[notavalleyman]

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

[miki_tyler]

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.

[satvikpendem]

Good for you, I want to see more things created by those who have an imagination but don't necessarily have the technical skill or time to bring it to life; there is no need to have it be monopolized by those who do, everyone deserves to have their ideas seen, at least in some form.

[whateveracct]

This reads to me like "I don't have the skill, so I don't understand what quality even means." Which is the main issue with using AI.

Comic art is as abstract, expressive, and integral to the final product as "story, structure, and dialogue." Using the art to express motion, setting, emotion, etc is so key. It's why most comic artists are masters of figure drawing.

[carpo]

This is great. Can see you put a lot of work into it. I like it.

[satvikpendem]

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.