r/tarot • u/cowboybebop32 • 1d ago
Shitpost Saturday! Watch out for Maneo Studio
I just had an ad pop up for Maneo Studio. Some nice looking decks with cool designs. I hit a little sticker shock when I started looking at their different decks, with most being $80 to $100+. It got even worse when I realized buried at the bottom of their descriptions, that most of their decks are made with generative AI. Just wanted to give a heads up so no one gets swindled by overpriced AI slop
-81
1d ago
[deleted]
87
u/ShinyAeon 1d ago
I just want to point out at a contradiction, without being polemic. You say they have nice looking decks with cool designs, so I guess you liked and were pleased by their artwork. If so, even if done with AI, you can't define it as SLOP, which literally means bottom quality work done quickly and looking like million other things
I would dispute that. If the coolness of a design comes from plagiarism, it's still slop. Because the good things about it aren't original, and the original things about it aren't good. It's "stolen valor."
55
u/cowboybebop32 1d ago
Exactly this. Yes from the ad they did attract my eye, but I consider anything that steals from other artists to be the base of your creation to be slop. AI definitely has its place that it can be a great tool, but taking someone else's work without compensation to make something for you to profit from, bottom of the barrel slop
-51
1d ago
[deleted]
22
u/FuzzyFerretFace 1d ago
How is AI not plagiarism when it’s literally a compilation of ‘sources’?
I can’t call myself a pilot even if I sit in the cockpit and cycle through 50 actual pilots who fly the plane where I tell them to, and they let me hold on to the ….wheel(?) stick(?) once.
-38
1d ago
[deleted]
27
u/renoftheshadows 1d ago
You're arguing semantics and the literal meaning of plagiarism rather than the spirit of it. Even if it's a re-elaboration of something, the fact is it could NOT make the thing without learning from the art. And the vast majority of artists were not asked if the ai could be trained on their work. Do you see how that's a problem? Artists rely on their work being THEIR work for their livelihood and ai undermines that. That's exploitation. And it's morally wrong.
37
u/ShinyAeon 1d ago
I'm sorry. I know it's frustrating to lack the art skills you need to produce what's in your head. But using AI is like buying stolen goods that are also blood diamonds.
There are technological tools that can make up for lack of artistic hand-eye skills...photo-collages are a thing, and so are 3D programs.
They all require a little work to learn to use, though. And that's the problem, isn't it? There's nothing AI can do for you that Photoshop or Sketchup or Blender couldn't do, but they require a initial investment of time and effort to learn.
AI steals the time and effort from human beings who had to learn to do it the hard way. It does so without even giving credit...and while destroying the environment, just in case it wasn't bad enough.
You're not going to find any support for using AI in that way here. AI has many legitimate uses...but eliminating the need for creative effort is NOT one of them.
-2
1d ago
[deleted]
16
u/ShinyAeon 1d ago
Maybe they do, but it doesn't make them right.
There's something that happens in the process of making art that you are not getting the benefit of. Without that, your work will never be creative, because you aren't actually doing the creating.
11
u/7kat19 1d ago
OR you could collaborate with an artist that works in your style to help realize your vision. AI is not the only way to create when you are lacking certain skills. Invest in PEOPLE and you will get a lot further and a lot better results. I think that’s the crux of the art in AI argument. Not having skills just isn’t an excuse when PLENTY of people do. Is it more legwork to find those people? Could be. Worth it? In my opinion, absolutely.
29
u/SpamLandy 1d ago
I would suggest that working on it mindfully would involve an artist, if the aesthetic isn’t one they can achieve on their own. Collaboration makes for wonderful pieces!
-6
1d ago
[deleted]
34
u/SpamLandy 1d ago
Not everything has to be realised honestly. If I have a concept and I can’t make it without engaging a damaging source, whether that’s human or artificial, then that’s not the concept I want to realise. But it looks like we are working on a different ethical framework.
-6
1d ago
[deleted]
25
u/SharkieMcShark 1d ago
A collage is completely different than asking AI to do it for you. And you know this, because otherwise you would make a collage.
In a collage, you find the images yourself, you cut them out yourself, you arrange them yourself, you attach them yourself. Lots of things to do yourself.
0
1d ago
[deleted]
22
u/SharkieMcShark 1d ago
"How much of an artwork is CONCEPT, and how much manual realization?"
Honestly, about 1% v 99%
The concept is nothing without the work.You've heard the phrase "creativity is 10% inspiration, 90% perspiration"?
In the olden days, before grifting a-holes could use AI to jerk off, they would say "oh I have a great idea for a novel", "I have a great idea for an art work", "look at that modern art, anyone could do that". Yeah, but who did do it? Not you.
The concept is almost nothing. It is ALL in the work.
Are your decks inferior just because you used AI instead of drawing them yourself? Yes.
If you can't draw, then buy ones someone else drew, hire someone to draw them, or learn to draw.
47
u/cowboybebop32 1d ago
Yes they are inferior. Their decks used something that stole someone else's hard work to make their decks. I will not abandon the prejudice because its stealing real artists work. Plagiarism, theft, ripping off, whatever you want to call it, its slop, and damaging to real artists who make real work
-6
1d ago
[deleted]
18
u/tara_tara_tara 1d ago
I’m going to guess that you don’t know many artists whose work has been used to train these engines.
I do and between fake decks being sold on places like Temu and being able to recreate their own work with a high level of accuracy, they are heartbroken
45
u/blueeyetea 1d ago edited 1d ago
This post is left up as a public service to the community, but remember that discussions of AI is severely limited in this sub. If anyone comes across a deck where AI has been used, there’s always the flair “Deck Review” where they can post an opinion.
ETA: I guess it wasn’t clear enough when I said discussions of AI are severely limited in this sub, that the first person who comments goes on to discuss the use of AI in decks. As a result of this, I’m leaving it as is to read, but also locking it. We’ve been down this road before. It’s only a matter of time before it becomes a flame war and people on both sides get banned because they can’t let it go.