This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Quote from: cascoly on January 18, 2023, 20:07me too (in the 1%)!!!Quote from: ADH on January 18, 2023, 17:37
Adobe, over 500k AI images for sale, 99% will never be sold because there is little or no use for them. By the end of the year, following the actual trend of uploads, it will be 5 millions for sale. When do you think Adobe will start charging for uploading AI generated garbage into their portal?
your source for any of those claims?
guess i'm finally part of the 1% since my AI images have sold on AS, SS and DT
Quote from: derby on January 18, 2023, 13:58
Ok so time to play game :-)
I've asked to chatGPT news and opinions about copyright issue.
I started with this post, and put exactly the same terms:Quote from: BelieveInStock on January 13, 2023, 13:52ANSWER FROM ChatGPT:
I was wondering if the AI image is just a mosaic of tiny parts of other images, or does it "paint" a new image from scratch ? For instance let's say we have a prompt where the main subject is a cat. Is it possible that an eye or nose of that cat is just taken from some photograph in the internet ?QuoteArtificial Intelligence (AI) image generation models can use a variety of techniques to generate new images. Some models use a mosaic-like approach, where they combine small parts of existing images to create a new image. Other models, such as Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs), are trained to generate new images from scratch.
In the case of GANs, the model is trained on a large dataset of images and learns to generate new images that are similar to the ones in the training set. The model learns to understand the features and patterns of the images in the dataset, and uses that knowledge to generate new images.
In regards to your question about the cat image: It's possible that the model takes small parts of existing images and combines them to generate the cat image, but it's also possible that the model generates the cat from scratch using the knowledge it has acquired during the training stage. The specific technique used depends on the architecture of the model, the quality of the data set used for training, and the specific task the model is being used for.
It is worth mentioning that GANs and other similar models are able to generate very realistic images, but it is not always possible to know if a specific image was generated by the model or taken from a real photograph, it is quite hard to tell.
A little be boring but useful.
Then I asked:
Try to fight back against the copyright issue a lot of people claim against AI generated images. Let me know what do you think
ANSWER:QuoteThere is ongoing debate around the issue of copyright for AI generated images. Some argue that AI generated images should be considered original works and therefore eligible for copyright protection, while others argue that they should not be eligible for copyright protection because they are not created by a human.Q: In which countries AI generated images are consiudered original works and are elegible for copyright?
Currently, the law on copyright for AI generated images varies by jurisdiction. In some countries, AI generated images may be considered original works and be eligible for copyright protection, while in other countries they may not be considered original works and not be eligible for copyright protection.
Additionally, it's worth mentioning that some AI generated images may include elements from existing copyrighted images, which could lead to copyright infringement issues. To avoid this, one approach could be to use images for training that are explicitly labeled as free for use, or to use images that are in the public domain or that have been licensed under a Creative Commons license.
In any case, it is important to note that the laws and regulations surrounding AI generated images and copyright are constantly evolving, and it is important to stay informed and consult legal experts when in doubt.Quotehe laws regarding whether AI generated images are considered original works and eligible for copyright protection vary by country. In some countries, AI generated images may be considered original works and be eligible for copyright protection, while in other countries they may not be considered original works and not be eligible for copyright protection.
In the United States, the Copyright Office has stated that works created by a machine or computer program are eligible for copyright protection if they are the result of human authorship. This means that if a human author contributes original expression to an AI-generated image, it could be eligible for copyright protection.
In the European Union, the Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market has established that a work is eligible for copyright protection as long as it is an original expression of the author's own intellectual creation. However, it is not clear whether this applies to AI generated works and it's still not clear how EU courts will interpret this.
In Canada, the Supreme Court has ruled that computer-generated works are eligible for copyright protection as long as they are original.
It is important to note that laws and regulations surrounding AI generated images and copyright are constantly evolving, and it is important to stay informed and consult legal experts when in doubt.
Interesting! Or not?
At least, ChatGPT seems to be quite neutral
Quote from: Her Ugliness on January 18, 2023, 12:06
Inspiration means that we humans see, read or hear someone else's work and then we are mentally stimulated by what we see or hear.
Quote from: Justanotherphotographer on January 18, 2023, 11:09we human make the same (in a smaller scale... ) but we call it inspiration or learning or whateverQuote from: gameover on January 18, 2023, 10:58Quote from: Lina on January 17, 2023, 01:58Have you seen the source?
First lawsuits against AI: https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/class-action-filed-against-stability-ai-midjourney-and-deviantart-for-dmca-violations-right-of-publicity-violations-unlawful-competition-breach-of-tos-301721869.html
If you read here
https://www.theverge.com/2023/1/16/23557098/generative-ai-art-copyright-legal-lawsuit-stable-diffusion-midjourney-deviantart
the law firm has no idea how AI works
Yeah weird. I would have gone for arguing that the AI company has made commercial use of images without a commercial licence or permission from the copyright owner (which they have, even if no storage or image retention is involved).
Whether storage of information obtained through studying people's images counts as infringement is, I guess, more iffy. Surely there's no doubt the "model" the AI has of what an object or person looks like is derived from the study of other people's copyright work, regardless of the level of processing involved, hence "21st-century collage tool" (yes, I do understand the original image isn't used in its original form but it IS process into information to create the "new" work).
Quote from: Lina on January 17, 2023, 01:58Have you seen the source?
First lawsuits against AI: https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/class-action-filed-against-stability-ai-midjourney-and-deviantart-for-dmca-violations-right-of-publicity-violations-unlawful-competition-breach-of-tos-301721869.html
Quote from: derby on January 11, 2023, 14:54Quote from: ravens on January 11, 2023, 04:32
Wonderful, Adobe & Mat! This new policy is totally in line with abolishing the bonus code for 2023. Screw human artists! Bring on the robots!
I don't think I'll bother with photography any more. I'll get an army of robots and train them to blab text commands to robotic AI software night and day. These smart robots will vacuum pics generated by other robots, re-order pixels and create brilliant new pictures. (some say that's crap but they're only jealous, and live under a rock or something) Soon I'll have a portfolio of 100 Million brilliant AI images on Adobe Stock. I will be so rich! I will buy a villa in some place tropical, heck, I will buy an island of my own! I will buy a luxury plane that makes royalty, presidents and celebs jealous!
Thank you Adobe, you made my day. Screw artists, Robots are our future.
I'm old enough to remeber quite similar comments in the 90's when digital cameras comes out for large consumer audience.
Using these words means you've really never tested the AI tools. It's super exciting; but it's absolutely not easy to generate real good images.
It's not easy to use.
It costs money and it costs a lot of time.
It's relatively easy to produce in random way some incredible images, but it's abosultely hard to manage the tool to produce series of images with steady style.
Of course it will be easier in the next future; and it will become also cheaper.
But, as for photography, you always have to start from a good idea, and you also need cultural, and technical, skills.
Back to Adobe: I think at the contrary that giving contributors the option to produce (and sell!) AI images is a great opportunities to partecipate in production; at the opposite, other agencies like SS seems that will cut contributors, pushing their clients to produce images by ourselves. In my opinion this last way is absolutely wrong, starting from the idea that anyone have clear idea and skill to create any image they need.
One last example I know very well: in movie production I come from times when editing was made with film, scissor, glue... with big pain and time lost. Digital non linear editing completely changed the game but directors always need good editor to work, also to make choices. To have a digital machine that gives you thousand option in a single second doesn't mean that you don't need human time anymore to make your decisions and choices. Machine is fast, human mind has its own timing.
Finally, AI development is impossible to stop: refusing it and complaining about AI is totally useless, it will be the next future for all of us
Quote from: BelieveInStock on January 13, 2023, 13:52A good start would be looking up "neural networks".
Does anyone know some good resources explaing how generative AI art works ?
QuoteNo, its derived from thousands of cat eyes (or whatever) used to build up a sort of 'concept' of cat's eye, and then drawing a new one accordingly. Which also accounts pretty well for the funny notion the AI seems to have of "hand"
I was wondering if the AI image is just a mosaic of tiny parts of other images, or does it "paint" a new image from scratch ? For instance let's say we have a prompt where the main subject is a cat. Is it possible that an eye or nose of that cat is just taken from some photograph in the internet ?
Quote from: Evaristo tenscadisto on January 12, 2023, 06:37excellent, well written 👏 👏Quote from: Her Ugliness on January 11, 2023, 18:28
These were technoligical advancements that helped you in your task. AI does the art for you. It's not a tool that helps an artist, it's a replacement.
Gameover explains some points with "AI friend or foe?", on her blog with a very brief history of art.
She calls our attention to the word 'artificial' with comes from the greek philosopher Aristotle in his Rhetoric: artificiality (the quality of being made or produced by human beings rather than occurring naturally.) - very nice!
AI is a tool (1) and cannot do "the Art for you" (2).
1) It's hard in a post to explain in detail such issue regarding onto-technologies of the body but let me try to put it in this way: AI is an extension of your body not a replacement. In the same way that you don't replace your hand with a brush, you use a brush to paint. The brush doesn't paint by itself - you need a human to do it. In AI generator you need to type and work with a prompt: sort of digital code that machine can process your request.
Henry Ward Beecher once wrote, "A tool is but the extension of a man's hand, and a machine is but a complex tool." This fits here in line of scientific research into "embodiment". But there's "disembodiment" in AI too. Which basically means that AI feeds on the output to become more efficient- it collects the data of your image to improve future Artworks. So AI is a Tool with "embodiment" and "disembodiment"features.
2) AI cannot do "art" for Humans. Art is a representation or presentation of an idea in a shape/form. AI doesn't have ideas of its own, Humans do. Therefore AI cannot do Art but can be extremely efficient in drawing, playing music, etc. Best alternative is that AI it's a performer conducted by an artist. A tool to improve your Artwork just like photoshop is using with mouse and clicks interface instead of a Prompt.Quote from: Her Ugliness on January 11, 2023, 18:28
A more correct comparison in advancement in technology would be for example a telephone and switchboard operators.
In my opinion that is a bad comparison because switchboard operators don't create ideas like artists. The task/job was simple connecting cables. They were a kind of cogwheel in a communication system. New technologies made it faster, better and cheaper than humans. Now we all use a Smartphone with social media.
We don't have switchboard operators anymore but how much people you think have been hired in communication companies and social media (youtube, facebook, twitter, tiktok, instagram, whatsup, signal, etc) last 20 years?
None of social media companies existed before 2004 and according to google there are 142,282 people employed in the Social Networking Sites industry in the US as of 2023. Let's not forget about UGC creators which in fact creates everyday content and get paid to feed the channel by social media, ads or product reviews...so a lot jobs here too.Quote from: Her Ugliness on January 11, 2023, 18:28
I am not saying AI will replace all art, but it will certainly cause a decrease in artists when they have a harder time to make a living from art (which was already difficult before AI art!) as AI is cheaper and microstock photography and drawings are the easiest replaced by AIs and the first to go.
Things are evolving so to expect this market not to change is to stand still in time. I do agree at some point with Gameover analysis where "plenty of 'artists' will inevitably lose their jobs as soon as their customers learn how to order a piece of art directly at the source, a skilled and most likely way cheaper AI."
I think artists that see potential of AI in their work will continue the path. I already see a lot of UGC creators with thousands of followers only doing AI too.
This week i was approached twice by NFT collectors that want to buy my AI artwork so this can be a new market too. Others will go more for news/events and street life photography (there will always be in demand since AI cannot produce reality). Companies of every kind are hiring people to deal with social media, specially creatives that can do all in one: illustrations/ Shoot photos/videos and editing them.
At the end eventually people will adapt to new reality.
Quote from: cascoly on December 20, 2022, 22:17SF is OK, I like it a lot too. But here S<<F...Quote from: gameover on December 20, 2022, 12:06
I liked very much your post and think you are right as you say that AI is a tool - but it's a disquietingly clever one.
Your words started a disturbing chain of thought that I made into a post ....
Maybe it's just me, or maybe I've read too much Asimov...
check out https://www.cold-takes.com/ai-could-defeat-all-of-us-combined/
Quote from: cobalt on December 20, 2022, 08:22
Don't worry about all that.
The next generation of ais will all be very legally trained on OUR images.
Some agencies will ask for an opt in, others will just update their terms of service and tell you to pack up and leave if you don't like it.
Plus there is billions of visual content that no longer has any copyright, which includes some of the worlds greatest artwork.
In the same way ais will be trained in music, in writing, in software...
The legal part is probably the easiest to fix.
So you can decide to complain forever or change your job, or find an intelligent way to work with the new technology.
Quote from: DavidK on December 18, 2022, 19:30Thank you for your heartfelt wishes, DavidK. I too was a little surprised that people seem to like (and buy) my AI-divertissements, but it wasn't me who made the humankind. As Dale Carnegie wrote, "when I go fishing I put a worm on the hook, although I personally prefer strawberries with cream"
Oh sorry, my mistake. I didn't realize it was just a toy. In that case I wish you much success in your pre-Christmas 50% down sale through your own AI shop and indeed the same for your AI portfolio on Adobe this coming year. You clearly deserve it.
Quote from: DavidK on December 18, 2022, 17:27
"I don't need to imagine that, I am one of them - and I don't care in the least. Right, it took me quite some time to hone my art, however I don't need months to create a piece. Michelangelo perhaps... Lol"
Lol is right. Your art? Please. AI is not a tool. It's a crutch.
Personally I think you are looking at this all backwards. What took a comparatively short time was for the AI to teach you what it wanted, not the other way around. Making you the tool. This whole debate reminds me of a proverb coined by George Bernard Shaw. "Those who can, do; those who can't teach." I never thought that was necessarily true, however in your case "Those who can, do; those who can't, use AI" seems fitting. I suspect Michaelangelo and DaVinci and all of the other actual artists of their day who themselves were not above using all of the tools available to them at the time would still chuckle a bit if they heard you refer to what you do as "your art".
Face it, it's not.
Quote from: Justanotherphotographer on December 18, 2022, 11:03That's an interesting point that would pose several further questions. The first that occurs to me: an artist looks for inspiration, browses the web, scans a few dozen pictures (watermarked) until a good idea pops up; his or her work produces some profit. To whom should he or she pay the royalties: Google, the agencies that made the watermarked pics publicly available, the unmentioned and untraceable authors...?
What is being completely ignored, and should be front and centre, is the right of a company to use our work to profit without our consent.
QuoteThere certainly are, and they all do their darn best to make money. Some of them quite successfully (I'm thinking of the agencies that cash gold and pay peanuts), others with less success (ourselves perhaps?).
There are more parties involved than the artists having their work used and the customer using the AI app.
QuoteIn places you even seem to go as far as treating the AI app as a person in order to ignore the actual third parties involved; the businesses making the profit.Far from that: the AI is just a tool - though a very interesting one. As for "the third parties involved" (I guess you mean Midjourney), I think they are just doing their business.
QuoteI understand the temptation when you are the one benefiting, but imagine being the artists who spent years or decades honing their art to the point where they can spend several months creating one image just to have that work hovered up so you can pump out your pieces with so little (comparatively) effort.I don't need to imagine that, I am one of them - and I don't care in the least. Right, it took me quite some time to hone my art, however I don't need months to create a piece. Michelangelo perhaps... Lol
QuoteI can certainly see both sides of the argument...Then you know that what an AI produces is definitely NOT a collage of bits and pieces stolen here and there: weren't it a stupid piece of hardware I'd be tempted to say that all it 'steals' is CONCEPTS, and never from one single artist at a time.
Quote from: Justanotherphotographer on December 18, 2022, 11:10Do you always stop reading at the titles? Lol
The blog post even had a heading "Self-awareness?". Lol
Quote from: Devotio777 on December 17, 2022, 21:25Quite an interesting idea indeed! I'm now tempted to try with the next president of the Russian Federation...
So I just joined discord to generate some images with midjourney bot for fun, and guess what! I typed: portrait of next president of united states realistic high resolutioin... and it generated photo of 4 guys, 3 of them resembling Ron De Santis A LOT!
Very interesting.
Quote from: derby on December 17, 2022, 23:42Fantasy means actually many things: in the popular tradition it's mostly fairy tales, SF, dragons and horror. To imaginative minds it may mean a lot more.Quote from: gameover on December 17, 2022, 19:27
Today I sold 7 'AI generative': 1 photo-realistic and 6 fantasy. More fantasy.
Thanks Luisa, I would never image that fantasy images could have good market in microstock, for sure you did a really good job
