I would definitely be down to hear you follow this as it continues to unfold

@thebradcolbow

Жыл бұрын

👍

@nottyseel949

Жыл бұрын

@@thebradcolbow Question from a complete ignoramus (me): Completely understanding the basic concerns of AI art, I haven't heard anything of what to me, as an ignoramus, seems like a potentially great possibility for traditional artists. I'm curious about an educated take on the idea: I have so many artists that I follow and so many of their character designs I feel like "Wow, I wish there was an entire story in this art style, about this character. I want to see more about them and their world..." I immediately realize the immense workload that would be on the artist and why it isn't feasible, but from the story caption it does seem that the artist has more in mind for the character just simply cannot invest the time to flesh it out with the same quality. It now seems that the possibility exists that individual artists could potentially do full animations to feature length productions with the assistance of AI, is that possible? That to me seems like it would be amazing. But I'm not sure if AI art can actually animate a given scene based on single images created by an artist. There are many more questions, but is that even a remote possibility? By ignoramus, I mean I know nothing about AI and probably less about production level art.

@innerpull

Жыл бұрын

Same

@kristoferkrus

Жыл бұрын

Me too. I think this is very relevant for the art community.

@LadyGameProfessor

Жыл бұрын

@@thebradcolbow - Something I wish were included here is the toxicity in the other direction. I've heard from so many artists - many of whom have decades of "traditional art" experience and started training AI on their own work in order to speed up their art creation - who have been receiving literal death threats over their embrace of AI. ALL the toxicity needs to stop.

The fact that Artists get bullied because they are concerned for their livelihood is insane! Visual artists have never gotten the respect they deserve. I’d like to see how music artists react when AI can make hit songs similar to there hits without their consent.

@bennymotalem340

Жыл бұрын

This is already happening. We will see how it unfolds.

@cogs2937

Жыл бұрын

This seems to be how the internet works for everything. Mob rule.

@qud3913

Жыл бұрын

Dude, already happening, lol

@ChickenMcThiccken

Жыл бұрын

this just means that artists better look for other lines of work. lazy smoking mushrooms all day and painting; aint gonna work no more

@jamielaseev1321

Жыл бұрын

@@ChickenMcThiccken you think artists just smoke and laze around all day?

As an aspiring artist, and sometimes commissioner of art, I tried using midjourney’s free trial to do some experiments, went to inform myself and see what would come out of it. I had something pretty specific in mind, and it was my own character, and also something I would never use outside of my little experiment. Safe to say that the results were terrible. As long as you put general prompts without having a very specific idea of what you want, you can get very good looking images (that break down in details and hands tho) that uou can choose from, however when the thing you have in mind is specific and you want it to be done in a very specific way, the AI is unable (to my experience) to deliver. From my point of view, I much prefer to commission an artist that has the style I prefer and I envision for the art I want, I know I can talk to them and provide all the references they’ll need, make sure they understood my needs completely and get the result I wish, instead of hoping that an AI does it (and maybe gives my character four hands or an extra finger on each finger…)

@HyperDevv

4 ай бұрын

MIDjourney, stable diffusion and sora better

Please continue your commentary on the impact of AI art. It's a valuable perspective from a working professional artist.

Imagine that in the future there will be AI doing accounting, AI doing office work, AI doing data collection, AI driving taxis, planes and ships, AI that regulates air traffic, then millions of people will lose their jobs, it's time for me to buy land and start farming, If you think I'm paranoid guess what, my boss just fired me because he could save money by using AI instead of using an illustrator like me

@Rubonic

Жыл бұрын

Farming will also be done by robos

@thataverageguy826

Жыл бұрын

@@Rubonic Not all farmers are rich especially in my country, so not everyone will have enough money to buy a robot

@bitterbunn1831

Жыл бұрын

you forgot architechts cause they are developing an ai that can make building planes

@Vall_Ey

Жыл бұрын

you can start make art online as content creator, may be it's not for last very long since youtube rules become more insane too, but at least worth to try little bit.

@TiagoMorbusSa

Жыл бұрын

This is not the future, this is the present. You just don't know about it because its usage is built into larger business models or more complicated workflows. I mean, perhaps not the driving taxis example. But the others? 100%.

I'd love for you to keep covering this! You manage to talk about the issue from a very objective standpoint while still maintaining a sense of heart that stands with artists. I didn't know much about the legal nitty gritty of this case but you managed to make it so accessible and clear. Great content and hope to see more!

Thank you for covering this. You put everything so well, and I agree with your sentiments. As an artist, I’ve lost almost all my motivation recently because of this. I even deleted my artstation (although it’s likely too late to avoid being scraped). I’m so disheartened by the future we’re pursuing and by the attitudes and behaviour of so many people. There will be a lot of regret in the future after the earth beneath creatives has been salted, and we stop producing the people who bring more colour to the world.

@Skitdora2010

Жыл бұрын

AI is not you. What you create will be based upon a lifetime of your experiences and be unique to you. You can teach AI to write stories too, it knows words and grammar, but it will never tell your story based on your life experiences. Artists do not create for others, they create for themselves, and what you create will still fascinate other people because it was you who it came from.

@Cheapiebeepie

Жыл бұрын

@@Skitdora2010 Yeah but I'm hungry and have rent?

@NeroDefogger

Жыл бұрын

what even does that mean?

@sarahbaron3426

Жыл бұрын

@@Skitdora2010 companies won’t pay for an artist to work 1000’s of hours on art when they can get it in 10mins… there will be those that still occasionally use artists but many will be swayed by finances… it’s the way of some humans to not value what they have until,it’s gone ❤ many of my artist friends are already looking for other work after the last few years.

@midnightwhiz2664

Жыл бұрын

I know it is discouraging and scary. Honestly, this technology has put me in a bit of an existential crises. I’ve had this conversation with a handful of people and i’m really surprised at the amount of people who believe AI isn’t capable of replacing our jobs. But i doubt people are willing to sacrifice convenience, time, and money for manual labor, when even at this early of a stage professionals can be nearly identically replicated. Companies won’t have a choice but to use these tools because of competition. Artist and writers are only the first to feel the impact, but I couldn’t even list all the jobs that are now pretty much obsolete because of AI. It will be exciting to see all the innovations these upcoming years, it feels like anything is possible now that anything you want to know or see can be accessed quicker than you can communicate it. It’s almost like we all have access to the same brain now. But I still can’t shake the fear that greed & corruption will find a way to prevent this from truly benefiting mankind. Jobs won’t get any easier, employers will just expect more production. Ads and sponsorships will start to worm their way into question outputs. Originality will be unimpressive, invisible, or met with skepticism. Political conflicts about artificial warfare and propaganda. Privacy violations…and on, and on…. when wouldn’t it just be fucking nice if we could all just have some nice robots help take care of us, while we draw some fucking pictures…just because we want to? 🫠

Please continue to cover this topic, this has been eye opening and awareness of implications on artists and art is much needed.

Definitely continue covering this topic, great video 🙌🏾

@thebradcolbow

Жыл бұрын

Thank you! Will do!

Great. Civil. Instructive. Hopeful. Best perspective I've seen so far. Thanks, Brad.

@thebradcolbow

Жыл бұрын

Thanks Bill!

@firelordOzai3

Жыл бұрын

I don’t see why artists need to be civil when their identities are being stolen by a multi billion dollar machine that’s going to rob them of the ability to feed their families

Imagine developers developing AI to write codes and then getting fired because of the AI they develo... Oh, wait, that just happened a few months ago. Ironic.

@ShadowriverUB

Жыл бұрын

You still need programers to refine generated code, same as ai art needs fine tunning with photoshop

@jamiefredrickson2560

Жыл бұрын

@@ShadowriverUB People crying about AI art work are full if it EVERYTHING artist "create" is done by using the ideas and even images of other artists. AI is a tool like a paint brush or sculpt knife. Let me know when the cry babies literally plant, grow, and harvest the tree they used to make a wood sculpture for exmaple

@OnionMilker

Жыл бұрын

​​@@jamiefredrickson2560 You dunce the only way AI art exists is by the AI developers taking work artists make without their permission, the problem isn't in AI making art the problem is in it making art based off real people's work without their consent, knowledge or any compensation as these people quite often feed themselves through paid commissions. Why don't you spend 6+ years on daily drawing and studying and have someone rip off whatever you make while you starve and they make money off it? We all know you won't because you want cheap unethically produced art because waaah artists need to eat food and pay rent and pfff why pay them for their services.

@galaktoast

Жыл бұрын

This comment displays a misunderstanding of these AIs. They will never be job replacers for those with skills. Programmers are using ChatGPT to great effect to enhance their work as a productivity tool. For a non programmer, it will generate unusable, deprecated, or pretty barebones generic code. If artists saw AI the same way, it could be used as a boilerplate template in a sense to be improved upon, and the artists could use these tools to greater effect than non-artists. Also, you talk about layoffs. And while they are happening, it's not due to ChatGPT, at least not yet. The layoffs you were seeing have come after a mass hiring, and are pretty typical. Companies such as Google still have more people than they had before their mass-hiring, and even keep people employed just to keep them from other companies -- potentially hundreds of employees just sitting there collecting paychecks because it's considered worse if get hired by a competitor. Even my company had layoffs, but it doesn't seem to be stopping them from hiring more people they don't need.

@darkzeroprojects4245

Жыл бұрын

@@jamiefredrickson2560 Because having problems with A.I. bad. Got it.

Thanks for covering this topic! I think it is very important to raise awerness to the dramatic changes this technology is making in the world. I am sure that many of your subscribers are somewhere along their journy to make a career in digital art and these events can totally change their lives. Please keep us updated!

You merge everything related to art in a very good way on this channel, and I love it. You perfectly combined "Informative" and "entertaining" and you release videos like a wizard (precisely when he means to). So yes please, keep this content coming

I would love to hear more on this topic! My English teacher is actually having us do a lot of work and research on this topic right now and it interests me (and I’m sure many others) a lot. Thanks talking about this Brad! Love the content, keep up the great work!!!

Please do keep us updated. I just hope that the artists get a fair hearing at trial and that the obvious money backing AI isn't too much for them to overcome.

Keep making these vids Brad! Anyone drawing/modelling digitally needs to be in the loop with this! There is no sense hiding from it! I find it fascinating and have experimented with it as well asking "what if..."

I'd definitely like you to cover more of this! In the future maybe talk about how some generated images have the artist's signature still there.

@thebradcolbow

Жыл бұрын

I've been following this for a while and there is SO MUCH to dig into. I think that's a big part of the Getty suit because in so many images you can literally see their watermark.

@werewolflayne2730

Жыл бұрын

The ai doesn’t understand that a signature is an artists name, if you think it does tell it to write someone’s signature. All the ai knows is that some of the training data similar to the generation has a squiggly line somewhere on it. If you look at any of the signatures that you see in the generations you will be able to tell that it is just a squiggly line with no meaning.

@werewolflayne2730

Жыл бұрын

Also it’s not “still there”, as it never was there. The ai makes images by making noise, imagine how tv static looks, and slowly removes the noise until it looks like what the prompt is asking for. And how it knows what things look like is not due to copying work, it learned from the training data what the mathematical definition of a cat is. Since it has that definition it can use it to make images in anyway, and once the training is complete and the ai has all the definitions it needs then the training data is no longer needed, stable diffusion is only a few gigabytes and can run on consumer hardware.

@YouGoSheriGirl

Жыл бұрын

When mine have a signature or logo it's always been nonsense when you look closer. No discernible words. I consider that a distraction with most work and I either input a negative prompt or fix it in Photoshop.

@lp712

Жыл бұрын

That’s not a signature from any human artist from any art the ai referenced…. The ai created that itself… and it’s not an actual signature.. it’s a meaningless squiggly as if it was a signature. Why did you not think the ai could do that??? Why did you automatically assume that was a human artists signature???

As a data professional for years, you nailed it! It not easy to translate such complex situation into simple words, well done!

@thebradcolbow

Жыл бұрын

Thanks, that means a lot 😁

@sk-sm9sh

Жыл бұрын

It's kinda simple. It's just AI companies trying to blur the situation for the business gains. In essence generative ai is no different a collage generator it's just more complexity involved but it's really same principle. If we use copyright when someone puts a collage of 10 images, how come it's no longer theft if one uses a billion images as input? If you steal little it's a theft if you steal a lot you're free? What a nonsense is this? We must demand traceability where all generated artwork is provided with top influences and top influences should be paid money when generated artwork is sold. And we must demand that "great artist steal" is only privilege that humans may enjoy and not AI. AI should not be allowed to steal artistic inspiration without giving credits back including giving credits back to all the authors who had been long dead in some form of donations to art schools. In essence we should not let it lose and allow AI (in essence few companies that run them) to use human knowledge built over millennias for profit with no credit back.

@NeroDefogger

Жыл бұрын

@@sk-sm9sh you literally dude just dude just shut the f up dude just freaking shut up, what a patetic garbage dude, you have no freaking clue, educate yourself and learn computer science and to code, you will literally laugh at what you said, dude just shut up, "collage generator" HAHAHAHAHAHH I can't dude, I can't, yeah sure "billion images" in a 1000x1000 pixels aka 1 million pixels, you are so laughable, shut the f up

@klaussone

Жыл бұрын

@@sk-sm9sh It isn't simple, because AI raises deep questions about things we would consider to be self-evident. But are no longer so. Like the nature of learning, how we humans and AI learn. Did any artists anywhere ever learned by themselves? Is any work original or the result of reused ideas on different combination of preexisting factors? This question was easier before because beside the talent required, there was the investment of hard work. This work is still being made, but now in the fraction of seconds. Because both the learning and execution of AI is exponentially faster. This is an issue, because it is a philosophical question. Something both artists and legislators are poorly prepared for.

I think part of the toxic response comes from what non artists consider art, traditionally an artist makes a piece of work to be enjoyed by others and art tends to become public domain when it is not trademarked or copyrighted in modern times allowing the "free-use" term to be used for that specific art. so when it comes to non artists who can then make something in the "style" of an artist they like or find interesting to then make a custom art for themselves is a form of admiration, however then the issue comes when people try to monotize it, in essence AI like this is meant to be a tool for both novices and professionals to allow them to create great art. Artists have always had a hard time monotizing their works and this is a chance to change in both good and bad ways, there is going to be an adaption phase but I do see artists themselves being the ones to use AI the most in the end. AI is just another tool in the toolbox and a professional will always make better work than a novice and AI makes mistakes and has limits, (yall seen them hands on AI Art?)

Definitely keep up the coverage, if you can, Brad. It’ll be interesting to see where this all ends up.

Please keep it up with this topic Brad, it gets really time consuming and scary being informed in this matter mostly because when you find an opinion or post from the A.I images community it always feels like ''yes, you're going to be replaced and there's nothing that you can do'' :/

@Mrhellslayerz

Жыл бұрын

When the people you talk to practically live off of the phrase "Lol cry more", no words can help at that point. Only fights.

@simpleguy6751

Жыл бұрын

There are so many else you can do in life, and it is not like this is the first time that technology has affected some livelihood. In fact it has always been occurring, but we learned to adapt and took it to our advantage. And at the end of the day a lot of artists will eventually use this to speed up their work by a ton. This AI would obviously help the animation industry a lot, especially to create comics or manga as well. There are animated series that took yrs to finish, but this could shorten it to a single yr or even lower. Just look at Japanese animators who some don't sleep for almost an entire week just to quickly catch up with the deadline. Even in the manga scene people started to use online assets which they put in the background. Similarly how game engines got more advanced, so more people eventually could make better games and even regular people could help along as long as they have ample experience with the tools. Although I do admit those tools are technically still made by programmers. But those tools game more people to get into the same field. That's just how things work, people will do anything to strive. Some will rise and some will fall. Heck even took advantage of this AI and I clearly see the progress. It's already very sufficient, especially for quick creative reference. Honestly don't care if they cry more. It's not like I'm being selfish, but that's just how things go. You just gotta learn to adapt and move on. Even an architect relies heavenly on computer software or tools, and I don't find it any different from AI as we still will be using it as tools. If in the animation or movie industry. I'll probably be very relieved as I have more time to bond with others if this could get my work done faster or even have the opportunity to try other fields. Similarly how an IT student normally switches fields if one option doesn't work.

@nic.h

Жыл бұрын

The Art community is only the tip of the iceberg. AI is going to be a very disruptive technology for basically everyone no matter what you do, even more so once AGI (Artificial General Intelligence) is reached.

Please continue to report on this topic as events unfold. You are excellent at clarifying the murkiness and I consider this a very important discussion. Thank you for your hard work and excellent videos and reviews.

Genuinely interested in this topic as an artist, so I would like to see you keep covering it and giving your opinion.

Sam has great points. if he doesn't want his stuff to be use then he should have the right. If they're using his work to generate new work... and if he consent to it, they should be paying him royalties for every piece used but that's not the case. These AI companies are making so much money generating stuff with ur name on it. Same with sampling music, should have royalties if a piece is used. Actors and actresses also have the right if they don't want their image to be used.

Artists are having some very real and serious concerns about this and we get bullied for even voicing them. The whole system is build around trying to bypass artist’s decisions and preferences around how their work is to be used and yet people still think we are the ones that are unreasonable. Honestly good points and thanks for bringing this up.However I just honestly completely lost my hope and trust in the public regarding this issue based on their response.

@ray3dx661

Жыл бұрын

The moment you decide to post that work online, it goes without saying that you consent your art, photographs or images to be used in a transformative manner. For example, Photo-bashing parts of a motorbike to turn into a spaceship. The Motorbike might belong to an artist. But that Artist has no right towards the spaceship that was created using it as it simply is no longer has the same context nor is it a replacement for the original. Concept Artists have been photobashing and using their concept art commercially for YEARS!

@yanamihailova8901

Жыл бұрын

@@ray3dx661 I’m sorry but your points seem oversimplified. Also the art that AI creates does compete with the artists that it’s trained on, even if we don’t see the full extent of it right now. And a lot of photobashers use their personal images or stuff they bought to create professional work so its on a different level morally imo. Why aren’t musicians having their work ripped off and fed into AI without their consent if it’s really just a matter of being fair use as long as its “transformative” purposes?

@staceykimbell9324

Жыл бұрын

@Ray3DX sorry, but no. If you photobash part of Ian McKaig's spaceship into your "totally transformative" spaceship, you're still going to get that cease & desist letter plus legal fee. Transformative use can still violiate copyright. A piece being transformative isn't the only criteria for being able to freely creatively use that image. And lastly, just because an image is publicly viewable doesn't mean its copyright no longer exists.

@anonnymous7009

Жыл бұрын

@@yanamihailova8901 To use the competition argument you need to prove that sales have been lost because of a competing product. The AI is a software, it doesn't compete itself with a copyrighted art piece. It can create visually equal art, as can other software. It can create completely new art, as can other software. You can not prove a software is competing with you since the software is usable for everything, not just to compete with a certain copyright holder. Like you can't sue Chrome because it allows to right click save an images since it has more use than just that. So you need to argue against a product of the software, you need to show where it impacted sales, you cannot argue that the existence of a software may impact your sales because of the possibility someone may create something in your style. Arguing the mere existence of a software is infringing on your copyright because it can copy your style and impact your sales is nothing more than a backdoor to copyright style. If you do not provide an art piece that is infringing upon a copyright and is in competition and impacting your sales, that clause ain't gonna help you.

@rhaspiece

Жыл бұрын

@@ray3dx661 your first statement is wrong. for the photobashing part, professional artist use stock images that they have paid for. for 3d artist, they pay for asset that they can use for their environment 3d art. using asset that is not yours is wrong. also a lot of photobasher uses their own picture. those stock images/3d assets are sold and consented to being used in a project. image that is found on google is however debatable.

I really appreciate the conversation you are having around ai art, please keep talking about it. Thank you.

Yes, more on this issue please. You’ve summed this up quite well.

Please keep covering this! Imo AI shouldn’t be allowed to do what it’s doing without getting the consent of the artists first. I’ve seen artists get in trouble for having a similar work to another artist, AI shouldn’t be above this just because it’s computer generated. There are a LOT of artists that are angry about AI doing this…

@Nakamako1

Жыл бұрын

copyrighting is not to protect you. its to push the industry forward. the whole concept of an idea belonging to you without pushing the industry forward is imoral to me.

The prospects of AI as a professional tool is fantastic. I imagine an artist feeding their own art work into the training data set so they can produce their own work faster, or animators only needing to draw keyframes as in-betweens can be generated, or giving a colour reference sheet to the AI so it can add colour to black&white/grayscale images. But AI as a tool for the general public is a tool that will be misused, and freelancer artists would be the most affected (if specific artists are used as prompts then its basically like tracing scandals' on roids). Another angle to see is stuff like ChatGTP is already screwing over written assignments in education

@jaybeebartolome8386

Жыл бұрын

ChatGPT could probably disrupt business, med and law too in its later iterations.

@fartmachine5000

Жыл бұрын

You could create artwork faster for your clients, but we're looking at a future where people could just email an AI server as if they were emailing you and get artwork back instantly without you even being involved. It's very scary.

@minixlemonade2335

Жыл бұрын

How about focusing on the quality of the piece first instead of crapping out pieces at the speed of light. The speed of the process doesn't need to get faster.

@jaybeebartolome8386

Жыл бұрын

@@minixlemonade2335 Yeah, but the tech craps out a good quality piece at the speed of light.

@Mrhellslayerz

Жыл бұрын

@@minixlemonade2335 Tell that to the general public. 9 times out of 10, they just want quick and easy.

Good video! I started messing with some of these AI image generators recently to help me come up with some references and transfer styles of images onto other images but I only use artists or art that is in the public domain (due to the artists being over 50 years died). I think its important than living artist who have the rights to their art work should be able to opt out or at minimum get paid if they are used in these AI image generators

@lowaimnobrain

Жыл бұрын

What's the difference between me using your work as the genesis for my work, Vs me using one of your pieces and millions of others combined in a dataset? Seems a bit sour grapes to me. Stories, images, get copied on and iterated on constantly. Do I owe money to an estate because I sold a picture of a melted clock?

Hey mate, this was a really well-done, insightful vid and I would love to see more from you on the topic

You make a pretty good overview of the situation. Great stuff, I want more.

Please continue covering! Your perspective seems rooted in logic vs. emotion which we all need rn. I like the idea of finding ways to use this technology, but absolutely not at the expense of hardworking creatives. License & compensate the artists. It’s not that hard.

@NavanBethrax

Жыл бұрын

If I was able to look at a lot of paintings drawn by one artist and recreate used style flawlessly, would that mean now I have to license every picture I look at because after looking at it I can create different pictures in the same style ? I understand that it's always problematic when progress endangers jobs. People tend to get emotional. But if you look at it from an technical standpoint, you realize that what Stable Diffusion and others are doing isn't that different from my example. I argue, If you are free to look at it, Stable Diffusion is free to look at it as well. It isn't storing the image but fine tuning a mathematical function to produce certain outputs when prompted with different input words. Keeping things hard to accomplish, because if it gets more accessible for everyone, the monetary value depletes ?

@CharmedReally7

Жыл бұрын

@@NavanBethrax difference is, you as a person cannot do the same amount of demage to the indurstry by yourself. You are one person and actually are impacted by such things like inspiration, imagination and personality. AI has none of these and cannot prpduce anything of it's own, it produces it on a much larger scale and way faster. That is the difference, please do not be ignorant about this issue.

@NavanBethrax

Жыл бұрын

@@CharmedReally7 So the problem is that the AI it to efficient at what it does ? That's not a problem. That's like having the cure to cancer and saying: "We could cure cancer right now but think about all the jobs in health care that would be lost." You point out that AI cannot produce anything of it's own. So why would it need inspiration, imagination or personality. The operator is the one bringing those things to the table. Your problem boils down to, "It's too good at what it does." But don't worry even when they perfect AI Image generation, everyone will still need to put in a good amount of time and effort to receive their targeted result. In other words, there will still be a need for human artists.

@CharmedReally7

Жыл бұрын

@@NavanBethrax you're comparing AI ART to a fucking cure for cancer?? 🤣 what kind of a joke is this? What problem does AI art solve? ART is not a problem to be solved, the process icluded. AI art is simply a tool to remove all human thought, emotions, hard work and morality from the process, something that is important to art as much as the end result itself. AI is simply a way for lazy asses to get drawings without putting in the effort and profiting off of it as well.

@NavanBethrax

Жыл бұрын

@@CharmedReally7 I was just comparing things that would greatly benefit society. You are right about AI art generators being tools like a brush and paint, but wrong about them removing any of the things you mentioned. Calling all the people that can't draw, but want to express themselves "lazy asses" is just rude. It's just a small amount of people that pump out Art that is subjectively bad quality, low effort that just try to make a quick buck. For a majority of people this enables passion projects that wouldn't be possible before. For me all you focus on is art as a way to make money which totally misses the point of art.

Great breakdown Brad, yes please keep covering this topic!

Would love to hear so much more about this!

what do u think of the s21 ultra. Should i buy it for drawing?

Thank you for making this video. I'm sure it took a lot of time to produce something so fair and educational. Yes, please do continue to talk about it.

Brad, thank you for making this video. For making it so clear and fair. This is exactly the conversation I think we should be having. So to your question “should we do more?” Please do. Even if we wouldn’t agree a 100%, This approach of opening a dialogue amongst at least our selves is the right one and opens up a way fwd. keep it up!

I like these type of open discussion videos... Well made, I'll be keeping an eye out for the next one :)

Well put. Would like to see you follow the developments on this.

Really good point about what makes ai art so popular, it is zeroed in on imitating the top artists in the field. Thanks for your level-headed perspective on this.

@toututu2993

Жыл бұрын

Ai art lacks too many important ability to make good art that some really high level human artist been creating to inspire others. Understanding the world around and law of physics without relying on billions of images just to slap them together to make something that looks a bit new but old. Come on! What AI does is more of a scammers pretending to be artist

Bro this is legit pretty damn complicated but you managed to explain it pretty nicely, good job ! Personally, I feel like a lot of artists out there are too strict when it comes to taking inspiration from their work, but the fact that a damn robot can just take your stuff and learn your style within a small amount of time without your consent is irritating. The rendering is really realistic cuz... Well... A robot can't really make an error in a "mechanical" skill, can it ? Maybe I'm just too old school for those damn things

Yes, please continue covering this! This is a very interesting topic.

Thanks Brad! Really well done. Please cover this further!

This is a gigantically important topic. The picture artists are only the first step. We will see this with ALL creative work in the next years. This right here is a blueprint. - Either picture artist get fair compensation and everything will be on an "ok" trajectory - Or creative industries get gutted... which is horrfying for the artistis and also bad for the quality of models (less and worse training data) Thank you for covering this.

Жыл бұрын

If a kid learns to draw in the style of Tim Burton, should Tim Burton get compensated for "his" style being used? It's just like the fashion industry, in the majority of cases it is impossible to patent or copyright a design. What really matters is your audience reach.

@sk-sm9sh

Жыл бұрын

What's absolutely mad to me is this. If I make a simple collage generator that merges 5 images selling the resulting image would be considered copyright infringement. If you do same thing but with a billion image instead you walk free. What kind of madness is this? Steal little crime, steal a lot walk free? AI business firms are trying to blur the situation coming up with nonsense that AI is more magical and needs to be treated differently. No it isn't. It's just a fancy collage system that runs on thousands of graphic cards running very deep multi layered math but in the end it's same thing. In the end our brain is also just copying stuff but we as humans should enjoy privilege of being human and being able to steal using our brains. We should not allow this human privilege to AI companies. Their AI systems should be demanded by law to provide full traceability of it's decision making (it's possible it's just will require multi fold compute power from them thus will set their business few years back). For example they should be able to cite top artistic influences that were used. From there we can demand then to paying money to these top artistic influences. On top they should be paying cents when artistic influence is long dead artist too - possibly in form of tax that can be directed to art schools.

Yes thank you for this video! I too struggle with trying to be neutral on the topic since my husband works in tech and I love both traditional mediums and digital. Love the way you explained it and how you stayed an neutral as possible! 🙂I would totally watch more about this topic on your channel.

Thanks for the video Brad. I have been following you for some years and I always feel more informed after watching your videos. Absolutely keep informing me on this topic and all the other things you touch on! You are always one of the first KZread channels I recommend to other artists.

Artists are not disadvantaged by AI, they are disadvantaged by the lack of AI-based tools. Although current AIs can be used as tools by artists, it does not mean they serve as such. In fact, these AIs often hinder the artist when it comes to image-to-image conversion, making us abandon them for that purpose. However, text-to-image AIs help a lot in getting references, etc. But the tools artists really need are: • AI that scans line art or the entire paper drawing: Although some artists use digital tools for their works, many still prefer the traditional method because it is more usual and easier. However, the process of digitizing the work is complicated, and sometimes it's even better to redo everything digitally. This ends up being a double job, which can be discouraging. The existing methods cannot transfer the drawing with 100% accuracy, and the quality of the work is often reduced. • AI for art correction: Although image-to-image AIs are useful, they often end up altering the artwork or generating even more errors because they were not created for that purpose. • AI for line art: Making line art is one of the most important processes in a work as it gives shape and depth to things. However, if the line art is the same in all parts, the quality will be poor. • AI for painting: When painting, artists always start by adding the base color of each element contained in the art (each base is separated into different layers), and then they start painting. The problem is that the light and shadow process is very repetitive. If we could draw a ball, put the colors we want on it, and use an AI to transfer it to the part of the base we chose, it would save a lot of time. • AI-powered texture generation: An AI tool that can generate textures for an artist to use in their artwork, based on their preferences and input. • AI-powered brush stroke simulation: An AI tool that can simulate different brush strokes and textures, allowing artists to experiment with different styles and techniques. If all these AIs existed, we could reduce the average 10 hours of work to 10 or 20 minutes depending on the complexity of the art. But until these AIs exist, artists are still at a disadvantage. (text to image doesn't make sense for artists, artists like their own styles)

This is a conversation that needs to be had a million times over. The more voices that cover it, the more comprehensive and all-encompassing the conversation can be. Not just on this channel but branching out to other channels as well simply by just being a part of the overall conversation to begin with. I hope that made sense..? When I saw that the video was 10 mins long, I was like "ok that is how long it it going to take to introduce the subject", let alone get an opinion on it but I thank Brad for this nonetheless. I am a web programmer and I tend to see things by matter of pipelines and production lines. Simply put, Stable Ai knowingly started with legally radioactive material so they ended up with a legally radioactive result. Members of both the Institute for AI Ethics in Montreal and Turkey warned SAi NOT to release the software using the LAION-5B data set. Stating that it would be "detrimental to the future development of Ai technologies". Even proponents of Ai art who have experience in the legal field have come out and said "yeah, this is definitely copyright infringement" (check Corridor Crew for more info). The backlash and malicious response from the Ai art community is not doing them any favors when it comes to litigation or future legislation either. All they have done is demonstrate how much of a threat Ai art has become to copyright data and intellectual property management. I personally think that it is going to have much of the same result as the monkey with the camera case. The software will be the only recognized artist. Ai art will be labeled with meta data as it is produced, including the prompt and software used. New models will need to be trained for updated software that are opt-in only or properly licensed, or royalty free, etc. Old models will be denied use in the software to ensure the integrity of future updates and regulation. Perhaps even going as far as to block any ability to allow users to train their own personal ai models and forcing users to work with a curated and regulated all encompassing ai model?? Anything that is not labeled as Ai outright will be labeled as Ai by default and it will be on the artist to prove human authorship or else no copyright protection will be afforded to it.

@NeroDefogger

Жыл бұрын

no it does not, people just have to be educated, no need for any conversation

@JMulvy

Жыл бұрын

@@NeroDefogger educated on what exactly? I am very curious to know.

@NeroDefogger

Жыл бұрын

@@JMulvy y- a- emm eee... mmm t-the topic? of, of this, of this video, this context, about like, all of this? what? what do you mean what exactly? about the fictional universe of barbie and all the characters? you thought I meant that?

Great topic and well balanced! Please continue to keep us informed of this. The future with AI art is going to get interesting! Thanks for your great work!

This is the debate of the decade..Please bring more of this discussion Brad.

Yes! Continue covering this, we need your voice on this subject.

This is all super relevant to my own art journey. I am actually graduating graphic arts classes in May, and admittedly go back and forth between feeling like AI presents a lot of tools if I use it to touch up my own projects, but also sometimes wonder what is the point if the AI is going to generate art so far beyond my own capabilities. That's a really long way to say I would love if you would continue to make content about this topic, you present concepts in a way that are both informative and entertaining. Thanks for the work you do.

@CozyToad

Жыл бұрын

AI certainly has uses, however the main issue is the way its being developed is to cut out the artist rather than aid them and to achieve that is leeching off their work. I think AI has lots of potential and can positively impact people's lives, its just that there is less profit incentive to do so.

@viridianacortes9642

Жыл бұрын

Don’t give up. Even if AI does hurt us artists, don’t give up on your journey. Learning the skill of art is a beautiful thing and it’s knowledge shouldn’t be lost. Trust me. It’ll be tough for a bit. But don’t give up on your dreams.

@getherverse8001

Жыл бұрын

@@viridianacortes9642 Thank you for the kind words, this is exactly what I needed right now :-)

@7on

Жыл бұрын

Similar things happened around the invention of photography. That gave birth to impressionism. I'm looking forward to a new art movement.

@danart941

Жыл бұрын

I have been feeling the same way lately, everything im doing in art im learning online for almost a year now and for the past few months ive been thinking of giving up. The AI creates such high quality images, ik its leaching off artists but doesnt ghange the fact of the quality of the work. Idk if becoming a full time artist is possible for me at this point. Doesnt matter what i think it matters what other ppl thinks and thats how it has always been for me.

Hello, I have been following your channel for a while, starting with tipps on tablets why I got my Samsung s6 lite and recently how to color vector images and now I also like this discussing up to date things 👌 I think this ai trend should be thought over and even it's a strong tool it takes away peoples work not even like jobwise in the future but also what people have been creating, and the question of intellectual property should be really taken into consideration here 🤔

I do think you should continue to cover this topic. Artists are hopefully the harbingers of how humanity can use AI but not replaced by it.

Great video and I like your Lego modular in the background. 😊

This is an excellent video on the issues of AI. You make an excellent point on how the outputs of AI appear to be heavily weighted by the excellent artists work that feeds it.

@jamiefredrickson2560

Жыл бұрын

Except for a VERY IMPORTANT thing you and the rest who cry about AI. All "artist" borrow from everyone else and use tools to produce their "art" AI is nothing more than a tool and the fair use doctrine allows it. Study that law

This reminds me of the AI generated news and students using AI to write their papers controversy.

Thank you for making this. Calm, concise, articulate. You earned a subscriber.

Definitely want more information. If you can provide more videos, that would be great.

what is your opinion on the ethics of using ai art as a reference? i could kinda see it being sorta useful in that context but since it relies on the work of other artists it would be really hard to give credit properly

@thebradcolbow

Жыл бұрын

That's a great question. I really don't know. As a reference it's not that different than referencing the original work. But it comes down to if you think using the tools at all is wrong because of the way they are trained.

HELL YEAH it's worth you covering!! I think this is an inflection point for a LOT of different things... if AI can generate art, or music, or pass the bar... when is it coming for YOU? Whatever you do, you don't think an AI or a robot can't do it? Maybe not NOW, but that's what they thought about art and music only a few years ago. There's THIS angle as well: These AI companies train on artist's work, then sell that gained knowledge to put said artists out of work. Everyone is now DEPENDENT on the AI company to get their art, because being an artist is even less economically viable than it already is. You don't think said AI company isn't going to put the screws to you at that point? Imagine if AMAZON OWNED YOUR ART GENERATION. Imagine them demolishing artists so they can't compete. Imagine them SUING artists for their work impinging on THE AI'S copyrighted generational style. Don't think can happen? Look up Monsanto, and how they sued farmers for using THEIR genetically modified plants that invaded their fields. Where there's profit to be had, there will be douchebaggery, no question. The Arts are about to get inundated with this, and if we as a society aren't careful, this can have HUGE consequences. Sorry for the wall of text... I'm kind of passionate about this!

Please continue to cover this topic. And update on this lawsuit soon.

Probably your biggest comment stream yet, because this is by far your most consequential video on any topic. Yes, keep it going. Wish you’d post the extended version. Very well explained. I like the more serious version of you, too.👏🌟👍

Absolutely -- please continue to cover it. There's a lot I still need to learn, and this subject is evolving rapidly. Something I don't see covered a lot is the notion of scale. Specifically, if people treat the scraping and upgrading process involved in AI-generated art in the same manner as a burgeoning artist treats looking / copying other artists to learn, then a lot of the pro-AI arguments revolve around the concept of inspiration (whether a computer can actually be "inspired" is another topic all-together...). BUT with AI this "inspiration" has been scaled to a level not unlike the shift from making mixtapes to Napster and other similar services. Sure, the music industry probably wasn't thrilled at the idea of people making their own mixtapes, but it was really only after the copying and sharing of music explosively scaled with services like Napster did they take notice. And that's not even touching the subject of AI-generated music. So, yes -- please keep cover this and we'll keep watching and learning. Thank you!

@wombatillo

Жыл бұрын

A computer makes copies of information all the time. A human makes copies of information all the time. The idea that we should or even could somehow limit some copying to be ok but other copying not to be ok is not feasible. The idea that we can differentiate between different types of copying based on the motivation for copying is insane. It means lots of new work for lawyers but it won't stop independent darknet neural networks from eventually popping up. The computational power is becoming more and more available to anyone with even modest financial means. You can't stop information processing units (humans or computers) from looking at images or listening to audio and making copies and then reprocessing what they stored or learned. Demanding that only humans get to do this or computers only intending on copying and re-transmitting the data for human re-use exclusively get to do this is not even possible from a practical or information theory standpoint. Lawyers and artists are trying to legally solve a problem that is for all purposes inevitable to unfold a thousand times worse (or better) than we now think it to be possible.

@I-ONLY-BUILD-MECHS-AND-DUSTERS

Жыл бұрын

@@wombatillo Not really. You obviously aren't going to be allowed to go to a movie theatre and film the movie with a camera, because the camera can perfectly reproduce the movie with the obviously aim of theft. It's fine if a human goes however because a sole human can't reproduce the movie in any reasonable way, just as a sole human can't reproduce some piece of artwork very easily. It being "inevitable" doesn't matter. We don't generally allow human cloning even though it's probably going to happen at some point or many other things for that matter. Just discouraging it through law is enough to get it thrown off most major public platforms. Piracy will always exist. They need to get consent or hire people to create content to train their models, not just steal all the content and hide it in AI weights and pretend there's no stolen material in there. Having what amounts to a really sophisticated encryption scheme doesn't change the fact that the models are full of stolen art, no different than if I distributed full length HD movies encrypted by a password.

I just started looking at a ChatGpt3 a couple of weeks ago. With all the new AI applications, it has been a whirlwind. Like you I have a foot in tech and art. From discussions I had listened to it sounded like scraping was just taking the algorithms from images and mixing them in new forms. But you really clarified what is going on. I am with everyone else with the comments. PLEASE continue. Not only have you uncovered a bias, but also, described clearly what is at issue for artists. And, you are really funny! Keep it up!!!

@sk-sm9sh

Жыл бұрын

I believe we should demand more traceability from these AI companies. If they generate image they should be able to tell what were the most influential artistic inspirations. AI companies will try to convince you that it's impossible but it's all bs they can do it it's just adds a lot more computational power and will set back their bussiness few years back. With AI it's all about compute power, if one has 10 times the compute of someone else he would be able to compute back the decisions behind the weaker model. Thus we must demand that all AI models should provide traceability when they are delivered to public use. There is a saying great artist steal but this should not apply to AI. AI should not enjoy privilege of being human and be let off free and it's artistic influence should be considered same as stealing artwork. In essence if one takes image applies blur image - it's a theft. If one takes 10 images puts them into collage - it's a theft. If one takes a billion images and send them through multi layered math functions suddenly it's not a theft? What kind of nonsense is this.

@rexsceleratorum1632

Жыл бұрын

@@sk-sm9sh The AI is not building a simple collage of a billion images, it is creating a transformative work inspired by them. Just like a human artist who looks at thousands of images and finds an art style she likes, and then proceeds to create new art in that style. I can imagine art created by Michelangelo or Jackson Pollock in my head, which means I am storing the images in my head -- can I be sued for any art created by me using similar styles as a copyrighted art piece I can remember?

@sk-sm9sh

Жыл бұрын

@@rexsceleratorum1632 Michelangelo - by making art - is also creating a collage of all his memories and experiences. It's still a collage of many many pieces of the things that influenced him through his whole life. I believe that when it comes to humans - human expression should be free - as in - you shall not own anything to anyone when you're expressing your self. However I don't think same freedoms should be granted to computers - they should owe credits to any original authors that they used as influence. Computers can be more powerful than human brains in many ways thus one thing they can do is when they generate any piece of art they can compute what digital bits influenced it the most and these bits can be traced back to the input data that was supplied thus basically it can calculate top influences that caused it to create the output that it did - it's totally doable problem is that it costs more compute power and more memory thus AI companies will try to tell you bullshit how their AI is just like Michelangelo as it's better business for them to not generate this transparent trace that shows how AI derives the output.

@rexsceleratorum1632

Жыл бұрын

@@sk-sm9sh Now you are demanding a double standard. I have a hard time agreeing to that. If X is legal when I do it manually, it shouldn't be illegal when I use a computer to help me do it.

@sk-sm9sh

Жыл бұрын

@@rexsceleratorum1632 no there is no double standards unless you wish that computers would gain human rights. I don't think computers should be given human rights and freedoms. If you can paint a painting your self by impersonating someone's style - that's all fine. If you ask computer to impersonate somebody's style that's really running into copyright issues.

Oh yes! You did an excellent job in covering this issue. Please continue.

There is a mistake with understanding copywrite. The question is not whether it affects the market for the original works, its does it affect the market for the original work. What difference does the s make? Using the Steven king example, the question would be "does this new AI generated book devalue a particular book by acting as a replacement", not "does this new AI generated book devalue kings library as a whole". Styles are not copywritable, only particular images.

Really great monologue, Brad. Thanks. I too have seen the vicious responses from AI users against artists. Its degree of malevolence is initially startling and unusually high. However, it makes me wonder if it's driven by feelings of guilt and shame. If I were a failed artist (and I define that as someone who is not willing to put in the time and commitment to get good at it), yet had the desire to impress the world with 'my' art, it would put me in an emotionally strange position - as if I was consciously trying to deceive myself as well as others. Mix that in with a dose of insecurity in myself and what I was doing and then if I'm actually called out on it, and my inner and outer actions exposed, I would probably also behave in a pathetic and aggressive way too.

@signumxmagnum

Жыл бұрын

I think it's more of Money.

@studystudy3753

Жыл бұрын

Yeah, they always get mad at artist.

Thanks for calmly sharing this, Brad. I’m a “small” artist, and even I have found my work in one of the training sets. It feels violating in a number of ways to have it used in a mass production machine without my consent or compensation. If an artist wanted to study from my work? That’s fine. I’m a teacher. It’s not like the things I’ve learned are something I won’t share. But I’d take issue if a company took, printed, and sold my work on a t-shirt without permission, and this is a whole other level, and it doesn’t even seem to allow for the usual cease and desist channels. And complicated opting out? It should have been a choice to opt in. Given that choice, I’d have said no to this in the first place for my work. I also feel so much for those who have had entire machines trained on their portfolios, which goes beyond even copying a style, in my opinion. What I’ve seen of this particular aspect feels like something closer to identity theft. It makes sense that “style” (which I’d read in the broad sense like “genre”) can’t be copyrighted, nor in the sense I just used it, should it be. I shouldn’t be able to own the rights to all jazz music or impressionistic painting, for example, just because my work might be in that “style”. But this is more like completely replicating and cashing in on an individual’s actual voice (something that isn’t even possible to take in this way without a machine, and something that should be inseparable from that individual, a part of their identity) than it is like working in a genre. I just think there’s been some slippery wordplay around the phrase “you can’t copyright a style,” to try to justify something that has more parallels with identity theft than with style. As far as I can see, this isn’t copying a style. It’s singing with a stolen voice. It’s like Ursula pretending to be Ariel, swallowing her voice and singing with all of Ariel’s exact intonations and using her years of practice and singing experience, and in this case, the argument can’t even be made that Ariel signed her voice away in the first place.

thanks man. i hope i have a future in art, please continue to talk about stuff like this, a follow was given

Hey Brad! Definitely do more of those videos! Thanks!

Super critical issues. I would really appreciate further coverage of this. Thanks Brad!

One of the clearest and clear headed discussions on the ethical problems with AI art and your point that what these models produce would be any good if the most talented artists were removed from the datasets is spot on. Please do continue to cover this.

@amirattamimi8765

Жыл бұрын

But would human artist will be a good artist if they never learn from the best artist ? I think the main problem is human will never learn from just one artist so they couldn't imitate a particular artist while AI can

Any follow up on this?

Brad, this was very interesting and yes it would be great to dig deep into this topic

This was an amazing video, I really like the observation how Ai is obviously only using the most "desirable" images to generate outputs (I've always wondered how all those MS Paint Sonic OCs that are abundant on dA never threw off the learning algorithm if they were just "randomly scraping images" 🤣). Would love to hear more from you on this topic, I think you were really being fair to both sides. I'm not a fan of AI images as art but I also think many people don't really make good points when arguing against it but instead do appeals to emotion (which is understandable, but also easily dismissed).

@staceykimbell9324

Жыл бұрын

Yes, I agree that "weighting" prompts toward more desirable images isn't talked about enough. We often hear the claim that the models don't source from a small image set, but use their entire 5 billion image dataset when producing every image. Yet when I see discussion among prompters and model trainers, their entire goal seems to be to get their model to tag as much high quality (eg, copyrighted) data as possible while ignoring "bad" (open source or creative commons) data.

@ihl0700677525

Жыл бұрын

1. Try using specific prompt like "A cat drawing by 6 years old" and you'll get *exactly that.* 2. Since the average users of these AI tends to favor a highly "refined" picture over the less refined ones and will almost always choose the best looking pictures (i.e. those that mimics the works of pro-artists), the user base inadvertently "train" the AI to generate these kind of pictures, unless specifically instructed otherwise. 3. In short, there's no need for the programmers and the researchers to weight the data and create such bias based on their own personal preference (which may actually hamper the development of the model they are building). Their users and customers did it for them.

@captzero007

Жыл бұрын

It's easy to get terrible results to your prompts. But, one important reason you often get beautiful results is because these AI models use feedback from the user to rate the generation results. It seems obvious to me, that if everyone is giving their approval when the AI generates a cat that looks great... that it's going to weightedly continue to give them those types of results.

@poolsharkATTACK

Жыл бұрын

@@captzero007 ... Meaning the model still disproportionately relies on certain images in the "learning" set. Whether the "desirability" is being decided by the creators or the users it's still the same outcome.

@chaon93

Жыл бұрын

"Negative tags" is one of the main ways this is done, all images are assigned tags, some of which can be negative like "bad anatomy". by default most negative traits are MORE than filtered out, the AI uses them as examples of what it should NOT look like.

That was a thing that blew my mind, I installed Stable Diffusion on my computer and it can use "Negative prompts" to get rid of things you so not want to see in a generated image, and standard for those prompts are "watermark, signature, artist names, copyright, footer, logo, logotype", just for they have used so many downloaded images stock photos and copyrighted images that the AI think this is a part of what is art, some time you can create a image that get branded with "Getty", "Alarmy" or "Shutterstock". I think this is a good topic to cover for it is a new technology and a democratization of art, I am mostly annoyed of the bad images that was used for the training that did include watermarks, branding, signatures and so on, so when you use the free Stable Diffusion a large part o the post work are to edit out watermarks from your "own" images.

Great video man! Please continue provide more content on this topic. Hopefully there is a nice middle ground somewhere.

The way this is treated by law is so damn disgusting. "they allow you to opt out in the future" so if I steal the gucci designs, it's their own fault because they didn't send me a specific message telling me I am not allowed to use their design

@WhiteWolfos

Жыл бұрын

Technically you can only get away with it for an X time. Just look at all that fan art on Etsy. You can only sell so much Disney stuff till they come after you backed by their lawyers

Yeah, definitely interested in your perspective as this unfolds. If anything, it feels like it'll change how artists promote their work online and increases the need for blockchain-based copyright protection (not just NFTs). AI is going to be too big to be regulated, it'll be on artists or future technology on top of AI to better protect those elite artists and their work.

Same as in the music production. Why is the 60-70-80's music so good, it has soul in it....today? a DAW with the same plugins and TR808 sounds. Good luck you are totally right. Love your channel.

Anxious but also interesting times for any artist/illustrator. Yes please do continue to cover this subject.

It should be noted that people supportive of AI art are just as bullied and harassed as those against. There is very little coherent dialogue on this issue.

@integragemi7234

Жыл бұрын

And they should be, new AIs are going to eliminate taxi drivers, actors , programmers , soldiers tv presenters, teachers etc.

@mechanought3495

Жыл бұрын

@@integragemi7234 You have perfectly exemplified my second sentence.

From what I've heard and understand, AI doesn't "copy" the image. It learns from the images. I am a musician and songwriter. Everything I understand about music, all of the things I hear in my head are formed from music I've heard over my life time. My 'style' emerged from my experiences, listening, lessons I've taken, emotions, techniques and so on from a life time of music. Even the top artists that are concerned are incorporating the styles of others in their own works. Think not? What exactly were they taught in art school? What would a musician sound like if he'd never heard other musicians play? We all are familiar with the term 'influenced'. It is a common question in interviews. "Who was your biggest influence?" AI scrapes images to 'learn', then it takes a request for an image and produces one based on what it has 'learned' from other artists. The only way to not allow your art to 'influence' others is to not let them see it or hear it. If a painter likes something and thinks it is cool, do you think he/she will refrain from using that in a future work? AI is doing nothing more than learning from paintings and photos and such. We as humans learn every time we listen to a song or view a photo or painting. How would we write laws to prevent this? Good luck. AI just does it more in your face and obvious. You can't stop artists from seeing and using things in their own creations unless you remove them from public access. That sort of the defeats the purpose of art. AI while not human, is engaging in what we do and have done since the beginnings of civilization. The issue here is money.

artists using images as references : OK AI using images as references : BAD

Please keep covering this sort of stuff

Love this video, i feel it was a good and to the point coverage on the topic. I understand the desire to be fair to both sides and end up falling on the side of artist too. When I first heard about this stuff I gave it a go and thought to use it for extra texturing, thumbnailig etc. Found it a bit of a wrestle to use, but about as useful as a raw google image. when I heard about how these things were built and how some people deliberately made models on specific people I had to draw a line. One thing to note, because of how this tech work it's not just artist that will be impacted but everyone. The ability to train on anyone likeness (their face) is a serious cause for concern in regards to individual safety. And the proliferation of thi tech and it's use could make the internet unusable in regards to knowing what is real or fabricated. Hope to hear you thoughts on the topic too, I'm a significantly small youtube artist but if you ever want trade notes and collab that'd be amazing 😍

@ziggyzaggyshaggy8312

Жыл бұрын

With all the different types of Ais, voice, image and text. It might only be a few months before we begin seeing scams evolve to using peoples own mothers likeness to extract money from them. 2023 is gonna be wild

I would really like for you to cover this. As for my opinion, artists should have the right to opt out easily out of them A.I. As a beginner artist myself, I would be very mad/sad for A.I to use my art, retouch it, so when I post MY original work, people say "That's A.I art, make something original". It's a very interesting theme, I'm eager to see how this unfolds. I would also be very eager to see you cover these and other things in the art world, you talk clearly, concisely and civil. It'd be cool to watch vlogs from you.

@user-fy3nf3lg2j

Жыл бұрын

The damage is done

@user-fy3nf3lg2j

Жыл бұрын

The genie out of the bottle

@signumxmagnum

Жыл бұрын

No no no, it's not artists should have the right to opt out easily, it's should be by default unless they have permission, no work can be used by these A.I. Why does the artists that needs to tell people that they can't use their work for A.I. ?

@DianeAarts

Жыл бұрын

@@signumxmagnum yeah exactly, make it an opt in system. Legally that's what it should have been from the start.

@Chrisspru

Жыл бұрын

thats not an ai problem. thats tracing, which is a known art theft problem.

I would like to see you cover this issue more! 😎👍

Please keep making these videos, please please keep us updated! 🙏🙏🙏

It's kinda sad that a lot of problems with AI comes from the users who ruins the whole thing. From blatantly calling artists "gatekeeper", trying to "fix" someone's art by running it through AI without permission, or accusing someone's work as AI-generated image. It's hard to fairly justify AI when it gives birth to these kinds of people.

@daniilivanov9525

Жыл бұрын

If there is a place in system to abuse or midmax, people will do it. It was up to developers to introduce ai in more or less fair and ethical manner, but they failed desperatly, i mean we don't make every technology to come out public without regulations. Imagine what a shitshow there would be if there were no regulation on weapon or food production. Or anything you could think about.

@JACKjcs

Жыл бұрын

The IAs have not been ruined by the users, from the beginning the intention of the people behind these services has been to steal thousands of artists to create their database, Deviantart and Artstation are a good example, without that initial intention we would never have reached this point, people on the internet have always been crap when they are allowed, that's nothing new.

@repeekyraidcero

Жыл бұрын

Tbf tho. Those "issues" where around even waaay b4 came to be. I've never seen SO. Much. drama. anywhere than in the artscene. don't even want to deal with most "artists"

@samankucher5117

Жыл бұрын

yah the weird slurs towards artists dont help to ... seriously calling people paint pig or flesh artist or draw slave or a luddite or ... and so on is not nice .

@ProGamer-dh7gq

Жыл бұрын

If you love something, people say set it free. Yet in reality, often times you keep that to yourself. Don't let anyone ruin your peace. Unfortunately this is the internet and it is best to either adapt or to just leave the space.

I'm not sure how I feel about AI generated art. "It's beautiful, it's progress," is what I tell myself but inside I'm dying and questioning myself, "What's the point anymore?" I can't imagine myself not being an artist, being an artist is what keeps me going with this life. Maybe this is what artists felt when photographs started to become more and more popular because art back then when it was still portrait painting was just that. Capturing the likeness of individuals and moments in time, then it gets replaced with a camera that can do their work in seconds. But photography has become its own art and art has been able to go in a more expressive way with abstract or impressionism, not bound by the constraints of making realistic portraits. Who knows, maybe AI will birth the new generations of progressive artists like Pollock, Picasso, Van Gogh, etc.

@darkzeroprojects4245

Жыл бұрын

Im still sticking to how Im doing my work since I don't see much use for it personally.

@MontChevalier

Жыл бұрын

Yeah sure. AI art will take the hard work, effort and discipline that artists take years to develop and then make some loser who doesn't know a thing about sketching or art in general and then make him or her the same as someone who dedicated their life to art.

@jamesesparza6893

Жыл бұрын

This is nothing. This has happened a thousand tines over again in many different industries. Even now less luxury based industries are being folded over. You know how you survive? The AI, become its master and an expert. The human who only knows art is replacable, the human who knows AI and art...now thats whos going to replace them.

@jamesesparza6893

Жыл бұрын

N 1000x more expensive in everyway possible.the moment you industrialized is the moment art became replacable.

@Twiddle_things

Жыл бұрын

The only thing I like about AI is the poorer and more archaic models. When they bring out blurry dreamlike colour mush, bizarre ineligible text, and impossible hypnagogic places. What I like is to reference and make paintinga based off of the bizarre code mush... sure this MidJourney stuff is impressive and all but it doesn't hold any value to become an art form, if you ask me.

I must ask what do artist’s copyrights merit in other countries particularly the autocracies (such as China) that are progressing their own AI?

it's like suing the maker of guns for murder, its the person that misuses it not the weapon

Please, do continue to cover it, especially in this simple yet informative, and calm way. The absolute disregard and toxicity from the pro-AI (or anti-artists) has been revolting.

@crystaleldridge3988

Жыл бұрын

there has been a lot of disgusting vitriol on BOTH sides of this issue. It all needs to stop.

Updates would be nice considering that this does affect a lot of artists.

I have made my living as an artist for over half a century now. I recently found my name on lists of artist's styles used for prompts, and also my images on the " have I been trained" site. I hope there is some kind of easy opt out legally forced upon these pirates.

@HyperDevv

4 ай бұрын

Cant, cant stop progress

Your hamburger/restaurant comparison might be the best way to explain why this is an issue. I know answers are weighted but didn't think of it from a copyright protective until now. Enlightening, thank you.

At this point I’m glad I’ve never uploaded my portfolio to digital media, but I’m absolutely enraged for those artists that did and were honestly violated like this. It’s awful. AI is obviously a powerful tool capable of amazing work but I don’t feel ok if I use it, I feel like it takes away from what being an artist is, what developing your craft means, what messing up means, it’s just heartbreaking from a traditional pov, sadly it’s here to stay and we will eventually be forced to work with it and that kills my soul. Ps: when I first saw a sign/watermark on one of those generated images, not going to lie, my heart broke. All efforts artists put to protect their work, don’t do shit.

@jeffreyjohnson5823

Жыл бұрын

I feel you. It's been so long since I uploaded anything that I bet most of the people who know me probably think that I stopped drawing. I just got smart about what to share. Portraits I'll post, anything else you gotta see me in person. At least you get it. I feel like Sarah Connor when trying to tell people about this. A.I. for anything that we use our minds for is bad. This is not tin foil hat stuff either. Just plain common sense. Took me a while to even hop on board with digital. The only reason I did was because at least I am still creating all, the toolset is just mor portable. If I'm just putting words into a generator, then as an artist I would feel like I am ripping off someone who asked "Me" to do a piece of art for them.