TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

AI-generated content: Legality, ethics, and the nature of art

Go To

Figured that since it's the new big thing sweeping the globe, and how it'll likely have a profound impact on media going forward, I decided to open up a thread specifically to discuss the topic of AI art generators like Dall-E, Midjourney, and the like.

It's a polarizing subject, but I think there's merit in debating the various issues surrounding it.

Such issues include "is it ethical for AI art generators to be trained on data scraped together from copyrighted works, and how is it different from humans getting inspiration from art?" and "what do you see as the future of commercial artistic endeavors going forward (comics, game asset creation, animation, etc)?"

EDIT: Expanding the topic to all forms of AI-generated art, including creative writing and music composition.


There's also a more general thread for discussion of AI as a whole.

Edited by Mrph1 on Jun 22nd 2024 at 11:56:23 AM

editerguy from Australia Since: Jan, 2013 Relationship Status: You cannot grasp the true form
#276: Dec 11th 2022 at 9:26:53 PM

Taking things in a different direction, K-pop: The rise of the virtual girl bands

According to the article, the photo-realistic faces of Eternity's members were created by deep learning tech company Pulse9. An interesting process was used to create them.

Initially the company generated 101 fantasy faces, dividing them into four categories according to their charms: cute, sexy, innocent and intelligent.

Fans were asked to vote on their favourites. In-house designers then set to work animating the winning characters according to the preferences of the fans.

For live chats, videos and online fan meets, the avatar faces can be projected onto anonymous singers, actors and dancers, contracted in by Pulse9.

The technology acts like a deepfake filter, bringing the characters to life.

Kind of a 'Choose Your Own Idol' idea. Something about the voting strikes me as rather creepy.

Edited by editerguy on Dec 12th 2022 at 4:29:15 AM

RainehDaze Nero Fangirl (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
Nero Fangirl
#277: Dec 11th 2022 at 9:56:27 PM

It's an industry that's creepy from top to bottom.

editerguy from Australia Since: Jan, 2013 Relationship Status: You cannot grasp the true form
#278: Dec 11th 2022 at 10:09:40 PM

Even Harry Potter and the Portrait of What Looked Like a Large Pile of Ash?

Edited by editerguy on Dec 12th 2022 at 5:10:14 AM

RainehDaze Nero Fangirl (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
Nero Fangirl
#279: Dec 11th 2022 at 10:21:45 PM

No, I meant idols.

editerguy from Australia Since: Jan, 2013 Relationship Status: You cannot grasp the true form
indigoJay from The Astral Plane Since: Dec, 2018 Relationship Status: watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ
#281: Dec 12th 2022 at 3:38:38 PM

But one benefit of commissioning an artist is communication - if there's an issue with the product (like, say, a character's face not looking quite right), you can request adjustments.

Which is something you can't really do when it comes to those art generators.

This is simply not true. Other people have mentioned that you can simply restart with different prompts, but there are even more effective ways to implement changes. Many generators have "morph" options (just not DALLE, which is the most popular) where you can request specific changes to an already-generated images. I've seen tons of people taking those anime generations and merely drawing a couple lines and re-inputting them to get the very specific changes they want.

If you're sticking with human artists, all the power to you. I certainly understand the inclination. But it's simply not accurate to claim AI is bad at making changes.

There is no war in Ba Sing Se.
Chortleous she/her friend to the hooved (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: She does the things you do, but she is an IBM
she/her friend to the hooved
#282: Dec 13th 2022 at 7:43:46 PM

I will grant that AI can make granular changes (though you haven't detailed how that works in practice or how specific it can get, or how aware it is of context, which I'd think would be pretty important), but your last point seems to insinuate that human artists are on the way out, very much "if that's what you want to do, then that's cool I guess". I'd be curious to see what AI art devolves into when you cut humans out of the equation entirely and it just starts inbreeding and feeding off of itself for long enough.

Wonder why that never comes up? Because it can't be avoided. This technology is irrevocably built off of real peoples' work and as I have mentioned here before, proponents like to get tetchy whenever this comes up.

Edited by Chortleous on Dec 13th 2022 at 9:47:58 AM

Tremmor19 he/him (Y2: Electric Boogaloo)
he/him
#283: Dec 13th 2022 at 8:53:06 PM

I feel like theres a tendancy in this thread to lump any positive viewpoints on this together under the header of "pro ai art" along with a few NFT bros who are claiming were all gonna be replaced with computers by next tuesday. Like I havent actually seen anyone in here, even the people that think its pretty damn cool, say that AI art is going to replace human artists, or that we want to "cut human artists out of the loop entirely".

I think most people are just saying that, for a lot of purposes, this stuff is hitting a level where its actually good enough to be useful instead of just a novelty (look, ma, no inner consciousness!). I redid all of my dnd character art in stable diffusion— would it look better if i paid a professional? Yes! Was I ever going to do that? Nope! Previously I was using my own kinda-shitty pencil drawings.

(And I do get the ethical concerns, honestly. Im not sure what the ideal solution is. But, just on a personal level, my reaction? This tech is so cool.)

Edited by Tremmor19 on Dec 14th 2022 at 4:38:26 AM

alnair20aug93 🍊orange fursona🧡 from 🐾Furrypines 🇵🇭 (Long Runner) Relationship Status: Chocolate!
🍊orange fursona🧡
#284: Dec 13th 2022 at 9:51:56 PM

I don't know if this could be related here, but I have tried to input my real name on Craiyon, and suffice to say, it looked less of me, and more of a 19th century bearded dude.

I usually don't upload my real face on the Internet, and what you said about AI art, it's incredible and scary at the same time that a computer can produce an artwork in seconds, yet it still needs a human to prompt for ideas and to fine tune the rough patches.

ᜇᜎᜈ᜔ᜇᜈ᜔|I DO COMMISSIONS|ᜇᜎᜈ᜔ᜇᜈ᜔
editerguy from Australia Since: Jan, 2013 Relationship Status: You cannot grasp the true form
#285: Dec 13th 2022 at 10:13:11 PM

I find it all quite fascinating. Not from the perspective of an advocate or detractor, but for me it triggers a lot of curiosity.

Tremmor19 he/him (Y2: Electric Boogaloo)
he/him
#286: Dec 14th 2022 at 12:22:04 AM

[up] Its really impressive what can be accomplished with just remixing human art, no base understanding of the outside world. (and, conversely, which seemingly easy things it struggles with) It really given an insight imo into how we see art and how our brains might be making these creative decisions

like in the same way that photography made photorealism less of the Most Important Art Style and led to the rise of things like impressionism and surrealism, I think that there will be a movement in art styles as we start being more aware of the distinction between "artistic creativity" and "being able to render images accurately"

Edited by Tremmor19 on Dec 14th 2022 at 2:19:00 PM

indigoJay from The Astral Plane Since: Dec, 2018 Relationship Status: watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ
#287: Dec 14th 2022 at 7:57:32 AM

your last point seems to insinuate that human artists are on the way out, very much "if that's what you want to do, then that's cool I guess". I'd be curious to see what AI art devolves into when you cut humans out of the equation entirely and it just starts inbreeding and feeding off of itself for long enough.

I don't think human art is on the way out. I certainly think it will change. Just as realism became less popular when photography became accessible, generic anime commissions will probably become less lucrative now that AI is accessible.

I think there are good reasons to buy from humans. Personally, I buy art from my friends because it holds special value. I just think people should be realistic when they're giving their logic for boycotting AI. Sentimental value, empathy for human artists, and uniqueness are all good reasons to pick people. "AI makes rigid art" is not.

There is no war in Ba Sing Se.
Tremmor19 he/him (Y2: Electric Boogaloo)
he/him
#288: Dec 14th 2022 at 11:23:43 AM

[up] character consistency, too, at least for now. there's a few ways you can try, but no really good way to say "ok, take this exact same character you just drew, and put them in a different drawing" (unless you're willing to use the actual same picture at the same angle etc) same with setting, and style unless you copy an exact artist

also, ai struggles greatly with more complicated interactions between elements, particularly uncommon ones (see the Horse Rides Astronaut problem).

Also, emotional, expressive cartoons are flat-out untouched. like, not even close, humans win this one

.... basically if you are an artist who primarily works creates a few very specific, fairly repetitive art types (painted background landscapes, or big titty anime girl commissions i guess) then yea this is a serious threat. Otherwise? its a neat tool, but it can't do what you can do

Edited by Tremmor19 on Dec 14th 2022 at 2:38:25 PM

Tremmor19 he/him (Y2: Electric Boogaloo)
he/him
#289: Dec 14th 2022 at 11:35:06 AM

Actually, if anything, this has made me way more aware of how cool cartooning is and how much genuine creativity and understanding it requires

https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/av0edz27jk131.jpg
Cavin and Hobbes, by Bill Watterson, known human

https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/dalle_2022_12_14_141831_a_boy_looking_shocked_to_realize_his_mother_had_been_replaced_by_a_puppet_drawing_cartoon_in_the_style_of_bill_watterson.png
"a boy looking shocked to realize his mother had been replaced by a puppet, drawing, cartoon, in the style of Bill Watterson"


This is the best cartoon i got out of twenty generations trying different AI to see which one did best, changing up the prompt, etc. If anyone can get a better one, please share

Edited by Tremmor19 on Dec 14th 2022 at 5:00:08 AM

editerguy from Australia Since: Jan, 2013 Relationship Status: You cannot grasp the true form
#290: Dec 14th 2022 at 4:49:18 PM

@Tremmor19

Yeah, I agree with you about the difference between "artistic creativity" and "being able to render images accurately".

When an artist can express their emotion or their experiences through their art, it has depth that an AI can't match.

Also, art with depth has meaning to the artist.

I'm kind of reminded of Vincent Van Gogh, who painted even though his art was worthless in his lifetime. There's a depth to his artwork that comes from a very human, emotional way of seeing the world. He wasn't making money, but something drove him to persist. AI art is interesting, but it really is a different type of thing.

indigoJay from The Astral Plane Since: Dec, 2018 Relationship Status: watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ
#292: Dec 15th 2022 at 12:05:56 PM

[up] & [up][up][up] Yeah, consistency and facial emotion are things to go to humans for. I think illustrators are probably safe for now. Those who do character design might lose business to AI, but full-suite illustration for games and books is locked off.

[up][up] I'm not sure that's entirely true. Obviously art is subjective, but I think both humans and AI have their hits and misses when it comes to emotion. Van Gogh's Vase with Fifteen Sunflowers does not communicate emotion to me. This random image I made on a shitty generator a year ago does.[[https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/neon_prose.jpg

I guess it's a question of whether expressing the artists' emotions is more valuable than evoking emotion in the viewer. I don't think AI threatens any artists' ability to express their emotions—like others have mentioned, you can do that without selling your art for money.

I also think that people picking apart bad AI art is an interesting phenomenon. It's valuable for artists to show the public exactly how AI is worse than them. At the same time, it almost feels like a target for negativity that would never be acceptable to take out on a human competitor. Maybe it's actually a good thing for developing human artists that there's a new target for internet pettiness.

There is no war in Ba Sing Se.
editerguy from Australia Since: Jan, 2013 Relationship Status: You cannot grasp the true form
#293: Dec 15th 2022 at 4:13:47 PM

[up] I'm saying that there is value in an artist expressing their emotion and experience through art, regardless of how the audience perceives it. Van Gogh is an example because when he was alive, the people around him did not value his art at all. It had value as personal expression independent of that.

AI art is a different phenomenon in that sense.

AI can't express emotion or experience because it doesn't have any, so I think it's a good reminder for creative people to think beyond aesthetics and draw from more personal sources of inspiration.

My point was about the creation side.

Ultimatum Disasturbator from The Wiggle Room (Old as dirt) Relationship Status: Who needs love when you have waffles?
Disasturbator
#294: Dec 15th 2022 at 4:18:47 PM

By the way there's a protest against AI Art going on Artstation.com (very important website to professional artists)

The protest is to due how AI are trained to generate images based off what works are fed to them,this is course leading to rampant art theft

have a listen and have a link to my discord server
Imca (Veteran)
#295: Dec 15th 2022 at 6:27:08 PM

Wonder why that never comes up? Because it can't be avoided. This technology is irrevocably built off of real peoples' work and as I have mentioned here before, proponents like to get tetchy whenever this comes up.

It only built off peoples work in the sense that AI needs an absolute fuck tone of data to work right, and trawling google is about the only way to get the amount of data needed in a feasible way that isn't just going to end with an AI that cant recognize black people or women as people... yes this was a legitimate issue earlier generations of AI had, because most of the data sourcing was internal.... Microsoft is noted here since its AI could only recognize White and Indian men.... because it trained them with its employees.

Tangent aside, at the end of it it doesn't mater if the AI starts feeding into itself, its still able to learn from that, and in fact produce better and better results, self feeding is how more advanced AI's have too and already DO work.

Let me re-frame it for you using a non artistic AI, the US Airforce has an AI called ALPHA, ALPHA is notable for the fact that no pilot has been able to shoot it down over its course, not even a single time... so its already a better pilot then humans are.... right okay, so how do you train ALPHA if you cant use human generated data? do you just call it a day and accept that its better then human pilots and doesn't need improvement?

No, ALPHA is trained.... by ALPHA.... you take multiple copies of the AI each with minor changes, you throw them into what is essentially an AI battle royal, andd the one that does the best moves on, and has the changes thus made to it, and the process repeats itself... in what is essentially a computer based equivalent of Darwinian evolution.

Back-porting this, eventually you will reach a point where it is no longer feasible to train with human data like you noted, but that isn't a problem once you have a large install base, you just need a method to judge what is "improved" over the last generation of program and what isn't... the questions becomes one of how your going to do that when it reaches that point.

Probably the most realistic one is filtering for engagement, watching which variants produce output that people like the most, then taking those ones and making iterations on them.

Edited by Imca on Dec 15th 2022 at 6:29:41 AM

editerguy from Australia Since: Jan, 2013 Relationship Status: You cannot grasp the true form
#296: Dec 15th 2022 at 6:41:05 PM

[up] I was wondering about engagement. If people share or download certain types of images, at least in theory AI could learn from that to better interpret its future instructions, right?

Imca (Veteran)
#297: Dec 15th 2022 at 6:43:57 PM

Correct, though I honestly doubt it will be that simple.... your training program is honestly the most complicated part of the program that is even human comprehensible.

Like those will be the factors, among.... who knows what else... Artistic AI are not the type I worked with and I am not being paid to sit down and concept this....

Edited by Imca on Dec 15th 2022 at 6:45:19 AM

RainehDaze Nero Fangirl (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
Nero Fangirl
#298: Dec 15th 2022 at 6:58:25 PM

The problem with refining an art AI that develops beyond replicating human creation is generating a fitness function that can be automated. Otherwise, every training step has to go through human feedback first... which slows it to a crawl.

Addendum to the recognition problems: you also have to deal with the biases inherent in the public's perception of things. It's something that image recognition has a massive problem with—gender balance amongst recognising certain professions, for instance, or what adjectives get paired with different minorities.

Imca (Veteran)
#299: Dec 15th 2022 at 7:20:04 PM

Yea human feedback does slow it, but it doesnt stop it.

See youtube.

RainehDaze Nero Fangirl (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
Nero Fangirl
#300: Dec 15th 2022 at 7:25:51 PM

I think the slowdown would be drastically slower if it's not part of basic functionality that is constantly receiving input, though. And you run into the usual problems of ML updates—making the batch sizes per-update too big tends to be surprisingly bad for learning, but you can't move onto the next training step until you've got the prior updates that adjust its output. Interesting problem to work on once the whole 'can we get it to do good hands' thing is addressed, tbh.


Total posts: 4,572
Top