When online commenters detect my art as AI
Posted by Jare 1 day ago
Comments
Comment by johannesrexx 4 hours ago
Those same people feel that they can detect AI-generated works?
Those same people have the audacity to spread their uninformed opinions online?
Those same people are spreading their harmful opinionated content online, actually causing real harm to real artists.
This proves the old adage that opinions are like assholes, everybody has one and they stink.
I've been following David Revoy for years and purchased his Pepper & Carrot books, long before machine learning and large language models got into the hands of unskilled people. He is right to complain.
Comment by wjnc 1 day ago
His work I is what I would describe as somewhat middle of the road Fantasy / SciFi Pop art. The deviant art of old, or even before, the art that would cover the scifi magazine. It’s an amalgam of styles and interests from the nerdy spectrum, obviously done with great care by the artist. Problem is with middle of the road is that that’s where the LLM averages out. Not flaming the artist at all, these are lovely works, but an average of lots of pop art / interests. I don’t think he will lose his livelihood - art by commission will stay a thing. For poster and promo work, that’s gone probably.
Comment by armchairhacker 17 hours ago
Comment by Retr0id 15 hours ago
Comment by armchairhacker 13 hours ago
Comment by tomasphan 2 hours ago
Comment by cwmoore 14 hours ago
Comment by throwaway314155 18 hours ago
With respect, you totally are. Call it what it is - your honest criticism/opinion. Calling their work “middle of the road” and then saying they can’t get certain jobs then trying to pretend you’re being nice is just dishonest.
Comment by wjnc 14 hours ago
But if that pinnacle lies on the average of a lot of types of (pop and non pop) music the LLM might give a sound that at first glance sounds like a specific artist.
The Backstreet Boys (and One Direction as well) were pretty good (lol) but any average of boybands will sound like them. That is not a digg on their artistry but on them being the middle of the road in pop.
AI classical will sound romantic? AI rock will sound Three Doors Down? AI art will be deviant like (but there still can be true artistry in that category). That /I/ usually like arts at least a standard deviation away of the middle, is just my snobbery, which I was trying to explain away because in my opinion artistry is in the craftsmanship (not taste of the public).
Comment by BigTTYGothGF 9 hours ago
The worst to my eye is the Alice in Wonderland one. What's going on with Alice's hair? What's the tea on the left being poured into? What kind of playing card has a 'C' (it can't be a messy Q as the figure on it is male) and why is there only half a heart there? What's with club on the jack next to it? What exactly is that black bird doing? (It's been a long time since I've read the books, what bird is that anyway?) How does the flamingo's body work? Is Alice sitting on it? Why are there buttons on both sides of the White Rabbit's coat, and why is it shaped differently on the left and right?
Comment by heaney-555 7 hours ago
Comment by jhbadger 16 hours ago
Comment by badc0ffee 13 hours ago
Comment by jhbadger 11 hours ago
Comment by Gander5739 11 hours ago
Comment by po1nt 16 hours ago
Comment by rf15 1 day ago
Comment by remuskaos 15 hours ago
Mad respect for that. I've donated a couple of bucks.
Comment by ashleyn 14 hours ago
Comment by GPerson 12 hours ago
Comment by anr0 1 day ago
i find it's actually easier to "discover" than it is to "create" using llms. discovery, especially in math, is mostly a question of throwing compute at a problem and trying different results. there's a verifiable answer at the end. but there's no way (afaik) to aim something you're training via RL at a creative problem and say "make the next lord of the rings". taste literally changes by the day, and so much of what makes art matter depends on cultural significance you can't specify in advance. if you were training a music model in 1915, it would never come up with rock and roll. it's so hard to know what's going to resonate. van gogh was making his work for essentially nobody and now it's worth millions. you can't pre-load a success criteria for that
i think this is important to call out in a world that seems to devalue creative work now. people think llm generated "artifacts" are creative but in reality it's garbage and based on pattern recognition
Comment by ncr100 1 day ago
Watch a time lapse illustration video here: https://www.peppercarrot.com/0_sources/miniFantasyTheater/ma...
Comment by bjconlan 18 hours ago
Comment by anakaine 10 hours ago
Comment by MrVandemar 1 day ago
Creative work is now so devalued the instinct when most people see something is to believe that nobody put the work in and it was generated, because that's suddenly the overwhelming majority of "art" we are seeing. It's horrifying.
Comment by vouaobrasil 22 hours ago
Comment by fwlr 1 day ago
In this world, however, AI companies have been permitted to cause this massive tragedy of the commons, and they are the ones we should reserve our epithets for.
Comment by SukadarBukadar 1 day ago
Comment by blargey 1 day ago
Comment by jwitthuhn 1 day ago
Comment by kbelder 8 hours ago
Comment by LocalH 1 day ago
Comment by account42 19 hours ago
Comment by acdha 15 hours ago
Comment by tanseydavid 13 hours ago
Comment by ronsor 1 day ago
Comment by Retr0id 15 hours ago
Comment by AlienRobot 1 day ago
None of these accusers seem to have done the bare minimum of Googling the artist's name before starting making accusations. I don't know if it's laziness or just lack of tech literacy that pervades the modern world, but it's very sad to see it.
Don't let it get to you. They are all saying things without thinking.
Comment by unintelligibled 17 hours ago
I remember seeing his Yin and Yang piece especially trending on deviantart maybe 2010 to 2012, he was really well known and no doubt his was among the material scraped for training models.
Comment by ButlerianJihad 1 day ago
Comment by raincole 1 day ago
Comment by sayamqazi 1 day ago
Comment by AlienRobot 1 day ago
Comment by redsymbol 8 hours ago
Comment by avaer 18 hours ago
I was very surprised, so I'd look up Y and find it was just someone charging for a product based on my code. And people in the community would accuse me of stealing.
I've seen this scenario play out with several of my friends too.
This isn't a new phenomenon, AI just makes for a more efficient laundry. Nobody cares, and nobody does their research. The tech industry is full of psychopaths glad to piggy back on your work and find loopholes to get away with it.
It's one of the reasons I'm not so keen on open source anymore. I'm glad to do free work, but being accused of theft while people make money off it is not a great reward. Probably a lot of creatives are feeling the same right now.
Comment by cloudie78 16 hours ago
Point and laugh at them, and move on. They don’t matter, they’re idiots.
Source: I’m a dumbass.
Comment by iammjm 22 hours ago
Comment by jdw64 1 day ago
Comment by chrisjj 20 hours ago
Comment by mxmilkiib 16 hours ago
Comment by account42 19 hours ago
Comment by dev_hugepages 20 hours ago
Comment by RetroTechie 8 hours ago
Before AI, the only question was who made a particular artwork. Human-created practically a certainty.
When AI-generated art was new, it was all exiting & the process described to boast about AI capabilities or the skills of people deploying AI. But human-created still the default assumption.
Now, AI-generated <anything> is everywhere, and that default assumption of "human-created" is often questioned.
The natural next step is "AI-generated" as default assumption, unless claimed / shown (or even proven) otherwise.
Imho: assumption is the root of all evil. Investigate! Or take an author's word for it unless they're shown to be a liar. But as another commenter noted, it's a kind of tragedy of the commons. Methods to prove you as a human created <artwork> will be a thing.
Comment by zkmon 16 hours ago
When a machine weaves fabric, no point in sticking to handloom and sell it as handicraft. Use powerloom and add your artistry on top of it.
Comment by RugnirViking 15 hours ago
If you have a soul and aren't an awful creature that sees the world as a series of zero sum interactions, other concerns play into this. Things like you actually enjoy the work or you feel proud of making the piece or you care that every last detail is as perfect as you are able to make it.
Now I won't say that it's never right to use AI (goodness knows I do). But its totally wrong to suggest there is "no point" in ever doing things a different way from the cheapest possible technology
Comment by sjoedev 15 hours ago
We have video cameras and movies, yet stage actors on Broadway are celebrated like movie stars. People still read books. We have cameras and photoshop, yet a huge market still exists for oil on canvas. We have synthesizers, drum kits, and all the tools we need to make music on a computer, yet live concerts with guitars and drums sell millions of tickets annually. We have the technology to deliver payloads on another continent with millimeter precision, yet every few years, the whole world gathers to watch people who have trained a lifetime to run, jump, and throw stones.
“The old way is dead” doesn’t hold up in the arts like it does in the sciences. Technology moves on, but humans are the same. You can inspire and awe us today using the same tools and methods that were used hundreds or thousands of years ago.
Comment by yesterdayjones 1 hour ago
AI has removed the human element entirely. This is a paradigm shift, and there's more merit in bemoaning using AI to wholesale generate a "photo" than there ever was in a film photographer bemoaning digital.
Comment by AlienRobot 13 hours ago