In my opinion, I think mentioning that an AI reference photo was used for inspiration should be enough. Considering that the photos aren’t replicated if others put in the same prompt and the artist is still doing all of the actual painting then I don’t fully think it’s cheating/ plagiarism.

I think even if two artists got AI to generate a reference photo and they both got the same picture. Both artists would paint it differently they would never look 100% the same.

Two artists could paint from a picture and come up with 2 very different compositions. I guess if you can copy it exactly, maybe ….? I don’t always come up with my own idea. I find pictures that I like and try to covey that feeling, so I’m not sure either. Very confusing.

My inspiration to create a painting comes from things I feel, see, imagine and touch. I am a novice in watercolour. AI may be another source of inspiration. However, I could never replicate it because of my skill level. I see AI as adding to the creative experience and not stealing.

Emma, I enjoyed watching your video and appreciate your thoughtful discussion on using AI-generated images. As a fellow art educator specializing in acrylic painting, I wanted to share my perspective on using AI generative tools to complement my teaching. In my online art academy, I use AI-generated images as references to provide my students with unique and diverse starting points. These tools can offer fresh inspiration and help break creative blocks. My students fully know that we use AI-generated images, and we discuss the ethical considerations and the importance of transforming these references into something uniquely their own. I actively guide the AI process, being very specific about the changes I want to see, and often use multiple tools to refine the final image. This ensures the result is a collaborative creation where your input and expertise are highly valued, incorporating my artistic vision and technical adjustments. Using AI in this way not only helps my students develop their skills but also encourages creative exploration, and introduces them to innovative techniques. It’s a fascinating blend of technology and traditional art that I believe enriches the learning experience, sparking new ideas and pushing the boundaries of what we can achieve in art education. Thank you for raising this important topic. I look forward to more insightful discussions on how best to integrate new tools into our teaching practices. I would love the opportunity to create an image for you using our many tools. Let me know what you would like to paint! Ginger Cook and Jon Little (Tech Bear)

@h.a.s.7336

9 күн бұрын

The problem is, most AI companies are stealing visual art and writing work to feed their machines and not compensating the artists or writers. There are court cases going on to try to solve this problem. AI companies have tried to redefine the definition of "fair use" to fit their agenda, but it is not fair to creators. Copyright laws are very important for creative work to thrive.

This aspect of AI is intriguing. Recently a friend simply entered key words as prompts...such as 2 rabbits on a bike. AI generated several choices. She chose the one that most aligned with what her idea was. It offered a visual for her idea. From there she created her piece in her style. I don't consider that copying as one might from a photo or a tutorial. I do not think that credit would necessarily be needed. The idea and execution was hers. The image was a prompt. I think that this is unchartered territory and there will be so many opinions but that's what they are at this point...opinions. Personally I enjoy creating pieces that combine analog art with digital. This too can raise lots of opinions and discussion. IMO...it's all about creativity and moving forward into unexplored territory. Longer answer than expected...lol Thanks for opening the discussion.

I don’t think it is cheating I follow many watercolor artists and try to paint using their reference photos and because everyone has their own style I can never recreate the same version of a photo but I would always say reference by and the name of the artist. In saying that I think it is a great tool for inspiration.Thank you for this video💕🦋

I think I would just state that the reference was generated through AI. Stealing? No, I don’t think it’s stealing since it’s a computer generated image.

I definitely feel it is okay to use it for a tool. A friend has a program called Mid Journey and I feed it adjectives about a scene in my imagination. The person generating the photo has to know how to create the “scene” and what to write. I have painted quite a few “AI” paintings from my imagination that were generated by the program and it was super fun to do. However, I only paint for myself in my sketchbooks at this point.

I've used AI for composition ideas but I do think it can be a moral grey area. It doesn't bother me because I'm just painting for me. I'm not selling my work, but if I was I think I would disclose where my inspiration came from if I was asked. I use it when I can't possibly create a reference for myself, but it never comes out looking exactly like the AI image anyway so it's not like I'm 100% copying it. I think of it more like...if I took a photo of a garden I wanted to paint. I didn't come up with how the garden was planted, that was someone else's vision. Do they then get credit for my painting?

I put my own drawings into an AI generator (Dream) and see what pops out, I set the “influence” to 90% so it’s pretty much all my drawing with a few tweaks (bigger lips, smaller eyes etc….) I might have never thought of. I get some cool results.

I think it's fine to use it as inspiration since like so many have stated that 2 artists using the same picture still would not end up with the same exact painting. Referencing that the original seems logical since the original picture was not my own. Also, loved your version! ❤

Great topic and very interested in where all this is heading for artists and creators. Thanks and lovely painting. ❤

personally, AI still doesn't really sit right with me so I've never used a generator. I don't think you can steal from AI but if it creates something that very obviously looks like an artists work, then that's different ❤

So is it stealing if I watch you and try and “copy” you? I am not you and do not have your experience, but I follow you and try and paint from your videos. I would never claim that I came up with the idea that I got from you and you are not claiming that you came up with that composition.

@wingsister3345

10 күн бұрын

I agree. The source must be acknowledged. The final result will differ depending on the skill, style and temperament of the artist.

I think on a personal artist level, using AI for inspiration and being transparent about that is fine and it can be a wonderful tool. I do have concerns about how AI comes up with these images - if AI is stealing art because it uses existing artists' work (even if just as inspiration) without proper credit. So many ethical questions with AI in general!

I believe AI gets its images by scanning tons of other images already found on the internet that meet the guidelines you type out and then uses those to create a new image. If you’re doing art for yourself obviously you don’t need to note anything… but I definitely think it should be noted when someone uses AI to copy/as inspiration if they are sharing their work with others. If you don’t then you’re essentially saying “I thought of every aspect of this painting” and that feels deceitful.

@M0odyBlue

Күн бұрын

I just had so much fun generating landscapes in different styles, impressionist (like Monet), preRaphaelite, and post Impressionist. They were all similar scenes, but painted differently. I think it could be a fun tool for practicing different styles. I didn’t see anything that, even if copied exactly, would take the place of an artist-painted piece. We have had and are still having a similar discussion concerning AI generated music on Wings of Pegasus YT channel.

I love your interpretation of this reference. It's not an exact copy. It's so moody and the rain effect you achieved is so lovely. I think this is a game changer to help you get going in a direction. Mentioning you got inspired from an AI prompt should be more than enough.

I don’t think it’s stealing personally, like many have said, it’s your interpretation of an image. It certainly would be the most above board to say where it came from, though I wouldn’t think less of you if you didn’t.

AI images are created by software scanning millions of images already uploaded, whether they be art or photographs, and "stealing" bits and pieces of them to create something new. Although the original images can be copyrighted, the AI-generated images cannot because it would be impossible to trace where every pixel came from. I used the AI tool to create a line drawing that I used for watercolor and every time I look at that painting, I get the heebie jeebies. I'd rather create something that came from my imagination rather than something generated by a software program. I'm still on the fence about where this could all lead but I'm leaning toward it being a bad thing. Already, a vast number of "news" articles are being generated by AI. Companies are using AI to create worker schedules, sometimes with disastrous results. And on an on. AI has the potential to get very much out of control, especially when it comes to photos. For example, a photo can be generated showing someone in a compromising situation, causing great harm, when in fact the subject of the photo was never in the situation depicted. Sorry, now rambling! I did enjoy your video and your bringing up this thought-provoking topic.

AI can indeed be used for brainstorming ideas to give a piece of art its essence by artists, art is always a learning process, you might be confused by how to put a certain visual reference onto paper, but these tools can help you with it, so that the next time you can do your personal touch to it. Art is always portrayal of your individuality onto the already used mediums and techniques used by people from several decades and centuries before you. I just don't support copying the entire piece, it's not wrong, but putting your ideas is what makes an artwork eccentric.

Im same as you emma unsure some very valuable comments on herr. But...i love the painting and i love how your interpretation of it is. Definitely would like to see this done step by step. I struggle with wet on wet and then adding the second wet on wet technique do maybe this could be a video please ❤

I don’t think it’s cheating because your painting will never be exactly like the one AI did. Yours will always be unique. The reference is just for inspiration.

We all collect or have”references,photos ect”, and we take ideas and colors and morph in to our creation. The artist in our soul, creates! There is nothing under the sun thats original. AI will always be around now, it’s up to us to decide how we will use it. Very interesting to think about! Karen Dirmish, learner

I believe the source should always be acknowledge regardless where it comes from. Cheating would be just taking the photo the AI creates and passing it as an original, but getting inspiration its completely different!

I think this is a tool just like any other tool that an artist might use. Many artists are using Photoshop to remove backgrounds from the reference photos and painting from that. Very many artists are using things like the “cut out” tool that flattens your images and are winning awards in shows from those images that were modified. I can feed my image into into AI and give directions so that it transforms to a much better photo. I personally see it as just a very much more advanced tool that artist should be able to use like any other tool.

Hiya, I think it's correct to say "you were inspired by AI" that way it might not be an exact, traced copy. Thanks for this; very thought provoking xx

Love your picture as always. AI as it is now is awesome to train artists to see the logic of a scene. Especially lights and shadows. There is always something a little bit off in the generated images that the artist can improve. For me, the biggest problem is where the AI acquired the images to train the AI system. Finding one that didn't steel other artists work is proving neigh impossible. If we could have that, I would have less issue using it. But in the current state, it feels icky to use this tool knowing how it was developed.

I think enough artists use reference photos and don’t necessarily say it unless asked. I agree that if you’re aware of the photographer giving credit for the reference photo is the right thing to do.

I love your painting. I have trouble trying to come up with my own composition.

There are many great points made below on this subject...I would only be repeating what has been said. I think it could be a great tool, just as with photographs - and our imaginations are the only limitation! Thank you for bringing this option to us, along with a good, thought provoking topic!

Great discussion !

I have the same questions as you do with AI . I think it’s a great tool to use for learning how to paint 🎨 a subject that you can use to create a painting, to use for inspiration, but is it stealing I’m not sure 🤔. Like you I would have to honestly say & give credit for the idea & inspiration to AI. This was a great video idea for sparking some creativity & great conversation Emma! Thanks 🥰so much for sharing your thoughts & video with us!🫶🏻

Just found this and wanted to share- each AI generator has its own policy, so it would be good anyone using AI generated images, reads the policy. For example IG AI (Meta)’s policy says that its not allowed “ Representing that the use of Llama 2 or outputs are human-generated” so this tells me we must give some credit to AI

As the courts ruling goes.. AI can be used as a tool but unless it is substantially altered by Human hands.. it cannot be copyrighted.

No, I don't think it's stealing. It helps generate ideas for artist without worrying about being sued for copyright issues.

Interesting topic. I'm going to ask my attorney daughter-in-law. Basically we are asking is Can a non-person (AI) own a copyright to an artwork image..... Photographers own the copyright to their work.

I haven’t got the option to search META AI. I wonder if it is only available to verified accounts ?

TBH for me there is no difference between this and painting from a reference photo. As you saw, it is very hard to copy it exact. So for me its a NO to crediting AI. A reference photo is an actual piece of art that somebody makes, so I would always credit that. To me this is NOT stealing. I mean, its not like there is an AI man quickly using watercolor to paint your picture 😀

When I searched I get the same pictures so they must be stored under certain words, categories etc.

I don't know enough about it. I will continue to use human intelligence for the time being. I will wait and see (for several years) to see if any problems arise that can cause a lot of trouble!!! Just my opinion🤔🖌

If a class uses a live model are they copying or are they making an original?

@charlottesmom

9 күн бұрын

EXACTLY!! When you use a model, a human, a bowl of fruit or anything else on Earth in a still life or life model class all the paintings in the class will be different, sometimes wildly different. If you get ideas from AI it’s basically just a model for what you paint, very few people can paint like a xerox machine thus the human influence.

I don't credit AI for the original image because it isn't an artist who created it. I obviously change it to fit my style and my medium and in the end the painting is mine.

I love your painting more than the AI ❤

I think our own style influences products. Many people paint “Old Faithful “ but will never be with the same perspective! AI has not yet been deemed a for sale item? If our work is not for sale, it doesn’t seem like stealing. Just inspiration?

I agree that AI won’t replace artist ! I do think we can take ideas from it and give credit maybe ! But I also believe serendipity is more important when creating art and AI still might not give us that! Getting inspiration from nature and surfing random photos on Pinterest is something I do and a chance discovery of something I paint is better for my creative process!

You still made the image your own by painting it imo. Your work speaks for itself, regardless of reference

Inspiration is inspiration. I don't care who/what your muse is, just keep painting

AI collects its information by culling every piece of artwork / writing / music , etc on the internet, and does _not_ credit the creator in any way. And consequently, *AI generated work is plagiarism and is in breach of copyright laws.* The problem is that at the moment (as far as I know) no-one has brought a test case to court, but when someone does, and is able to prove that part of that work is their own, the sparks will fly for sure! To take someone's song, piece of art, photograph, writing, etc and claim it as our own (which we do, if we don't have permission from the originator of the piece, whch has to be in writing, btw, and even if we do have permission, don't acknowledge the source), we are in breach of copyright, *no matter how small or large the changes we make.* Creators have the intellectual copyright of the work they produce, and that stands in international law. Even if you use, for example, Emma's tutorials, done, as it is, as a YT tutorial, and don't acknowledge her as your source, you are breaching copyright, even if it's "only in my sketchbook". By not acknoweldging our source, we are allowing people to think it's all our own work, and in fact, yes, it _is_ theft. It seems to me that very few people know this, and it makes me very sad! Th argument that, "Sit a group of _N_ people in front of a scene and you'll get _N_ different pictures" is true, but if a life drawing, it is done with the permission of the model. If a still life, it's done with the permission of the person who set it up. But did you know that in law, photographing someone's house and using it in the public domain, the owner of the house and the architect could each sue you for breach of copyright? Of course, this rarely happens, but there _have_ been court cases against this, and won. The only way to be sure that you're ok is to acknowledge the source of your inspiration. Oh, and to stop using other people's reference photos and take you own! After all, the majority of us have mobile phones with cameras, and all of us have subjects to paint all around us, every single day - the tree by the roadside, the cars parked nearby, the flowers in the gardens, the view from the bus, the lake in the park, the cat snoozing in the garden, the shelf of food in the larder, and for many, the people we live with. The choice is endless. All it takes is the use of our inbuilt creative ability and the willingness not to be lazy, but to stretch that ability, and have fun and take pleasure in saying, "The drawing / painting / composition is all my own work."

@charlottesmom

9 күн бұрын

But……if I’m putting MY OWN drawing into the AI generator (Dream) and putting the influence on 90% (meaning they use 90% of MY OWN drawing to influence what is spat out by the generator) I think it’s fine, as it really only tweaks my own stuff 10%. I’m not stealing 90% of some other random person’s work, it still looks like my stuff just tweaked ever so slightly. My stuff is on is on the internet so who knows someone could be getting my work (amateur though it is!! 😂)spat out as AI for them.

I don’t have a real issue if the result is used in the same way one uses other references. That AI relies on compositing bits and pieces of images/art that already exist becomes a gray area for many. Selling a print using an image produced by a computer (not to be confused with creating digital art with traditional skills using a computer/tablet) is something that is happening and realistically not going away. I guess it ultimately boils down to the viewer/buyer and what the want/expect. No matter what I believe there should be transparency in how artwork is represented.

Even when an artist draws inspiration from other artists or a beginner takes inspiration from video tutorials, there are no two the same. I think mentioning the photo reference was AI generated is enough. Chances of more than one person having the same reference piece generated is minimal.

I don't know enough about AI to comment except that it is scary. This painting is beautiful! What colors did you use for the sky? Thanks Emma 😊❤

I think using any platform to take inspiration from is not plagiarism. Moreover I think it gives the artist many ideas for his/ her creation. 😊

I get your thoughts on this- I would say AI inspired but no copyright requirement

i also used AI to make a few paintings and came up with the same questions. For now, Ai generated images are free of copyright. So legaly, you dont need to reference it. This said, i would mention it, cause its how i am. The images fed into Ai are from real artist, you can even ask Ai to create a picture in a particular artist style, but when you prompt AI to add this or that to the image, the there is a chance the resulted image was never made in real life. I suppose the answer rests in our own conscience, at least until laws are created!

In my opinion, first no matter what reference photo one uses as inspiration, one doesn't copy it exactly. It is good to credit the photographer or artist that gave you the inspiration. AI is computer generated, it isn't a person, and using a photo generated by AI for a painting one still wouldn't make an exact copy. I wouldn't give credit.

Maybe it helps if you know that AI art can not be copyrighted. So... generating a reference photo and then making your version of it, I wouldn't consider it stealing since you reference from a non-copyrighted image. And yes, I know the whole topic of AI supposedly stealing from artists, but that is a different discussion on its own I guess. ❤ so, yeah, it's difficult. And I love your painting by the way😊

So you painted a landscape based on an AI image. So what? Painters throughout history paint images from models or being out in a field somewhere painting a landscape. I don't think it's any different you painting based on an AI image than if you paint a flower bed based on your neighbor's garden.

@charlottesmom

9 күн бұрын

And….that scene she painted could actually be from somewhere on earth, no different like you said than taking a photo or looking in a book, or a passing field for influence, or even getting influence from some painting in an art gallery. Who hasn’t seen 12 million different painted versions of The Starry Night, or Girl With a Pearl Earring on Instagram, that doesn’t seem to bother anyone. 🤷🏻‍♀️

I feel that although you may have not physically sketched the image you still had to put in the guide lines and the initial idea and as far as copying it line for line I myself even when using a reference photo never just flat out copy it I use elements from several different places and as far as giving it credit well im kinda not sure on that one lol but that's my opinion lil

I think if an artist is using AI to generate reference photos they should mention that they used ai image generation for inspiration (when asked). Some people might frown upon this, but that’s really all they can do, ai art isn’t copyrighted, you can do whatever you want with it. The ethical concerns are valid to ponder, but if an artist is using ai to improve their art, increase efficiency, and increase their sales, then I say let it be so!

I use AI for inspiration, but never put ‘in the style of’ another artist. Then it will come up with that artist style and almost a copy!

@charlottesmom

9 күн бұрын

TRUE!! I would consider that stepping on toes. If you just knock in “star filled sky with rainbow and unicorn”🦄 I think you’d get some interesting influence for paintings but fairly random stuff.

Very tough topic. I think if you said AI inspired that is enough. That leads me to another question which I think could be similiar to the AI issue. Do you give credit to every paintings inspiration? You are driving down the road and see a beautiful farmhouse and field, and you take a photo and go home and paint it or you do plein air at that moment. Not your home, you did not paint the house, plant the field. Do you go to the home owner ask their name and get all the details and credit them for your inspipration? Please paint everything day to day scenes, landscapes, gardens, flowers, farms, abandoned building, cars, buildings etc, are you 'copying' what you see in front of you, do you credit those photos? If you mention every inspiration for every piece of art work you do then yes reference AI, if you do not ever mention your inspiration then no, its your artwork reference / mention as you see fit. You can go down so many rabbit holes with this it could make your head spin.

Where does AI get these images?

I see no problem using it for inspiration and a tool. What I have seen that is more of an issue is when someone uses AI to generate an image and then uses that image to print and sell. They don’t put their take on it or any other work into besides typing an idea into a program

Think its a good tool for beginner artists who's not grown enough yet to create their own image. If your selling or sharing it to many others you should let people know its a AI copy or AI inspired. Its was great that your painting was different enough that I liked yours better.

Good question. How do you know which AI created the image and how do you credit AI? And, as stated below, no 2 paintings would be the exact same. Perhaps saying the image was "inspired" by an AI image would be sufficient. Guess we'll have to have the first lawsuit? But who would being it?

With my painting skills it would be an insult to artificial intelligence...lol

@charlottesmom

9 күн бұрын

I do put my own drawings into AI and get some nice tweaks on them that I would have never thought of, they still look like my work, only better. 👍🏻

I think it is a great learning tool. I’m not sure on if you need to reference AI. I’ll be watching the comments

It’s a tough one isn’t it, because if the AI works out a scene that is never replicated, then it feels like it’s just for you and ok to use it. And it’s tempting to let the AI do all the thinking and working out. I could get really carried away using it as a tool, but is it right? Not sure.

Very interesting. I think if you take inspiration, because you will never be able to copy exactly as created, that it is not necessary. Not sure how it is any different than looking at another artists work for inspiration.

I don’t have ask AI on my instagram? It says not available. I use An AI program to help me with planning a painting

This is a concern. If you have 10 artists sitting at the same location, each painting the same scene or model, do you get identical paintings? It is similar to us following you while painting. If I keep my painting as close to your painting as possible, I would say inspired or based on your Emma L KZread tutorial and not claim it as my own. I am not a professional artist yet, so I would not be selling those paintings anyhow. But as I move towards that goal and I mix up a flower bouquet or paint a local mountain scene, how many have seen or done the same the thing to generate their inspiration? When using copyrighted images versus “free” images, the copyrighted source definitely needs to be acknowledged. If not, at that point, it is plagiarism. But if you take a similar photo image or are at the same location, (I.e. plain air) without ever seeing the copyrighted image, you can imagine a similar scene in your painterly style and create that painting. Then is that painting an original or copied because someone else took a phot you never saw? All good things to contemplate. But we shouldn’t let it cripple us in thinking that there are no new or original ideas, we just need to paint for ourselves. Paint HAPPY!

My first thought is, ‘If you know exactly what is going to be done, why do it?’ Picasso. I also worry about ppl who think changing something 10% is ok to then call it their own. But I can also see the potential to use it as reference. What bothers me most is, where do these images come from? Where does each piece of the composite image come from? A computer needs to take the pieces from somewhere… And finally, I want ai to do the shit jobs I don’t want to do, while I do the things I do! Let me paint while ai cleans my benches….

@GigisART

10 күн бұрын

I couldn’t have said it any better. I’m so against using AI in any art form, I get “hot under the collar”! I’ve worked hard to learn so many different mediums. I’ve shared my art online for over 25 years. So AI has access to every picture I’ve ever posted, and now anyone can use it? NO!

I think AI uses other artist's and photographer's work as reference, so it doesn't really "do" much. It might be nice to just thank all the artists and photographers who have put their work out there for AI to reference.

Hello Emma. I have to say that I have had the same questions about AI inspired images. I don't think it's cheating unless you print it out and call it your own. I think that mentioning AI inspired images is up to each individual. I don't think it is helpful to artist when developing there drawing skills or imaginstion. On the other hand it is helpful when at tines your stuck and just staring at a blank paper not knowing where to start. We've all been there. I quess as long as AI doesn't become self aware and seek out vengeance against us for taking there idea 🥺. So for now i think it's a usefully tool for sure. I don't know that I would feel the need to give credit to AI generated ideas...🤔 that's left to each artists personal choice for now. Thank you for this discussion Emma I think yiu speak for alot of us ❤

I feel credit needs to be given to the source. When you use AI, you don't know the source or artist who took the photo. I also think it can be a great learning and practice tool. For those who sell their work, the source should be revealed, in my opinion.

I think if crediting an AI generated image you would in fairness need to credit "the whole of humanity". Mad right? Not if you consider that that's the way AI works by using the data sourced from all of us originally. I mean if we source inspiration only from nature for example we don't consider that we're stealing from "the planet" or a "creator". When you think about it we actually "create" or "generate" (even from our imagination) very little indeed. Our thought processes develop through a myriad of interactions, experiences and social constructs from the time we are born. I think we just credit fellow human beings rightly because we make conventions in order to best understand the truth of work and in order to not advantage ourselves or disadvantage others. It's a bit like when people cheat in sport. We just don't like it. So, I think to just say you used AI is okay but it wouldn't actually be the end of the world if you didn't. You can't break a trust with it or hurt its feelings. The questions of integrity don't seem the same some how.

It's no different than a song writer changing up the words a little to someone's song..I think as long as you change or add a little something to it you don't have to worry about it!

@juchlu3081

10 күн бұрын

Maybe I would write something like "inspiration from AI". Just to be on the safe side.

@MrsBarnabas

10 күн бұрын

Wendy, I'm sorry, but you are wrong. To take someone's song, piece of art, photograph, writing, etc and claim it as our own (which we do, if we don't have permission from the originator of the piece, whch has to be in writing, btw, and even if we do have permission, don't acknowledge the source), we are in breach of copyright, no matter how small or large the changes we make. Creators have the intellectual copyright of the work they produce, and that stands in international law. Even if you use, for example, Emma's tutorials, done, as it is, as a YT tutorial, and don't acknowledge her as your source, you are breaching copyright, even if it's "only in my sketchbook". By not acknoweldging our source, we are allowing people to think it's all our own work, and in fact, yes, it _is_ theft. It seems to me that very few people know this, and it makes me very sad! AI collects its information by culling every piece of artwork / writing / music , etc on the internet, and does _not_ credit the creator in any way. And consequentlyl AI generated work is plagiarism and is in breach of copyright laws. The problem is that at the moment (as far as I know) no-one has brought a test case to court, but when someone does, and is able to prove that part of that work is their own, the sparks will fly for sure!

I think this is a great tool for practice painting. And until AI becomes intelligent enough to hire a lawyer, you’re pretty safe to copy it and sell the painting. As to whether it’s right or wrong, I think it’s pretty much the same as copying anything. It’s not your idea, but if you’re ok with that, go for it! Lots of people have trouble coming up with original compositions. As I said before, AI looks like a great tool.

I don't believe I would ever be able to copy a painting stroke by stroke from any source. I'm not that skilled. I would credit the original idea whether it was from a photo in a book or from an AI generated photo.

Using AI is exactly that “artificial “; I do not think it needs even to be mentioned. While painting from and photograph, even the ones we take ourselves, are not originals for they’ve been generated , or derived, from nature, and we cannot in “reality” take credit for the composition of such photo. We can “artistically” generate it using our own style and color palette, or by rearranging certain aspects of it but it still comes from a source we had zero in put into “originally” speaking. When it comes to using other photographers photos however, it bears giving credit to the photographer for capturing the light and using certain camera settings specific angles set by the photographer, which in my humble opinion is an art in itself. Giving AI recognition, to me, is like giving a bed recognition for conception. I’m NOT for giving recognition to anything deemed “artificial intelligence”. I do however believe those who garner AI to directly muddy the waters of people and events to pass that off as reality should reference that they used AI BECAUSE in those circumstances they can use it to confuse people for a nefarious gain over another person or event!

to a certain extent it is the same thing we do with our human eye, just that with the AI we are devoid of looking up or naturally ingesting the inspiration. So I don't know that you would really need to say anything. Especially when you consider how many artists copied each other during many movements of art within the past. I myself do not like AI being anywhere near the art space. it does not belong. But as far as inspiration goes, it does not change anything in this case. Also, I think they said AI images cannot have a copyright, so you could use it and claim it as yours. This is the same thing as saying is tracing cheating, when there is so much proof that old masters did it, and that true artists use the tools they have and experiment with tools. that true artists truly only care about the results they get. i hate to make a case for AI anything. but true human artists copy from multiple sources, that is how it is not truly copying someone. and if its collecting from multiple sources, it is basically humans outsourcing creativity. Now I would say never to use AI because i think we should do the creativity, getting inspired, and finding random sources or surprise sources of inspiration organically, the real question is would you rather do the process of getting inspired organically or electronically. I HATE that Facebook changed the search bar to ask Meta AI anything. I HATE IT. Also there are no truly original ideas if you look deep down and many artists have mentioned stealing like an artist, including David Bowie.

Also wondering , in this world of technology, how much does AI know about your style of painting. If I asked for a picture of a bouquet of flowers would I get a very simplistic picture based on my skill level. Big brother is watching!

Noooo…using AI (even for “inspiration”) will just make it better and eventually unless there’s some kind of intervention it’s gonna replace artists 🤷‍♀️ there’s plenty of human inspiration do not resort to this.

I am not a professional artist intending to sell my work. I can see where this could be an issue for this class of artists, but identifying AI as the inspiration should be enough “credit” given since you really don’t have a named artist to credit. We look at all kinds of things to get inspiration and never classify it as cheating or copying. AI is simply another tool for the inspiration toolbox. Does anyone really have a completely original idea that has never been expressed before? Even when I use a tutorial my finished piece does not look just like the instructors version, but I still give credit to the artist for the inspiration. If I ever use AI for inspiration I will say so. If others feel that using AI is morally wrong, then don’t use it.

I’ve only heard about AI but I just went to Instagram and messed with it. It’s wild.

If AI can steal from all of us, we can steal from AI..

YOU PAINTED it, it’s gorgeous. An inspiration is not the same as a copy. IMO

So controversial a subject Emma. I am like you and would love to know the rules of the game. I follow a lot of KZread channels (not all art), and many are talking about the fact that there being no rules about AI is dangerous. I do wonder if any Art organisations have written any rules about working with AI in Art ?

I think it is totally fine to use AI for reference. To copy and paste an AI image for non-profit is fine too. I do that for the non profit job I work at because I don’t have the time to travel and snap photographs. To copy and paste the AI image into a for profit site in my opinion seems a little dishonest to me.

I don't think it's anything wrong with using it for reference and inspiration. When you recreate it using your style I don’t feel that is "copying"...in my opinion. If someone looks up an artist and copies their art...that is copying/stealing. The AI is generating from random images....there is no way to "give credit" to a single artist. I don't see anything wrong with it.

NO! If you’ve ever used article flowers as a focus for a floral arrangement to paint from, did you steal from those artificial flowers? However if you want to give them credit, go ahead. Are you guilty, do you feel guilty.. to thy own self be true.

I’m not into ai, I agree with you, how can things be patented now? It’s morally wrong….intellectual property?

Its not an original so I think it would be unethical to sell it, but for practice it's fine. Personally I have no interest in using AI for anything. I can find plenty of inspiration on my own and even take my own reference photos.

I enjoy painting AI created images. It helps me experiment more with mixing colors, layout and a host of other things. I like to paint. Period. I don’t want to spend hours creating a drawing. I just want to paint and it gives me pleasure to do so. My watercolor paintings never look exactly like the AI. How could it? It's not watercolor and mine is. It is my skill or lack thereof which creates the final piece. And . . . That’s ok. I don’t sell my work. I may give away a few pieces but that's about it. In my opinion, it is very sad that in this world everything is mine, mine, mine. God created and creates EV- ER- E THING - period. I don’t see many people giving Him credit for even the slightest thing. Oh, and by the way, he doesn’t try to copyright everything either. Only man looks to take the credit every chance they get. Relax. Enjoying painting and stop worrying about every little thing. Life is way too short. Just my 2 cents.

AI is copying other artists' style, and recombining elements taken directly from other artists' work. AI models will produce images that contain parts of artist's watermarks. Where is the art used by the AI model coming from? Did the artists give permission for the AI trainers to use their art? Is applying an alteration mask to an element of an original artwork, and then combining that with other masked elements from other works actually coming up with something new or just randomly combining known elements? If you use AI to inspire a piece, as opposed to copying with minor alterations, that could be a valid use. AI can find elements in styles from artists you've never heard of and might not have seen otherwise. This can inspire you in a similar fashion that scrolling through an online gallery, or art book, or in person art show. However, even this limited use is helping the AI model owners profit off the theft of other artists' work. Are you okay with AI model owners profiting off YOUR art without paying you or even asking permission?

Legal issues and ongoing copyright lawsuits aside -- if you are copying something a machine spit out, what's the point of painting at all, if you cannot claim it as 100% yours? All you did in the process was the execution, but nothing of the planning and inspiration behind it. What does it do to your creativity if all you end up being is a human photocopy machine?

You could just say this art was inspired by AI photo.

I use AI as a rough idea but I don't copy it

I think AI is just a tool and there is no shame in using it. Are we crediting iPhones each time we take a picture and then using it as a reference? You can say: “but it’s me, who took a photo”. Ok, but with AI wasn’t that YOU, who put in the prompt? There are few points I think we need to take into account: 1. I prefer putting in prompts that are much more complicated than “simple landscape”. I put in the EXACT idea I want to paint, then I get a bunch of generated stuff that I need to then manipulate, change to my liking AND keep in mind and fix all the mistakes it creates, like doors that are opened and closed at the same time 😂. 2. In the day and age where artists have such tight deadlines and need to work a lot to make a living, any tool or shortcut must be used! 3. It’s an amazing tool for when you fell burnt out. Because normally you would just stop painting at all or feel frustrated every time you paint. AI can help artists go through burnout and hopefully feel inspired again. These are just few points, but there are soooo many, I can’t even fit them in this small comment section

@brandonmagnus4414

10 күн бұрын

Yeah, I use it frequently for generating reference photos that suit my style and that inspire me, and I find it requires a lot of tinkering with the prompt to get decent images worth making art from