Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 9238081" data-attributes="member: 18">You can't do that though. To have the history, it has to have assembled the piece in stages, and it'll obviously false if you go back and try and simulate every brushstroke - and paint programs do record every brushstroke. Also, as you say correctly, AI art has no understanding of what it's doing, so couldn't create the fake layers needed. It would be an obvious nonsense.So that might happen one day but would require a different approach in the generation in the first place, but we're a long way out from that, and I suspect even then it'd be highly distinctive. Further, using that would be deception - and whilst criminal action is unlikely, civil action is highly likely. Even if such a technology existed, it'd get found out, and people would get bankrupted being sued for this.They'd need to start again from first principles to make AI generate art like an artist does. It's fundamentally not how AI art works. It doesn't have brushstrokes, it doesn't have layers, it doesn't have you selecting X tool and performing Y function, it just BLARTS out a fully-formed calculation and says &quot;This am picture&quot;.Could they build a thing that operated like an artist? Sure. But that's nothing that's on the market right now. The bigger threat right now is more down to part of a scene being done with AI art which is what appears to have happened here (well, I suspect, it was almost all of the scene, but I'd need the files to prove that), like just the background or whatever. And that's where your point becomes very relevant:This is indeed the ideal - and I suspect we will see it - but probably not from Adobe or their ilk, because honestly they're heavily invested in trying to legitimize AI art, not to create a situation where it can be identified easily.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ruin Explorer, post: 9238081, member: 18"] You can't do that though. To have the history, it has to have assembled the piece in stages, and it'll obviously false if you go back and try and simulate every brushstroke - and paint programs do record every brushstroke. Also, as you say correctly, AI art has no understanding of what it's doing, so couldn't create the fake layers needed. It would be an obvious nonsense. So that might happen one day but would require a different approach in the generation in the first place, but we're a long way out from that, and I suspect even then it'd be highly distinctive. Further, using that would be deception - and whilst criminal action is unlikely, civil action is highly likely. Even if such a technology existed, it'd get found out, and people would get bankrupted being sued for this. They'd need to start again from first principles to make AI generate art like an artist does. It's fundamentally not how AI art works. It doesn't have brushstrokes, it doesn't have layers, it doesn't have you selecting X tool and performing Y function, it just BLARTS out a fully-formed calculation and says "This am picture". Could they build a thing that operated like an artist? Sure. But that's nothing that's on the market right now. The bigger threat right now is more down to part of a scene being done with AI art which is what appears to have happened here (well, I suspect, it was almost all of the scene, but I'd need the files to prove that), like just the background or whatever. And that's where your point becomes very relevant: This is indeed the ideal - and I suspect we will see it - but probably not from Adobe or their ilk, because honestly they're heavily invested in trying to legitimize AI art, not to create a situation where it can be identified easily. [/QUOTE]

Verification