[Jabcomix] Santo Playa comics

[Saitama]

Hopefully they do
Just have to be patient and grateful

I could share the pages, but I don't know where to the code is and how to remove it.

 

[Noce]

Don't risk it

 

[Noce]

Is it me or Jabcomix site is down?

 

[Saitama]

Is it me or Jabcomix site is down?

It's not just you.

And the pages are mid anyway.

 

[Emilyvt]

It's not just you.

And the pages are mid anyway.

How so?
I’d love to see

 

[potatoezzz]

Unless you painted the Lascoux caves then everything you've ever done has been copied from someone. Whether it is surrealism, cubism, impressionism or any other -ism, someone has done it before you and better. Case in point, a lot of people would say ripping off images and models from 'A Wife and Mother' was the cheapest and uncanniest slop imaginable, then having the brass neck to charge for it? Scummy. But at least it's not AI eh?
There's a lot of absolutely shit AI stuff out there, but there's also a lot of absolutely shit drawings/cartoons/paintings out there as well. To just label all AI as cheap slop is just silly.

I agree with this heavy. Did you guys know that when the camera became mainstream artist said pretty much the same rhetoric. I will say tho ai is a tool that is sooo much easier to abuse.

 

[rhapsodymipo]

Unless you painted the Lascoux caves then everything you've ever done has been copied from someone. Whether it is surrealism, cubism, impressionism or any other -ism, someone has done it before you and better. Case in point, a lot of people would say ripping off images and models from 'A Wife and Mother' was the cheapest and uncanniest slop imaginable, then having the brass neck to charge for it? Scummy. But at least it's not AI eh?
There's a lot of absolutely shit AI stuff out there, but there's also a lot of absolutely shit drawings/cartoons/paintings out there as well. To just label all AI as cheap slop is just silly.

"Or any other -ism."
Sloppism has a nice ring to it. It's also funny how you don’t even bother defending AI-generated images on the grounds of quality, you just say, "Well, people make crap without AI too." Sure, they do. But at least they learn something in the process, whether it’s posing 3D models, anatomy, or color theory. With AI, all you really grasp is how to churn out slop. And the worst part? You can’t even tell how bad it looks, because you’ve learned absolutely nothing valuable along the way. The technology might evolve, but a slop shitter will always be a slop shitter.

 

[Modok]

Unless you painted the Lascoux caves then everything you've ever done has been copied from someone. Whether it is surrealism, cubism, impressionism or any other -ism, someone has done it before you and better. Case in point, a lot of people would say ripping off images and models from 'A Wife and Mother' was the cheapest and uncanniest slop imaginable, then having the brass neck to charge for it? Scummy. But at least it's not AI eh?
There's a lot of absolutely shit AI stuff out there, but there's also a lot of absolutely shit drawings/cartoons/paintings out there as well. To just label all AI as cheap slop is just silly.

I just noticed this. This is actually a pretty decent amount of insight.

 

[Gilberto2006]

AI is like a gun. It's a tool that, if used responsibly, can have its negative effects greatly reduced. But the problem is that its too easy to defend under the guise of technological evolution, and its negative effects are so much easier to downplay while still proving to be devastating to the entire concept of art itself. Yes, you can behave unethically with your medium without utilizing AI, but I think the AI debate is basically boiling down to a question of whether the damage it can do is worth condoning for its original purpose(s).

 

[Lagiadus]

Well Well, looks like the site’s finally up

 

[potatoezzz]

AI is like a gun. It's a tool that, if used responsibly, can have its negative effects greatly reduced. But the problem is that its too easy to defend under the guise of technological evolution, and its negative effects are so much easier to downplay while still proving to be devastating to the entire concept of art itself. Yes, you can behave unethically with your medium without utilizing AI, but I think the AI debate is basically boiling down to a question of whether the damage it can do is worth condoning for its original purpose(s).

Well I think much like a gun it's a bit too late for that. The tech is out we just gotta hope people use it responsibly as a tool and not as a replacement

 

[Gilberto2006]

Well I think much like a gun it's a bit too late for that. The tech is out we just gotta hope people use it responsibly as a tool and not as a replacement

True. We'll likely begin to see legislation passed elsewhere to restrict its damage while innocent artists here are sent "thoughts and prayers".

 

[potatoezzz]

True. We'll likely begin to see legislation passed elsewhere to restrict its damage while innocent artists here are sent "thoughts and prayers".

That or someone gets really creative with it. Only one I've seen that is at least trying to push the creative boundaries of ai are the corridor guys. That and some weird fixes from Hollywood.

 

[Gilberto2006]

That or someone gets really creative with it. Only one I've seen that is at least trying to push the creative boundaries of ai are the corridor guys. That and some weird fixes from Hollywood.

Like any automation, if its integrated humanely with a shred of consideration for the human element in the field, then the damage can be minimized. I understand with things like the loss of home video sales that movie studios have had to come up with ways to protect profits, which has unfortunately mostly lead to nothing but additions to big tentpole franchises and remakes. But allowing AI to reduce the grueling efforts of special effects artists so they can meet deadlines with less stress but without trying to replace the artist would be a beneficial application.

 

[Emilyvt]

 

[Emilyvt]

 

[egenes]

Are the last two pages posted by "Emilyvt", page 21 and 22 of chapter 3 ?

 

[Butcher9_9]

Are the last two pages posted by "Emilyvt", page 21 and 22 of chapter 3 ?

Thats how I have numbered them, but it may vary my 1 as some people count the cover page as 0 rather than 1 which would make these 20, 21.

 

[justanothernoob]

Thats how I have numbered them, but it may vary my 1 as some people count the cover page as 0 rather than 1 which would make these 20, 21.

What do you show as page 20? My cover is as yours is, page 1, and the pages just don't seem to flow........

TIA!

 

[Butcher9_9]

This is my page 20. The 2 arcs flow when viewed seperatly, it just seems to switch randomly between the 2 which is why it seems strange but thast the case for the whole comic so if its an issue its not just at the end.