|
|
|||
| forums: groups: | |||
|
"Would you rather see AI pics or real pics?"
Love you, too
I thought I knew the results, but not sure anymore.
I think REAL pictures of women getting messy are better then AI images.
You know that someone is truly experiencing the mess.
However i also enjoy AI images (particularly for situations that i would love to see in the REAL world). Thus those such as Skirtpie ant enjoyable, as i like messy women looking smart and wearing dresses, skirts and heels.
AI images allow us to indulge our fantasies of situations we would love to see enacted.
You know that someone is truly experiencing the mess.
However i also enjoy AI images (particularly for situations that i would love to see in the REAL world). Thus those such as Skirtpie ant enjoyable, as i like messy women looking smart and wearing dresses, skirts and heels.
AI images allow us to indulge our fantasies of situations we would love to see enacted.
Real!
Real. AI is just a lot easier to generate and a lot of the people who like it seem to really, REALLY like it, so it's a lot more numerous.
All flesh is equal when gunged.
Obviously I'd prefer to see real women in the slapstick situations that Skirtpie so exquisitely creates with AI. His AI renderings depict the type of ladies, style of dress and situations that I particularly enjoy.
However IRL the odds of witnessing or being a part of that type of scene are unfortunately practically nil ! If I had unlimited budget I'd love to re-create them IRL with some of our UMD All-Star ladies. but thats not the case ... So I really enjoy the AI pics and tend to let my imagination run wild.
I do also really appreciate real images that Skirtpie has posted over the years
PT2
However IRL the odds of witnessing or being a part of that type of scene are unfortunately practically nil ! If I had unlimited budget I'd love to re-create them IRL with some of our UMD All-Star ladies. but thats not the case ... So I really enjoy the AI pics and tend to let my imagination run wild.
I do also really appreciate real images that Skirtpie has posted over the years
PT2
I think real will always have the edge, simply because it has actually happened.
However, experimenting with AI had its place, how else are you going to gey beautiful ladies, to roll in the mud, ruining thier white lingerie, without it costing an absolute fortune
However, experimenting with AI had its place, how else are you going to gey beautiful ladies, to roll in the mud, ruining thier white lingerie, without it costing an absolute fortune
.
Real photos don't really see the point in AI
Definitely real.
I've conjured up some pretty good looking muddy maxi dress pictures (
@JD) but it still doesn't come close to the real thing.
I've conjured up some pretty good looking muddy maxi dress pictures (
@JD) but it still doesn't come close to the real thing.
"AI" is really artificial fantasy. Top computer designers will all admit that there is no intelligence there, just a lot of computing power. Real is overwhelmingly better, but "AI" allows for some fantasy experimentation. Now and then I'll see an "AI" image that I might want to save. Otherwise, I skip the vast majority of them. Even in photography, there are so few real moments in WAM. Those generally don't get photographed or video recorded.
AI WAM is basically "a better way to write WAM stories". You can use it to create any look, any number of participants, any setting, any style.
You could use AI to create images of a spandex-clad superhero-themed food-fight held in the first class dining room of the risen Titanic - or even stage it in the stokehold with stokers shoveling coal in the background. Things that could never be done for real.
You can also use it to storyboard ideas, try out outfit concepts, or gunging methods.
The real thrill in WAM story-writing was bringing your own fantasy to life, initially in text, but now in full imagery. Creating a wam scene in your head, or on screen, is one almighty rush for anyone who does it.
But in terms of an audience looking, for now at least, people like the idea that what they are looking at really happened, real people actually felt that custard flowing into their pants or that custard pie splattering all over their face, the actual experience.
Over time, as TV shows and Hollywood movies gradually replace real actors with AI-generated characters, future generations may not be as fully about the division, but change always takes time to work through.
I voted real for now.
You could use AI to create images of a spandex-clad superhero-themed food-fight held in the first class dining room of the risen Titanic - or even stage it in the stokehold with stokers shoveling coal in the background. Things that could never be done for real.
You can also use it to storyboard ideas, try out outfit concepts, or gunging methods.
The real thrill in WAM story-writing was bringing your own fantasy to life, initially in text, but now in full imagery. Creating a wam scene in your head, or on screen, is one almighty rush for anyone who does it.
But in terms of an audience looking, for now at least, people like the idea that what they are looking at really happened, real people actually felt that custard flowing into their pants or that custard pie splattering all over their face, the actual experience.
Over time, as TV shows and Hollywood movies gradually replace real actors with AI-generated characters, future generations may not be as fully about the division, but change always takes time to work through.
I voted real for now.
Saturation Hall - Forth! The Gungemaidens!
I'd rather not see ANY AI pics ever.
I don't need no fuckin' stinking AI pics!
Oh Janet! You look so funny!!!
As soon as there were real videos I pretty much lost interest in WAM pictures, I like mess that moves ... which means that for me AI is way behind at the moment.
I'm still interested in what it can do, though. I look forward to AI videos becoming a thing, but I guess they will be more of a side interest than competition for real WAM, because of the "real person" aspect. I think WAM is a lot about empathy with the WAMmed ...
It's primarily because I'm not really interested in WAM images that I'm experimenting with slideshows+games on my site. I wonder if the story / game aspect can make up a bit for the lack of a real person behind the WAM. I am trying to give my AI players "character"
I like realistic AI images vs the somewhat fake / "too perfect" default modes of many AI image generators, but that's not a problem with the technology, it's just the default settings. They work fine for realistic WAM images with a bit of coaxing. See my gallery for some examples
... which means that for me AI is way behind at the moment. I'm still interested in what it can do, though. I look forward to AI videos becoming a thing, but I guess they will be more of a side interest than competition for real WAM, because of the "real person" aspect. I think WAM is a lot about empathy with the WAMmed ...
It's primarily because I'm not really interested in WAM images that I'm experimenting with slideshows+games on my site. I wonder if the story / game aspect can make up a bit for the lack of a real person behind the WAM. I am trying to give my AI players "character"
I like realistic AI images vs the somewhat fake / "too perfect" default modes of many AI image generators, but that's not a problem with the technology, it's just the default settings. They work fine for realistic WAM images with a bit of coaxing. See my gallery for some examples
DungeonMasterOne said: AI WAM is basically "a better way to write WAM stories". You can use it to create any look, any number of participants, any setting, any style.
You could use AI to create images of a spandex-clad superhero-themed food-fight held in the first class dining room of the risen Titanic - or even stage it in the stokehold with stokers shoveling coal in the background. Things that could never be done for real.
You can also use it to storyboard ideas, try out outfit concepts, or gunging methods.
The real thrill in WAM story-writing was bringing your own fantasy to life, initially in text, but now in full imagery. Creating a wam scene in your head, or on screen, is one almighty rush for anyone who does it.
But in terms of an audience looking, for now at least, people like the idea that what they are looking at really happened, real people actually felt that custard flowing into their pants or that custard pie splattering all over their face, the actual experience.
Over time, as TV shows and Hollywood movies gradually replace real actors with AI-generated characters, future generations may not be as fully about the division, but change always takes time to work through.
I voted real for now.
You could use AI to create images of a spandex-clad superhero-themed food-fight held in the first class dining room of the risen Titanic - or even stage it in the stokehold with stokers shoveling coal in the background. Things that could never be done for real.
You can also use it to storyboard ideas, try out outfit concepts, or gunging methods.
The real thrill in WAM story-writing was bringing your own fantasy to life, initially in text, but now in full imagery. Creating a wam scene in your head, or on screen, is one almighty rush for anyone who does it.
But in terms of an audience looking, for now at least, people like the idea that what they are looking at really happened, real people actually felt that custard flowing into their pants or that custard pie splattering all over their face, the actual experience.
Over time, as TV shows and Hollywood movies gradually replace real actors with AI-generated characters, future generations may not be as fully about the division, but change always takes time to work through.
I voted real for now.
This times a thousand. Obviously there's writers block but there's something about writing a script for a custom you're having made and being able to bring your fantasies to life (I know now what it's like to be a producer and see ppl vote on a "what should X wear for this scene?" and be like yeah I've already determined it sorry lol) that just gets you going.
If my horror career ever takes off, I'm gonna be like Stephen King except instead of a blue chambray shirt, you can guarantee that I WILL find a way to shoehorn a maxi dress scene into the book lol.
DungeonMasterOne said:
Over time, as TV shows and Hollywood movies gradually replace real actors with AI-generated characters, future generations may not be as fully about the division, but change always takes time to work through.
I voted real for now.
Over time, as TV shows and Hollywood movies gradually replace real actors with AI-generated characters, future generations may not be as fully about the division, but change always takes time to work through.
I voted real for now.
Hollywood was just held hostage for months by both actors and writers who went on strike over this very issue, with landslide support mind you. As long as they have a say, and they very well should, replacement isn't happening without their permission.
Making smut is easy. Making art takes more!
Real all the way. Like someone mentioned, knowing someone experienced it is part of the excitement. Most AI images are just off looking enough to bring me out of it and come off more unsettling.
The only application of AI I have found useful is enhancing low quality images that were taken before HD and 4K cameras were prevalent. The AI enhancing programs are improving and for me, it still does the job since the source material is real. Though they typically work best with the before mess images since I've found they understandably struggle with how to interpret a face covered in pie or slime.
Though a WAM fetishist using AI to create scenes of themselves could be exciting since it would be a real person that is turned on by mess expressing fantasies that are too elaborate or difficult to actually pull off.
The only application of AI I have found useful is enhancing low quality images that were taken before HD and 4K cameras were prevalent. The AI enhancing programs are improving and for me, it still does the job since the source material is real. Though they typically work best with the before mess images since I've found they understandably struggle with how to interpret a face covered in pie or slime.
Though a WAM fetishist using AI to create scenes of themselves could be exciting since it would be a real person that is turned on by mess expressing fantasies that are too elaborate or difficult to actually pull off.
squidgyballs said: I'd rather not see ANY AI pics ever.
As a photographer, I can agree most of the time. Only place I can't is where fantasy is concerned. AI has its place, and it's awesome if you're doing something like creating a character for a game or trying to get an idea for how something would look without having to do the real thing. In the case of WAM, though, I fully agree.
As a frequent creator of AI pics allow me to say.....real. Always real.
But that comes with a caveat and that is probably a year from now, we don't be able to discern the difference between the two.
You can call me,
Al
But that comes with a caveat and that is probably a year from now, we don't be able to discern the difference between the two.
You can call me,
Al
Real. Because I know it actually happened.
Slime...more slime!!!!!
Real. I can generate so many images that I like, but at the end of the day I am looking at real pics.
I enabled the synthetic filter because I am preferring to browse real pics. Most of the synthetic ones are not my preference. I mostly prefer to view the images that I generate.
I would rather see my own generated images that show my preferences instead of real pics if the real pics are not my preference. There are plenty of real pics that show my preference though.
It is fun to be able to create fantasy images that are otherwise impossible. I would rather generate and see these fantasy scenarios than pay thousands of dollars to see models use a dozen real wedding cakes to get messy. But, I would rather just see real pics of a model with 1 cake than a generated image of a characters with dozen wedding cakes. For now.
I enabled the synthetic filter because I am preferring to browse real pics. Most of the synthetic ones are not my preference. I mostly prefer to view the images that I generate.
I would rather see my own generated images that show my preferences instead of real pics if the real pics are not my preference. There are plenty of real pics that show my preference though.
It is fun to be able to create fantasy images that are otherwise impossible. I would rather generate and see these fantasy scenarios than pay thousands of dollars to see models use a dozen real wedding cakes to get messy. But, I would rather just see real pics of a model with 1 cake than a generated image of a characters with dozen wedding cakes. For now.
I don't even need the pic to be in great quality. One of my favorite WAM pics is this one, which is in black and white and definitely not HD. But it has a great hit, great expression, great legs. And it is REAL. As I said above, I like your AI photos, but the AI fantasy pics will soon swamp us. Any pic you could dream up will be available to you and you won't be able to tell if it is real or not.
Then we will have a luddite movement back towards authenticity.
Then we will have a luddite movement back towards authenticity.
16parkvilla said: I think real will always have the edge, simply because it has actually happened.
However, experimenting with AI had its place, how else are you going to gey beautiful ladies, to roll in the mud, ruining thier white lingerie, without it costing an absolute fortune
However, experimenting with AI had its place, how else are you going to gey beautiful ladies, to roll in the mud, ruining thier white lingerie, without it costing an absolute fortune
....Define fortune...
now I won't do your scenario for nothing, but I would not consider my fees a fortune... for the scenario you've outlined, at this time - $400 plus cost of lingerie will get you about 20 minutes of that...
Sponsors
Sponsors
Design & Code ©1998-2025 Loverbuns, LLC 18 U.S.C. 2257 Record-Keeping Requirements Compliance Statement
Epoch Billing Support Log In