We already have that issue and govt’s and people deal with it legally. Class action law suits and fines are not a new concepts. We should strive for better implementation and enforcements.
1 Like
What I recommend is not based on one’s experience or talent. There might be some loops to go through to join the community to make sure the user is legit (no reCAPTCHA obviously).
From what I understand, this cannot prevent people grabbing images from a website to train AI if they really want, just a restriction from a law standpoint (maybe?), if someone really don’t want their work being thrown into AI database.
a) Build a self-hosted website
b) Make a License of agreement to refuse being trained in any AI, can only see the images in the website after pressing “agree”, and
c) Restrict other search engine to access the picture from the website (e.g.: find this site image from google image search), so the images can only be accessed after agree the License of agreement.
3 Likes
all jokes aside that isn’t a long term solution
4 Likes
Right, that is why I said captcha would not be allowed. There might be a human interview. The captcha type services are already used for training and labeling for ai.
So were relying on human biases?
Is not that how you would do it when you need to join a real life social circle?
Elaborate.
Are we discussing the networking solution which that always has social hierarchy/bias.
or the quite literality
I wouldn’t even try, not because I haven’t tried before. As soon as I put my input into the ongoing conversation, people stop talking. Or better yet choose to ignore me all together. 
2 Likes
“side note: I would like a tool which generates ‘art’ for me by learning my own art style. Like small things which could be repetitve, like a small tree in the bacground, a grass patch somewhere, etc.”
If this is maintained, on a person’s personal space, and used to further their own works it would have merit as a tool, however, there still are people that woudl use it to copy someone elses talent I fear.
But yes, If this was a tool that remained offline, it would have use at times.
For some projects, that I do, I make reusable object files in png layer format so I can bring them in when needed.
Already some brushes I do, copy leaves I have created and do help speed up my process.
However, I am in control of this.
I could see that, as you say, a tree you’ve created in your style, or a patch of grass,(es) filling in space, would be handy.
To be honest, it isn’t the process for things like this, things you would control on your own on your pc, that bothers me. That is an interesting process and idea.
What bothers me, concerns me depresses me etc etc…
That is, these giant databased machines that are feeding off stolen resources, creating at a whim, an idea that could have put food on the table for an artist.
Instead, the wealthy person that funded this, will get richer off a 10 to 15 dollar a month subscription, so someone can give a prompt and pretend they did the work.
Artists have used tools of various types ‘forever’ in the history of the world, to create. So yes, if this isn’t abused, it could have become a benificial tool to art, but as it is now, it needs to put the heart of an artist back in thier work, and the copyrighted works of others should never be allowed into the machine.
I think if the plugins for krita kept this in mind to keep this just for the individual, I could see if being okay, as long as it was the original artist that created the works, and used the prompts to continue their own elements styles and art.
Why was this not the original goal of midJourney, or, Dalle? Instead of the nefarious path it has taken of theft, and the ruining of the lives of so many artists preyed apon.
I have heard musicians upset with AI music, writers chuckling, but, also worrying about AI writing bots… We are now seeing the first direction of AI doing animation.
AI can write and correct code.
We will soon, if this is not handled properly with copyright laws, all aspects of creativity farmed out to a bot that basically has taken our libelyhoods as artists of all media.
As I mention, as a tool for the individual, with their materials, it could have worked well. but not currently as it is, pulling files from the internet.
I don’t want to be reduced in my creativity either.
Painting a stick man, and letting the AI flesh out the piece, sounds interesting, but soon we have no more creativity left to give than just that.
I agree with you, if it was a tool, and not a force of someone else’s art taken, it would be fine.
If the copyrights become inforced, and they need to purge their database and start over with liscensed work, it would be a start in the right direction.
If watermarks generated with each piece as well, that woudl help too.
Imagine you buy a licence for “Boris Vallejo” and each piece woudl generate a signature and file data saying something like “AI generated in the style of Boris…” etc. that woudl also be a step in the right direction. The original artist might get paid then.
I dunno though, I still will probably always have my worries, and depression about it.
When looking at a piece of art, I want to be amazed by the artist and the artists skill, and not say, " bet that is AI "
I think if someone is developing AI plugin for Krita, and it is contained on the person’s computer, and subject to the art they input as source, then, it is a tool.
I think, if the development uses someone elses materials, and not the use of said programs skills, and this is done without concent, it is theft, and copyright law should protect the artists from that.
Sorry I feel like I am rambling.
I feel bad for the folks being stolen from, for people that feel that even before they start their life in art, it is already being taken. For those that had a taste of getting paid for art, only to now be told that “oh, yeah you wanted 200 dollars for that piece, I got it for subscription to an AI bot and a prompt;”
just, as it is now, this isn’t good, this isn’t helpful, this is not fair, right or just.
So, I think we all need to voice our dissatisfaction, as we are doing.
I’ll just leave you with this example of how it make me feel.
It feels, like someone going to a bakery, grabbing the nice looking display loaves of bread, while the baker’s back is turned, driving across town to an empty storefront, and selling that bread someone else worked on, and was using as a display, as your own and at a higher cost.
Yeah, someone paid for the stale display loaf and is eating it, and paid more.
But the fellow that grabbed the display, did nothing in creation, except they got the credit while the baker, proud of their work, displayed the work, lost the bread, and the sale, because the consumer is full on stale display bread.
Thats how I feel.
3 Likes
I’ve removed all my artworks from ArtStation yesterday
Not because I’m against AI, I don’t have any problem with AI technology and I even can see good things with that (and also very bad things, unfortunately)
I removed everything just because of the political choice of ArtStation that is similar to DeviantArt one: by default artworks can be used for training, and artists have to flag all artwork as explicitely not usable for AI training
I don’t like this way of doing things that is unrespectfull for artists
Grum999
8 Likes
I think I will too. I will probably only keep a presence on my website. I know it will be hard to market myself this way. but I think that will be future
5 Likes
I’ll check for a pixelfed gallery, orherwise a personal one…
Grum999
1 Like
Yep…I restarted my pixelfed gallery a few months back…
1 Like
https://twitter.com/Krita_Painting/status/1603287662512820226?s=20&t=93O5RcBusukn3dWGj1j7Tw
i dont know what to say
It is an opinion. Everyone is free to have its own. You, me and also the foundation behind Krita can have a different sight of things, what is the problem?
The ages where everyone had to believe and do what their king said they have to believe and do, are luckily gone.
Michelist
5 Likes
I don’t want to be the AI advocate on this forum or anything like that, but since you quote me, I’ll reply.
The graphics card is not necessary, it is only needed if you want to use Stable Diffusion locally. But if you have access to a PC and Internet, you can use Stable Diffusion for free using Google Colab.
It is true that this takes a lot of effort out of creating art, but it does not take away the joy of those who use it. Many people are not capable of drawing well for many reasons, however with these AI methods they find it much more accessible to translate their ideas into drawings, which of course makes them happy.
Yep, just did same thing.
honestly had not used deviant art in 14 years, but this reminded me, it was probably a good idea to update.
4 Likes
Yeah and google colab has price right. I think it is only free for non commercial purpose. And setting it up is not easy for an average person.
What are those reasons and what is drawing well in this scenario. Anybody can draw well eventually if they practice. I am not saying people should not use this to make art if it gives them joy then okay but the argument that there is some barrier to art that is false in my opinion. Like I said you can put stones together and make art. What is stopping people from picking up pencil and paper? Surely it is cheaper and easier than using google colab and purchasing a pc
6 Likes
It’s free for anybody that has a Google account, for commercial or non commercial use. Of course it can be hard to set it up, but for certain people (for example programmers, who coincidentally are usually not too good making art themselves) it’s pretty simple. And also, there are lots of tutorials on Youtube that can will make the task supereasy, barely an inconvenience 
If you want you can watch here one tutorial that explains how to install on Colab the current Stable Diffusion 2.1 version https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NS2mzmH-lpk
Or even easier, you can use the demo here: Stable Diffusion 2-1 - a Hugging Face Space by stabilityai (it’s not as customizable as the other one, but still).
Not everybody can practice, even if they want to.
People can have a job that leaves them almost no free time, or they also can be injured and not be able to use their body well enough, are just two examples that came to my mind (because, sadly, I know them too well).
Of course I’m not saying that everyone should use AI to make art, what I’m trying to say is that AI is just another tool, and that if some people only can use it to create images, and thus be happy for being able to materialize their dreams at last, AI could be a positive thing
1 Like
If they really want have the will to practice art who is stopping them?
That is just an excuse. I have seen working professionals like doctors practicing art in their free time, engineers programmers people not related to art field have successfully practiced art and have even changed careers. For example Yuko Shimuzu a well known artist was a PR professional and had a career in corporate PR for 11 years before moving to New York to study art for the first time. She started very late and is successful. So age or profession can’t be a barrier. Having a job is not an excuse to not learn art. It like I won’t learn art since I have a job but I want to push a button and make art.
I have seen people with no hands make art with legs. Here check out people drawing with their legs because they have no arm or even eye sight
Provided you are willing to put same effort in fine tuning the prompt you can also put same effort into learning art. How is time and effort put into fine tuning a prompt different than learning to sketch? AI people get defensive when we say it is easy and requires no effort they say they work countless hours to fine tune to get the desired result. but why can’t they learn to sketch and practice art with same amount of effort if at all it is the same effort like they say?
To me it seems these people need a shortcut and are really lazy they want to call themselves artist but don’t want to study artistic skill. Which is really wrong since they will need it anyway if they want to get a decent picture out of AI instead of mangled hands.
Quiet privileged view. Many people can’t even afford a meal and you are saying that they should use google colab, in what world you live in? This is elitist thinking and gate keeping AI image making to rich corporates and people. We need to give ability to use this tech to each and every person on earth who wants to draw and that too cheaper than pen and pencil or the material that nature gives to make art to truly make it democratic and all this while their belly is full. Do you think that is possible? Can Emad of stability AI give free PC with graphic card and free meal to each individual in developing country who can’t afford it so that they can truly dream and materialise their vision or is it just PR talk to get venture funding?
Of-course I am not disputing the usefulness of the technology. I am just pointing out the irrelevant excuses that the proponents come up with, to advertise and evangelise this tech. Their reasoning is all with holes. Atleast they should be honest and tell the world what it is really for. People who are rich and don’t want to learn art but want to make art and call themselves artists or people who don’t have time or patience but are rich to invest in google colab to make art in record time and earn more money. it is same as the pretentious billionaire who hires ghost writers to write him a novel and hoards all the good PR in the media pretending to writing a book while in reality he is just a person who commissioned it. if asked about the details and intricacies of the book he would fall flat in shame.
From what I have experienced by using SD, it doesn’t read my mind and it doesn’t give me what I think even a bit. I have to accept what it spits out and then build on that. How is that my expression? How can you say it helps them materialise their dreams when it can’t possibly see what they visualise in their mind by reading their mind. To me it sounds like a religious advert showcasing a false miracle.
8 Likes