein-like monster.


This thread has got me thinking, though, about using AI as a tool for art. While writing a single prompt and having AI make something for you could be seen as lazy and soulless, at what point could using AI as a tool for art be considered work? Is it impossible to use AI as a tool and also do work on your behalf at the same time? What if you spent hours interacting with AI while going over each detail you wanted and tweaking it until you get what you wanted? Would that still be considered lazy? While the AI was still the one generating the content, I could see a point made where it would be similar to machine assistance from computers nowadays instead of having everything done purely by hand or with handheld tools.

[jjgp1112]

Spoiler:

I created this image when sitting on a bar with some pen and paper. It was a fun exercise, nothing that someboy with the same will and intent could not have done, and I suppose much better than me.

Spoiler:

This got me an award in an art exposition (printed in big size). It's just some simple shapes with gradients to create an environment and mood. I don't expect an artist to enjoy it, but people and critics did, because sometimes the artist has to look past his own belly button.

I know how to go from hard work to simplicity. I was hoping for somebody to speak up and show some empathy to that position. Not to be complete assholes.

I have seen a number of people throw around the "empathy" word in defense of making AI art and like no offense, but it's just insultingly insidious.

[JulieYBM]

Or you could make a horror film where they kill certain people and use part of Toriyama to hopefully bring him back, but create a Frankenstein-like monster.

That or a slasher film thing where the insane fans need to be stopped from committing murders in the name of getting more Dragon Ball.

This thread has got me thinking, though, about using AI as a tool for art. While writing a single prompt and having AI make something for you could be seen as lazy and soulless, at what point could using AI as a tool for art be considered work? Is it impossible to use AI as a tool and also do work on your behalf at the same time? What if you spent hours interacting with AI while going over each detail you wanted and tweaking it until you get what you wanted? Would that still be considered lazy? While the AI was still the one generating the content, I could see a point made where it would be similar to machine assistance from computers nowadays instead of having everything done purely by hand or with handheld tools.

The AI is still doing the 'work', albeit doing it poorly and inefficiently. It would literally be easier to just do it yourself.

There's a major problem that fandom in general seems to have with viewing the creation of art as 'work' or the process inherently evil. That's capitalism brain rot doing your thinking for y'all. "I have to work, I don't have time to make art!" or "All my art isn't profitable, therefore it has no value!" It's literally not the way for us to be approaching art in general—whether as a viewer or a creator of it. I am begging people to just make art for themselves and enjoy the process of creating.

[Ronin]

Or you could make a horror film where they kill certain people and use part of Toriyama to hopefully bring him back, but create a Frankenstein-like monster.

That or a slasher film thing where the insane fans need to be stopped from committing murders in the name of getting more Dragon Ball.

This thread has got me thinking, though, about using AI as a tool for art. While writing a single prompt and having AI make something for you could be seen as lazy and soulless, at what point could using AI as a tool for art be considered work? Is it impossible to use AI as a tool and also do work on your behalf at the same time? What if you spent hours interacting with AI while going over each detail you wanted and tweaking it until you get what you wanted? Would that still be considered lazy? While the AI was still the one generating the content, I could see a point made where it would be similar to machine assistance from computers nowadays instead of having everything done purely by hand or with handheld tools.

The AI is still doing the 'work', albeit doing it poorly and inefficiently. It would literally be easier to just do it yourself.

There's a major problem that fandom in general seems to have with viewing the creation of art as 'work' or the process inherently evil. That's capitalism brain rot doing your thinking for y'all. "I have to work, I don't have time to make art!" or "All my art isn't profitable, therefore it has no value!" It's literally not the way for us to be approaching art in general—whether as a viewer or a creator of it. I am begging people to just make art for themselves and enjoy the process of creating.

I see work as just putting a lot of effort into something. It may or may not be unenjoyable or "inherently evil" depending on what you're doing and what your preferences are. I'm sure everyone likes and dislikes certain types of work.

My hypothetical question was a response to people calling AI art lazy and lacking any human soul. It made me wonder if it was possible to use it in an unlazy and soulful way. Is it the AI itself that's bad or certain methods of using it that's bad? You could get philosophical and wonder what's the difference between an LLM and human thought. Aren't humans just biological machines with thoughts and feelings that could largely be described as a very complex LLM based off of prior experiences?

[The Dark Knight]

Maybe Jump should just let Dragon Ball end and move on to other series, which is what they should've done back in 1995 when Toriyama completed the manga and when Toei completed Z's anime. We've gotten so many new stories since the Buu arc, but the vast majority of them have failed to come remotely close to the quality of the original series. Maybe it's time for both fans and corporations to realize that Dragon Ball was a lightening in the bottle series that will never happen again, and simply move on. They managed to move on after GT for a decade and a half, so it's not like they're incapable of surviving without Dragon Ball.

[PhantomSaiyan]

I see work as just putting a lot of effort into something. It may or may not be unenjoyable or "inherently evil" depending on what you're doing and what your preferences are. I'm sure everyone likes and dislikes certain types of work.

My hypothetical question was a response to people calling AI art lazy and lacking any human soul. It made me wonder if it was possible to use it in an unlazy and soulful way. Is it the AI itself that's bad or certain methods of using it that's bad? You could get philosophical and wonder what's the difference between an LLM and human thought. Aren't humans just biological machines with thoughts and feelings that could largely be described as a very complex LLM based off of prior experiences?

The use of ai that you described might not be lazy (still lacks soul though because you're not actually making the thing) but it definitely is stupid.

Re directing all that effort into actually doing it yourself is the move.

And ai algorithms are not even close to how humans work so don't even go there

[Ronin]

I see work as just putting a lot of effort into something. It may or may not be unenjoyable or "inherently evil" depending on what you're doing and what your preferences are. I'm sure everyone likes and dislikes certain types of work.

My hypothetical question was a response to people calling AI art lazy and lacking any human soul. It made me wonder if it was possible to use it in an unlazy and soulful way. Is it the AI itself that's bad or certain methods of using it that's bad? You could get philosophical and wonder what's the difference between an LLM and human thought. Aren't humans just biological machines with thoughts and feelings that could largely be described as a very complex LLM based off of prior experiences?

The use of ai that you described might not be lazy (still lacks soul though because you're not actually making the thing) but it definitely is stupid.

Re directing all that effort into actually doing it yourself is the move.

And ai algorithms are not even close to how humans work so don't even go there

Yeah, I don't see why someone would use it in the way I described unless they preferred to do it that way for some reason. But what may seem stupid to one person might be interesting and fulfilling to someone else. It's all subjective. Could also be useful if someone is physically unable to do it. I don't think it lacks soul any more than pottery, spin art, splatter painting or any other art making where you don't have full artistic control.

And yes, I know that human minds aren't literal AI algorithms. My point is that parts of them can be seen as conceptually similar since they both make patterns from prior information and use that to create something new.

Also, to answer the subject matter of the thread; I don't think attempting to re-create Toriyama in any way to make more official DB content is a good idea. Regardless of whether it's AI or if he's cloned or however else.

[PhantomSaiyan]

I don't think it lacks soul any more than pottery, spin art, splatter painting or any other art making where you don't have full artistic control.

Can't disagree more with that.

What people need to understand is that even if you spend hours refining a prompt, you're still not the one making the "art", while in every example you cited, the human directly creates the art, it's weird that you think they don't have full artistic control, they are directly shaping their creation instead of just saying "hey robot do the thing for me"

What you mean maybe is that there's an element of chance and randomness when it comes to splatter painting, I can see that, but that is still part of art, and it still comes directly from their hands and their own work with no other third party involved.
And with pottery there's very much a lot of control over the final product so I don't know why it's even mentioned

[JulieYBM]

I stopped meticulously planning my stories out because it stopped having an element of freshness to it. The human creating art in the moment is something that AI doesn't capture, because AI doesn't have thoughts, feelings and its own POV for what any little creative choice can mean or not. You can feed a prompt or a detailed outline to an AI, but that isn't creating anything youself, that's some soulless machine creating an approximation.

Associating the process of making art with "thing bad and can be automated away" defeats the point of art: the artist's personal journey getting there.

[Ronin]

I don't think it lacks soul any more than pottery, spin art, splatter painting or any other art making where you don't have full artistic control.

Can't disagree more with that.

What people need to understand is that even if you spend hours refining a prompt, you're still not the one making the "art", while in every example you cited, the human directly creates the art, it's weird that you think they don't have full artistic control, they are directly shaping their creation instead of just saying "hey robot do the thing for me"

What you mean maybe is that there's an element of chance and randomness when it comes to splatter painting, I can see that, but that is still part of art, and it still comes directly from their hands and their own work with no other third party involved.
And with pottery there's very much a lot of control over the final product so I don't know why it's even mentioned

Agree to disagree. I mentioned pottery because the kiln can make unpredictable effects on the materials that you might or might not end up liking. They can be mediated, of course; but I thought I'd mention it. I am not invested enough in AI art to continue discussing it. I honestly could take it or leave it. I do see people's points if they criticize it for being lazy and/or soulless when it's used in certain ways ("real" art made by people could also be described this way sometimes). I am simply saying that I don't think it's that cut and dry to make broad statements about it. Anything that moves you is art. Regardless of whether it's done by a person, computer, animal, nature, a sequence of events or anything else. Doesn't matter if it's done on purpose or on accident either. And people are going to have their own subjective preferences for what moves them. If anyone disagrees with me, then I'm fine with that.

[MCDaveG]

Or you could make a horror film where they kill certain people and use part of Toriyama to hopefully bring him back, but create a Frankenstein-like monster.

That or a slasher film thing where the insane fans need to be stopped from committing murders in the name of getting more Dragon Ball.

This thread has got me thinking, though, about using AI as a tool for art. While writing a single prompt and having AI make something for you could be seen as lazy and soulless, at what point could using AI as a tool for art be considered work? Is it impossible to use AI as a tool and also do work on your behalf at the same time? What if you spent hours interacting with AI while going over each detail you wanted and tweaking it until you get what you wanted? Would that still be considered lazy? While the AI was still the one generating the content, I could see a point made where it would be similar to machine assistance from computers nowadays instead of having everything done purely by hand or with handheld tools.

The AI is still doing the 'work', albeit doing it poorly and inefficiently. It would literally be easier to just do it yourself.

There's a major problem that fandom in general seems to have with viewing the creation of art as 'work' or the process inherently evil. That's capitalism brain rot doing your thinking for y'all. "I have to work, I don't have time to make art!" or "All my art isn't profitable, therefore it has no value!" It's literally not the way for us to be approaching art in general—whether as a viewer or a creator of it. I am begging people to just make art for themselves and enjoy the process of creating.

I see work as just putting a lot of effort into something. It may or may not be unenjoyable or "inherently evil" depending on what you're doing and what your preferences are. I'm sure everyone likes and dislikes certain types of work.

My hypothetical question was a response to people calling AI art lazy and lacking any human soul. It made me wonder if it was possible to use it in an unlazy and soulful way. Is it the AI itself that's bad or certain methods of using it that's bad? You could get philosophical and wonder what's the difference between an LLM and human thought. Aren't humans just biological machines with thoughts and feelings that could largely be described as a very complex LLM based off of prior experiences?

My question going back from my long post that nobody reads anyway would be:
If it takes you that amount of time to correct things after AI in the creative realm, why wouldn't you spend the time on it yourself?
This to me as a pro in the field has second layer, which is efficiency.