I created some avatars for you all to use

[AntivaxHunters]

I hope you enjoy them.
They work great for avatars on here, Facebook, Twitter, etc. Feel free to put them to use 😉

[50 Shades Of Blue]

1. Very nice!

[AntivaxHunters]

6. Thank you

[Autumn]

2. Love them! How about AOC?

[AntivaxHunters]

4. The Squad is next

[ratchiweenie]

17. Great minds.

[AntivaxHunters]

100. Here you go!

[link:https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=18338687|]

[samplegirl]

3. Really cool!

Can I use a few as a reference photo to watercolor one??

[AntivaxHunters]

5. Absolutely!

[samplegirl]

63. Thank you

[Think. Again.]

7. Wow...

Is that all your work?

They're all great!

[AntivaxHunters]

9. Yes thanks

They began life as AI as a base then I used Photoshop & Lightroom to edit & manipulate them, finally tweeking them to the point I was ok with them. It took about a week but I'm happy with the results. Glad you like them 😊

[Think. Again.]

14. They're excellent!

One of them will be showing up as my avatar (THANKS!) as soon as I can figure out why the DU auto-sizer ain't working for me!

[Sky Jewels]

66. It's just AI.

Literally anyone can generate images like this in seconds. It takes no talent at all.

[MorbidButterflyTat]

75. Yes

I see this everywhere.

[AntivaxHunters]

98. Incorrect. It's not just AI

It's also Lightroom, Photoshop, and in some instances Illustrator & Snapseed.

Are you aware Adobe has instituted AI inside Photoshop now?

AI is but another tool in the art bin for artists. Technology evolves. There was once a time when creating digital art wasn't considered art at all, when people believed images created inside Photoshop were utter garbage, when digital photography wasn't real photography, & illustration isn't real art.

These days I don't have to worry about exposing myself to radioactive cadmium oils or breathing in paint from using acrylics with a Pasche airbrush. I think that's a good thing.
My BFA is in illustration from Rocky Mountain College of Art & Design. 😁

We're in an art Renaissance. And it's a beautiful thing.

[EYESORE 9001]

8. I like them all

but Steampunk Hillary is stunning.

[AntivaxHunters]

10. That was a fun one to create

[littlemissmartypants]

37. I love that one, too! ❤️

[nocoincidences]

15. Me, too!

That one really grabbed me!

[Oopsie Daisy]

12. LOL!

[AntivaxHunters]

19. ???

[Chainfire]

13. I am heartbroken that I don't see my face in there...

Just kidding, nice work.

[malaise]

16. Nice

Rec

[TygrBright]

18. Steampunk Bernie ROCKS! Thank you! n/t

[DBoon]

103. I like that one too

[ancianita]

20. You make them larger than life! Stunning!

[Mr.Bill]

21. Could you possibly contact EarlG

and see if they can be added to the stock avatars on this website for those of us not skilled enough to move them from this thread to our avatar?

[AntivaxHunters]

22. How do I do that?

That would be neat

[Mr.Bill]

25. Here's his profile page:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=101563

Send him a DU mail.

I bet lots of people would use them.

[AntivaxHunters]

30. Thanks I will do that now

[multigraincracker]

23. Great art.

I love em all.

[highplainsdem]

24. AI avatars. Would be better to have human-created art. DU is a serious

progressive website, not a place for displaying anyone's latest AI art as avatars.

I know you mean well, but anyone playing with an image generator can have it churn out dozens of images a minute.

If you want to post your AI art, the Art group here would be the best place for it. If they allow it. I vaguely recall Mastodon banning AI art some time back, though I don't know if that's changed or if certain parts of Mastodon welcome it.

[AntivaxHunters]

28. The base is AI the rest is Photoshop & Lightroom

The last avatar of Nancy Pelosi I also tweaked in Illustrator.
What a strange gate keeping comment though about progressives. Last I heard we weren't the ones into banning things. Strange.

I don't know what Mastadon has anything to do with it but okkkkkkk......

AFAIK artwork on here is allowed as long as it's overlay graphic or pornographic.

[highplainsdem]

33. AFAIK we've never had anyone here pushing DUers to use AI-created art, which

starts with images churned out by mindless software in seconds, for avatars that will be displayed all over the board.

DU already has a great selection of avatars, and IMO real photos of politicians are 100% better than AI- generated images of them.

Much more respectful.

Many people don't consider AI art real art. Many of the image-generating programs out there are trained on data sets of stolen images.

And AI-generated art is a threat to real artists who spent years learning how to create images.

Right now Spotify has been flooded with AI fake music. 15 million tracks from one AI company alone.

I've asked people in.Music Appreciation, which I host, not to post AI stuff there, since the group is about appreciating real music from real human artists.

And while you gave prompts to an image generator and made some choices about which ones to keep and tweak slightly, you didn't create the images you posted here or have much control over what the machine churned out. Identical prompts can get very different results, because the AI is just following an algorithm with no awareness of an image being created.

Anyone on this board could also use AI to create dozens of avatars a day. And some of them would probably want their favorite AI creations added as DU avatars, too.

I don't think EarlG should be asked to open up DU's avatars to everyone who can have software generate an image in seconds.

IMO, DU's own collection of avatars should NOT be used as a gallery for any member's artwork. Especially not for AI-generated images.

[AntivaxHunters]

34. Fascinating

It sounds like the old argument of how illustrattion isn't art.
Or how digital photography isn't photography.
Or how digital art isn't art (pre-AI).

Personally I'm of a different opinion where AI is simply another tool to use & create with. Sure there's people who just type in words to create something & in that sense I agree with you but I see more as a base & only a beginning.

So ya we'll disagree on this but it's not worth arguing about. Creating is the window to the soul, heart, & mind.

I'm reminded of a quote by Albert Einstein...
"Creativity is seeing what others see and thinking what no one else ever thought."

[highplainsdem]

43. You are not really creating art when you give a prompt to an

image generator. Any more than someone telling AI to write a story really wrote that story.

As I said, anyone else here could do something just like what you did and get an image in seconds. Literally under ten seconds, usually, with four different images being offered.

If people here want AI art for their avatars, there are lots of image generators online to use.

If they don't mind using tech that many people consider unethical and many artists are suing.

And again, this stuff has no place in DU's selection of avatars, unless you want potentially thousands of AI-generated avatars to be added to it, or EarlG to have to spend his time deciding what to add from the likely flood of AI-generated stuff that he'll get bombarded with, as everyone who likes to play with AI wants in on it.

[AntivaxHunters]

47. Well we're going to have to disagree

I agree with how people just throw stuff in & out it comes but that's not my workflow.

And remember, art is very subjective.

Look at history when they said Jackson Pollock throwing paint at a canvas wasn't art. Or how they Mapletborpe's art wasn't art because it was too offensive. Or how Photoshop circa 1993 wasn't art & would ruin the art world. Or how art created in a Wacom in 1999 wasn't really drawing.

Yup.

Art is subjective.
Art has no limits.

Have a great evening ❤️

[highplainsdem]

53. Using AI to generate images isn't like Pollock throwing paint at a canvas. It's like throwing a

switch at a distance to have machines you can't see throw paint at canvases you can't see, and then deciding if you like any of the results.

[Think. Again.]

88. Creativity...

...supercedes the materials or methods employed.

I admire your work, think these images are great!, and appreciate your creativity as the source of them.

(and I really respect how well you can keep your cool!)

[AntivaxHunters]

97. Thank you

I've learned that arguing from a point of logic & rational is better than arguing from a point of emotion. It's how I engage Trump supporters & it drives them bonkers lol

Happy you like my work, thank you!

[Pluvious]

94. New tools and techniques is always disruptive...

I recall reading about the introduction of recorded music in theaters putting musicians out of work

The disruptive impact of AI is just starting to be processed

Thank you for sharing your time and energy in attempting to enrich our diverse community 😉

“No good deed shall go unpunished” 😎

[AntivaxHunters]

95. Thank you very much

I really appreciate it.
I certainly didn't expect some people to be so triggered by my illustrations.

[highplainsdem]

99. I guess you somehow missed all the news this year about artists striking and lawsuits

being filed because of the harm AI does.

And those AI-generated images are not "your" illustrations. Your work is just whatever tinkering you did after you gave the AI a few words as a prompt and within seconds it gave you an assortment of images to choose from. You did no work at all to create those images, which were created by mindless algorithms from images stolen for data sets.

[NYC Liberal]

102. Hey, I'm a chef

because I put frozen Mac-and-Cheese in my microwave and pressed a few buttons. That's how it works now right?

in case it wasn't obvious; I agree with you.

The other mediums I see people making comparisons too, like photography, require actual work, skill, and artistic intent. Even more important, they don't rely on stealing the work of others. AI "art" literally could not exist if it didn't have the work of real people to steal from. Imagine if you commissioned a portrait from an actual painter, paid them nothing, took their work, then told everyone you made it because you told the artist what you wanted.

There might be a place for AI "art" that is solely trained on work which was commissioned to be used for that purpose. If artists are hired and paid fairly to create training data specifically for AI, and they choose to take the job with that knowledge, that would be okay, I think. Even then, I don't think AI "art" will ever rival art created by a human being, because the intent and the emotions are not there.

[Think. Again.]

106. You might have missed...

...that the news this year was actually about professional creatives being cheated out of due compensation because studios and publishers are ripping them off.

You might have also missed that the striking creatives publicly acknowledge the validity and value of digital art.

[highplainsdem]

110. Considering I've been posting regularly about the problems with generative AI, I have

not missed what the debate is about.

The AI used by AntivaxHunters is not one of the very, very few using a legal rather than stolen data set.

And btw, AI-generated art is not digital art created purposefully by humans. AI-generated art is whatever the AI spits out in that session from that prompt, with the AI having no awareness of what was generated, and the person using the prompt having only very limited control over what will result. Which is why a lot of flawed images are churned out and the user of the AI will try to find the least crappy ones and maybe tinker with those.

[Quixote1818]

26. Looks exactly like the type of stuff my AI app creates. Especially things like birds with no heads

like in the MLK image. LOL

[AntivaxHunters]

29. Which app do you use?

[PortTack]

27. Nice!

[WhiskeyGrinder]

31. AI art is unethical and ugly and hurts the environment. If you can't be assed to draw it yourself,

why should I give a shit about it?

[AntivaxHunters]

36. You seem nice

Bad day? Need a beer?

[highplainsdem]

45. WhiskerGrinder's opinion of AI art is one many people share. And if you

don't know about AI's environmental impact, I suggest you google it. And google

ai artists lawsuit

while you're at it.

[betsuni]

52. Was just thinking, wasn't AI a big part of the Hollywood writer's strike?

[highplainsdem]

60. Yes. And it's part of the actors' strike still continuing. Journalists are

organizing to fight it. There are multiple lawsuits against AI companies, and because stolen intellectual property is in almost all data sets used to train generative AI, there will be more, and AI companies are trying to make users bear legal responsibility whenever their AI violates copyrighr. See this OP I posted today: https://www.democraticunderground.com/100218336263

Generative AI is fundamentally unethical.

It's also no more artistic than having someone else paint or write stories for you would be.

[betsuni]

61. Thank you!

[MorbidButterflyTat]

80. Speaking of unethical...

...some MAGAts have been AI-ing pictures of Slobby with Martin Luther King, Jr., and others from history, him "praying" and isn't AI behind those ridiculous Slobby NFTs, as Rocky, Rambo, etc.?

[highplainsdem]

82. The Trump NFTs were photoshopped, not AI-generated - link below - but RWers have been using AI

for all sorts of horrible things. Including porn starring AOC, Hillary Clinton and other Democrats.

Even a ChatGPT-written pro-gun children's poem in the style of Dr. Seuss, which I ran across on Twitter one day: https://www.democraticunderground.com/100217753275#post22


Article on Trump's NFTs:

https://gizmodo.com/donald-trump-nft-trading-cards-1849900531

[MorbidButterflyTat]

86. OFFS!

That is disgusting! I don't know which is worse, people profiting off it or people condoning it.

[littlemissmartypants]

51. With a whiskey chaser...apparently...

[AntivaxHunters]

71. LoL 😂

[WhiskeyGrinder]

84. Oh, I'm definitely not.

Bad day? Need a beer?

Nope and nope.

I answered your questions, so I ask again, if you can't be assed to draw it yourself, why should I give a shit about it?

[AntivaxHunters]

101. I'll leave you with this

❤️❤️❤️

You have a great weekend friend.

[MorbidButterflyTat]

107. Don't get a nosebleed

up there on your high horse.

[AntivaxHunters]

109. Don't burn your tush

Being all hot & bothered over illustrations. Sunburns kind of suck lol

[flying_wahini]

32. I love them ALL!

[littlemissmartypants]

35. FANTASTIC! AntivaxHunters you're so talented!

I don't recognize them all though. Can you edit to add identity?

I'd love to see a young Diane Feinstein* and Secretary Pete Buttigeg!

* https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143136650

[AntivaxHunters]

38. Thank you

I'm debating about deleting the thread because people are mad. If I do I'll mail you what I made 😊
Glad you like them

[littlemissmartypants]

44. Don't delete it!! There's a very active peanut gallery here at DU.

Don't let ANYONE steal your joy!!

[AntivaxHunters]

54. Thank you

I sure wasn't expecting to receive big mad comments about some illustrations that's for sure.

I've not muted anybody. Perhaps I should start

[littlemissmartypants]

59. My list is loooonnng. Sometimes I post a thread and it will say "ten replies"

But I only see two.....

[AntivaxHunters]

62. LoL that's funny

[Sky Jewels]

64. You do realize it takes zero "talent" to generate AI images?

[littlemissmartypants]

65. And it costs nothing to be nice.

[Sky Jewels]

67. You might want to read the full thread to

find out more about the harmful effects of using AI “art.”

[littlemissmartypants]

68. Or I might want to mind my own business. To set an example for others.

I know plenty about AI and art and AI art and I don't need anyone to lecture me on the subject.

[AntivaxHunters]

69. Thank you

[AntivaxHunters]

70. It's not just AI

[highplainsdem]

74. You said your art isn't just AI, and that the AI images you got just by typing in

a few words as a prompt were only "the base" and you did some work with each picture after the AI created the image for you.

But the MLK image, for instance, still has a number of obvious AI artifacts in the sky, and not just the headless bird Quixote1818 pointed out in reply 26. One of those things in the sky thrown in by the AI looks like a flying starfish with a red cone attached, and three smaller AI glitches are even less identifiable. There's a large orange blotch in one corner of the sky. MLK's jacket is black on one side and reddish brown on the other. And if the orange and reddish colors are meant to suggest glaring light, then the shadows on his face and neck are completely wrong. I'd think using Photoshop to create a uniformly colored sky without unidentifiable flying objects would have been fairly simple, but you didn't correct those flaws.

And even if you had, the image of MLK would have been produced by the AI.

And the image generator you said you used in your other art thread, Wombo, is not one of the very, very few AI image generators using licensed work it has a legal right to use for training its AI.

Look, I know you mean well. And image generators can be fun to play with when they'll take any random idea that occurs to you and turn it into a picture in seconds.

But that's no more creating your own art than telling a human artist to paint something, and giving a few words of instruction, would be. And if you took the picture someone else painted for you and tweaked it, the changes you made would be yours, but the original picture wouldn't be your art, any more than making a few edits in a story or novel makes that the work of the editor rather than the writer.

[Quixote1818]

76. I work in publishing and AI has put a number of illustrators I know out of work

I see AI and I instantly think of my illustrator friends not being able to feed their kids. I just get a negative reaction when I see anything AI. It seems like the OP basically admits it's AI in the comment section but it should say they are AI right in the OP. All this praise in the comments for an algorithm that just copies from real artists.

[highplainsdem]

77. Both commercial artists and photographers have been very, very badly hurt by

AI, already.

I've posted a number of OPs about AI-generated writing flooding Amazon's Kindle self-publishing platform, sometimes with the books under names identical or similar to established authors, and all Amazon has done is remove the byline-copying books after complaints are not only made but publicized, and only recently Amazon finally said that these AI authors will be limited...to publishing only three books A DAY on Kindle.

Three. A. Day. A mere 1,095 AI-generated books a year. How will those poor AI-using fake writers survive?

Regular publishers are getting flooded with AI crap, too. SF magazine Clarkesworld had to shut off submissions for a while earlier this year because they were being deluged with AI-written manuscripts.

[MorbidButterflyTat]

81. OMG

That literally makes me sick.

Those self-published Kindle "books" are garbage to begin with. Some of them have thousands of 5 star reviews, very suspicious. I wonder what kind of cut Amazon requires.

I loved Clarkesworld. As difficult as the slush pile has always been for unknown writers I guess now it's an absolute nightmare, for writers and editors. This is like Napster, times a billion.

[Think. Again.]

111. You say you work in publishing...

...you must be very very upset about all those hand typesetters who were put out of work, or all the print shops who had to close down, or all the delivery drivers who no longer carry print magazines, or all the independent bookstores that have gone under, or all the other people seriously affected by digital developments, and yet here you sit, on your laptop, conducting your social conversations via the web.

[Prairie_Seagull]

39. No charge to see the free 2 headed calf but the 2 headed person is going to cost ya.

Sooner or later. EarlG and Elad or going to have to make a call on this. I support and don't mind paying for art completely produced by artists. Doesn't art hold up a mirror?

[MorbidButterflyTat]

104. I think in this case...

...it most definitely does.

[mysteryowl]

40. Fantastic! Bernie's had me laugh outloud!

What is Bernie dressed in?



Did you draw these?

[highplainsdem]

48. They're all AI generated.

[mysteryowl]

79. Oh, wow.

The era

[littlemissmartypants]

50. It's Steampunk.

Dictionary
Definitions from Oxford Languages · Learn more
Search for a word
steam·punk
/ˈstēmˌpəNGk/
noun
a genre of science fiction that has a historical setting and typically features steam-powered machinery rather than advanced technology.
"if you like steampunk, this is a great book for you"
a style of design and fashion that combines historical elements with anachronistic technological features inspired by science fiction.
"the essence of steampunk is homage to vintage fashion with a modern, sassy twist"

●●●

Steampunk is a subgenre of science fiction that incorporates retrofuturistic technology and aesthetics inspired by 19th-century industrial steam-powered machinery.[1][2][3] Steampunk works are often set in an alternative history of the Victorian era or the American "Wild West", where steam power remains in mainstream use, or in a fantasy world that similarly employs steam power.
Snip
Various modern utilitarian objects have been modified by enthusiasts into a pseudo-Victorian mechanical "steampunk" style.[25][45] Examples include computer keyboards and electric guitars.[46] The goal of such redesigns is to employ appropriate materials (such as polished brass, iron, wood, and leather) with design elements and craftsmanship consistent with the Victorian era,[22][47] rejecting the aesthetic of industrial design.[43]

Paris metro station "Arts et Métiers", designed in 1994 to honor the works of Jules Verne

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steampunk

[onecaliberal]

41. All very nice!

[MLAA]

42. Love them all, it the first Pelosi one is perfection. You captured her wit, intelligence and power

Edited to add: I don’t recognize the one before MLK

[AntivaxHunters]

49. A young FDR

I need to work on that one more.

[MLAA]

58. Aaaaah, now I see it.

[chouchou]

46. Excellent job

Thank you.

[Fla Dem]

55. How talented. Nice work! Especially like the Nancy Pelosi ones, but they're all great!

[Owl]

56. Nice! 👍

[littlemissmartypants]

57. Please edit them and add the identity, please! ❤️

[JHB]

72. How did you create them? They look like AI (so-called) art.

I have some bones to pick if you're promulgating replacing artists with automation. Plenty of worthy art from real people.
Also, DU has some specific technical requirements for avatar images. None of these conform to those.

[highplainsdem]

78. They are AI. As a number of replies above point out.

[BWdem4life]

73. How bout some Ukraine avatars?

Some of us are not changing them till the war is over

[Sogo]

83. Who is the man in the pic about MLK?

[AntivaxHunters]

85. A young FDR

[LudwigPastorius]

87. I must have missed Jesse Jackson's high top phase in the 80s.

[MorbidButterflyTat]

108. We all did!

[AZSkiffyGeek]

113. His brief time performing with Kid 'n Play

[LudwigPastorius]

117. LOL

[Croney]

89. At first I saw, and now cannot unsee, big fingers reaching out toward the President

in the first picture. Very menacing.

[Raine]

112. I wondered at first if the giant Cheetos were trying

to get hold of him.

[betsuni]

114. Me too.

[sheshe2]

119. That is what I thought as well.

[CousinIT]

90. Dall-E, Bard, Midjourney, Firefly...? n/t

[AntivaxHunters]

91. Photoshop, Lightroom, & Dream

[Snooper9]

92. Why don't you try to use only paint, no AI

and really see what you can do

[AntivaxHunters]

93. Why don't you try to be nice

Kindness is free.

There's trans people being legislated out of existence & you're upset by some avatars I created for people to use? I just can't.

[highplainsdem]

96. Why don't you look at this thread and watch the FTC roundtable with real artists so

you'll understand why generative AI harms them?

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100218338820

And yes, you should try creating your own art instead of telling AI to do it for you.

And label it clearly as AI when you post it. Label it AI in the OP, and ideally in the thread title. Just naming an AI tool most people here are unfamiliar with doesn't make it clear that you had some AI tool create the image first.

[MorbidButterflyTat]

105. It's obvious to me

this person doesn't give a damn.

Your patience and persistence is commendable, but unfortunately, IMO, futile.

[redqueen]

115. Even though that person clearly doesn't care,

others reading the exchange may have learned something new.

Surprised to see appreciation for what are obviously just AI-generated images (with minor changes, apparently).

[BluesRunTheGame]

116. You didn't "create" anything.

Show us work that you have done start to finish with photoshop or illustrator. Show us a decent pencil drawing.

[AntivaxHunters]

118. Why? All you're going to say is that it sucks.

Offer me a good explanation why I should take your bait when I'm old enough to understand exactly what your intentions is.
Go be angry at someone else. Who gets mad at someone who created avatars for people to use? Avatars!
Do you want to see my gym membership too?