I was on stable diffusion art and one of my comments got removed for saying the OP didn’t “make” the AI generated art. But he didn’t make shit the AI made it, he typed in a description and hit enter. I think we need a new word for when someone shared art an AI made, like they generated it or something. It feels insulting to actual artists to say you made art with AI
You must log in or register to comment.
So there is this feature where you can focus the AI on a specific file when generating responses. If that file contains only your own digital art, is the AI art produced yours? Not saying that’s what you found, but maybe there is some nuance to AI art creation.
Prompted it is the best one I’ve heard, as crafting the right prompt is something of a skill on its own.
They didn’t make it, they prompted the AI to make it.
This is how art has worked for millennia.
I go to a human artist and say “please make me a painting of my family. Make my wife more beautiful, me more tall, and my kids not look like little shits.” And then you give money. That’s a prompt for a commissioned work.
No one ever praises the Duke of Milan for commissioning a painting of The Last Supper. They praise Leonardo Friggin’ di Vinci for making it.
Yeah, that’s a great analogy actually.
It is not. The issue here is not “praise”.
It’s weird to see this used as a con. This is exactly the framing AI app creators use. If it’s the same as paying an artist to make you art, then there are no issues whatsoever with using that art wherever.
There are deeper questions here.
This is weird to have to say, because I feel like I’m more open to AI generation than most online people, but I still think it needs a new copyright framework, it’s not the same as buying work from a human.
Honestly, these are both simplistic takes. Tools are tools are tools, so for better and worse there is a big gradient across “popped up a genAI and asked for an image with a prompt”>“asked a genAI for an image and then asked for changes”>“asked a gen AI for an image and then fine tuned it and tweaked it in parts to the point where, let’s be honest, this would have been faster to do in Photoshop from scratch” (which is a thing and it baffles me a little)>“made an image using some genAI content in the process”.
It’s a bit of a mess, and a good reason why to be safe for production and commercial use a lot of pro content creation places just ban the technology outright to avoid legal issues later. That’s a good call.
If you want to draw a line for amateur image sharing… I don’t know, it gets weird and complicated.
Well it’s like you commission a work when you use AI. Do this, more like that, bluer, smaller etc. So not creating art IMO.
Well, just to put things in perspective, you absolutely get to show, sell and promote something you comissioned, at least under most agreements. I’m not sure that is a great comparison. There are bigger issues with AI image gen than there are with paying an artist for something and using it for your project, whatever that may be.
Yeah but you’re not allowed to say you made it, you can buy and sell paintings all day long 🤷🏻♀️ I don’t really get what you want to say here.
there’s also sometimes deeper collaboration with image generation, where you edit the result in like krita and then send it through the generator again to smooth out the edges of the touch-ups.
i occasionally do work where i cut up existing images to make new ones, like making a person in a particular pose by pulling an head from one image, a torso from another, an arm and background features from a third etc, then i would painstakingly color match and blend it all together with hours of filter, clone brush and single-pixel edit work. with image generation i can get a blending and lighting pass for my image in a few seconds. it’s not perfect but the speed makes the work a lot easier.
Seems like it would be buch easier to take up drawing and painting 😁
Jk, to each their own artistic process.
i’m no artist, and i only do this stuff for me and my friends :) i’ve tried drawing but my fine motor skills are lacking. i see it as a sort of mashup art, which closely watches the way i see image generation as well.
People who ask for art didn’t do the art. Wretch, you have merely stated a request. Worse, you have spoken your desires to a demon, and now you proudly display its gift as your own work.
- So really it should be “[work description] by [Dali-2], commissioned by [Name]”
- It should not be. But yes.
This!
It’s just a commission.
It’s just disappointing how few people are literate with standard occult practices. Never summon anything more powerful than you, never tell your innermost thoughts and desires to a demon, and if you are that stupid don’t brag about it. Real JV league demonology.
Cool post but how is this a shitpost
It takes less effort to post a single paragraph of ranting than it does to edit the text on a meme image. In a way, this is a shittier shitpost than most.
It just is.
Cause its shit
Counter argument for the sake of education, go try to recreate his picture using Stable Diffusion. Let me know how easy it is.
Please stop calling it art. A generated image is not art.
proompter
How wonderful, another AI thread on .world, a feast for my blocklist.
The block button hungers for the luddite with no basic reasoning skills.
Luddites were right. They opposed the use of certain types of automated machinery due to concerns relating to worker pay and output quality.
This is not the dunk you think it is. Of course you’re a moron who likes AI slop so there’s not much in the way of thinking.
Just regurgitating a word you heard without understanding where it comes from. In a way you’re worse than AI model.
AI genner, lol.
Slopper.
“Wow this guy’s portraits are really good!”
“Nah he’s just a slopper”
