If you want to experiment with something similar by yourself and you don't have the patience to wait for Stable Diffusion to crunch through thousands of images on your laptop or in a Colab notebook, here's how you can parallelize processing relatively easily on AWS Batch or Kubernetes: https://outerbounds.com/blog/parallelizing-stable-diffusion-...
How a Stable Diffusion prompt changes its output for the style of 1500 artists
101–110 of 205 posts
Re: How a Stable Diffusion prompt changes its output for the style of 1500 artists
#102What's kind of crazy is how the images tend to have similarities in small features that become very apparent when flipping back and forth between images, but which are not obvious per se. For example, I flipped back and forth between Beatrix Potter and Paulus Potter. A rounded white bonnet in one picture becomes a couple of blossoms in the other. The roof of a house becomes some shadowy wall with plants in the other.…
So interesting, and really seems somehow related to how we dream, hallucinate.. or even experience reality?
Arguably it could be different from our experience. It could even be a superior and more efficient methodology then the things our brain uses to imagine things.
Re: How a Stable Diffusion prompt changes its output for the style of 1500 artists
#103Earlier quoted context omitted.
People said this about cameras. About digital cameras. About digital photo editing software. The next generation will normalize these tools and find incredible ways to be creative within their new cutting edge medium. The post-art world is here! Just think about how history books will remember this period! The styles that will be borne of necessity, of the need to break down art and find what makes it tick.
> People said this about cameras. About digital cameras. About digital photo editing software. Did they? Because I don't think they did. I think most people were amazed by all these technologies.
Both reactions always happen. With basically anything new, people will select some points via happenstance or bias, draw one of a few basic trend lines [1], and give a hot take. Because they generally think only about first-order effects and don't imagine other things that could happen, the hot takes are often of the utopia/dystopia variety.
These hot takes generally tell you more about the opiner (or the audience they're playing to) than the reality to come. It turns out it's hard to model en entire universe using 3 pounds of meat.
[1] Heinlein listed some of them way back in 1952: https://archive.org/details/galaxymagazine-1952-02/page/n19/...
Re: How a Stable Diffusion prompt changes its output for the style of 1500 artists
#104It would be so much better to just have all of these 1500 pictures next to each other in a list with the artist's name under it.
[deleted]
Re: How a Stable Diffusion prompt changes its output for the style of 1500 artists
#105The concept of "derivative work" is pretty important in copyright law. I wonder if anyone has thoughts on this, in terms of this type of project. Should there be legal implications to this?
I know someone -- a completely unknown artist -- who used to make a fair portion of their living by drawing D&D characters for people. Unfortunately, orders slowed down, because someone can input one of his images into software like this, and generate endless variations in the same style. Should this be allowed?
Are images created "in the style of" a certain artist completely dependent on images created by that artist? If so, should that artist be compensated? Why or why not?
Re: How a Stable Diffusion prompt changes its output for the style of 1500 artists
#106What's kind of crazy is how the images tend to have similarities in small features that become very apparent when flipping back and forth between images, but which are not obvious per se. For example, I flipped back and forth between Beatrix Potter and Paulus Potter. A rounded white bonnet in one picture becomes a couple of blossoms in the other. The roof of a house becomes some shadowy wall with plants in the other.…
The positioning seems very consistent, almost to the point where I wonder if that was part of the selection process to demonstrate the differences in style. There are only four per style, where the position of a subject could be a selection factor. Hard to tell if the position similarities are driven by the Stable Diffusion model or by the selection of representative images.
Re: How a Stable Diffusion prompt changes its output for the style of 1500 artists
#107The concept of "derivative work" is pretty important in copyright law. I wonder if anyone has thoughts on this, in terms of this type of project. Should there be legal implications to this? I know someone -- a completely unknown artist -- who used to make a fair portion of their living by drawing D&D characters for people. Unfortunately, orders slowed down, because someone can input one of his images into software li…
"Should there be legal implications to this? ... Should this be allowed?"
Even if there are laws against it, the cat's out of the bag.
There's no stopping billions of people all over the world making derivative works at the push of a button.
Re: How a Stable Diffusion prompt changes its output for the style of 1500 artists
#108What's kind of crazy is how the images tend to have similarities in small features that become very apparent when flipping back and forth between images, but which are not obvious per se. For example, I flipped back and forth between Beatrix Potter and Paulus Potter. A rounded white bonnet in one picture becomes a couple of blossoms in the other. The roof of a house becomes some shadowy wall with plants in the other.…
The positioning seems very consistent, almost to the point where I wonder if that was part of the selection process to demonstrate the differences in style. There are only four per style, where the position of a subject could be a selection factor. Hard to tell if the position similarities are driven by the Stable Diffusion model or by the selection of representative images.
Maybe it's based on img2img? Some are different enough that it's not obvious that's the way it has been done though.
Re: How a Stable Diffusion prompt changes its output for the style of 1500 artists
#109What's kind of crazy is how the images tend to have similarities in small features that become very apparent when flipping back and forth between images, but which are not obvious per se. For example, I flipped back and forth between Beatrix Potter and Paulus Potter. A rounded white bonnet in one picture becomes a couple of blossoms in the other. The roof of a house becomes some shadowy wall with plants in the other.…
So interesting, and really seems somehow related to how we dream, hallucinate.. or even experience reality?
from "is your blue my blue" to "is the AI's blue our blue" :)
Re: How a Stable Diffusion prompt changes its output for the style of 1500 artists
#110What's kind of crazy is how the images tend to have similarities in small features that become very apparent when flipping back and forth between images, but which are not obvious per se. For example, I flipped back and forth between Beatrix Potter and Paulus Potter. A rounded white bonnet in one picture becomes a couple of blossoms in the other. The roof of a house becomes some shadowy wall with plants in the other.…
The positioning seems very consistent, almost to the point where I wonder if that was part of the selection process to demonstrate the differences in style. There are only four per style, where the position of a subject could be a selection factor. Hard to tell if the position similarities are driven by the Stable Diffusion model or by the selection of representative images.
The composition and positioning come from the original seed. If the same seed is used, the same background image noise is applied for the initial image which is transformed into all the styles.
Thus the similarities you see would make sense if using also the same seed for the tests.