The 'before' image passes the test this time in a "Treachery of Images" sort of way.
No elephants: Breakthroughs in image generation
61–70 of 373 posts
Re: No elephants: Breakthroughs in image generation
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Like, sorry, but if you want to earn money doing art, please be good at it... By definition, almost half of all $ARTISTS are worse than the median. Should that half not get paid for their time?
Yes. They should look for a job that actually covers their lifestyle instead of crying about AI taking their jobs. They can always put in more hours and become better. I cant imagine they have a lot of paying customers anyway.
I keep waiting for physical objects to become important again. AI isn't coming for the ceramic folks.
Re: No elephants: Breakthroughs in image generation
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes. They should look for a job that actually covers their lifestyle instead of crying about AI taking their jobs. They can always put in more hours and become better. I cant imagine they have a lot of paying customers anyway.
What about the half of the remaining artists that are below the new median?
Should be good enough to alrdy have established some customers.
Re: No elephants: Breakthroughs in image generation
#64Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes. They should look for a job that actually covers their lifestyle instead of crying about AI taking their jobs. They can always put in more hours and become better. I cant imagine they have a lot of paying customers anyway.
I keep waiting for physical objects to become important again. AI isn't coming for the ceramic folks.
I think that would be great. Traditional art market is not nearly as big as the digital space. I'd love if people valued traditional art again as thats the only stuff I do.
Re: No elephants: Breakthroughs in image generation
#654o still exhibits the "pink elephant effect", it's just... subtler, and tends to reveal itself on a complex or confusing prompt. Negations are also still not handled properly, they tend to slightly confuse the model and decrease the accuracy of the answer or the generated picture. The same is true for any other LLM. Moreover, the author is asking the model to rationalize the decision he already made ("tell me why the…
But it's literally a different architecture (auto-regressive, presumably sequence based vs diffusion). In my experiments it is significantly, overwhelmingly better at consistency, coherence and prompt adherence. Things I needed control nets before it just... does it. and even zooming into fine details, they make sense.
Here is an example with a bunch of negations: https://i.imgur.com/P8G5ICs.png
Re: No elephants: Breakthroughs in image generation
#66> 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…
>> it's unfair for artists to have their works sucked up What framework can we use to decide if something is fair or not? Style is not something that should be copyrighted. I can pain in the style of X painter, I can write in the style of Y writer, I can compose music in the style of Z composer. Everything has a style. Dressing yourself has a style. Speaking has a style. Even writing mathematical proofs can have a st…
In music, someone can sing the same style as another, but if they imitate it to the point that there is brand confusion, where the consumer believes the product came from X when it actually came from Y, that's clearly crossing the line.
Re: No elephants: Breakthroughs in image generation
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
Being someone who has paid a lot of attention to Ghibli, I wouldn’t say their style was well established 35-40 years ago… There is considerable evolution and refinement to their style from Naushika, to later works, both in the artistic style and the philosophical content it presents. I think allowing it to be fair game would have destroyed something quite beautiful that I’ve watched evolve across 40 years and which I…
Yeah, of course their style isn't static, but I was taking Kiki's Delivery Service (1989) as a point where much of their visual style was pretty well-established.
I agree that some of his main elements were relatively set by then but others continue to evolve.
Personally I feel that his work is entirely fair game after his death, by which I mean to say after the end of his journey that he has poured his entirety into, in terms of value to humanity and respect to him for that value I think it’s reasonable to respect his wishes during his lifespan.
Re: No elephants: Breakthroughs in image generation
#68This 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…
That is a very interesting point about how little use of AI most of us making day to day, despite the potential utility that seems to be lurking. I think it just takes time for people and economies to adapt to new technology.
Even if technological progress on AI were to stop today, and the best models that exist in 2030 are the same models we have now, there would still be years of social and economic change as people and companies figure out how to make use of novel technology.
Re: No elephants: Breakthroughs in image generation
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
I find it unlikely that someone who was willing to pay an artist for a charcoal sketch would be satisfied with an AI alternative. You don't just buy art for the aethstetic, you buy it for a lot of reasons and AI doesn't give any of the same satisfaction.
I'm all for paying artists for their work. Unfortunately, same as tattoo artists, some just heavily overcharge for mediocre results (been tattooing myself AND I know a few things about art). Like, sorry, but if you want to earn money doing art, please be good at it...
> some just heavily overcharge for mediocre results
if people are paying, then they aren't "overcharging"
Re: No elephants: Breakthroughs in image generation
#70It's interesting to hear people side with the artists when in previous discussions on this forum I've gotten significant approval/agreement arguing that copyright is far too long. As I've argued in the past, I think copyright should last maybe five years: in this modern era, monetizing your work doesn't (usually) have to take more than a short time. I'd happily concede to some sort of renewal process to extend that p…
> I think copyright should last maybe five years: in this modern era, monetizing your work doesn't (usually) have to take more than a short time. I
funny how people who say this kind of stuff are never content creators (in the monetization sense).