Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

AI doppelgänger experiment – Part 1: The training

julienposture.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 137 posts

Re: AI doppelgänger experiment – Part 1: The training

#31

Post by HiroshiSan »

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #3

No, two artists are the same. As an artist, if I’m not constantly pushing the boundaries of how I’m expressing myself via media then I’m just telling the audience the same thing over and over. Im not actually changing as an artist, I’m simply producing the thing regularly that is expected of me. This is 99% of professional art you find your style and then you do that over and over for money so that you can survive in…

Goodluck replicating and replacing a leyendecker or a Gibson or a Rockwell. Getting to that level of technical proficiency is more than just settling into a style.

Re: AI doppelgänger experiment – Part 1: The training

#32

Post by spywaregorilla »

monadINtop wrote: post #20
ninetyninenine wrote: post #17

AI is to the point where it can create it's own style. We talk about these styles as if it's some kind of sacred thing. What you don't realize is that we're past this point. There's a latent space of different art within a certain style category, but there's the latent space of different categories itself. AI can already traverse the space between art in a single style category AND it can traverse the gradient space…

lol sometimes I wonder if the reason so many tech bros make so many grandiose statements about how AI has already trancended the bounds of human creativity is because they've never really had actual experience with art and literature and music growing up. They say things like this and then you go and look for an example of these incredible works of artificial art and it is the biggest pile of shit you have ever seen.…

Your dignified belief in the supremacy of human ingenuity will be cold comfort to the young artists struggling to find employment

Re: AI doppelgänger experiment – Part 1: The training

#33

Post by monadINtop »

spywaregorilla wrote: post #32
monadINtop wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

lol sometimes I wonder if the reason so many tech bros make so many grandiose statements about how AI has already trancended the bounds of human creativity is because they've never really had actual experience with art and literature and music growing up. They say things like this and then you go and look for an example of these incredible works of artificial art and it is the biggest pile of shit you have ever seen.…

Your dignified belief in the supremacy of human ingenuity will be cold comfort to the young artists struggling to find employment

Yep, you're right. But idk why you phrased that like it's a rebuttal to my criticism. This is another failure of our economic system, for incentivising the owners of art production to churn out literal mindless slop to cut costs, instead of safe guarding artists and creators for the sake of their intrinsic value to society and humanity.

Since, of course, they must eternally seek to reproduce capital to the detriment of everything else.

Re: AI doppelgänger experiment – Part 1: The training

#35

Post by freetinker »

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #3

No, two artists are the same. As an artist, if I’m not constantly pushing the boundaries of how I’m expressing myself via media then I’m just telling the audience the same thing over and over. Im not actually changing as an artist, I’m simply producing the thing regularly that is expected of me. This is 99% of professional art you find your style and then you do that over and over for money so that you can survive in…

I’m no artist, but I’m not sure I agree. As an example, Cubism (Picasso) or stuff by Pollack (arguably another ‘great’) seems quite distinct and therefore reproducible – at least visually if not physically (paint texture, etc.).

Re: AI doppelgänger experiment – Part 1: The training

#36

Post by voiceblue »

spywaregorilla wrote: post #12
voiceblue wrote: post #4

Related: "Invasive Diffusion: How one unwilling illustrator found herself turned into an AI model" [0]. It's astonishingly simple to train both LoRAs and Embeddings nowadays -- if you combine it with tech like ControlNet, you can more or less have direct control over the illustration as well (see this example I converted to Hollie Megert's style with barely any effort [1] using the model from [0]) -- but FWIW I was p…

> However, I do think there needs to be some kind of protection from having your 'style' commoditized without consent, using unauthorized images of your own art. 1) Hire artist to copy the style for 10 images 2) Train model on those problem solved. If you choose "using your images specifically" to steal your style as the hill you want to die on, then you're going to find it's a very useless line of defense.

That's common enough that there's a name for it [0]. "Stealing the style" is not so much a problem as commoditization, which may find some measure of defense in terms of trademark (not copyright). In this case, for example, the model is named hollieMengert_v1, and we are referring to the style as "Hollie Mengert's art style".

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean_room_design

Re: AI doppelgänger experiment – Part 1: The training

#37

Post by nonrandomstring »

ninetyninenine wrote: post #23
saintfire wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wish we could apply that logic to software. AI is in a magical universe where we all pretend copyright isn't a thing just because we don't like it.

You missed the point. You view it as a war against human rights. Copywrite. I view it as a lost war. The war against human meaning. We're living in a bubble. Where we pretend it all still matters and that AI will always be inferior to everything we do forever and for all eternity. All bubbles will eventually pop.

> I view it as a lost war. The war against human meaning.

If "human meaning" goes, all else goes with it;

Social media, search, education, ambition, creation, innovation...

And along with that goes Google, Microsoft, OpenAI, Apple, Meta, Amazon...

There's nothing that exists outside that "bubble" of human meaning,

Technology must preserve it, or technology dies.

Unless you are confirming what many have already said.. that digital technology has become death cult?

Re: AI doppelgänger experiment – Part 1: The training

#38

Post by jsheard »

vunderba wrote: post #18
voiceblue wrote: post #4

Related: "Invasive Diffusion: How one unwilling illustrator found herself turned into an AI model" [0]. It's astonishingly simple to train both LoRAs and Embeddings nowadays -- if you combine it with tech like ControlNet, you can more or less have direct control over the illustration as well (see this example I converted to Hollie Megert's style with barely any effort [1] using the model from [0]) -- but FWIW I was p…

Corporate Memphis seems to have that very "flat almost clip-art" style to it. Generative art is ideal for this type of stock art use case where 90% is simply good enough for the vast majority of situations. I feel like the gig economy (things like Fiverr) are unfortunately going to get absolutely crushed by generative art systems since most of their customers aren't that particular and are likely fine with anything t…

> I feel like the gig economy (things like Fiverr)

Predictably this is already happening, it doesn't take much browsing in categories such as tattoo design to spot the hallmarks of AI generated artwork. To add insult to injury they often pretend they aren't using AI, so they can up-charge for more intricate artwork that would take more effort if they weren't really just adding more synonyms for "detailed" to their Midjourney prompt.

Fiverr does have a dedicated category for AI art, but they don't seem to be making any effort whatsoever to keep AI art out of every other category, so it's pointless.

Re: AI doppelgänger experiment – Part 1: The training

#39

Post by [deleted] »

jsheard wrote: post #38
vunderba wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Corporate Memphis seems to have that very "flat almost clip-art" style to it. Generative art is ideal for this type of stock art use case where 90% is simply good enough for the vast majority of situations. I feel like the gig economy (things like Fiverr) are unfortunately going to get absolutely crushed by generative art systems since most of their customers aren't that particular and are likely fine with anything t…

> I feel like the gig economy (things like Fiverr) Predictably this is already happening, it doesn't take much browsing in categories such as tattoo design to spot the hallmarks of AI generated artwork. To add insult to injury they often pretend they aren't using AI, so they can up-charge for more intricate artwork that would take more effort if they weren't really just adding more synonyms for "detailed" to their Mi…

[deleted]

Re: AI doppelgänger experiment – Part 1: The training

#40

Post by ecjhdnc2025 »

jsheard wrote: post #8
ecjhdnc2025 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The art masters cannot be replaced, you cannot predict what they’re going to do next because they change the rules entirely. This is how we know a great artist from a mediocre artist. I agree that in principle the best working artists are those who know how to create, modulate and discard artistic languages over time -- creating and abandoning rules for sequences of work -- but AI systems can clearly be unethically…

> because as soon as there's enough work in the new style it can be stolen. This is where the oft-cited comparison to previous advances like the camera breaks down - AI has an ongoing parasitic relationship with the mediums it is displacing. The camera doesn't need a thousand photorealistic paintings of a new subject to be made before it can capture that subject going forward. AI is an unprecedented situation, as far…

I agree wholeheartedly.

As a photographer I am shocked to see other photographers who are AI proponents making the comparison to the beginning of the photography era. (Though it's usually the very bad photographers or those who haven't actually done any reading about the impact of photography on art who make this point)

Art's one hope to avoid this parasitism is to move back into the realms of the purely physical, I think (and as a photographer that includes me).

Post reply on HN