Comment by notavalleyman
9 months ago
How much of the part 1 pdf was made by a person versus chatgpt if you don't mind me asking?
The MC's hair colour and stubble change between the first three frames and everything has that yellow sheen.
9 months ago
How much of the part 1 pdf was made by a person versus chatgpt if you don't mind me asking?
The MC's hair colour and stubble change between the first three frames and everything has that yellow sheen.
I explain the whole process in “The Making Of” section, but happy to share more here if you have specific questions!
Given how much AI was used in this, it really should be noted prominently on the main page, not just the making of page which most people won’t see.
My personal detector feedback is that this is slop, the images have the yellow fake sheen, none of the characters were drawn in an interesting way, and the text font is unreadable. The idea of submitting AI generated slop with 0% human input, and then burying it under 'making of' and not even admitting it here when asked, is a bad sign for me
Edit, to be less rude of me, clearly what you've worked hard on here is a chatgpt prompt which generates a fun comic. Why don't you submit that for discussion/comparison instead of a sample of model outputs without providing the prompt
Not my intention. I actually broke the process down by task and role in the themakingof/ section. If I had drawn the sketches myself, just the line work would’ve taken about 50% more time, before even getting to color.
As for the writing, the story, structure, dialogue, I’d say 90–95% of it is human-made. If there’s anything you’re curious about that’s not covered on the site, I’m happy to share more details.
3 replies →
Who cares? It's clearly not "0% human input" as the author stated, and as long as the output conveys the ideas presented, it's fine, in my opinion.