|
|
|||
| forums: groups: | |||
|
"Would you rather see AI pics or real pics?"
Love you, too
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...
Real. All day.
The key is knowing it happened/involves real people and textures (this is why I still love the physical makeup and creature FX in movies vs. all CG), and also there's just an uncanny valley/not-quite-right aspect to AI at present.
AI continues to be just stiff enough, just awkward enough, just frozen-in-time enough, that I check out.
Someone posted a raft of them recently, and a few of them are very good -- but even those, my eye/brain judged differently. Even if they were not labeled synthetic, they look it.
So much of WAM is intention and results -- meaning, you pie someone, you slime them, you wade into the mud, etc. and what occurs from there, it's virtually impossible to get the kind of "perfect" results that AI generate.
There are crusts that don't completely break; splatters that miss someone's eye or mouth; the way mess sticks to hair; a mix of slimes/paints that result in unexpected new colors and looks; a weird texture that results from mixing, say, oatmeal and slime and treacle. And on and on.
AI cannot replicate nuance, it cannot replicate "accidents" happy and otherwise, it cannot replace true human reaction (e.g. where hands go, an opened or shut mouth or eyes, body language).
As some have said here, the day is coming when it WILL be able to do that stuff, and that will be interesting.
It's a really fascinating topic, though, because on the one hand, you can get EXACTLY what you're looking for -- better coverage than might occur in a TV WAM scene, sexier models than one might be able to afford, a more willing and predictable target to dump mess on. If you're looking for something really really specific that you've yet to see any producer recreate OR you just can't afford to pull off a scene like it as a custom or on your own... AI is there. Much like CG imagery in films and tv, it gives you something that is maybe even impossible to create in any other way. And it's closer to real than a painting or a drawing.
But...
It's those nuances, man. Those details. They are telling and it tends to make me react more negatively bc it just *feels* fake. Versus a real mess that I didn't particularly love, but I can appreciate that them's kind of the breaks when you set out to create mess -- it's there right in the term itself -- you never can predict exactly what will happen and what it will look like.
Unless you use AI.
I am glad that Messmaster/UMD has instituted a labeling system re "Synthetic". Some folks clearly really dig it and put a lot of time into mining and creating these images and I totally can accept that. Again, especially in a world of fetish and fantasy. But I'm glad for the labeling because I do tend to skip over those posts, just knowing inherently "Not my bag, baby". It's very simple and useful.
JY
The key is knowing it happened/involves real people and textures (this is why I still love the physical makeup and creature FX in movies vs. all CG), and also there's just an uncanny valley/not-quite-right aspect to AI at present.
AI continues to be just stiff enough, just awkward enough, just frozen-in-time enough, that I check out.
Someone posted a raft of them recently, and a few of them are very good -- but even those, my eye/brain judged differently. Even if they were not labeled synthetic, they look it.
So much of WAM is intention and results -- meaning, you pie someone, you slime them, you wade into the mud, etc. and what occurs from there, it's virtually impossible to get the kind of "perfect" results that AI generate.
There are crusts that don't completely break; splatters that miss someone's eye or mouth; the way mess sticks to hair; a mix of slimes/paints that result in unexpected new colors and looks; a weird texture that results from mixing, say, oatmeal and slime and treacle. And on and on.
AI cannot replicate nuance, it cannot replicate "accidents" happy and otherwise, it cannot replace true human reaction (e.g. where hands go, an opened or shut mouth or eyes, body language).
As some have said here, the day is coming when it WILL be able to do that stuff, and that will be interesting.
It's a really fascinating topic, though, because on the one hand, you can get EXACTLY what you're looking for -- better coverage than might occur in a TV WAM scene, sexier models than one might be able to afford, a more willing and predictable target to dump mess on. If you're looking for something really really specific that you've yet to see any producer recreate OR you just can't afford to pull off a scene like it as a custom or on your own... AI is there. Much like CG imagery in films and tv, it gives you something that is maybe even impossible to create in any other way. And it's closer to real than a painting or a drawing.
But...
It's those nuances, man. Those details. They are telling and it tends to make me react more negatively bc it just *feels* fake. Versus a real mess that I didn't particularly love, but I can appreciate that them's kind of the breaks when you set out to create mess -- it's there right in the term itself -- you never can predict exactly what will happen and what it will look like.
Unless you use AI.
I am glad that Messmaster/UMD has instituted a labeling system re "Synthetic". Some folks clearly really dig it and put a lot of time into mining and creating these images and I totally can accept that. Again, especially in a world of fetish and fantasy. But I'm glad for the labeling because I do tend to skip over those posts, just knowing inherently "Not my bag, baby". It's very simple and useful.
JY
Real. The photo option should be set to "Real".
Here's one that a real producer would not be able to do 
But a single image doesn't really cut it, there's obviously a story here, at the very least a "before" pic is needed ... it starts to be quite a lot of work.
I've found the "showing emotions" part of AI generated images, funnily enough, works well. They are well trained on portraying human emotions ... like good actors, I guess. And like a movie, whether the result works for audiences emotionally is going to be a lot about the writing
The WAM part is harder, the AIs are not trained on a lot of WAM images but that's just an implementation detail, there is no reason they can't do good WAM images. Whether there will be good AI WAM videos is not sure yet but the field is moving crazily fast, I guess we'll know soon enough.
Edit: I'm still not "arguing for" AI images, of the two I am for sure for real WAM but I hope they can coexist in a fun way.
Edit 2: it's perfectly possible to produce AI WAM images of a real person, but I haven't experimented because I'd need a willing model before I am comfortable doing so, and of course that's also needed to publish anything. If any producer+model would like a private demo I'd be more than happy to oblige, send me a message it would be really interesting if real content ended up with AI bonuses on the side.
But a single image doesn't really cut it, there's obviously a story here, at the very least a "before" pic is needed ... it starts to be quite a lot of work.
I've found the "showing emotions" part of AI generated images, funnily enough, works well. They are well trained on portraying human emotions ... like good actors, I guess. And like a movie, whether the result works for audiences emotionally is going to be a lot about the writing
The WAM part is harder, the AIs are not trained on a lot of WAM images
but that's just an implementation detail, there is no reason they can't do good WAM images. Whether there will be good AI WAM videos is not sure yet but the field is moving crazily fast, I guess we'll know soon enough. Edit: I'm still not "arguing for" AI images, of the two I am for sure for real WAM
but I hope they can coexist in a fun way. Edit 2: it's perfectly possible to produce AI WAM images of a real person, but I haven't experimented because I'd need a willing model before I am comfortable doing so, and of course that's also needed to publish anything. If any producer+model would like a private demo I'd be more than happy to oblige, send me a message
it would be really interesting if real content ended up with AI bonuses on the side.
getemdown said: 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.
This sums up my position too.
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.
I'd disagree, AI is a good way to make something which tends towards the average. That's why it's so good at making images of pretty women in their mid 20s getting green gunge poured over then and so good at making a gameshow that looks like any one of a number of gameshows.
What it lacks, what WAM stories (and erotic fiction in general) can do best of all is new ideas and new sensations. They can convey an experience that a person has had far better than an AI can guess at what it would look like.
That human connection and human input is why I'm pretty sure generative AI like this is going to be a flash in a pan; people still want things that were deliberately made by people, not things that were made from a specification sheet.
Slopped said: Real. I've tried to filter out the AI from appearing under the Pictures option on here but they still seem to show up.
It's almost impossible to get 100% of people to tag things the way we want. If you see anything not tagged right, could you take a sec and flag it? That comes right to me.
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.
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.
This. Tons of people have incredible imaginations and creative talent, but just lack the actual artistic ability, time, or equipment to lay it down and make it real. AI is going to unlock the imaginations of everyday people and that's going to be way more powerful than most of us think.
Stay messy, my friends
Not only do I prefer seeing real pics, I prefer TAKING real pics.
I tried making AI-generated WAM for about a week just to see what all the hype was about. Got decent results. Saw how I could do better with practice. But I got bored really quickly. The biggest takeaway I got from those hours of generating images that looked juuuuuust real enough to piss you off about how fake it is was that I need to get my camera, reach out to some models, and Make WAM Real Again.
So I guess kudos to AI for generating some inspiration for the aesthetics of future photo and video shoots. But it's not going to replace the real fun, the real experience, and the real people who make WAM WAM.
I tried making AI-generated WAM for about a week just to see what all the hype was about. Got decent results. Saw how I could do better with practice. But I got bored really quickly. The biggest takeaway I got from those hours of generating images that looked juuuuuust real enough to piss you off about how fake it is was that I need to get my camera, reach out to some models, and Make WAM Real Again.
So I guess kudos to AI for generating some inspiration for the aesthetics of future photo and video shoots. But it's not going to replace the real fun, the real experience, and the real people who make WAM WAM.
I'd disagree, AI is a good way to make something which tends towards the average. That's why it's so good at making images of pretty women in their mid 20s getting green gunge poured over then and so good at making a gameshow that looks like any one of a number of gameshows.
Something original, then? Challenge accepted! Please see attached.
Any good? Well, that's in the eye of the beholder
... we are a bit in the "throw it at the wall and see if it sticks" phase 
wills said: Not at all interested in AI pics. What's the point??
If that many want them could we have a separate forum for them? Then all would be catered for.
If that many want them could we have a separate forum for them? Then all would be catered for.
The point is wish fulfilment. If someone was producing 'real' photos like this, I'd look at them all day long. But they're not.
And there is a separate forum. I post there quite a bit.
Figuring out a way to show people only content they're interested in totally makes sense; I've also been posting mostly over on the AI group.
One data point, announcing my site update for this week on the main forum instead of the AI group brought about 7x more traffic. That suggests to me that there is more interest than is represented within just the AI group.
However, it might be that most of those new visitors from the main forum don't like the site and won't visit next time. So my plan is that if there is a downwards trend in traffic following future updates then I'll go back to posting mostly / entirely in the AI group.
Either way I'll be careful to label everything "synthetic"
Edit: here's another image I think is fairly original
One data point, announcing my site update for this week on the main forum instead of the AI group brought about 7x more traffic. That suggests to me that there is more interest than is represented within just the AI group.
However, it might be that most of those new visitors from the main forum don't like the site and won't visit next time. So my plan is that if there is a downwards trend in traffic following future updates then I'll go back to posting mostly / entirely in the AI group.
Either way I'll be careful to label everything "synthetic"
Edit: here's another image I think is fairly original
I prefer the REAL, but will admit there are both good and bad pics in real and AI. I can appreciate the potential for creating impossible scenes in AI, but working with bing is discouraging because it does not seem to favor wam or messes (not to mention nudity).
Knowing that the real people in the real pics want to, and love to get messy will win over AI any day~
Knowing that the real people in the real pics want to, and love to get messy will win over AI any day~
Real. AI isn't there yet, still looks fake. Everything breaks down the second I look at broken hands with 6 fingers pointing in the wrong directions, and the occasional 3rd arm or leg.
Not to mention all the wam AI I see on this site is the most vanilla stuff you could possibly imagine. There are literally millions of videos on YouTube with real people being pied in the face. Why would I want to look at a still image that not only isn't real, but doesn't look real either? When the real thing is being uploaded on a daily basis for free on YouTube, as a full video.
It's not an ethical issue. It's not that it's fake. I can do fake, I like hentai, but I typically look at absurdly over-the-top goofy fantasy sci-fi stuff that's infeasible in real life. Until AI is capable of doing that, and making it look good, I have no patience for it
Not to mention all the wam AI I see on this site is the most vanilla stuff you could possibly imagine. There are literally millions of videos on YouTube with real people being pied in the face. Why would I want to look at a still image that not only isn't real, but doesn't look real either? When the real thing is being uploaded on a daily basis for free on YouTube, as a full video.
It's not an ethical issue. It's not that it's fake. I can do fake, I like hentai, but I typically look at absurdly over-the-top goofy fantasy sci-fi stuff that's infeasible in real life. Until AI is capable of doing that, and making it look good, I have no patience for it
There are literally millions of videos on YouTube with real people being pied in the face. Why would I want to look at a still image that not only isn't real, but doesn't look real either? When the real thing is being uploaded on a daily basis for free on YouTube, as a full video.
That's perfectly fine if you can find real content based on your preferences, then AI possibly isn't for you.
For my tastes (more curvy women and wetlook) and still pictures rather than videos, you virtually can't find anything so I opted to try and make my own images using AI.
I agree with you that most pictures posted here are very artifical and unnatural, but I've also seen some which are nearly undistinguishable from real photos. The more fantasy and precise settings you try to put into a picture, the less real the result will be.
Real for sure, but what producer will fill an office waist-deep in nacho sauce? There are things like this that we can visualize with AI, but likely never see real people doing. I did photos of a luxury bus getting stuck in mud, and women in evening gowns getting out in the rain to try and push it. Would this happen in real life, and if it did, would a photographer be on hand for photos? Not likely. So I see AI as a way to fulfill crazy ideas that otherwise wouldn't be seen. But I prefer real photos of real women messy, but they seldom are of what I really want to see, and I don't want to pay for a custom. (The one time I did, it wasn't what I had asked for)
My tupenny worth is they are different media, serving different things. On the face of it, yes, it's all content with people getting covered in stuff. Deeper than that, of course real wam is better. The knowledge that people are actually doing this stuff to each other and themselves is a huge part, if not the main part of the wam scene.
AI is a new and experimental thing that is happening to us, and a large part of that experiment is to see how much is lost knowing that it's not real, but relies on our imagination to fill in the gaps.
Personally, I have a degree of reservation about doing it in real life, the taboo of getting someone else messy is really intense, and I find it difficult to be that naughty, even though it's a great part of my sexual psyche. British and repressed, I guess. Feels bad, because I'd love to be as sex positive as most of our members are, I just find it hard. I genuinely don't think of myself as judgemental, except evidently about myself. I like to remember that two things' I've heard from good people in the past about "as long as it's safe, consensual and legal" and "try not to yuck on someone else's yum". And I'm fortunate enough to have a trusting loving partner who understands my sexuality and we play together for real in a loving environment.
But it's exciting to me to have a media where it's not real people I'm doing this to, so I can be as naughty as I like.
I have no clue as to whether or not other people engage with that, but some people seem to enjoy it.
If I thought for a second it would diminish the creation or use of real wam, I think I'd stop making immediately.
I hope this doesn't cross across as confrontational or defensive, I just wanted to offer what is perhaps an explanation for it, also sorry for the seppuku in the middle of this!
AI is a new and experimental thing that is happening to us, and a large part of that experiment is to see how much is lost knowing that it's not real, but relies on our imagination to fill in the gaps.
Personally, I have a degree of reservation about doing it in real life, the taboo of getting someone else messy is really intense, and I find it difficult to be that naughty, even though it's a great part of my sexual psyche. British and repressed, I guess. Feels bad, because I'd love to be as sex positive as most of our members are, I just find it hard. I genuinely don't think of myself as judgemental, except evidently about myself. I like to remember that two things' I've heard from good people in the past about "as long as it's safe, consensual and legal" and "try not to yuck on someone else's yum". And I'm fortunate enough to have a trusting loving partner who understands my sexuality and we play together for real in a loving environment.
But it's exciting to me to have a media where it's not real people I'm doing this to, so I can be as naughty as I like.
I have no clue as to whether or not other people engage with that, but some people seem to enjoy it.
If I thought for a second it would diminish the creation or use of real wam, I think I'd stop making immediately.
I hope this doesn't cross across as confrontational or defensive, I just wanted to offer what is perhaps an explanation for it, also sorry for the seppuku in the middle of this!
z3n said: ...a single image doesn't really cut it, there's obviously a story here, at the very least a "before" pic is needed ...
I've used "before and after" or "a progression of two photos" in my Bing prompts. The results are often mixed. Bing has the pie hit first, then the girl is clean and I'm not sure what the forks are doing there. One night the girls in each half were different people in different dresses! That brings up a point StickyFingas made
Everything breaks down the second I look at broken hands with 6 fingers pointing in the wrong directions, and the occasional 3rd arm or leg.
If I can't fix it in Photoshop, I delete it. I agree, the backwards hand, conjoined arms, and so on take me right out of it. I just keep and sometimes share the good ones.
(BTW, the last one, gray dress, and the blue one were photoshopped to insert a pie facing the right way.)
As for "anything you want on YouTube" most of what I find there is TBH crap. Bad camerawork often missing the actual hit or focused on the models legs, out of focus, shaky, wetlook taken from so far away in such bad lighting that it could be 70-year-old men, clothing that shows nothing when wet (or dry for that matter). I usually don't even bother checking out YT clips any more unless its something specific.
I do wish that there was a "both" option.
I mainly prefer the real stuff, but letting my imagination go wild with AI photos -- the ladies can dress exactly how I'd like, and there's an inexhaustible supply of mess, and that kind of "custom" costs the low price of ZERO.
Both are fun, so I would have said both.
I mainly prefer the real stuff, but letting my imagination go wild with AI photos -- the ladies can dress exactly how I'd like, and there's an inexhaustible supply of mess, and that kind of "custom" costs the low price of ZERO.
Both are fun, so I would have said both.
I even wanna be me! -- Zoe
Personally I do prefer real shoots, but I was surprised how easy it was to create AI images with Image Creator.
instagram: @pure_paint
Real 100%
