AI art is bad

Feel free to post any friendly non-asfr related talk here. No character play.
Post Reply
CheeseMaker
Posts: 62
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2022 7:03 pm
Technosexuality: Built
Identification: Human
Gender: Male
x 21
x 23
Contact:

AI art is bad

Post by CheeseMaker » Sat Dec 03, 2022 3:25 pm

I'm hearing a lot of how there are software tools or apps that generate art using available sources in the internet, making AI art.

I think this is bad due to it being probably dtremental to genuine digital art done by real people. This is just advanced Art theft. Like what if someone steals someone's unfinished work and made it with AI art and claim it as its own- oh wait...
https://www.google.com/amp/s/kotaku.com ... 655704/amp

User avatar
FaceoffFembot
Posts: 653
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 2:29 am
Technosexuality: Built
Identification: Human
Gender: Male
Location: France
x 39
x 18
Contact:

Re: AI art is bad

Post by FaceoffFembot » Sun Dec 04, 2022 9:40 am

It's not as direct of a steal as facile takedowns say (i.e. it's basically copy-pasting parts of images together), but yeah, text-to-image technology is built on the uncredited, unpaid back of artists and photographers. Also, calling deep-learning models "AI" is a marketing scam - there's no real intelligence or understanding at play, just statistical regurgitation.

Building datasets properly labeled and varied enough to train a versatile deep-learning model are prohibitively expensive, even for Google or Tesla : they either resort to crowdsourcing or outsourcing to countries with much lower wage expectations. And training a model that can generate anything with a few words probably requires data orders of magnitude more complex than photos of traffic signs.

Midjourney and OpenAI (DALL-E) are coy as to what they're feeding their models, but StabilityAI, makers of the open-source Stable Diffusion, were very transparent: for their initial releases, they used the LAION-Aesthetics V2 dataset, which is, unsurprisingly, just a scrape of 2.3 billion public web images (and no, just putting your copyrighted content online does not make it public domain). Since then, they decided they didn't want to bother with the legally blurry questions of copyright and responsibility in machine learning and axed big chunks of their training data that had to do with NSFW content and living artists for their 2.0 model - which some users think results in a poorer model.

So yeah, a big part of how powerful Stable Diffusion or Midjourney seem are predicated on illegitimate reuse of human artists' works. Besides, text-to-image technology and other deep-learning generations are not being developed out of scientific curiosity, artistic experimentation or for the benefit of mankind, but to lower the cost of bulk copy-writing and automate laborious, unglamorous tasks. Established artists who can leverage their names and unique creative styles aren’t at risk, but freelancers will probably have to lower their prices as deep learning gets more adoption.

Also : I'm sorry but "AI" "art" sucks. Text-to-image technology has its place as another tool in a workflow, which I've personally begun to do, but all the art I've seen is just raw output that half-assedly regurgitates established ideas and only stands on its novelty: compositions are wack, details are absent, and it's just so impersonal, unimaginative and unsurprising. Deep-learning models are not designed to produce artistic or truthful results, but passably plausible ones.

User avatar
NatalieBayer
Fembot Central Staff
Posts: 459
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2003 3:09 pm
Technosexuality: Built
Identification: Android
Gender: Transgendered
Location: The Moon
x 8
x 164
Contact:

Re: AI art is bad

Post by NatalieBayer » Thu Dec 15, 2022 10:37 am

Just my two cents here, but...

I have an account on novelai.net, and I use it to make a lot of "AI art" but not for the purposes of reselling it. I use it exclusively for generating alternate outfits, poses, and reference material so that I can send it to actual artists. I 100% believe in paying for actual artists to do actual art and use their skills, AI art can never ever replace that.

I do, however, take issue with the ethics of scraping massive databases of art for the express purpose of putting it into AI and then using that to cut out the actual artist. Thats not cool, nor will it ever be.
Want a story commission? Send me a DM, a PM, an Owl, a Discord, Smoke signal, parchment wrapped to an arrow, or just a good old fashioned email.

BD
Posts: 414
Joined: Fri May 14, 2004 9:14 am
Technosexuality: Built
Identification: Human
Gender: Male
x 1
Contact:

Re: AI art is bad

Post by BD » Sat Dec 17, 2022 8:56 am

Same as NatalieBayer here. Except i just downloaded stable diffusion and run it on my pc because i do not wish to give my stuff to some random corporation.

Post Reply
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests