AI/LLMs AI art bans are going to ruin small 3rd party creators

[Maxperson]

You are excluding the third option, which is that the result is not actually creative, and that it is simply a non-creative derivative. It’s not that the AI has been creative, or that you have. The result is simply not creative.

Because that's not an option. It is creative, because something new is being created by the human with the vision.

If you photocopy a piece of art, neither you nor the photocopier have been creative.

Which is about as far from what I am describing as a bird is from a monkey.

 

[FrogReaver]

Which is about as far from what I am describing as a bird is from a monkey.

So you’re saying they are similar enough to both be animals?

 

[Maxperson]

So you’re saying they are similar enough to both be animals?

I figured that since a photocopied picture and a created picture are both pictures, the example should both be animals.

 

[BenjaminPey]

If the work contains AI-made parts and human-made parts, then the AI-made parts are, well, made by the AI, hence derivative, and the other is made by the human and potentially creative. I don't see any merit in this reasoning.

Now if the AI-made part is now inexistent, it begs the question: in what precise way does the AI was useful in the process? What are we talking about, here? Please be as detailed as possible, because discussing all this in the abstract leads to confusion.

To consider that the AI is simply a tool akin to a ruler that you just use as a guide for your hand, for instance, is simply untrue. AI doesn't work like that. It's not helping you making the thing, it makes the thing, and you don't even know how or with what. You just see the end result. So, unless you directing the AI for every pixels there is (at which point, frankly, just make the dam thing yourself), there will still be unaccounted-for pixels, pixels that was produced and placed there by the AI without you willing it. Pixels you didn't create.

 

[FrogReaver]

To consider that the AI is simply a tool akin to a ruler that you just use as a guide for your hand, for instance, is simply untrue. AI doesn't work like that. It's not helping you making the thing, it makes the thing, and you don't even know how or with what. You just see the end result. So, unless you directing the AI for every pixels there is (at which point, frankly, just make the dam thing yourself), there will still be unaccounted-for pixels, pixels that was produced and placed there by the AI without you willing it. Pixels you didn't create.

I think the issue with this assessment is no one is saying it’s simply a ruler or other tool.l in all cases. Many use cases of ai image creation are obviously not and agreed by all to be not tool-like. But that also doesn’t mean that every use case is not tool-like. What others are suggesting is that some ai image creation use can certainly be just as tool-like as using a ruler, certainly not all though.

 

[BenjaminPey]

And that's why I asked, if possible, for a detailed process of image creation with tool-like AI.

 

[FrogReaver]

And that's why I asked, if possible, for a detailed process of image creation with tool-like AI.

That’s fair, I feel like max has given some quite detailed processes, but I guess it depends on precisely what details you want to see.

 

[BenjaminPey]

All I read was abstractions like "I change it so that it's totally changed", but maybe I missed some posts.

 

[FrogReaver]

All I read was abstractions like "I change it so that it's totally changed", but maybe I missed some posts.

Probably. Someone earlier had a good real world example but it’s not quite what we are talking about. I wont try to cite it as I won’t be able to do justice to it. It would make a good jumping off point though. Maybe when I get to computer instead of phone I will try to locate it.

I think the general premise is you start giving a prompt. The ai generates an image. You then ask for modifications to the image. It produces a new image incorporating that feedback. You do that again and again. Let’s say you go through 100 refinement prompts until you get an image that matches exactly what you wanted. That’s not simply telling a black box to produce any image, you are driving a process to produce the actual image you want.

 

[Morrus]

something new is being created by the human

Something new is not being created by the human. The ‘something’ is not new, and also it’s not created and it’s also not by the human. The only correct bit of that phrase is the word “something”. “New”, “created”, and “human” do not belong there.

But we’ve been over this a hundred times already. This is definitely the just repeat things over and over until people die of boredom thread!