AI Generated 'Art'

[qzar9999]

Those are pretty nice, Sai. Great results there.

I don't see the point in being salty about AI generated art, y'all. It's not going away, and no matter what anyone says, there will always be people who insist it isn't art, and people who will defend its validity to their last breath. Personally, I consider the human inputting the prompts and fine-tuning the results to be akin to a patron or commissioner - and if they take the generated artwork and do post-production and collaging and etc. with it (e.g. MasterMini on DeviantArt - https://www.deviantart.com/mastermin...tion-933179472 ) then they're more like a collaborator or co-creator.

I mean, I paid for a good friend of mine to paint an image for my upcoming book cover. My original idea, my mental effort, but his hands, his canvas. Patron and artist. How is AI art functionally any different from that?

[変な変態]

I love this ‘new’ technology! Best part is that as it stands now, the works an AI makes can’t be copyrighted. At least this is how some US courts have ruled for now. Reason why; its not a human who makes it. This tech will only get better as datasets grow larger and algorithms evolve. This will give everyone a virtual treasure trove of art receding in the public domain.

This is the major difference from commissioning a human artist. A person can give you the rights to use work that they made. At least in the US; you can’t do that with work from an AI. Of course as far as I know human made derivatives are copyrightable.

[OhZone]

Originally Posted by BBB

Those are surprisingly high res. May I ask where they were made?

Just a phone app.

I forgot which now.

Starry AI or Wonder.

Also, for all of the above and the MasterMini piece, lovely or not - NEEDS MORE PROCESS! Ha!

But the Kévin Gemin thing was funny.

[BBB]

Originally Posted by OhZone

Just a phone app.

I forgot which now.

Starry AI or Wonder.

Also, for all of the above and the MasterMini piece, lovely or not - NEEDS MORE PROCESS! Ha!

But the Kévin Gemin thing was funny.

Oh wow, looks like there's been an explosion of them. I'm going to sound like a leech, but has anyone found one of these apps (phone or desktop) that A. Gives you free image credits (even just a few) on a regular schedule or B. Doesn't attempt to keep results SFW?

[Prof_Sai]

Originally Posted by 変な変態

Best part is that as it stands now, the works an AI makes can’t be copyrighted.

It seems to me there is an obvious loophole here, which is that you copyright some element and then ask the AI to reproduce it. For example, if you ask it to draw Mickey Mouse, I've no doubt that Disney would effectively own the copyright to that. Or you can do some post editing. For example, use AI to make a background, and then add a figure to that. Also, if you start with a drawing and have AI enhance it, surely that is still your work?

Oh wow, looks like there's been an explosion of them. I'm going to sound like a leech, but has anyone found one of these apps (phone or desktop) that A. Gives you free image credits (even just a few) on a regular schedule or B. Doesn't attempt to keep results SFW?

I haven't tried these, but I might soon:

https://github.com/divamgupta/diffus...e-diffusion-ui
https://github.com/invoke-ai/InvokeAI

[jiryha]

Generally speaking, the issue is not so much with the AI art itself. It's easy to argue that its just another tool used to create art, and in fact is one we've been using for a while anyway as anyone that's ever used the magic wand tool in photoshop, or the dynamic stretch tool basically used the same idea.

The reason it is such a huge topic though is based on how they're created. They're using copywritten material without pay or credit. Hell, DeviantArt just launched their own and everyone on their site is automatically signed up to have their art used for it. You have to opt out of it manually.

I basically liken it to this generation's version of ebaum's world. It's another group of people stealing other people's work to make themselves money (and before you say 'but the one I use doesn't have ads', read the eula. They are selling your info which is why they all require you to sign up.).

Great tool, sleazy practice.

[Prof_Sai]

Originally Posted by jiryha

everyone on their site is automatically signed up to have their art used for it. You have to opt out of it manually.

An AI learned to draw by looking at MY art? No human would do that.

[Prof_Sai]

Here is what an evil wizard named "Who shrinks you" did on the Shrunken Woman board:

[Tina Tiny]

I'm endlessly fascinated by this.

[Test-0]

So having done a bit of work learning this whole ai art thing and it causing my resurgeance as of recently on deviant art, I might as well throw my hat into the ring. Not for if it's legal, or the ramifications of what it means, if it's art at all, stuff like that. Thats boring, I'm gonna talk about what I did with it.

So to start off, I started rendering stuff only a few months ago, with almost no actual knowledge of how it works, how to make it work, how to even set it up correctly. And for that last part, it's still not correctly set up and my setup for ai rendering is very 'chunky' and blatantly works wrong is many areas. But I like that, adds character.

Started with the txt2img stuff as everyone does, learning prompting and getting a feel for how it works, but got bored with it fairly quickly. It made cool things, but nothing I thought was worth extra effort, since literally anyone could do the same. Then I learned about img2img and started to try it out, using my own drawings as the sources. This is what pulled me in. Unlike txt2img where the image generated might as well just be an image already saved in the ai and printed at me, img2img was it actually trying to duplicate the source image in question in some fashion. Poorly. Or at least at the time when I never learned how it all worked and just did things at random.

For the most part, I was going to just let it stay my own personal thing, shared only with a specific other friend and no one else because I didn't see a reason to put up anything it made, because while it was fun to play with, I didn't find anything it did interesting enough to me to share past that one friend.

And then I made a rendering mistake, set something wrong, and it generated most of a BE sequence from the image I was trying to remake. I figured out what I did wrong, but with sharing it with my friend I suddenly had that spark of, hey this is actually interesting. So I shared it.

https://www.deviantart.com/test-0/ar...make-934331203 was the image I had liked the most out of the renders that most closely matched the original, but still had it's own flair, and this: https://www.deviantart.com/test-0/ar...W-BE-934332738 is the sequence that I got from the broken renders, patched up with photoshop to fix any major errors or glitchy looking parts. I had to reinstall all of my editing stuff. My drawing tablet, a copy of photoshop that is as old as my original drawings, all the things that had been sitting packed away for years and years.

Unlike most of the AI stuff I had seen being spread across the internet, these had a new feel to them, likely because I used my own sketchy messy drawings to make it. A separation from it being something an AI made up, it was now something that both the AI and myself had worked in part on. Images that can't be made by the AI alone, because it needed a source to work from to do it.

I'm still not completely pleased with just posting what the AI remakes of my things, so as a result of getting an AI to draw for me, I got convinced to start to draw my own things once again. Since that first post of AI stuff, I've done both a fully drawn sequence and using completely original drawings in the AI make a sequence from that.

So what are my thoughts on AI art? Seems cool.

[Case Scenario]

It would be a lot cooler if it didn't trawl art without the consent of working artists. Sorry, I know you didn't want to start a conversation about the boring ramifications, and plenty of other folks have already gotten on their soapboxes, but this matters a lot to a lot of people. I'm not gonna demand that anyone stop using it, but there is a larger issue here, so I feel obliged to touch on that with some links for anyone who's interested.

There's a reason why there's an outcry against it. And it's not just complaints about the integrity of the art (though there's that). More importantly, these programs could be far more ethical if they only sampled public domain work, or portfolios volunteered or fairly purchased from artists. As it is, many artists are understandably upset that they now have to compete with programs that have hijacked their work to create bootleg simulacra. Real artists are losing jobs to this stuff. Some are having their style directly replicated because the program incorporated their products without their permission.

If you want some more perspective from the naysayers, I encourage you to browse a few of these threads and articles, if you have the time. It's good to be informed about the impact this is having.

https://twitter.com/JoJoesArt/status...71121829629953

https://twitter.com/kortizart/status...60819368792065

https://twitter.com/ceno02/status/1609895897944449025

https://www.technologyreview.com/202...xhy8m-G_c6Slk0

https://waxy.org/2022/11/invasive-di...L3ZeDU0Ta1BomY

https://arstechnica.com/information-...ning-data-set/

[Prof_Sai]

What if I trawl art without the consent of working artists?