So I've finally got stuff online for my current D&D campaign, and it lets me show some of the illustrations that a player has made using the Midjourney app for AI-generated art. In our case, it was a struggle particularly for the nonhumans - because he's trying to make characters that have D&D types but in an Incan-inspired setting. The results were interesting. I vaguely recall we had discussed this before, but I thought new examples might be interesting.
I have some ethical qualms about using AI art as a replacement for commercial illustrations, because I believe it's reusing copyrighted art as data that wasn't licensed for this purpose. On the other hand, for non-commercial campaign art, it seems less of an issue.
So here's the human noble fighter Purix:
(https://cdn.midjourney.com/ffaa3039-91ec-4953-93fb-d064b4f3dc5c/grid_0.png) (http://solar-empire.wikidot.com/purix)
The human cleric Saya:
(https://cdn.midjourney.com/f7f8984f-38e1-487a-b56c-3763f95f9d83/0_3.png) (http://solar-empire.wikidot.com/saya)
The dragonborn sorcerer Kawiil:
(https://cdn.midjourney.com/5c995a87-06d3-49fa-b389-701d0b2386cf/0_0.png) (http://solar-empire.wikidot.com/kawi-il)
The half-elf warlock Sayani:
(https://cdn.midjourney.com/ab4f3497-28b1-4b59-abfd-b39214f78cc7/0_2.png) (http://solar-empire.wikidot.com/sayani)
And the wood elf monk Isa Rabi:
(http://solar-empire.wdfiles.com/local--files/start/isa-3.png) (http://solar-empire.wikidot.com/isa-rabi)
I don't have the details about the prompts he used to get to these images yet.
How does this compare with others' experience?
Still can't do human hands, but Dragonborn hands are perfect.
This is like the tests in Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep. See if someone is a real human artist, ask them to draw hands.
Hands are getting better all the time. MJ v5 is great and SD + depth fields/control net are pretty good.
Quote from: jhkim on March 22, 2023, 02:56:50 PM
I have some ethical qualms about using AI art as a replacement for commercial illustrations, because I believe it's reusing copyrighted art as data that wasn't licensed for this purpose. On the other hand, for non-commercial campaign art, it seems less of an issue.
Good man.
My wife is a professional artist. She and her coworkers are justifiably anxious about AI art and their professional online portfolios having been "scraped" to feed the AI databases.
I had considered using Google's new "Bard" AI just to throw some personal campaign notes in and see what it could cogitate. She asked me not to help any AI in any way, which was enough for me.
jhkim, love the Aztec vibe. I've got a couple of back burner projects that I'm thinking about doing AI collaborations with (creating the initial poses and sketches and having AI make them presentable.)
Feratu, I'm interested in you and your wife's opinion on Adobe Firefly and Mitsua Diffusion One, both of these are ethical data models for AI Art. Firefly leverage's Adobe's huge stock art library and Mitsua is only trained on a smaller data set of public domain and authorized images. I tested it with 'wood cuts' and line drawings and I got it to more or less work for medieval images suitable for character portraits and the like, which is to be expected given the available historical sources.
Just for fun...
(https://www.tangent-zero.com/files/wood_cut01.png)
Quote from: zircher on March 22, 2023, 05:55:16 PM
Feratu, I'm interested in you and your wife's opinion on Adobe Firefly and Mitsua Diffusion One, both of these are ethical data models for AI Art. Firefly leverage's Adobe's huge stock art library and Mitsua is only trained on a smaller data set of public domain and authorized images. I tested it with 'wood cuts' and line drawings and I got it to more or less work for medieval images suitable for character portraits and the like, which is to be expected given the available historical sources.
zircher,
I have no personal beef with "ethical" AI and am mildly curious about its useful applications. My sweetie is unfortunately completely blackpilled and now wants nothing to do with any of it. It's unfortunate, too because we've both always enjoyed science fiction's speculative AI portrayals. Reality turned out to mostly be CRAPitalism rather than capitalism.
I also like the images. I think I'm primarily with jhkim. No issues with home games.
When it comes to commercial, if I were to release a game I would struggle to trust an unknown artist. There are too many stories of people taking money and running or running super late on deadlines.
So I'd probably reach out to Rob or somebody here. But assuming I couldn't find someone I trust, I might consider AI or go without like Whitehack.
I'm going to say something unpopular (nothing new on my end):
Unless you can prove a particular AI is plagiarizing artists IDGAFF if it's "ethical" or not.
Furthermore I am fully onboard, for someone like me who doesn't have the money to hire artists it's a valid option over using the same public domain art everybody else has already used. It's going to empower people to produce higher quality products.
Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 22, 2023, 06:38:09 PMFurthermore I am fully onboard, for someone like me who doesn't have the money to hire artists it's a valid option over using the same public domain art everybody else has already used. It's going to empower people to produce higher quality products.
I see it more as a way to DEVALUE people, but stuff like that has happened before. Shoe factories didn't empower the avarage person with the ability to make shoes. It did devalue the price of shoes and make them available for more people.
The people I see most excited for this technology are giant firms excited to fire all their art staff to reduce overhead.
But thats reality and the nature of technology and advancement. The invention of the care caused the loss of jobs for many well meaning horse breeders.
Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 22, 2023, 06:38:09 PM
I'm going to say something unpopular (nothing new on my end):
Unless you can prove a particular AI is plagiarizing artists IDGAFF if it's "ethical" or not.
Furthermore I am fully onboard, for someone like me who doesn't have the money to hire artists it's a valid option over using the same public domain art everybody else has already used. It's going to empower people to produce higher quality products.
I believe most stakeholders practically everywhere think the same and already care more about maximizing this quarter's profits over leaving any viable consumers in their wake. It reminds me of the cartoon where the robot college counselor can't help the human graduate student find a job, but points out that every company is desperately seeking a human to fill the role of consumer.
And to be clear Im not saying this is capitalisms fault. This would be hell under communism as well.
But the idea of AI art and its intended applications has me completly blackpilled on the future. People with no ethics developing technology with no ethics for people with no ethics primarily for the purpose of spewing out media we already have a glut of.
The best case scenario I can imagine is the future from Wall-E. And thats the nicest best case scenario.
Greetings!
I've read some Futurists, these kinds of visionary uber-futuristic people that have talked about the coming technological, Knowledge-revolution, and how it is going to be hugely transformative to all societies, everywhere, like the Industrial Revolution, but larger.
Robots, AI, computerized technologies are going to reach a threshold of breakthroughs that are going to be mind-boggling in scope, application, everything. While they often disagree when this huge transformation is to occur, they all agree it is a certainty. Then, there are some that have explained that it won't be a one-bang ind of event, but a series of transitions, coming in waves. Others then have pointed out that these changes are also likely to come about much faster and sooner than previous generations or analysts believed would be possible.
The implications of these changes are staggering, effecting every area of life, work, communities, politics, economics, even how relationships are viewed and defined.
For example, relatively soon here, our society will be facing unemployment rates of 40%, 50% or higher. Robotics and AI technologies will simply eliminate most jobs, and entirely transform what we think about "WORK" and "CAREERS". The economies of the near future are going to be far more streamlined, far more efficient, and require far less manpower. Your jobs in so many fields will be simply gone. There simply will be no need to employ 1,000 people to do "X" when that workload can be accomplished by 5 highly-trained specialists, overseeing a landscape of Robotic technologies and AI assistants. There may also be a specialized team of say, 10 people that are highly-trained technicians that can work on any required repairs, adjustments, or upgrades to the systems and structures involved. Thus, 1,000 jobs won't be needed. This huge descaling will be seen in virtually every kind of field. There are already high-tech factories in Japan that create tons of "X", while being operated by robots and AI. These giant technological factories are supervised by maybe a dozen actual human beings. That's it.
We are already seeing a foreshadowing of the changes that will sweep through professional education, with colleges and universities for example. People already have access to scholar-level work and data on their cell phones that far exceed what a scholar knew 100 years ago after a lifetime of study and work. Just wait until we have VR hook ups, and technologies that can interface with the human brain by putting on a helmet or some other thing that shares data. Much faster, more thorough, and available anywhere and everywhere. College and universities will largely be a thing of the past.
This also gets into an economic push for UBI--Universal Basic Income. It seems like something like it will be necessary, because there won't be jobs for 80% of the population. The jobs will simply not exist. This development will radically impact our entire societal view of work, and of careers. The whole concept of working your life away, and all that. These developments will hugely impact how we view families, and the nature of time. Some experts believe this will unleash an unprecedented growth further in technology, beauty, arts, and many other things, because millions of more people will be living lives of leisure, freedom, discovery, and enlightenment.
Work-place and a huge outgrowth of changes in industry, economics, and technologies, will generate greater mass efficiencies in work, so that for millions of people, daily essentials will no longer be of any concern. These developments will proceed with medical enhancements that will extend people's lives, which will also have an impact on human relationships and families.
The military is already talking NOW--about how within the next 15 years, the vast majority of the entire military--land, air, and naval forces--will be robotic. Likewise, we are already seeing huge changes in retail and food industry technology. Macdonald's have been transformed into robotic kiosks, robot workers, all run and supervised by only a handful of actual people. Truck drivers? Gone. They will be replaced by robot trucks. Uber drivers, Taxi drivers? Bus drivers? All gone. Manufacturing is increasingly industrialized with more machines, more robots, and more computers--and a need for far less human workers.
I think we will see the market for human artists also undergo huge changes. Sad, for sure. But the inescapable reality will rapidly be here--a computer program will be able to create more artwork, better artwork--or at least comparable to what 85% of actual human artists are doing--and such will be produced also in a fraction amount of time. Thus, no need for 85% of human artists, everywhere. There will only be a market for the absolute top 10% or 15%, the artists that can simply reach and maintain levels of excellence and detail that, as of yet--the computers and robots and AI won't yet be at quite that same level of excellence.
These same dynamics in efficiency, scale, ease of maintenance, quality production and output, vast financial savings, will effect virtually every industry and line of work.
I'm of course disturbed by other implications going on, but just by looking at the very basic kinds of transformations being brought in--and very quickly!--the immediate changes to society at all levels is most certainly going to be profound.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
RPG industry will be completely different (& glutted). Anyone will be able to create whatever they want, and there won't be a significant production quality difference between "D&D" and "Fantasy Heartbreaker."
Quote from: SHARK on March 22, 2023, 07:31:02 PMI'm of course disturbed by other implications going on, but just by looking at the very basic kinds of transformations being brought in--and very quickly!--the immediate changes to society at all levels is most certainly going to be profound.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Agreed, but I mostly see them as negative. Scarcity is a source of pain, but its also a source of meaning. I see only a hellscape in the future because humans may be motivated by fear, but are motivated by comforts so much more.
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on March 22, 2023, 07:43:40 PM
Quote from: SHARK on March 22, 2023, 07:31:02 PMI'm of course disturbed by other implications going on, but just by looking at the very basic kinds of transformations being brought in--and very quickly!--the immediate changes to society at all levels is most certainly going to be profound.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Agreed, but I mostly see them as negative. Scarcity is a source of pain, but its also a source of meaning. I see only a hellscape in the future because humans may be motivated by fear, but are motivated by comforts so much more.
Greetings!
Oh yeah, Shrieking Banshee! I agree, there are like two or three *bad* things, for each 1 good thing. I'm pretty convinced we are doomed to clown-world.
I was reading an article earlier--maybe a video--about how Facebook and TikTok and Instagram, have *already* created actual, measurable, changes in people's lifestyles, attitudes, politics, and relationships--all from being programed, and addicted, and influenced by Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok.
I've also believed that 50% of the human population are brutish, simple apes that are only focused on food, shelter, clothing, fucking, and basic entertainment. Fulfill those basic necessities, and half the population could care less about anything or anyone else in society.
I also think that number of basic morons is growing, year by year.
The studies also recently show how here in America, our total average vocabulary has significantly decreased for people under 35. The US population on a whole is two standard deviations lower in IQ than 30 years ago. We are literally getting stupider as a population. Less educated, speaking simpler, gibberish English, functionally illiterate, naïve, and easily manipulated on a mass scale, like a gigantic herd of stupid animals.
AI technologies are going to further make people more dependent, more brainwashed, and more easily controlled. Nice, stupid, domesticated animals.
The future is bright indeed!
I think it is pretty obvious that more and more people are eager to be slaves. Give them the essentials--food, sex, entertainment--and they don't care about "Rights". That requires too much work, responsibilities, obligations, and duties. Let a handful of uber elites, the crème of society, rule over everything. It's good to be controlled by the super-state. More morons are convinced they *deserve* free handouts and goodies, so they will keep voting for leaders and elites that give them more, and more, and more. Our society is distracted, and also obsessed with decadence, with debauchery and pleasure of every kind. It is quite literally destroying our entire population, by eating away at their functionality from within. Their lives become focused on consumption, on pleasure, on basic needs, on selfish hedonism--meanwhile their minds and their actual education and ability to think rots away, degrades away and is so corrupted, that we have an increasingly helpless society.
I read a comment somewhere where someone said..."The giant Asteroid can't come soon enough!" *Laughing*
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Quote from: SHARK on March 22, 2023, 08:28:18 PMI read a comment somewhere where someone said..."The giant Asteroid can't come soon enough!" *Laughing*
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
An asteroid isn't very fair to the Amish. Im not to that cynicism level yet. Im just more annoyed by peoples reaction to this technology. You can hand absolute power to an angel and be fine. Its just I don't trust people with more technology or power.
Quote from: SHARK on March 22, 2023, 08:28:18 PM
I read a comment somewhere where someone said..."The giant Asteroid can't come soon enough!"
I tell my family the same thing at least once a month! I'll sit on the porch and laugh as it hits. It's good field sanitation: burn pits!
I will say, it beats the fuck out of poser art. That stuff just makes me die inside when a "professional" company uses that crap.
Ethically? I await the day when middle and upper management are in danger of being replaced by AI, and we see some serious Butlerian Jihad efforts from people who pushed these AI algorithims. ;)
Artists are just joining the long line of artisans that have been replaced by technology over the ages. It's awful for the artists, but it's unstoppable. Nothing like this ever goes back in the bottle.
Anything AI creative makes me think sex and masturbation. If you can't manage to achieve the sex, there is always masturbation as a close second - and you know that the mediocrities who settle for masturbation will be telling everyone just how awesome it is, and if they say it enough times then they will even believe it.
That is what is happening now with real creatives vs AI creations.
This won't change anyone's mind. The masturbation fans have already accepted the least common denominator of blandness in creative endeavors is 'good enough' for them. They are as complacent and satisfied as a mushroom growing in shit.
Doesn't mean the rest of us are.
AI art - seems to work best when people take it as a base, then add a human touch. Hands & eyes especially!
80% unemployment - hm, one thing new tech is doing is recreating the cottage industries of yore. These days I buy my D&D minis and scenery from bespoke printers, one guy with a printer in his garage, not big companies. Likewise my D&D/FRPG books. Internet communication, home printing - these things create jobs as well as destroy them. There are certainly a lot of people in the left half of the IQ curve whose prospects seem a bit bleak, but that's been the case since the 1980s. Governments can help somewhat by doing the Trump anti-globalist thing and encouraging onshoring industrial production. I think the IQ 105+ creative types should still have opportunities in Brave New World, though.
Quote from: S'mon on March 23, 2023, 03:03:04 AM
AI art - seems to work best when people take it as a base, then add a human touch. Hands & eyes especially!
80% unemployment - hm, one thing new tech is doing is recreating the cottage industries of yore. These days I buy my D&D minis and scenery from bespoke printers, one guy with a printer in his garage, not big companies. Likewise my D&D/FRPG books. Internet communication, home printing - these things create jobs as well as destroy them. There are certainly a lot of people in the left half of the IQ curve whose prospects seem a bit bleak, but that's been the case since the 1980s. Governments can help somewhat by doing the Trump anti-globalist thing and encouraging onshoring industrial production. I think the IQ 105+ creative types should still have opportunities in Brave New World, though.
Whenever I've been unemployed, I've always had multiple plans. Started working on as many of them as I had time for, and then ended up sticking with the career path that got me results first. Even when I'm working I've got multiple plans, although obviously less time to set them into action. Whatever industry you're working in, you should always have an exit plan, a different career you can pivot to. You should have a hobby that can potentially turn into work. And if that hobby was art and you got work as an artist, and are now losing that work, then you have the option to switch back to what you were doing when art was just your hobby.
Quote from: Zelen on March 22, 2023, 07:40:21 PM
RPG industry will be completely different (& glutted). Anyone will be able to create whatever they want, and there won't be a significant production quality difference between "D&D" and "Fantasy Heartbreaker."
That's a future I can live with. :)
Quote from: Ratman_tf on March 22, 2023, 09:43:22 PM
I will say, it beats the fuck out of poser art. That stuff just makes me die inside when a "professional" company uses that crap.
The problem with Poser art is that there is a massive gulf between what you can achieve with old freeware versions (less features) and the free models that come with or can be scraped off free sites, lack of experience, and no postwork (i.e. the stuff you're thinking of) and the results you get if you actually sink a few hundred bucks into the most recently versions of the software and actual professional model resources, then take the time to learn the program, and are familiar with the more advanced features of Photoshop to apply to post work to your renders.
And even the bad stuff at least has a human brain (and authorized use licenses for the use of pre-existing 3d assets) doing the design work, not a massive array of on/off switches running someone else's coding on a massive collection of art whose legal use for that purpose is dubious.
Quote from: Grognard GM on March 22, 2023, 10:02:00 PM
Artists are just joining the long line of artisans that have been replaced by technology over the ages. It's awful for the artists, but it's unstoppable. Nothing like this ever goes back in the bottle.
I fully agree. Craftsmen lost their jobs en masse as a result of industrialization. There is no reason why "creatives" such as artists should face a different fate. Attempts to stop such developments may temporarily slow them down but are ultimately doomed to fail.
Quote from: Rhymer88 on March 23, 2023, 10:23:44 AM
Quote from: Grognard GM on March 22, 2023, 10:02:00 PM
Artists are just joining the long line of artisans that have been replaced by technology over the ages. It's awful for the artists, but it's unstoppable. Nothing like this ever goes back in the bottle.
I fully agree. Craftsmen lost their jobs en masse as a result of industrialization. There is no reason why "creatives" such as artists should face a different fate. Attempts to stop such developments may temporarily slow them down but are ultimately doomed to fail.
They can always throw their wooden clogs in to the gears of the A.I. art mills.
This tech isn't going to replace artists, just make it so artists that use the tech can crank out hundreds of art pieces a day instead of 1 or 2. Clients are still going to want their art to be composed in a specific way or want all the art in a project to be consistent in look and feel. Anyone can pop a prompt in and produce a one off, but producing art specific to high standards is a lot more complex:
(https://comfyanonymous.github.io/ComfyUI_examples/area_composition/workflow_night_evening_day_morning.png)
This isn't that different to the invention of the spreadsheet app or the word processor. Technology allowed skilled accountants and typists to force multiply. This could mean that people in those positions that stayed on pen and paper/typewriters eventually lost their jobs. But for those that adapted, they didn't get fired, companies just scaled up the work they could do more with the same staff levels.
Specifically for RPG products, rather than a game like Shadowdark having multiple artists I'd expect the future will have writers/producers working with a single artist, creating multiple output portfolios based on the client's needs and sending back hundreds of images the client can pick the best of and even request further iterations on. People will still be employed, but the quantity and quality of art will improve and the individual project art costs will likely stay the same.
Budgets likely won't change, just the amount of work you get back per $ spent will be going way up.
AI is not a problem "per se", it is only a tool. I might still hire an artist to do that stuff for me with the right prompts, I think. For now, I prefer using art made by people.
The danger is keeping AI in the hands of a few, through government regulation and monopolies, A really "free AI" could be great.
Of course, giving god-like powers to AI will likely destroy humanity. But using it as a tool for RPGs might be very positive.
While DAZ/Poser is uncanny valley stuff. It is great for setting up control nets. I used a random DAZ image to make a canny and depth field control nets and then told Stable Diffusion to render from that. Here's the results of three different model sets using the same prompt. Very consistent pose/composition, gotta love the control that I get over the AI to play with the render style and make the images that I want. AI collaboration is the way forward.
(http://www.tangent-zero.com/files/daz_test_SD01.png) (http://www.tangent-zero.com/files/daz_test_SD02.png) (http://www.tangent-zero.com/files/daz_test_SD03.png)
We tried to find an artist. The only people we could find who listed prices we could afford and whose art we liked, we are pretty sure are using AI art. (They offer unlimited changes for no change in cost.) A close second was photomanipulators.
If/when we make actual money at this, we did find some very professional, very expensive people.
We do not have time to spend days and days wasting our time asking people who won't post prices (or if they do commercial work) what they would charge for something. Especially for a low-end request.
We spent several days looking for an artist. In less than that amount of time, I installed Stable Diffusion (https://github.com/cmdr2/stable-diffusion-ui#installation) grabbed 3-4 alternative models from Civitai, and we made what we needed.
And it looks pretty good.
We've pretty much said, we'll just look at artist alley at conventions not stress about it. Professional RPG publishers I've talked to indicated they find one or two people they can afford and deliver, and use just them until they die or leave the market.
Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 22, 2023, 06:38:09 PM
I'm going to say something unpopular (nothing new on my end):
Unless you can prove a particular AI is plagiarizing artists IDGAFF if it's "ethical" or not.
I'm not sure what you mean by "plagiarizing".
What I see artists complain about is the AI being trained by using their art. I don't see it much different than a human copying other people's art to learn how it works. But then, I'm also not much of an artist. I see this as different from creating art and marketing it as by some artist when an AI did it. Something I haven't actually seen people do -- even though I'm sure someone has.
It's easy to determine what was using in training since the big AI projects all have their training datasets online. And they did pretty much scrape the internet for any available art for training.
Where I think the copyright office got it wrong (they said AI art can't be copyrighted, only configurations of AI art) is that getting the prompts right to create the image you want is a lot of original creative work. It isn't "just random". You should see some of the huge positive and negative prompt lists people use to generate particular pictures. Yes, a beginner can brute force it, but a lot of the experts don't.
Quote from: Tod13 on March 23, 2023, 04:01:04 PM
It's easy to determine what was using in training since the big AI projects all have their training datasets online. And they did pretty much scrape the internet for any available art for training.
You'd think so, except AI is also trained by AI images. For example, Adobe is making a big deal that all their Firefly training is on "copyright respected" material they own via Adobe Stock. Except artists have been using Midjourney and SD to create Adobe Stock art:
(https://preview.redd.it/ya7xwguu9ipa1.png?width=386&auto=webp&v=enabled&s=046035f1a4d5ef08c607646fa2150d2f79b52790)
AI training AI is also about to get a lot more common. Stanford just released Alpaca which used GPT-3 to train their model up to being about as good as that model. GPT-3 was like $4 million to train, training up Llama using GPT-3 took $600 and a few hours.
Quote from: Dracones on March 23, 2023, 04:31:20 PM
Quote from: Tod13 on March 23, 2023, 04:01:04 PM
It's easy to determine what was using in training since the big AI projects all have their training datasets online. And they did pretty much scrape the internet for any available art for training.
You'd think so, except AI is also trained by AI images. For example, Adobe is making a big deal that all their Firefly training is on "copyright respected" material they own via Adobe Stock. Except artists have been using Midjourney and SD to create Adobe Stock art:
(https://preview.redd.it/ya7xwguu9ipa1.png?width=386&auto=webp&v=enabled&s=046035f1a4d5ef08c607646fa2150d2f79b52790)
AI training AI is also about to get a lot more common. Stanford just released Alpaca which used GPT-3 to train their model up to being about as good as that model. GPT-3 was like $4 million to train, training up Llama using GPT-3 took $600 and a few hours.
Cool. I hadn't seen that. I'd be more impressed if they actually posted the database, since "openly licensed content" is kind of vague. *shrugs* I figure anything you post on the internet will get used for whatever they finder decides to do with it anyway.
The Alpaca web site has been taken down for, among other reasons, toxicity (I guess it's not properly censored to spew only leftard talking points. https://www.theregister.com/2023/03/21/stanford_ai_alpaca_taken_offline/ (https://www.theregister.com/2023/03/21/stanford_ai_alpaca_taken_offline/)
But do not despair, the whole thing can be run on your PC Or so this article claims) https://medium.com/geekculture/writing-a-medium-article-using-ai-stanford-alpaca-running-on-your-local-pc-e025416a032a (https://medium.com/geekculture/writing-a-medium-article-using-ai-stanford-alpaca-running-on-your-local-pc-e025416a032a)
In case you want to download and install it has the instructions in an easy to follow format.
Here's the repo: https://github.com/tatsu-lab/stanford_alpaca (https://github.com/tatsu-lab/stanford_alpaca)
This one claims to have a "cleaned" Data set: https://github.com/gururise/AlpacaDataCleaned (https://github.com/gururise/AlpacaDataCleaned)
I already downloaded it and will try to run it locally.
I painstakingly drew all 45 students for my latest RPG module, one at a time, one per day, and while AI had nothing to do with it, I look back on my efforts and am really proud of what i did. It's no DaVinci, but the sweat that went into doing it myself makes it all look glorious in my eyes. (https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/890643086848430180/1088630609368338503/Freshmen_of_1985_md.jpg)
Quote from: Cathode Ray on March 23, 2023, 09:09:40 PM
I painstakingly drew all 45 students for my latest RPG module, one at a time, one per day, and while AI had nothing to do with it, I look back on my efforts and am really proud of what i did. It's no DaVinci, but the sweat that went into doing it myself makes it all look glorious in my eyes. (https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/890643086848430180/1088630609368338503/Freshmen_of_1985_md.jpg)
I would pay for this as I need NPC portraits for my projects.
Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 22, 2023, 06:38:09 PM
I'm going to say something unpopular (nothing new on my end):
Unless you can prove a particular AI is plagiarizing artists IDGAFF if it's "ethical" or not.
Furthermore I am fully onboard, for someone like me who doesn't have the money to hire artists it's a valid option over using the same public domain art everybody else has already used. It's going to empower people to produce higher quality products.
We have caught a couple now. Some are way easier to spot than others.
Af for art theft. These things are very NOT using only public domain art. They are pulling from DA and everything else they can find.
Quote from: jeff37923 on March 24, 2023, 06:10:19 AM
Quote from: Cathode Ray on March 23, 2023, 09:09:40 PM
I painstakingly drew all 45 students for my latest RPG module, one at a time, one per day, and while AI had nothing to do with it, I look back on my efforts and am really proud of what i did. It's no DaVinci, but the sweat that went into doing it myself makes it all look glorious in my eyes. (https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/890643086848430180/1088630609368338503/Freshmen_of_1985_md.jpg)
I would pay for this as I need NPC portraits for my projects.
I am flattared! However, these NPCs are for my Radical High module's character profiles, and all belong to my own RPG.
(https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/890643086848430180/1088795630123618344/Freshman_Orientation_sm_02.jpg)
Never mind. Read wrong post together. Sorry.
Apologies Omega. All I can say is it is late in the work week, and my brain is fried.
I've been using Stable Diffusion for some time. The argument that it infringes on artworks it was trained on is...wrong. I can experimentally prove it, and you can replicate the experiment I used to do so if you doubt me.
I took a random image post with workflow off the Stable Diffusion reddit, copied the information on the model, prompt, and seed, and told my 3090 to make 40 copies of that exact image. Not only were the images not identical to the source image, but it's questionable if any of them were infringeably similar to each other.
THIS was the original: https://www.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/100tp0v/protogenx34_has_absolutely_amazing_detail/
This is my output batch: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1H3EkD1DQ7kToEyHspbLf6a--vOYJ730m/view?usp=share_link
And remember, this was a batch of 40 images with the same model, prompt, and seed. This is as close to generating identical images as Stable Diffusion can manage. My point is that AI generated art is not Minecraft. Identical seeds and prompts do not necessarily produce identical results. Not all models are like Protogen here and generate different images from the same seed, but many are. And, of course, if you're talking recreating an image the AI was trained on, you would expect at least this much inconsistency; generated images must start from a noise seed, but training images created by a human by definition do not have a seed.
Incidents like recreating Iranian Girl, Green Eyes are almost certainly the product of cloud services trying to shave their hardware rental costs by scraping images off a google search and putting it through an Image to Image filter, which is a completely different method of image generation and isn't guaranteed to produce non-infringing results.
This puts the art community in a situation where it's basically impossible to tell if an artwork was made or enhanced via AI and it's impossible to tell what artworks went into training an AI without the creators self-incriminating.
At the moment the US Copyright Office says that AI artworks are not copyrightable, but exactly what that means is up for some debate. A lot of artists use AI to enhance their workflows so where human art ends and AI generated begins is quite a gray area. I think that this isn't really a thought-through position; it's more an attempt to scare businesses away from AI by saying they have no copyright protections. But if it stands in court, that would mean you can use a private AI model and the artworks it generates are copyright-free, meaning you can train another AI with them and the second AI can be used for commercial purposes provided you don't care about defending your copyright. Because the artworks it was trained on are not copyrightable.
Like I said, not a terribly well thought through policy.
Quote from: Omega on March 24, 2023, 07:16:59 AM
Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 22, 2023, 06:38:09 PM
I'm going to say something unpopular (nothing new on my end):
Unless you can prove a particular AI is plagiarizing artists IDGAFF if it's "ethical" or not.
Furthermore I am fully onboard, for someone like me who doesn't have the money to hire artists it's a valid option over using the same public domain art everybody else has already used. It's going to empower people to produce higher quality products.
We have caught a couple now. Some are way easier to spot than others.
Af for art theft. These things are very NOT using only public domain art. They are pulling from DA and everything else they can find.
By that metric, nearly all art is theft. Everyone is
copying I'm sorry "taking inspiration from" someone else.
Quote from: Corolinth on March 26, 2023, 10:26:49 AMBy that metric, nearly all art is theft. Everyone is copying I'm sorry "taking inspiration from" someone else.
Correct.
"Art is theft." -- Pablo Picasso
"Nothing is original. Steal from anywhere that resonates with inspiration or fuels your imagination." -- Jim Jarmusch
"Art is too important not to share." -- Romero Britto
"You've got to embrace the future. You can whine about it, but you've got to embrace it." -- Matt Groening
Quote from: zircher on March 26, 2023, 01:50:36 PM"You've got to embrace the future. You can whine about it, but you've got to embrace it." -- Matt Groening
"Also, tune in for season 34 of The Simpsons!" - Matt Groening