
What's this? OwO??? I honestly have no idea, but you're welcome to linger!
40 posts
Testing Style Translation. Hope They Look Recognizable ^^;

Testing style translation. Hope they look recognizable ^^;
-
seekra liked this · 4 years ago
-
lance-alt liked this · 5 years ago
-
jamjimz liked this · 5 years ago
-
deceitfullyanxioussss reblogged this · 5 years ago
-
deceitfullyanxioussss liked this · 5 years ago
-
fandoms1reality0 liked this · 5 years ago
-
flowercrownsandtrauma liked this · 5 years ago
-
maze-of-tones liked this · 5 years ago
-
beetlewine-art liked this · 5 years ago
-
queroze reblogged this · 5 years ago
-
queroze liked this · 5 years ago
-
mybelovedmybeloved reblogged this · 5 years ago
-
pidgeoneon liked this · 5 years ago
-
marshmeleesblog liked this · 5 years ago
-
rotary-rambles liked this · 5 years ago
More Posts from Dastrixart



A long time ago an anon asked my thoughts about drawing backgrounds, so I finally got around to putting this together. It’s more prop-centric, but it still represents my philosophy to backgrounds.
I’ll try to do something more about drawing actual background spaces in the future! Please let me know what you think, if anything is unclear, or if you have suggestions for other tutorials you might find helpful!

There’s a protest going on against AI art over on artstation, so I feel like now is the time for me to make a statement on this issue!
I wholeheartedly support the ongoing protest against AI art. Why? Because my artwork is included in the datasets used to train these image generators without my consent. I get zero compensation for the use of my art, even though these image generators cost money to use, and are a commercial product.
Musicians are not being treated the same way. Stability has a music generator that only uses royalty free music in their dataset. Their words: “Because diffusion models are prone to memorization and overfitting, releasing a model trained on copyrighted data could potentially result in legal issues.” Why is the work of visual artists being treated differently?
Many have compared image generators to human artists seeking out inspiration. Those two are not the same. My art is literally being fed into these generators through the datasets, and spat back out of a program that has no inherent sense of what is respectful to artists. As long as my art is literally integrated into the system used to create the images, it is commercial use of my art without my consent.
Until there is an ethically sourced database that compensates artists for the use of their images, I am against AI art. I also think platforms should do everything they can to prevent scraping of their content for these databases.
Artists, speak out against this predatory practice! Our art should not be exploited without our consent, and we deserve to be compensated when our art is exploited for commercial use.