AI quicksand/fetish art?

Sink Into On-Topic Discussions
User avatar
BogDog
Posts: 1549
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 7:18 am
Location: California

Re: AI quicksand/fetish art?

Postby BogDog » Sat Jan 14, 2023 4:41 am

In this case I believe the credit for the AI works go more or less to the programmer(s) as well as the user feeding in info for his or her code to use to generate an image. We come up with images in our mind and brink them to reality. With AI nobody knows what the image will be until software processes numbers and comes up with something. Hard to determine who to credit. :?:


As I said, AI is welcome (and inevitable). I like what you have come up with so far. Apologies if I insulted you. But upload sites need to categorize it all, especially with people like the one I mentioned churning out rushed, sloppy renders by the dozens while skilled and rookie artists alike have to take time to make something. The latter's work gets lost in it all because of this even though their works often took more effort to produce.

You don't put cars in a truck show even though they are 99% similar. Everything gets a place and everything in it's place.

Happy rendering.
"Life is tough. It's tougher if you're stupid." - John Wayne

Viridian
Posts: 1587
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 10:03 am

Re: AI quicksand/fetish art?

Postby Viridian » Sat Jan 14, 2023 6:16 am

BogDog wrote:In this case I believe the credit for the AI works go more or less to the programmer(s) as well as the user feeding in info for his or her code to use to generate an image. We come up with images in our mind and brink them to reality. With AI nobody knows what the image will be until software processes numbers and comes up with something. Hard to determine who to credit. :?:

Does any artist know exactly what the result will be before they start? Isn't the process of creating art just "feeding in info" into the medium of choice to create an image?

You don't know what you're getting with AI if you don't know what you're doing. If you do know what you're doing, you get far more predictable results that match what the creator wanted to generate. There are a lot of happy little accidents with AI art as with traditional art, and a good AI creator will go back to understand what it was that worked and shape their approach to create more consistent results.

Few, if any, AI artists are claiming that AI generators are their own illustrations or paintings, because they're not. But it's like a digital artist being denied credit for their work because they used Photoshop, a program that someone else made, using custom brushes that someone else created.

At best, working with AI is like working with a co-illustrator. The workload depends on exactly what needs to be shaped and how much it needs to be customised by the human creator, but the human creator certainly has a lot of input in the process. The end result is not exclusively the work of the human creator, but that doesn't deny them the recognition of the creative work they did put in, even if you don't consider them to be the sole illustrator.

But upload sites need to categorize it all, especially with people like the one I mentioned churning out rushed, sloppy renders by the dozens while skilled and rookie artists alike have to take time to make something. The latter's work gets lost in it all because of this even though their works often took more effort to produce.

So what's the benchmark? Is it "rushed, sloppy" work? There are far more examples of traditional and a digital art that are nothing more than a greylead pencil sketch of Amy Rose from Sonic the Hedgehog with circles drawn around them that take no more than 5 seconds. That's okay compared to an AI-generated storyboard that takes me hours to put together?

Is art made by humans really being lost? Looking at your search result, as of now:
Screenshot 2023-01-14 at 15-38-30 Search 'stuck mud' on DeviantArt - Discover The Largest Online Art Gallery and Community.png

We see a Jungle Book-inspired illustration for an original short story. A sequence of illustrations by prominent artist Hefess, a 3D animation by prominent QS artist TAPBagan, a photo set from Muddy Pinays, and a high quality illustration from Secretdude and Redsky. Scroll down further and you get a set of very high quality AI renders by lastbruja, then the gamut of AlexPeters uploads.

The QS artists on dA are largely unaffected - they don't lose followers because sloppy AI art is a thing. The most popular tab still brings up the most prominent artists with quality work. And if the quantity of art is creating congestion (which it isn't), that's just as much a problem caused by non-AI spammers. Sure, you've got AlexPeters pumping out fat girls in mud with AI, but you've also got Wahknight/EmperorMire doing requests every single day with coloured pencils at a 5-year-old level in the exact same pose on the same lined A4 paper in the same pose from obscure anime and video games. Is that a threat to AWSands? No - the handful of quality illustrations produced by AWSands stands far above other artists, human or AI. It's not like people are going "Hm, AWSands has drawn a babe with glasses and a red shirt in quicksand, and Viridian has drawn a babe with glasses and a red shirt in quicksand, damn, I have to choose one". It's normally "YES! MORE QUICKSAND ART! FROM ANYONE! PLEASE!"

As Acidtester and Nessie said, there's no competition between artists and there are very few artists. There's no money lost from commissions, no followers lost because of an increase in uploads by other creators, and no infringement on style by AI artists duplicating human artists. if anything, the rise of AI artwork is helping human artists because it's pulling in more viewers who wouldn't otherwise know about the QS genre and find that there are collections and groups dedicated to it.

And that's the thing: people can curate their own collections. It doesn't make sense to "ban" anything from dA and make any style of art go to its own space. You can say the same with anime, or with furries, which are very polarising on their own, or fetish art in general. I generally don't like anime-style QS art, which is like, 90% of art uploads. In fact, as an aside, this is the kind of bullshit I get on dA when people ask for requests:
Screenshot 2023-01-14 at 16-05-45 Chat DeviantArt.png

But if you only want to see art that suits your tastes, make your own favourites collections, or follow the QS Art groups that ban AI art. Everyone can use the same track, but if you just want to see NASCAR and not truck racing, you go to the event dedicated to that. I'm not trying to be a nanny. I'm just trying to point out that there are more streamlined ways to explore deviantart. It's a general art platform that doesn't filter what you specifically want, so when it's the non-curated search results, there's a lot of digging through crap. I'd curate the collections which suit my tastes, but there are so few of them that I prefer to create my own pieces.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Viridian @ deviantART: http://viridianqs.deviantart.com/

Acidtester
Posts: 512
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 10:06 pm

Re: AI quicksand/fetish art?

Postby Acidtester » Sat Jan 14, 2023 2:29 pm

Yeah, I blocked AlexPeters too. I hated seeing his fucking garbage popping up every time. He made a group of MCU fan art or some shit and requested that I add my drawings to it… fuck outta here dude! He’s a piece of shit.
If the system had one neck,
You know I'd gladly break it.

Sekani
Posts: 102
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 4:31 pm
Location: San Bernardino, CA

Re: AI quicksand/fetish art?

Postby Sekani » Thu Feb 16, 2023 4:02 am

Two things on this subject...

First, there's no doubt in my mind that AI-generated art is art. Despite some perceptions, getting an AI to output exactly what you want is a skill that must be learned, practiced, and mastered, just like drawing with colored pencils, Adobe Illustrator, or Daz 3D. Just dismissing it all as cheap or soulless seems very pretentious to me. The holodeck from Star Trek is the potential final form of AI-generated art, but no one ever says that it's soulless.

Secondly, and the real issue in my opinion, is plagiarism. AI generators have to be trained on data sets. If I input all of Pete Boggs' drawings as a training set, I could end up with an AI capable of replicating his distinct style to suit my own purposes without giving him any name or financial recognition. That just seems fucked up to me. The courts haven't decided how AI and copyright laws are going to work yet, but it's something to think about.

Viridian
Posts: 1587
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 10:03 am

Re: AI quicksand/fetish art?

Postby Viridian » Thu Feb 16, 2023 7:11 am

Sekani wrote:If I input all of Pete Boggs' drawings as a training set, I could end up with an AI capable of replicating his distinct style to suit my own purposes without giving him any name or financial recognition.

As an artist, you were never required to give another artist recognition or financial payment if you emulate their style. Style is not copyrighted. No one's stopping you right now from drawing a cartoon using his shape of boobs, his method of depicting quicksand, or using his exact font. It's probably a lot easier to emulate Pete's style by hand than by AI. No artist can claim that "I am the first to draw like this, no one after me can draw anything similar without giving me credit". It also can't be plagiarism if the piece produced is an original piece, not one that was made by someone else and then stolen.
Viridian @ deviantART: http://viridianqs.deviantart.com/

User avatar
williams64901qs
Posts: 31
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2022 8:27 am

Re: AI quicksand/fetish art?

Postby williams64901qs » Fri Feb 24, 2023 12:52 am

Acidtester wrote:B84B93D8-82E6-43E6-9E81-7F7493454ECC.jpegB94F8553-73E5-40AB-B54E-A5F2160A56A3.jpeg


lol! :lol:
"Watch where you're standing in...it could be QUICKSAND!!!!"

User avatar
BogDog
Posts: 1549
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 7:18 am
Location: California

AI-Generated Images Can’t Get Protection, Says US Copyright Office

Postby BogDog » Sat Feb 25, 2023 12:45 pm

Important info for A.I. producers: https://deadline.com/2023/02/ai-generat ... 235270781/

The U.S. Copyright Office has decided that a comic book created with an artificial intelligence program can have a copyright registration. But the office also said individual AI-generated images couldn’t be granted protection, according to a Wall St. Journal report.


The decision centers on an 18-page graphic novel, Zarya of the Dawn, created last year by software developer and author Kris Kashtanova using written prompts to the AI software Midjourney to create the book’s images.

After a long review, the Copyright Office has decided that the individual AI-generated images would be excluded from the copyright.


In a letter, the Copyright Office ruled that the “unpredictable output of Midjourney” meant that the author didn’t create the individual images.

“Because Midjourney starts with a randomly generated noise that evolves into a final image, there is no guarantee that a particular prompt will generate any particular visual output,” the letter from the Copyright Office said.

The ruling comes at a time where the AI frontier for creators is being established. Critics claim that AI merely sifts through text and images under copyright to create new works. This is done without permission or acknowledgement.

Already, books, magazine and news articles, and artwork created using AI is appearing in the marketplace. Amazon has more than 200 books credited to ChatGPT.
"Life is tough. It's tougher if you're stupid." - John Wayne

Viridian
Posts: 1587
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 10:03 am

Re: AI quicksand/fetish art?

Postby Viridian » Sat Feb 25, 2023 12:50 pm

None of us are producing anything unique enough that could be copyrighted anyway.
Viridian @ deviantART: http://viridianqs.deviantart.com/


Return to “General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest