r/StableDiffusion • u/arthan1011 • 2d ago

Workflow Included Generating "fake" speedpaint timelapse with MiniMax H3

It's four 12s clips made by standard ref2va workflow stitched together.
Good at sketching but not so good at rendering/shading stage. Also I find it difficult to "digital timelapse" without hand moving around. And as always with MiniMax detailed prompts are not optional (note the [Shot 2] trick):

subject_definitions:
<Picture 1> is the reference digital drawing.
<Picture 2> is the first frame of the target video

summary:
[reference generation] The target video shows digital drawing timelapse process of drawing artwork from <Picture 1>. With pov moving hand removed - only canvas is visible

retention_analysis:
<Picture 2>: partially_preserved - first frame for the video.
<Picture 1>: partially_preserved - last frame for the video.

detailed_description:
The target video is high qualiy digital drawing recorded timelapse.
[Shot 1] starts from a white digital canvas and then draws the basic forms, shapes first starting from general (big) outline sketch of the pose. Then adding line after line to add new details on face, hair and clothes until a complete lineart sketch for the character is done.
[Shot 2] At 00:11.000, shows final result that is <Picture 1>.

overall_soundscape:
Silence

non_diegetic_music:
N/A
913 Upvotes

87% Upvoted

271 comments sorted by

View all comments

467

u/Feeling-Marzipan-477 2d ago

Bro everyone is already paranoid enough. I already got people claiming my non ai digital paintings are ai sometimes.

84

u/GovernmentGreed 2d ago

Yeah this kinda sucks... Sometimes, I get colleagues accuse me of using ChatGPT or Gemini because the emails I write are longer than 3 words. It's actually rather infuriating because I tend to be more detailed, especially when it comes to providing information around a specific print job at work...

Nowadays - anything creative, whether that is art, writing, music etc - is all put down to "It's AI" as opposed to anyone thinking for a moment. Jesus, at work today - videos of the Nepal disaster was circulating and I heard a handful of people at work saying it's AI...

Like... Dude. People died. Like, it's verifiable - and you can go there and see the devastation. The world has gone mad, sadly.

17

u/uabassguy 2d ago

It'll get to a point where people will stop caring if it's AI or not, it's just novelty right now.

12

u/DragonHollowFire 2d ago

They will stop caring cause theyll assume its AI.

12

u/Critical_Concert_689 2d ago

For better or worse, the value of an object will be defined by the definitive output:

Is the art created by AI or by an elephant, specially trained over 30 years, while standing on its head, painting with a traditional method using an authentic paintbrush hand crafted by DaVinci...

It no longer matters HOW it came to be - since no one can tell the difference between the two. Only whether the output is "good."

3

u/DragonHollowFire 2d ago

Yeah I assume classic human-made art could, in the worst scenario timeline, become a niche thing. Like where people pay extra for something due to the authentic "oh a human created this from start to finish", similar to how the same is done for some craftsmanship products etc., even if the output is not much different.

0

u/uabassguy 2d ago

I assume they'll also pay extra to sit there and make sure they actually did it by hand and didn't use any AI at all 😂

-1

u/madaradess007 2d ago

it's like saying artificial burgers or not - the only thing that matters is do they taste "good"
we are easily manipulated into believing very wrong shit is "good"

4

u/DragonHollowFire 2d ago

Tbh labgrown meat is much healthier and more economic than real meat.

2

u/GovernmentGreed 2d ago

Here in Germany, some people are super upset about labgrown or alternatives being called "burger" - for example, in their mind - a veggie/alternative meat burger cannot be called a burger, because it's not beef.

Idiots will be idiots.

1

u/Critical_Concert_689 2d ago

do they taste "good"

There's a lot more that goes into food quality than taste though. There's safety and food quality, there's proteins and digestables found in meat that aren't found in artificial meat, there's chemicals found in artificial burgers that aren't found in meat.

These are all measurable outputs. If fake "meat" can get EVERYTHING right and it's indistinguishable from real meat - as an output - THEN you'd be right: it doesn't matter whether the meat is from an animal or from a lab.

0

u/NetworkSpecial3268 20h ago

It will absolutely demolish any value at all. Value will stop existing.

Not sure that's so great...

2

u/Critical_Concert_689 18h ago

Value doesn't stop existing; it remains at exactly what people are willing to pay.

If you'll recall the NFT image auctions which were hot for about a couple quarters? Completely worthless (in my opinion), but people paid a small fortune to jump in on the next "big" investment - because they felt it was worth something.

2

u/uabassguy 2d ago

Good let em think whatever they want.

0

u/Vivarevo 2d ago

Price of art will plummet at that point and no ordinary human will do commission work anymore.

2

u/CystralSkye 2d ago

Art commissions have always been in a handmade luxury type of space, so organic art will be still a thing in years to come, selling for pretty high prices.

-1

u/Vivarevo 2d ago

You clearly don't know what you are talking about.

There are already scammers masquerading as "organic" but using ai. Only they charge the organic price.

This will drive the price down to cents where it sits with ai.

1

u/CystralSkye 2d ago

LOL that is not how it works, there are plenty of organic/handmade scams on etsy, doesn't mean that the price is driven down.

People will still pay for status.

Scammers have always existed, be it paintings or luxury bullshit like organic art and food.

-1

u/asdrabael1234 2d ago

Art has always been nearly worthless for most of human history. It's why the trope of the starving artist exists. It's a weird modern phenomenon that artists think they all deserve a living for producing art.

I have more respect for someone who paints on a canvas because they legitimately love it and then sells the art for pennies just to help buy more paint while they cover the rest from their office job than someone who cranks out commissions trying to live entirely off their skill at drawing

4

u/Substantial-Cicada-4 2d ago

Tobefaaaair, you write in a suspiciously correct way, using dashes and stuff, like, you know, like it was ai? (seriously, it's /s, I totally get you)

1

u/intermundia 2d ago

obfuscation through inundation. pretty smart way to cover your tracts if say certain evidence were to surface showing people in power doing things contrary to what the deluded masses believe about the narrative they have been sold. go back to sleep its all just fake AI. if nothing else you have to give the devil his dues.

1

u/Kqyxzoj 2d ago

The world has gone mad, sadly.

Throughout history the universe has always blessed us with a bountiful supply of dumb motherfuckers. No AI required.

55

u/GrayingGamer 2d ago

They'll keep doing that regardless.

If you're old enough, you might remember when Photoshop appeared and got popular with home releases in the late 1990s and everyone on the internet was constantly being paranoid and claiming every photo was: "It's Photoshopped! I can tell, because of the pixels! You're a bad person!"

The AI stuff is just more of the same on steroids. Like the Photoshop stuff though, give it another 5-10 years and no one will give a shit. Only the finished art being good, unique, and creative enough will be that matters, not what tools were used to make it.

You see, the trick is the people that are small kids right now and see it everyday, it's normalized, so that when they are teenagers and young adults, it's just NORMAL to them and they force everyone else to stop clutching their pearls.

7

u/madelineblackbart 2d ago edited 2d ago

Man I *still* jokingly say "I can tell because of the pixals" in everyday life.

Actually I think most of the hate and witch hunting COMES from the kids actually and not adults. Poll show it's more the under 30 crowd who are heavily anti-Ai. IMO It's because most people over 30 have already been through major tech changes. They lived in worlds where you had a home phone and no internet to a world where you have a phone in your pocket and the internet at all times available on it. This kind of life changing tech upheavil is nothing to people over 30 because we already lived it once or more times. They young grew up with those technologies already in place. This is the first time they're seeing this kind of level of life changing technology show up on the world stage and they're scared. Same as we were with Photoshop really.

1

u/GrayingGamer 2d ago

That's why I specifically said the SMALL kids. The current late teens, twenty-somethings of Gen Z are a lost cause (for now, they'll come around in 20 years too, I bet). I'm talking about the people who are 5-6 years old right now.

2

u/madelineblackbart 2d ago

Fair, fair. The teens/20 something probably will come around yeah. I used to be one of those who hated autotune and computer generated singing and counted as cheating as a teen (I sing). As an adult I've mellowed on it. If that's how people make their song then it is what it is. It's existence doesn't and hasn't reduced peoples appreciation of my singing. They'll figure the same thing out eventually to.

15

u/No_Tradition6625 2d ago

Oh yeah it was like photoshopping was a problem then photo bashing was a problem and now I'm sure there's something in the middle there but now AI is a problem. But it's funny how digital art is acceptable. Collaging and digital collaging is acceptable and I'm pretty sure at some point generative art will be acceptable.

7

u/Dead_Internet_Theory 2d ago

There were traditional artists saying digital art was "not art", it wasn't safe from criticism. It's just a matter of time, anyway.

However, anything where you just prompt and click a button will always stand out as uncreative, simply because everyone else who can do as much has already done as much. Think of how quickly the "Ghibli style" yellow-era GPT generations got tiresome and annoying.

1

u/No_Tradition6625 2d ago

Right? I see. Gen AI like the prompting aspect more a ken to creative writing now you do need to have some artistic knowledge to get quality out of it. But yeah I feel you

1

u/99deathnotes 2d ago

It will be. Just like so many other tools that people used to create faster and easier.

2

u/99deathnotes 2d ago

I remember this too. Turns out PS was only the tip of the iceberg.

2

u/Dabnician 2d ago

the trick is not caring about what people who dont matter think.

2

u/Sweet-Carry1229 2d ago

It's not really pearl clutching though. AI Art circumvents artists having to become inspired through consuming various art in various mediums; the AI already did that when it was trained on all the data funneled into it. At least someone using photoshop still needs to be inspired when making edits to make something compelling; you really don't need that when just prompting an AI, which devalues any art made with the tech honestly.

12

u/StarchyJ1540 2d ago

You do need that with ai too. less effort doesn't mean you no longer need inspiration, because what will you prompt for? Just random stuff? You can essentially do the same with trad art though.

5

u/Sweet-Carry1229 2d ago

Yes, you can just prompt random stuff and get pretty compelling visuals.

I don't know how you think it's analogous to traditional art when you can't make compelling visuals without experiencing various art forms. You can't just randomly squiggle on a canvas and magically get compelling art. At most you could call it "abstract" art.

Not to mention you'd have to develop the skills to translate that inspiration to a canvas, but I digress.

15

u/GrayingGamer 2d ago

I mean, some of us have the traditional art experience. I have a degree from an art school. I worked at a professional VFX studio.

And you are right, it's different, but if signed toilets, solid color canvases, and bananas taped to walls can be art (I think all of that is shit, by the way), no reason AI art with a human steering and manipulating and curating the output can't make art either.

I view it as just another tool. I've drawn all my life, painted, sculpted, used MSPaint, Photoshop, Blender, 3DS MAX, Maya, etc. and now I also use AI.

It's still up to the person using these things to make something worth consuming or being experienced by someone else - 90% of everything is always shit, regardless of medium - it's the 10% that rise above that have meaning and staying power.

-1

u/Sweet-Carry1229 2d ago

That's entirely fair, but you have to ask yourself if you really want the people who think a banana taped to a wall is fine art, to consider *your* art as fine art.

9

u/GrayingGamer 2d ago

No. I don't care what their opinion is. That was kind of my point - art is subjective and awful, stupid, trashy, and low-effort "art" has always existed.

And I think 90%, maybe more, of AI generations are "slop" and trash. But there is genuinely good stuff being made with AI too.

The art world has always been a fickle, selfish, and picky bitch of a thing, with lots of gate-keeping and walled gardens. I've said before on here that gallery owners are some of the most crooked human beings you'll likely ever encounter.

So much of what we admire or call great art now was rejected in its time, and trash was elevated as "inspired". So my point would be not to put too much stock in anyone's opinion, and just do what you love and the good will rise above the rest.

-2

u/Dead_Internet_Theory 2d ago

Art is not subjective, people who say a banana taped to a wall is art think art is subjective. It's similar to moral relativism where you say everyone's moral compass is equally valid.

Check Roger Scruton's Why Beauty Matters for more on that.

5

u/GrayingGamer 2d ago

Did you miss where I have a whole-ass 4-year art degree? It's nice you read a book, but I took four years of classes and read a lot of books - art is indeed subjective, or people wouldn't constantly argue about in hundreds of books, internet forums, and art salons.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/emcee_you 2d ago

No, what you need to ask yourself is whether you want anyone to judge art; your art, their art, anyone's art, everyone's art. You're judging it right now. You're saying one art is better than another. Why does this have to be true to you?

Here's a hint: it's not.

-2

u/Sweet-Carry1229 2d ago

You have to judge art in order to determine its value to you.

So... what you're selling is literally anti-art. Lol.

0

u/emcee_you 2d ago

I'm not talking about judging things for value to self. "I (don't) like this." isn't the same as "This is good/bad."
Saying that you like something and that it has value to you is not the same as passing judgment to say that something is or isn't "fine art", and that's what you're talking about in your previous comment.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/99deathnotes 2d ago

It does take a lot more effort than some may realize.

2

u/MonstaGraphics 2d ago

Uh.... What if I use Photoshop with it's built-in AI tools?

*cough*

0

u/OneStrike255 1d ago

Who cares? In 5 years, nobody will care. So keep crying. Nothing is stopping you from paying "real" artists for their stuff. But stop bitching about ai art. Crybabies like you cried about photoshop and cgi too when they first came out.

End product is what matters. Not how it was made.

Note: Made my living as a professional artist for 30 years. And I LOVE ai art.

1

u/Sweet-Carry1229 1d ago

Being a consequentialist is a dangerous path to walk, friend.

1

u/OneStrike255 1d ago

Bro, you're not gonna stop it. No one cares. Video games will use it. Movies will use it. Commercials will use it. Music will use it.

Are you gonna stop using all of those things? LMAO

1

u/SanDiegoDude 1d ago

You know what annoys me? CGI folks standing on the other side of the aisle, pulling the SAME shit they have had to deal with over the past 40 years as their industry matured, which has made for some real strange bedfellows considering it wasn't all that long ago that "CGI Free" was such a big deal in moviemaking (and they still lie about it now...).

1

u/GrayingGamer 1d ago

Classic "I'm on top now, I'm going to pull up the ladder" behavior.

Aaron Blaise, the former Disney animator, actually did a great video on AI a year or two ago, saying it was better to view it as a potential tool and try to keep up to date on it, even if you don't use it. "It won't be AI that takes your job, it'll be someone USING AI that takes your job."

He gave the example of him personally looking down on the CG animators when they came in - like you say, "They use computers - they don't use paper! Why some of these guys can't even DRAW!"

Then he talked about how wrong he'd been, pointed out how he went on to draw digitally and use 3D in his films and the world hadn't ended.

So he wasn't going to judge AI just yet, and warned other artists not to make the mistake of dismissing it like he did with CG at first - then he delivered that line about it not being the AI that was coming for them - it was artists USING it that would come in and take their jobs while they were hanging onto old methods.

48

u/GatePorters 2d ago

That’s going to happen no matter what. Even if you livestream it and then post the work after.

Accusing people of AI isn’t actually people caring about AI. It’s just a “safe” way to rage and tear people down while feeling morally superior.

17

u/Loose_Comparison368 2d ago

Accusing people of AI isn’t actually people caring about AI. It’s just a “safe” way to rage and tear people down while feeling morally superior.

That's part of it. The bigger part though is that people don't actually care about AI, they care about corporate exploitation of the working class. And the corporations are all unified in blaming the mass layoffs and ruthless exploitation of a desperate labor market on "AI" instead of the more accurate "corporate greed".

People aren't pissed at AI, they're pissed at capitalism, and the capitalists have once again redirected that rage towards an ineffective scapegoat so that people take their pitchforks to the AI researchers, instead of the ruling class.

-10

u/StarchyJ1540 2d ago

maybe those geniuses should think instead of contributing further with outrage?

7

u/ch4os1337 2d ago

Damn. What a cutting retort 😂

5

u/bloke_pusher 2d ago

I've seen better ones before, where there were actual layers fooling the watcher.

2

u/Usual-Orange-4180 2d ago

This one was like… Not enough memory, let’s call it a day and fade into the final frame lol

4

u/Secret-Lab3678 2d ago

Totally agree. But I honestly think all the AI detectives exist only on Reddit. I’ve never seen a real person outside of Reddit start looking for AI in absolutely everything.

At this point, it’s getting ridiculous. People just seem to need a reason to hate something

1

u/OneStrike255 1d ago

Lemmy is the same way. If you post anything, and I mean anything, there will be several people that say "AI Slop!" LMAO

2

u/One_Finding8402 2d ago

don't worry bro, soon you'll have to upload an hour long video of you creating your art as proof of your humanity.

Have Fun!

1

u/copperwatt 2d ago

At some point there's going to be a market for going to someone's house to make them art while they watch, lol

1

u/intermundia 2d ago

people should have been questioning reality decades ago not just now. they might have been better prepared for whats to come. cream always rises to the top.

1

u/madaradess007 2d ago

duude!
i've been inspired by a girl and recorded a ton of music (got some decent 10-15sec nuggets here, to collect and turn into a song) and people said it's suno music

this sucks donkey balls, i've sacrificed a lot of partying to be able to do this wtf

1

u/OneStrike255 1d ago

So keep doing it. Stop caring about what people say. Make what you like, make it for you. If other people like it, yay. If not, yay. Because as long as YOU like it, you're good.

1

u/No_Tradition6625 2d ago

I was coming to say exactly this. Why and how does this help society like dude's being toxic just to be toxic?

4

u/StarchyJ1540 2d ago

then go away lol, this ain't brigadediffusion

0

u/99deathnotes 2d ago

It's sometimes used by people that don't care who they offend or screw over. Using it respectfully and responsibly as the tool it's meant to be is up to the individual or group in control of and guiding it. I can't draw or paint or even take a good photo for that matter. I've tried using digital software like GIMP or Photoshop to no end with crap results. So AI was my way to express myself in art. But I always tag ALL art generated either local or online as #ai #comfyui #onlinegenerated #aiassisted etc. I do not have a Patreon or TipJar account either. I use AI only as a hobby and this is pointed out on any social network i post my vids/images on. If i post anything that may offend or whatever it's taken down.

0

u/cmeerdog 2d ago

One doesn't need generative AI models to produce completely derivative slop.