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

No elephants: Breakthroughs in image generation

oneusefulthing.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 373 posts

Re: No elephants: Breakthroughs in image generation

#271

Post by adamredwoods »

Taek wrote: post #33
probably_wrong wrote: post #12

> Is it okay to reproduce the hard-won style of other artists using AI? Who owns the resulting art? Who profits from it? Which artists are in the training data for AI, and what is the legal and ethical status of using copyrighted work for training? These were important questions before multimodal AI, but now developing answers to them is increasingly urgent. I have to disagree with the conclusion. This was an importa…

I don't think there's consensus around that idea. Lots of people (myself included) feel that copyright is already vastly overreaching, and that AI represents forward progress for the proliferation of art in society (its crap today, but digital cameras were crap in 2007 and look where they are now). Its also not clear for example that Studio Ghibli lost by having their art style plastered all over the internet. I went…

The Ghibli style took humans decades to refine and create. All that respect and adoration for the craft and artists and the time it took, is now gone in an instant, making it a shallow trivial thing. Worse is to have another company exploit it with no regard for the ones who helped make it a reality.

The threat of AI produced art will forever trivialise human artistic capabilities. The reality is: why bother when it can be done faster and cheaper? The next generation will leverage it, and those skills will be very rare. It is the nature of technology to do this.

Re: No elephants: Breakthroughs in image generation

#272

Post by drdaeman »

mrdependable wrote: post #252
Taek wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think there's consensus around that idea. Lots of people (myself included) feel that copyright is already vastly overreaching, and that AI represents forward progress for the proliferation of art in society (its crap today, but digital cameras were crap in 2007 and look where they are now). Its also not clear for example that Studio Ghibli lost by having their art style plastered all over the internet. I went…

Studio Ghibli might not have been affected yet, but only because the technology is not there yet. What's going to happen when someone can make a competing movie in their style with just a prompt? Should we all just be okay with it because it's been decided that Studio Ghibli has made enough money? If the effort required to create that can just be ingested by a machine and replicated without consequence, how would it…

> What's going to happen when someone can make a competing movie in their style with just a prompt?

Nothing? Just like how if some studio today invests millions of man-hours and does a competing movie in Studio Ghibli's aesthetic (but not including any Studio Ghibli's characters, branding, etc. - basically, not the copyrightable or trademarkable stuff) nothing out of ordinary is going to happen.

I mean, artistic style is not copyrightable, right?

Re: No elephants: Breakthroughs in image generation

#273

Post by marcellus23 »

schwartzworld wrote: post #264
williamcotton wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trying to draw a squirrel when you have no artistic talents or experience is not the fun part. I've produced my own music recordings in the past and I've hired musicians to play the instruments that I cannot. Having exasperated recording engineers watch my 5,000th take on a drum fill that I absolutely cannot play is not the fun part. Sitting behind the glass and watching my vision come to life from a really good drum…

> Sitting behind the glass and watching my vision come to life from a really good drummer is absolutely the fun part. Is having the ai spit out idea after idea fun in the same way for you?

He's not talking about using AI to generate ideas, he's talking about using AI to turn ideas into reality.

Re: No elephants: Breakthroughs in image generation

#274

Post by girvo »

65839747 wrote: post #265
becquerel wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All labor is bad.

We aren't in the Fully Automated Luxury Gay Space Communism stage just yet, so labor is a necessary evil.

I'm not convinced LLMs are the road towards Minds, and I'm pretty sure the Culture would think we're a bit of a mess (I'm pretty sure they literally did in one of the final books), but who knows maybe I'm wrong!

Re: No elephants: Breakthroughs in image generation

#275

Post by mrdependable »

drdaeman wrote: post #272
mrdependable wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Studio Ghibli might not have been affected yet, but only because the technology is not there yet. What's going to happen when someone can make a competing movie in their style with just a prompt? Should we all just be okay with it because it's been decided that Studio Ghibli has made enough money? If the effort required to create that can just be ingested by a machine and replicated without consequence, how would it…

> What's going to happen when someone can make a competing movie in their style with just a prompt? Nothing? Just like how if some studio today invests millions of man-hours and does a competing movie in Studio Ghibli's aesthetic (but not including any Studio Ghibli's characters, branding, etc. - basically, not the copyrightable or trademarkable stuff) nothing out of ordinary is going to happen. I mean, artistic styl…

You are missing the point entirely. If you can make a movie with just a prompt, who is going to invest the money creating something like a Ghibli movie just to have it ripped off? Instead people will just rip off what has already been done and everything just stagnates.

Re: No elephants: Breakthroughs in image generation

#276

Post by iandanforth »

M4v3R wrote: post #26
card_zero wrote: post #7

Looking at the example where the coffee table is swapped, I notice every time the image is reprocessed it mutates, based on the previous iteration, and objects become more bizarre each time, like chinese whispers. * The weird-ass basket decoration on the table originally has some big chain links (maybe anchor chain, to keep the theme with the beach painting). By the third version, they're leathery and are merging wit…

Yeah, this is in my opinion the biggest limitation of the current gen GPT 4o image generation: it is incapable of editing only parts of an image. I assume what it does every time is tokenizing the source image, then transforming it according to the prompt and then giving you the final result. For some use cases that’s fine but if you really just want a small edit while keeping the rest of the image intact you’re out…

Fwiw pixlr is a good pairing with GPT 4o for just this. Generate with 4o then use pixlr AI tools to edit bits. Especially for removals pixlr (and I'm sure others) are much much faster and quite reliable.

Re: No elephants: Breakthroughs in image generation

#277

Post by iandanforth »

smusamashah wrote: post #135

I am waiting for when I could provide these a scene snippet from "Hitchhiker's Guide To Galaxy" (or any book) and it could draw that for me. The gold planets, the waking up on the beach, total perspective vortex etc. I like the book, but there are quite a few scenes which are quite hard to visualize and make sense. An image generator that can follow that language and detail will be amazing. Even more awesome will be…

Have you tried? It works well for other books, e.g. here's a scene from "A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court" which is conveniently in the public domain.

https://chatgpt.com/share/67f5d652-f7f4-8013-b2f2-3c997ea513...

Re: No elephants: Breakthroughs in image generation

#278

Post by __loam »

Vvector wrote: post #258
__loam wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

* You cannot ethically use a tool that was produced by appropriating the labor of millions of people without consent. You are a bad person if you use it. * I disagree. When you publish your work, I can't copy it, but I can do nearly anything else I want to with it. I don't need your consent to learn from your work. I can study hundreds of paintings, learn from them, teaching myself to paint in a similar style. Copyri…

Training an AI on something requires you to produce a copy of the work that is held locally for the training algorithm to read. Whether that is fair use has not been determined. It's certainly not ethical.

Re: No elephants: Breakthroughs in image generation

#279

Post by __loam »

fc417fc802 wrote: post #229
__loam wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

The straw man is yours. No claim of entitlement was made. A scenario was provided that appears to refute your unconditional assertion that using this technology actively harms creative labor. You've presented all sorts of wild assumptions and generalizations about the people who don't share your vehement opposition to the use of this technology. I don't think it's the person you're responding to with the implicit bia…

> Do you really expect people to blindly adopt your ideological views if you just state them forcefully enough?

This is the view of most people outside the industry.

Re: No elephants: Breakthroughs in image generation

#280

Post by Suppafly »

Retr0id wrote: post #5
x187463 wrote: post #3

This is a before/after moment for image generation. A simple example is the background images on a ton of (mediocre) music youtube channels. They almost all use AI generated images that are full of nonsense the closer you look. Jazz channels will feature coffee shops with garbled text on the menu and furniture blending together. I bet all of that disappears over the next few months. On another note, and perhaps other…

I've never used a stock photo site before, so I suppose it's no surprise I have no real use for "generate any image on demand".

>so I suppose it's no surprise I have no real use for "generate any image on demand".

Other than stock photos, porn is the killer app for that, but most of the AI companies don't want to allow that.

Post reply on HN