I am betting big on exclusivity, just like traditional paintings are valued a whole lot more than digital even if it's modern art garbage, I believe AI art will only cheapen itself and further drive the price of human made art up way way up

I hope you are right Jin and that it goes that way. The problem is humanity likes novelty and this AI generated "art" and "writing" (looking at you ChatGPT) is the newest shiny thing. Most people are besotted with shiny new things and clamour to be on the same bus without really critically seeing things for what they are. In this case people are assuming these generations are valid artworks and not putting in the real work, discipline and attention that truly underlies all practices. It basically means paying ones dues and the danger of these technologies it that it creates users (the word user has never been more apt here) who believe they have reached a level of mastery when they have not even entered the arena.

This is about the clearest demonstration I've seen of Midjourney's utter worthlessness.

I just saw a Twitter thread where people were all typing in random gibberish as their prompts and showing the resulting "art". There's no better illustration in my eyes of how non-creative a pursuit this is; how it asks nothing at all from the user in terms of skill, talent, imagination, integrity... you name it. It just does everything for you.

So, it just blows me away when people try and claim ownership of these images - as if they'd had anything to do with their making - when the truth of the matter is that my dog could literally walk across my keyboard and the machine would then shit out a dozen images that look every bit as good.

Beyond the issues of copyright theft, I just find it all so pathetic. I've got nothing but contempt for people who show these things off like they've actually made something.

After you see like 60000000 of these utterly insanely amazing ai generated pics they all look the same, and the last post is a great metaphor for this. Also training the data set built off the backs of hardworking artists who didn’t consent to having their works used and them not seeing a penny while midjourney et. al. make I’m betting reasonable money with their fancy algorithm which cant ‘draw’ a single pixel without massive amounts of training "data" i.e the blood sweat and tears of countless artists and then having people be all like "boo hoo, u don’t like innovation get with the times" in response to artist mentioning this … they must either not understand the bigger picture of how these ai work or are just indifferent psychopaths… also ppl creating with ai, I think i have seen an artist using ai but with other layers of ‘organicly created’ and that’s prob the way forward art but yeah for the most part people currently "creating with ai" it’s like… no… the computer made it.

That's good, but it doesn't do anything for the artists who created the artworks the algorithms were fed in training. Kinda makes it even worse for them - not only is there a derivative "work" now, the derivative is also unprotectable, which might make it less likely that someone licenses their original.



Watermarks might actually be helpful in this fight. If they show up recognisable in generated images, it is proof for use of copyrighted material (if using a different watermark for each artwork, even proof of which one was used).
If the generated images only contain unrecognisable versions of the watermarks, that should still make the images a lot less appealing and maybe dissuade people from using them in their publications.

I've been wondering about this regarding the signatures that were visible in some images. Were they real signatures "copy-pasted" by the algo, or were they "made up" signatures the algo produced because so many of the training images had one in the lower right corner?

-

Thinking about it, if machine-created images are unprotectable, shouldn't there be a way to tell (even for someone without an artistic eye) if an image was generated? Maybe mandatory watermarks in AI art would be a solution to that.

Garbled watermarks are very common. The machine can't really differentiate, so you will see fragments of watermarks all over Midjourney images.

Sometimes you'll see the prompter has added their own signature or watermark in Photoshop afterwards, and I've seen hilarious tantrums on Twitter and elsewhere from Midjourney people complaining about other Midjourney people stealing their prompts.

Mandatory watermarks may become a thing. That has certainly been proposed. But that court ruling is a very good thing. The judge actually said in the ruling that they're not copyrightable because the user doesn't meet a minimum standard of creative input.

As was previously stated, once you've seen 100 of them, you've seen them all. You can pick out an AI generated image like you can an overused type face. AI are will just become the Copperplate Gothic of fonts, much like the crappy movie covers of B grade movies that litter streaming services like Hulu and Netflix.

I honestly don't see why artists are getting so upset and insecure about it. I'm an artist and somehow I've been able to just laugh it off. I think it's because I've given up on the notion I can control the world and the stupid people in it. I'm more a hedonistic nihilist at this point. It stressed me out too much to get angry at things out of my control.

But yes, I agree with PsyloCiBeen. It's the newest shiny thing. Only a matter of time before it's replaced with the next shiny thing.

Hahaha i'm dying!

"You stole my prompt!"

Absurdly, given that text is copyrightable, and the prompters (hopefully) do come up with the prompts themselves, they could potentially have some sort of legal standing for suing each other over that

Yeah, you’ve said that - any number of times - along with “well, it’s here to stay so you’ll just have to get used to it”, and “why don’t you just get better than the machine?”.

Personally, I find this to be a bootlicking point of view, but whatever; feel however you feel about it. I do get really sick and tired of people telling me how I should or shouldn’t feel about it, however - so maybe knock that shit off going forward. It’s not helpful or at all appreciated.

As of yet, midjourney has 1.3 million online active users on the main discord alone, not counting invited bots.

Last time I posted here, if I remember correctly, it was around 700k.

For all the tough talk and calling each other names, it seems like none of you even touched this thing.

This last sentence alone could be sooo so spicy if worded correctly though

My point being, I do not see the actual purpose of insulting each other, or even passive agressively stating such things. Most threads on the forum have clear purposes, or at least a place for level headed discussion.

And im kinda fine with the thread going on. It's nice and dandy to think of this place as above the other forums, or have incredible conversations with ppl / in the chat. But threads like these are also very important to observe as I'd like the place to have a high standard and quality. Higher than what's seen here.

Part of the issue is in making statements of some inflammatory nature based on an opinion, we forget whom, that happens to be part of the conversation, it could be apply to. Tact in prose is what's needed.

As an example, when someone is talking poorly about people that use psychedelics to a psychedelic user without directly referencing the user. To be more specific, I'll share a personal anecdote. One day at work, my boss asked me how I was doing after I asked him the same. I told him I was well and feeling good on my microdose. He proceeded to share how he thinks microdosing is bs, and starts talking about other people and microdosing and sharing some rather misguided opinions (such as, "they're just depleting their serotonin...". Point being, while he may not have consciously been directly referring to me, he inadvertently was due to the fact that I am part of the subset of people that are microdosing. So effectively, he was subsuming me into his opinions of others, whether he meant to or not.

One love

I just don't appreciate being told how to feel about it. I've let it slide a number of times, but it's rude and weirdly passive aggressive, so I responded with an invitation to kindly knock the shit off in future.

Artists have every right in the world to be upset by this. They have every right to feel their livelihoods are being threatened; every right to feel pissed off that their efforts have been hijacked to train the very thing that is actively trying to put them out of business.

If you (and I don't mean you specifically, widderic - because these are often repeated shitty mantras from people trying to shame artists into shutting up about this - but you as well for sure) don't feel bothered by it, then don't. I'm very happy you remain unaffected. But don't presume to tell me shit. My feelings are totally valid.

Reference -

"Greetings,

Your chat rights have been suspended for 1 week due to inappropriate images shared by you in the Boofroom. This is an all inclusive place, and I'm sure plenty of female members would be offended by such imagery and discussion. We lack in the female perspective here at the Nexus as is. That makes it harder to make everyone, including women, feel welcome.

Thank you for understanding.

One love,
Vm" - VoidMatrix

Thanks J

Can we share cartoon graphics of male nipples in the Boofroom?

I actually find the vast majority of midjourney art really boring.. and there is already a certain 'look' to it too which is making it quickly forgettable.. at least from my set of eyes. So I wonder whether in the art space it may just fizzle out and remain a thing used people needing images quickly made for certain purposes.. of course the answer is probably that it wont. which really sucks for artists who need to try and survive financially. But yeah I dunno.. art generated by animals who spend their life perfecting the craft still totally whoops it.. flaws and all.

We don't need to see every little thing our mind can come up with displayed in front of us.. I feel like it just cheapens imagination. Its not going away though I'm sure of that.. but I think there should at the very least be limitations put on letting it basically steal the works of others

Is anyone else already finding it boring?

I look at it differently though. If this continues the way it does, I doubt static images is what the big endpoint will be.

What I picture and would like to see from these technologies is something along the lines of:

Getting into building my house, as per usual, and having a whole big blank wall in one room, most probably the chill out or work room, but if the end product is watery or oceany with fish maybe the shower wall would work as well.
So then instead of painting it, or putting any decoration on it, just put some kind of cheap led lights on it connected to one pc, as a very big monitor sort of thing you see.
Then when the whole wall is a (hopefully cheap) monitor, connect this to one of these technologies and tell them to showcase another universe, with Night Elves chilling and drinking tea in a green forest, making music and smalltalking. It could be a 15 minute mixture of videos, or maybe if the technology goes really nicely hour long videos could be produced?

So the end result is, a wall near the place you work is showing you absolutely custom generated images. Similar to standing afk in a RPG video game inside of a medieval inn, you hear the music, see the artificial conversations that the game produces, it has a feeling to it.

I also disbelieve this will be confused with real human made art, and also I don't think we'll be losing the real deal over it. Just like previously stated, doing psychedelics in a forest, or even a picnic, will kick anything these technologies can do in the ass for a loooong long time...

A quick edit, i've seen f1's responses and do not agree at all. I think it's passive agressive and way out of order. It sucks for artists right now, I understand why some are scared or pissed, I just don't share the views of where this is going, and statements like artists will disappeare > the same way as a junior programmer I don't feel threatened by chatGPT writing code any time soon

I've seen what happens when people pick fights with you, so I won't.

Sorry that you felt personally attacked by that, it wasn't my intention. But, dually noted. I'll absolve myself from the conversation. Could have been a little nicer about that though. I have feelings and stuff, something AI doesn't have.

Also, some confusion in there somewhere with who was referring to who. I'm lost at this point. I wasn't directing what I said at any single person, just proposing how I (as a graphic designer) feels about it. I can feel my way, you can feel your way, there's really no harm in that. Definitely don't want artists to shut up about this at all, it's a very interesting subject that will continue to evolve until there is a consensus.

Well... I suppose it's probably comments like these, which seem to appear repeatedly in response to my expressing my point of view:







I'm sorry you think that expressions of concern and anger by me or any other artist as it relates to the unauthorized and uncompensated use of their work "contributes to negative energy". Your solution to switch careers in response may be the right one for you, but it's galling to see you suggest that to others - just as it's galling to have someone tell you to just get used to it and "outperform the machine" because there's nothing you can do to stop it.

And as far as f1 and Psychosomaticon are concerned, other than my post above with the gibberish prompts, they are maybe the best examples I've seen of why this stuff is garbage - and just so there is no confusion whatsoever, they don't keep getting suspended because they're flooding the forum with disposable garbage any random monkey could produce; it's because they're trolls for whom Midjourney is just another handy tool to be used for deliberate trolling.

When I say "you" it means the collective you. Not everything is directed at you.

That last quote you posted was though. As I associate anger with excess slander with the use of expletives.

As for switching careers, I followed that with "no one should have to do that though."

I'm exhausted from the conversation about AI art, especially now, and don't plan on contributing to the discussion any further regardless of my "in the middle" stance.

Hm... Well, considering the juvenile behavior that led to me suspending your chat rights, I'm not surprised by this action of publicly sharing my PM to you and trying to oust someone else. However, if you want me to put you on blast publicly, I can do that.



How about you don't play coy and feign ignorance while insulting my intelligence, because you know that's not the point. And if I'm mistaken and it's something that you are unaware of, then I pity you.



Answer one of these questions.
1. Where does it say that senior members can do so?
2. How far did you reach up your ass to pull that out?

It doesn't matter who complained, just that a respected member did.



As a matter of fact, I did. And I shared them with other mods asking for them to weigh in before I suspended you... what does that tell you?

Based on your actions and statements, be as disappointed as you want, because it's not worth my time to care what you think.

If you're so desperate to share such imagery, then go to Reddit. See you there... wait, no, I won't because it's not worth my time.

One love

No need for you to be at a loss, man. You called me out and I responded - so, no need for further confusion.