Sure. And if you read the post that talked about this proposed feature you can see they take immense care to answer all the possible questions that would arise. They already have told that this will not have stolen images from the internet like generative AI, it will not connect to cloud or anything on the internet. It will only need small amount of line art data donated by the krita user community with permission. So they have already made it quiet clear. Sure if it needs more clarity they will do that I am sure they will answer any questions.
Strange, I remember this thread from like 2 days ago, but maybe my memory is failing me, but I donât remember this extremely verbose assurance that it will never ever go full gAI. That being said, this is a very good thing. The line in the sand has been drawn, I fully trust the krita team to do the right thing. Just like I trust KDE in general. Theyâre based in germany, so they absolutely take privacy very seriously. Which I like about KDE.
The post was there from the beginning, the post got shared and brigaded on twitter and reddit from which uninformed users joined the forum. And started commenting without reading anything. To collate their feedback we made a breakout topic as it was taking the original post in a tangent.
Here is the quote from the original post
This project makes use of AI, or more precisely, neural networks (implementing it using just classical algorithms would be quite challenging). The technology itself has a very wide range, but recently it got well-known in the artistic community due to the popularity of the generative AIs like Stable Diffusion, Midjourney and Dall-e. We do understand the concerns artists have around AI, and how itâs being trained and used, and because of that we plan to do things differently (for example, we are not going to use generative AI in this project and we donât plan on using it in the foreseeable future)
Which talks exactly what you asked. I once again ask every one to read the initial post carefully. Do not believe in twitter and reddit keyboard warrioirs who spread FUD.
Additionally, once the model is trained (by donated images so itâs an opt in), there is no need for such a thing as opt in or out for other user, because it is trained. Done. No further input needed. No internet connection needed. No database needed. Done.
I think the wording at the very end âwe donât plan on using it in the foreseeable futureâ is what is tripping up the reactionaries. Itâs giving them a wiggle room that there is a possibility krita might change their minds on this issue. That being said, I donât believe it at all, so the sky is more likely to turn blood red than this happening.
Well the community doesnât support AI as we experienced. And there is no AI feature currently on the market, which could be of use to the artists and is open source.
But who knows maybe there is in the future? No one knows and no one discards that option. Why should we? There is no need to
@raghukamath Iâve just taken screenshots while re-reading my posts, and nothing Iâve said has been a lie, or against the rules in any way. Anyone reasonable reading my posts and the responses would see that ⌠and not join/donate/volunteer/code.
No loss to me if you remove my account, ironically for NOT breaking forum rules. Every thing Iâve said has been twisted so much I canât even recognise whatâs fed back, so thereâs no intelligent dialogue possible. I opened with that I keep art offline ⌠no twitter or reddit accounts, and definitely no FUD. I also said that I signed up only to join in with others regarding ai concerns, and that Iâve already gone to Paintstorm, which really is a joy. Krita has not been that, and Iâm very happy to leave it behind and clean up my system and bookmarks after posting. I wonât be reading responses, and, as someone who DOESNâT lie, I really mean that. Too disgusted to continue with this.
In finishing, when âyouâre a liar and weâll silence youâ is spat out with such dislike, itâs your stance that is the problem, and it lowers the standards that should be upheld on a forum. It also indicates that âethicalâ isnât part of the deal ultimately, as krita would come down hard on you for behaving in this way if that were so, but that doesnât happen. Canât even get basic ethical respectful conversation right, fgs. Truth itself doesnât go away because you donât like it. Natural karma will continue to make that point, and, as with me, you wonât be able to dictate to that either, or the countless others against ai.
This is your first lie and misinformation. It was announced at the beginning and not when it is fully ready. Like you claim
This is your second lie. Krita is not bending any license. If you are referring to the mailing list threads there was a discussion about which license would be good for the model or artworks that we are going to ask from users.
This is your third lie and misinformation. Kuserfeedback is not on by default. They do not track users. This is also not relevant to krita as it is not in krita.
This is fourth instance of spreading FUD. You already assume malice.
I do not remember anything that would add telemetry in krita. I am following krita development since 2014. They may have had surveys, there was definitely no opt in by default data collection. So again unsubstantiated claim. If you have evidence please share it.
I have quoted your own words.
Of course if continue to lie we will have to silence you.
I donât understand, so you donât use Krita, you criticize the decision to use neural networks (NON-generative AI), you donât believe that ethics exist in the development of new technologies, you refuse to read the answers and yet you get angry because the others got tired of giving you solid arguments?
Well excuse me for what I say but if you are using other painting software I think itâs ok but I donât think your concerns are entirely valid since you donât use and wonât use the software, instead we who are part of the community take the time to inform us about what the development team is doing and even collaborate in this, I donât think itâs fair that you want to impose your opinion, even more if you donât want to read our opinions.
Iâve already gone to Paintstorm, which really is a joy. Krita has not been that, and Iâm very happy to leave it behind and clean up my system and bookmarks after posting. I wonât be reading responses, and, as someone who DOESNâT lie, I really mean that. Too disgusted to continue with this.
You lost all benefit of the doubt you arenât trolling by this very post. Why else would someone who doesnât like krita and doesnât even want to use krita want to have such as invested backlash against a decision krita made?
Social media promotes thinking with the crowd not thinking for yourself. If youâre told AI is bad full-stop and donât understand what makes it bad, then youâll be unable to recognize when an âAIâ comes along thatâs good.
For example the user whoâs been doing nothing but lying in here because they firmly believe in something they donât understand.
Ok I think it is better to stop here. Let us wait for the new tool. Feel free to generate sketches and lineart and donate them. The more training materials they have, the faster they can train the model. So go for it.
I understand the proposed, is a tool to speed up the line art process, but I have 3 points.
1- why put a feature that most part of artist just do not will use, most of us have an particular process to line art, and it will not be replicated without training in our especific data, so itâs almost useless.
2 - even that the process use just C0 and donated art like mitsua-diffusion-one I do not feel comfortable with it, thereâs a technology that just mecanize the art process from an never seemed before like said in this article âFordism Comes to the Galleryâand AI Comes for the Artistsâ : https://www.thenation.com/article/culture/fordism-ai-art-dall-e/
3 - why use Gen AI when you can achieve a much closer effect with procedural vectors.
Btw I just will ignore that it features exists and keep using krita as longs I could, hope that you not break your promesse and do not start to dig into the evil and unethical part of Gen AI, or I will need to learn gimp or other Linux painting program, I Know that some part of my thoughts arenât rational, but Iâm just a human trying to keep being human.
Hi! Your clear-headness is, frankly, refreshing. Addressing your questions:
1.Thatâs a big assumption. I wouldnât be surprised if people intending to try the tool are keeping quiet for the moment to avoid harassment. After all demonization and accusations of artistic inferiority whoâd blame them?
Also, itâs this feature using this tech because thatâs what being funded. The good news is that there donât seem to have been any additional requirements.
2. Itâs a bit late to make that point. Professional illustration has been unreasonably demanding for a very long time. Itâs pretty common to read job postings for game and art studios looking for candidates âwho can remain self-motivatedâ. Donât you wonder why?
3. Because again, thatâs what being funded (which isnât gen ai), and because it potentially might yield slightly better results in some situations. It doesnât have to be groundbreaking to be helpful to someone.
Not directed at you in specific: Guys, donât forget funding is always a huge limiting factor. The dev team is made of volunteers but they can only donate so much time.
This. Iâm against AI art because of what it enables. At least AI will remain bad in the 3D realm, and CAD/Architecture. I know AI is useful for mundane tasks like reading text from pictures. I do plan to code with AI and keeping with ethics in mind.
Being honest, the function of this looks much similar to âColorize-maskâ and I never see any artist using this in any video or stream using krita, just when i searsh about it, but it can just be a âbubble effectâ, but i feel that when it is in the possible artists prefere feel that they are in the control, itâs just my own intuition thank you for your kindnees.
PS: I do not use Krita to Work, Work with art for me is most a dream them a reallity, just few commissions, but the point is most the mecanization of the process in the public vision then the commercial.
Artist using Krita for a long time here, I use colorize mask even to fill my sketches, because it has the function to close gaps, also I work with many commissions and using this function saves me a lot of time, although it is true that it is not a very commented feature is a very useful one and it is really helpful for everyone, even recently I showed the function to a friend and he started to use it, because again it saves him a lot of time.
You are right, when you say that no one, who streams, uses colorized mask. But it is only your assumption by the way I rarely see someone streaming using krita⌠And I would assume, that when the new lineart tool is implemented, that more people will use it. The problem I have with this colorized mask is, that you have to close all the gaps in your lineart. No room for evoking a feeling of weight, light and shadow and volume. But if I can do my lineart on top and let the tool interpret my sketch, then I can use this mask without a problem.
So Sketch > interpreted lines + colorized mask > Lineart
I didnât negatively remarked you on that one. Apologies if it felt some sort of offensive.
This is understandable, and thatâs why many members have tried to explain including me. Unlike other AI relying on stolen artwork, this is complete open source using CC artwork that too by members.
Yikes, so you trust a close source software than an open source where even a development feature is discussed out in forum. I can understand the fear but this way you lost all credibility from my side. feels like you are vocal for the sake of it.
with all that said, I am also out of this thread because this has become hate thread rather than a feature discussion thread.
