Yikes! Did season 1 episode 6 use AI-generated art?

[Rahul]

Okay, serious question to all the self-proclaimed "experts" here:

How do you go from this image:

To this image:

?

A) Spend a ton of time drawing the outline.
Then erasing every single line
Then completely paint the same image again, but completely different.
Then have a colorist, inker, texter come in?
Or
B) Draw a sketch. Feed that into AI. Do Photoshop clean-up?

 

[Rahul]

Like literally every single paint stroke is different between these two images, not even mentioning the inconsistent art style in the latter.

 

[Michael]

Well, I’m not going to explain to you what a fucking sketch is. Watch a damn drawing tutorial. Just because you’re ignorant on how an illustrator might arrive from sketch to finished drawing doesn’t mean there’s even a shred of evidence AI must have been used. You seem to be desperate for it to be a use of AI for whatever reason. So for all intents and purposed you present yourself as some kind of “expert” here. Yet you seem to be clueless as to the very basics of comic book drawing. They are the first fucking sketches, not the same artwork only with the ink and color missing. Obviously there were a number of steps between those two.

 

[Enterprise1701]

Did anyone get any confirmation on why the uniforms look 23th century? The theory the story was changed for some reason and the ship was meant to be much older makes a lot of sense to me.

No, they have thus far refused to admit the coordination / editing errors in the episode, namely the erroneous use of the Constitution class label for the external CG model despite the interior sets.

 

[tenmei]

No, they have thus far refused to admit the coordination / editing errors in the episode, namely the erroneous use of the Constitution class label for the external CG model despite the interior sets.

Except there is no eroneous use of the Constitution Class. The "Kirk" Class has never been referred to as Constitution Class on-screen and, at worst, we have the Connie IV Class (Miyazaki) in operation at the same time as the Connie V ("Kirk") Class.

 

[Rahul]

No, they have thus far refused to admit the coordination / editing errors in the episode, namely the erroneous use of the Constitution class label for the external CG model despite the interior sets.

I mean the logical explanation is last minute script changes. The CGI model of the Myazaki itself is also a kitbash of mostly SNW Enterprise parts, not any of the pre-burn ships we saw explode on DIS.
It was probably a 23rd century ship, and only later changed & re-decorated the SNW sets into a 31st century ship.

Well, I’m not going to explain to you what a fucking sketch is. Watch a damn drawing tutorial. Just because you’re ignorant on how an illustrator might arrive from sketch to finished drawing doesn’t mean there’s even a shred of evidence AI must have been used. You seem to be desperate for it to be a use of AI for whatever reason. So for all intents and purposed you present yourself as some kind of “expert” here. Yet you seem to be clueless as to the very basics of comic book drawing. They are the first fucking sketches, not the same artwork only with the ink and color missing. Obviously there were a number of steps between those two.

Then why the fuck didn't they publish any of the ACTUAL art, if it exists, to disprove they used AI?

 

[Enterprise1701]

I mean the logical explanation is last minute script changes. The CGI model of the Myazaki itself is also a kitbash of mostly SNW Enterprise parts, not any of the pre-burn ships we saw explode on DIS.
It was probably a 23rd century ship, and only later changed & re-decorated the SNW sets into a 31st century ship.

That's what I already said earlier, yes.

 

[tenmei]

Then why the fuck didn't they publish any of the ACTUAL art, if it exists, to disprove they used AI?

Because the episode was filmed at least 12 months ago, and maybe all that still existed was the linw art still held by the artist? Which is more likely than the grand conspiracy theory that is being proposed - a half glimpsed comic us hardly the Holy Grail is it.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Like literally every single paint stroke is different between these two images, not even mentioning the inconsistent art style in the latter.

An inker can change the entire look of a drawing. Vince Coletta was infamous for leaving out details in the art he inked. Inkers like Klaus Janson would add all sorts depth to the pencils he inks. Alfredo Alcala could obliterate a penciler's style with his inks.

 

[Mudd]

I was pals years ago with a DC inker who had endless stories about the differences in dealing with various artists - you know, you'd have a title that switched artists in the middle of a storyline, or an issue that started with one penciler and was finished by another, with very different sketching styles. And it would be up to the inker to try to maintain some continuity in the finished artwork.

Or, at least, up to the inker to the limits of their caring and patience - some pencilers were really relaxed about having their style and details modified, while others would pitch fits. And, of course, they were the "marquee" creators on the books, so...

 

[Michael]

For what it’s worth, here’s the Photoshop layers Stuart Pearce made available stacked on top of each other (had to guess layer effects and transparency, of course). The finished image you get does appear to be what we see in the episode. So he definitely has those elements as individual layers, which is of course not impossible to do with AI, but does strongly support his claim that they have been created by hand.

 

[Rahul]

For what it’s worth, here’s the Photoshop layers Stuart Pearce made available stacked on top of each other (had to guess layer effects and transparency, of course). The finished image you get does appear to be what we see in the episode. So he definitely has those elements as individual layers, which is of course not impossible to do with AI, but does strongly support his claim that they have been created by hand.

View attachment 52264

And the background art appears immediately in one go

I was pals years ago with a DC inker who had endless stories about the differences in dealing with various artists - you know, you'd have a title that switched artists in the middle of a storyline, or an issue that started with one penciler and was finished by another, with very different sketching styles. And it would be up to the inker to try to maintain some continuity in the finished artwork.

Or, at least, up to the inker to the limits of their caring and patience - some pencilers were really relaxed about having their style and details modified, while others would pitch fits. And, of course, they were the "marquee" creators on the books, so...

Again: This is not a real comicbook. This is a prop that was on screen for about 10 seconds in total.

 

[Nerys Myk]

When John Byrne did X-Men the Hidden Years, he asked for Tom Palmer to be his inker because he wanted that 60s X-Men look from the Thomas&Adams era. Fans wasted no time in telling Byrne that Palmer was "ruining" his pencils and Byrne should complain to Marvel and get him replaced.

 

[Set Harth]

But that one is really the absolute nail in the coffin.

Like you never grew an extra finger on a space mission.

 

[Rahul]

This whole "we didn't use AI" debacle is just the latest flavour in Hollywood's "we didn't use any CGI! Everything you see is real"-hypocrisy, that equally grinds my gears. Give the damn guys who make your stuff some recognition.

(Video series below really recommend btw)

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Nerys Myk]

And the background art appears immediately in one go



Again: This is not a real comicbook. This is a prop that was on screen for about 10 seconds in total.

What difference does that make? Props departments provide all sorts of detailed items that are screen for even less time.

 

[tenmei]

What difference does that make? Props departments provide all sorts of detailed items than are screen for even less time.

Maybe the background was created seperately and ported in?

 

[Nerys Myk]

Maybe the background was created seperately and ported in?

Probably. I've done that in art I've created

 

[jackoverfull]

Probably. I've done that in art I've created

And it’s the usual ways in these cases…

Having the photoshop layers strongly indicates that this is not ai, I concur.

By the way, isn’t it fascinating that we’re finally at a moment we can’t distinguish with certainty if something has been made by a human or a machine? We truly live in the future.

 

[fireproof78]

It's not the future. There's no flying cars.