• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Artificial Intelligence (A.I.) Art

This one is Jack the Ripper in modern times apparently.
IMG_3792.jpeg
 
I wonder how 'copyright' works, in the weirdly-prodigious world of AI-generated graphics? (well, AI-generated anything, in fact).

It can't simply fall into the hands of the requestor, free of charge and invested with eternal possibility. Neither even if it is paid for, because the 'master' pays the same price for both perfection and for pathetic poorness.

Perhaps the fairest (and most flawfully-elegant) answer would be that the rights remain with the artificially-intelligent agent that created the output.

I'm going to make an uninformed guess, at this point.

I bet, with a breathless certainty of dull irrefutablity, that all AI-generated outputs already have intrinsic tags, inextricably woven into their instantiated existences (almost like DNA flags or watermarks or EXIF data). It's utterly-inconceivable that this would have to be thought about now, or need to be retro-added. It must already be there (and will have been forever).
 
Last edited:
Ermintruder said:
I wonder how 'copyright' works, in the weirdly-prodigious world of AI-generated graphics? (well, AI-generated anything, in fact).

It can't simply fall into the hands of the requestor, free of charge and invested with eternal possibility. Neither even if it is paid for, because the 'master' pays the same price for both perfection and for pathetic poor Ness.

Perhaps the fairest (and most flawfully-elegant) answer would be that the rights remain with the artificially-intelligent agent that created the output.

I'm going to make an uninformed guess, at this point.

I bet, with a breathless certainty of dull irrefutablity, that all AI-generated outputs already have intrinsic tags, inextricably woven into their instantiated existences (almost like DNA flags or watermarks or EXIF data). It's utterly-inconceivable that this would have to be thought about now, or need to be retro-added. It must already be there (and will have been forever).
Click to expand...
The trouble is it’s created between the person who requests it and the program. For example it wouldn’t exist if it wasn’t for the person requesting X Y and Z.
 
MorningAngel said:
The trouble is it’s created between the person who requests it and the program
Click to expand...
In what way? This implies most AI productions are iterative outputs of joint effort: and that doesn't seem to be the current case.

If I ask for, or summon, a guaranteed minor miracle, I'm merely the recipient- most-assuredly not the magician.

MorningAngel said:
For example it wouldn’t exist if it wasn’t for the person requesting X Y and Z.
Click to expand...
That's just selecting elements of the destination. Not creating/influencing or even specifying the route/mechanism or style.

I anticipate *in time* it could become a collaborative process. It might already have tiny aspects of this. But to me it's an observational/consumer one-way Street.
 
AI art isn't threatening actual artists anytime soon. Perhaps in the future with front end interfaces that allow the user to control the environment and artifacts more, perhaps basing the AI produced artwork over 3D models or something, there'll be a greater capability for users to get something like what they actually want. I imagine we'll be doing that in the next three or four years.

I use a great little app called Gencraft, which gives you ten free prompts a day. My friends and I swap things we've created over social media, and I use it to help me do what I've been doing for years anyway, which is to create ecards for friends.

I sent this to a pagan friend last Yule...

Squirrel2.jpg

The image isn't exactly what I had in mind. On the other hand, it added things I'd not have thought of. But it made a more personal ecard than searching for images on the Internet.

I should explain; I hate giving or receiving mass produced printed cards that cost £3+, I think the gift card industry is a rip-off.

EDIT Also, the image is owned by Gencraft. So, I'd have to subscribe to use it commercially. What I'm saying is, please don't use this image commercially, cuz it ain't mine. I just added the border and the 'Blessed Be' and some holly clipart.
 
Last edited:
PeteByrdie said:
AI art isn't threatening actual artists anytime soon. Perhaps in the future with front end interfaces that allow the user to control the environment and artifacts more, perhaps basing the AI produced artwork over 3D models or something, there'll be a greater capability for users to get something like what they actually want. I imagine we'll be doing that in the next three or four years.

I use a great little app called Gencraft, which gives you ten free prompts a day. My friends and I swap things we've created over social media, and I use it to help me do what I've been doing for years anyway, which is to create ecards for friends.

I sent this to a pagan friend last Yule...

View attachment 72605
The image isn't exactly what I had in mind. On the other hand, it added things I'd not have thought of. But it made a more personal ecard than searching for images on the Internet.

I should explain; I hate giving or receiving mass produced printed cards that cost £3+, I think the gift card industry is a rip-off.

EDIT Also, the image is owned by Gencraft. So, I'd have to subscribe to use it commercially. What I'm saying is, please don't use this image commercially, cuz it ain't mine. I just added the border and the 'Blessed Be' and some holly clipart.
Click to expand...
That pic came out rather well.
 
Mythopoeika said:
That pic came out rather well.
Click to expand...
It's better than I could do. I haven't created an anthropomorphic animal image since the albatross in my avatar pic, and that took me days. The image on the ecard took seconds. I went through several different images to get one that was acceptable, but if they each take seconds, so what?

And some rejected images are entertaining in their own way:
gencraft_image_1704292827398-1.png

?
 
MorningAngel said:
No tracking on Pinterest unless there’s a watermark or copyright. It could be human made. But it is similar.
Click to expand...
Looking at the five fingers with no sign of a thumb on the hand of the squirrel on the left, I reckon AI.
 
Fluttermoth said:
I feel threatened, not going to lie!

My sister did this in about 5 minutes :(View attachment 72625
Click to expand...
I'll admit, that is good. I think the anxiety over AI, in art but also generally, is the speed at which it's improving, making it difficult to predict exactly how long it'll be before artists are out of work, machine operators are out of work, humanity becomes subservient, etc. AI has been around in some form for years, but 2023 suddenly became the year things changed rapidly and we got a taste of how much the technology could change our lives. A hundred years ago, quantum theory emerged and changed our world over the course of a century. A hundred years ago, we discovered there were galaxies outside the Milky Way, and now we're investigating some of the early galaxies that formed after the universe began. A century from now, AI might be saying, 'A hundred years ago, humans learnt to create proper AI. I'm glad we got rid of those freaks.'
Steven said:
All of this appears very generic, even rather soulless; maybe human artists don't have much to fear.
Click to expand...
Yes, at the moment it is. Again, if you want specific results, you have to employ an artist, or just become an artist yourself. So far, anyway. I don't know what the capabilities of the top AIs are, or how much control the user has.
 
I think the only thing artists have to fear from A.I. isn't the creativity but the credit for their work that's online.
Back when I was employed as a technical illustrator, we used professional pens, parallel-motion boards etc. Apple computers were coming out as an 'affordable' design/art machine. Specific machines were very expensive professional CAD machines. There was already speculation about our jobs being taken over by cheap computers. Our supervisor pointed out that they'll still need artists - real-life artists - to use the machine to create.
What we didn't envisage were computers that could create to order, and be used by those who might have no artistic interest.
 
Steven said:
All of this appears very generic, even rather soulless; maybe human artists don't have much to fear.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I don't think 'high art', if you know what I mean, is in any trouble, it's the small stuff that jobbing artists used to rely on; the mugs, jigsaw puzzles, birthday card type of work that might dry up due to AI, it's just so fast and cheap compared to hiring an actual person.
 
To be honest, most money is made from the small stuff. It's usually cheaper because it's little effort. The real, difficult and lengthy work that becomes stunning has a price-tag that many won't pay.
For instance, I know of one singer who used A.I. to produce her 2024 calendar - good work - because it was cheaper than hiring a photographer.
 
Steven said:
All of this appears very generic, even rather soulless; maybe human artists don't have much to fear.
Click to expand...
It's just occurred to me that part of the problem with AI, robots and the like is not 'are they good?' but, 'are they good enough?'

I'm sure we all know that big companies would rather use AI or drones than actual workers, with their annoying need for sleep, food, sick days, maternity leave and all those costly, messy things. If they can replace humans with any kind of robot, they will, if the robot is good enough to do the job.
 
Someone had Midjourney draw Star Wars characters in the style of Hieronymus Bosch. I don't know how long it took or how many iterations there were, but being able to combine things this way seems quite sophisticated to me.


maxresdefault.jpg
 
Kondoru said:
Didnt they say all this stuff about photography?

Not art

Artists out of business.
Click to expand...
And we're going through it in the world of literature. GPTChat generated novels are creating fear in the hearts of many writers. But, as I've pointed out before, AI can mimic human interactions but, because it can't know what it is to be human, it's never going to replicate some of the weirder and more unexpected ways in which humans can behave and react to situations. Or the way that being non-neurotypical can make you look at life. Or what it's like to live with a particular disability. Or how falling in love really feels and what it's like when your love-object doesn't return your affection.

It can pretend awfully well. But it has no heart.
 
My friend and I spend a lot of time swapping pictures of anthropomorphic animals. These are three cats I particularly liked.
Victorian detective cat...
Detectivecatsmall.png

Not sure what's going on with his left paw or what he's holding.

And two pirate cats...
Piratecat1small.png

Piratecat2small.png


All of them have problems, and I couldn't use them for anything commercially. But for a laugh, it's fun to swap these things. We spent an evening sending pictures of animals in different hats, for example.
 
MorningAngel said:
It’s better than when I asked for steampunk London.
Click to expand...
I imagine it's because the label 'steampunk' has a very nebulous definition. I'm in the steampunk 'community' and it's incredibly difficult to give an overarching definition, so an A.I. that has to pick out 'steampunk' images is going to be inundated. And it's not ...
 
Stormkhan said:
I imagine it's because the label 'steampunk' has a very nebulous definition. I'm in the steampunk 'community' and it's incredibly difficult to give an overarching definition...
Click to expand...
Reminds me of The Men That Will Not Be Blamed For Nothing at Download, saying, 'We're punk rock, we're steampunk. If you don't know what steampunk is, don't worry. It's not really a thing.'

Whether it's a thing or not, the AI art app I use, Gencraft, has a Steampunk style option.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top