A cottagecore ramgirl.
1 Like
Gotcha. The art style just looked similar.
1 Like
Agreed. There are some similarities between Tartakovsky’s work and that of McCracken for sure. I think a lot of people thought there was overlap between Powderpuff Girls and Samurai Jack. And I’m sure some artists may have worked on both.
1 Like
Does satirical cartoons and Mad Magazine count as art? Of course it does, that
Was rhetorical 
4 Likes
I had to check, sorry lol
But that’s cool
2 Likes
Apparently it’s from issue 129. The page is called The Mad Primer of Bigots, Extremists, and Other Loose Ends
The rest is not without its deeply problematic and racist elements.
2 Likes
Rock and Stone!
1 Like
The original post they were responding to is very amusing hahaha.
1 Like
It just seemed too on the nose haha. But that’s wild. And yes, very problematic.
1 Like
I didn’t like Porco Rosso as a kid but it’s grown on me.
I just finished watching the pilot and it was giving Vivy: Flourite Eye’s Song, Citizen Sleeper, Five Nights at Freddy’s, and obviously Disney. Anyway it was awesome. Adding it to the list.
1 Like
Don’t get in the robot, Misato.
This photo feels very cinematic.
Our Hero, Our Hero~
2 Likes
1 Like
I feel so sorry for real artists. I stumbled upon some Stardew Valley art that I really liked and was close to posting it here, when I found out that at least some of it was created using AI.
How can you be sure that the art you like isn’t AI-generated? Am I just too naive or dumb to recognise it, or is AI-generated art becoming so good that it’s impossible to tell?
I wanted to buy something as a gift, but I decided against it because I couldn’t verify that it was human-made. On the other hand, artists might be accused of using AI even when they draw it themselves, which is also devastating.
Fuck AI.
5 Likes
I feel like the safest thing to do is to check out the artist’s site / blog / social media presence, because chances are they’re going to be pretty upfront about their thoughts on generative AI at this point. In my experience, the vast majority of would-be artists using it are boastful about using it, and the vast majority of artists against using it recognize their reputation could be tanked if they’re caught using it.
The latest concern I’ve learned regarding this issue is how some art-making programs (Photoshop or what have you) have become so corrupt that an artist can inadvertently use some kind of AI tool without even realizing it (e.g. changing the dimensions of an artwork, and the program automatically filling in the empty space with computer-generated content similar to what was along the edges). A lot of folks are going to be caught off guard as more and more computer programs forcibly shove this nonsense upon them at every step and turn.
3 Likes
There are tell tale signs but some of them you really have to zoom in and start looking. Usually it’s the small details that are dead giveaways such as books on a bookshelf in the background melting together or having gibberish text or no page lines. Or it’s something more obvious like a person with extra or missing fingers. A lot of AI works, especially when it comes to character portraits, have a plastic sheen to them with big bright eyes.
Many real artists post WIPs (work-in-progress) posts and before/after posts (a drawing from 10 years ago redrawn again to show progress). Gen-AI content is also fairly new so simply checking how long they’ve been posting can warrant some clues.
2 Likes
The only 100% way I can think of is to verify that the artist doesn’t use any digital mediums in their art making. If it’s all physical media you’re probably fine.
2 Likes