Maybe the legal/ethics issue could be overcome by only allowing the use of royalty free and public domain art in the training data and image output, just a thought. If that’s been mentioned here before, I apologize, it’s a loooooong discussion thread.
1 Like
I should have fleshed that first response out, I wasn’t trying to trivialize what you wrote, sometimes I forget you aren’t all aware of my thoughts while I type 
To add on to that; humans at this moment in time are not machines. There will always be difference in terms on how that artwork is being created. Copy or not it nearly impossible to copy someone else art work. To copy/have skills to be able to copy the master is a rarity. Plus I don’t think most artists want to be known as a copycat of someone else art style. A lot of artist including myself we all want our own art style.
Most museums allow/encourage artists in the first place to copy the masters. Because the case is their improving/studying their own skills. (Plus spend time more time in museum equals to buying stuff from gift shop they have. That is a whole another discussion).
What I’m saying it basically illogical to copy someone else art style 100%. Not everyone have the same arm, brain or experiences in life. To be compare a human to a machine is illogical and at most inhumane.
To copy someone else work 100% is usually machine based. AI art is consider machine based. The whole sampling someone else music that usually falls under parody laws. Yet even then that idea shouldn’t haven’t been brought to the discussion to begin which, namely because music and art already have different rules. Despite the fact the word art is consider an umbrella term for creativity.
The issue with AI art a lot of artists alive at this very moment never consented to their art being copied for and by a machine. The only reason why OPT-OUT now existed because artist rebel back the idea that they want their art to be copied by a machine. The option from the start should have be optionally OPT-IN not forced.
Which is the reason why there’s there are a few ai lawsuits at this time.
Which the reason why ai art isn’t consider copyrightable as it stand at the moment.
People who are using ai art to sell cannot protect their ai art, if someone else sell the same artwork they made from ai, well tough luck.
Not to mention AI art invading into a lot of art spaces that human artists once consider safe heaven to promote, release their art and perhaps get jobs offers on. cough artstation cough
tldr: Artist and ai art are not the same. The video below might help bring more information to this discussion
5 Likes
@CryingTart , to add to your statement.
-
Yes no one can do a per pixel copy of someone else’s art style. While AI can, thus as you said even the “we all copy other artists” is invalid because we cannot mimic an art stile per pixel, nor do we want to.
-
Yeah, I’ve herd a lot of “well if it’s on the internet it’s fair game”, to which I always say: artists posted their artwork prior 2020, and had no idea that their art will be used to copy their style, thus generate images in their name for free and with no contribution to them. The use of AI to replicate someone’s style was never even considered prior 2020. Although I did watch a presentation on
style transferback in 2016 but that did somewhat a mediocre job. -
For the lawsuits that suggest AI generated art cannot be sold, I think is somewhat fair. Thus this makes it possible for AI to be used more as a tool for artists, rather than in place of artists.
3 Likes
Transhumanism is part of the future and it’s a whole topic on its own. A lot of things will be automated and there isn’t much we can do about it. Imagine wearing an eyeglass that projects things onto a Canvas, or be able to accurately eyeball what you see to help you draw or paint. Now imagine that eyeglass is built into your eye.
CSP 2.0 now makes it easy or speed things up for 2d artists when it comes to digital art. But in the real world, CSP is of no help, but that’s where Transhumanism comes in. I can imagine future traditional artists with enhanced ability doing art non-digitally.
1 Like
Hey everyone! I was wondering if anyone here has used ChatGPT or any other AI tools to help in painting or in their creative process?
@fl4res Your topic was moved into the AI Meta Thread so that it can become part of the ongoing conversation.
1 Like
apologies didnt know there was already an AI megathread!
1 Like
I did this less than 5 mins in stable diffusion, it’s a pretty image without personality or emotion, but it’s perfectly fine for concept exploration which is never needed to show to the public. So concept artists…
I was told by a friend from oversea that some studios there already fired whole bunch of artists and only keep handful of them feeding sketches to AI for concept art.
As AI improves, I have a feeling illustrators, modelers, riggers, animators will be 80-90% replaced by AI in the near future, the crafting part will be almost gone, artists will be managing the works and doing the final touches only. Artists will most likely be wearing multiple hats or even become directors themselves. A lot of high quality one-man projects or small team projects will be produced. We probably only need 5 ppl instead of 100 to make a pixar quality animated film.
AI can’t replace human artists completely, but the scale of an art team can be drastically reduced. We still need to have strong artistic sense to produce good AI art.
Stopping AI companies from using copyrighted arts can only delay what’s going to happen, but can’t change the future which AI will replace most of crafting part of art creation.
The tech is already here it’s unstoppable, it’s here right now drawing so much attentions for a reason, not only the digital art industry, other industries are also affected. It could be conspiracy theory or whatever. Those invisible hands behind it now are pushing the next Industrial Revolution.
honestly I hate it when people say ‘unstoppable’
napster did change the scene for music, and it is really damaging and tough for musicians now, but napster itself was stopped. re-directed.
This is what needs to happen to AI.
It needs copyright of humans enforced. It needs, to be regulated, but it can still be a toold for use, if it is packaged as an offline tool. a tool that only uses the artists input, and, or, a packaged “DLC” sold by individual artists, and provided by an artist, that woudl watermark and credit that artist.
This is a solution, that could have value.
The chat AI thing, also needs same regulation for plagerism (sp?) of authors, tech writers, etc. everything needs to be enforced by copyright law.
To ne clear, I hate this direction/leap in tech. The developers had a choice when wrking on this, a choice of theft and greed, or, a choice of sales by a usable tool. Like most things, developed by non artists, for the art world, greed is the winner.
this isn’t ‘unstoppable’ it just needs to be regulated and re-directed.
3 Likes
We have been only discussing illustration here. AI can simulate perfect natural (or eventually stylized ) motion for animation, a lot of animators will be replaced by AI, as well as modelers, riggers, and lighters. Those tasks are not copyright related at all. Even though the 2d field can be regulated, there are many other area in art industry can’t be regulated. AI will be changing the whole digital art industry it is unstoppable.
If big corporate are in it with the AI developers, it’s hard for artists to win. Those big studios have hired a lot of great artists for the past 20-30? years, the studios own the copyright of the works done by the paid artists. AI will still have solid database and out compete human artists eventually.
Yeah, the scary part is the transition. The government needs to face this issue, it either eliminate the massive unemployed or implement UBI.
lol
now AI does tinder matches for you
next step? 
Grum999
2 Likes
AI dating AI.
7 Likes
Maybe it will finally leave us alone then.
6 Likes
AI #1 and AI #2 will meet, then after first date decide to have AI sex stuff and generate a new AI #3
Grum999
4 Likes
The dawn of AI wars, all starts with sex. 
3 Likes
And because of “too much coupling/reproduction with itself”, AI dies out in the end…
Michelist
5 Likes
Inbred!
2 Likes
Yep, and the other similar word isn’t wanted too. LOL
Michelist
1 Like