- Corridor Crew's AI Video Is A Moral Betrayal Of Everything Animation Stands For, by Jade King. TheGamer.com. 03/21/23.
- The US Copyright Office says you can’t copyright Midjourney AI-generated images, by Richard Lawler. The Verge 02/23/23. / A copyright registration granted to the Zarya of the Dawn comic book has been partially canceled, because it included “non-human authorship” that hadn’t been taken into account.
- Midjourney Founder Admits to Using a ‘Hundred Million’ Images Without Consent, by Matt Growcoot. PetaPixel. 12/21/22.
When asked: “Did you seek consent from living artists or work still under copyright?”
Holz replies: “No. There isn’t really a way to get a hundred million images and know where they’re coming from.
“It would be cool if images had metadata embedded in them about the copyright owner or something. But that’s not a thing; there’s not a registry.
“There’s no way to find a picture on the internet, and then automatically trace it to an owner and then have any way of doing anything to authenticate it.”
- Artists fed up with AI-image generators use Mickey Mouse to goad copyright lawsuits. DailyDot.com. 12/16/22.
In response to concerns over the future of their craft, artists have begun using AI systems to generate images of characters including Disney’s Mickey Mouse. Given Disney’s history of fierce protection over its content, the artists are hoping the company takes action and thus proves that AI art isn’t as original as it claims.
"Someone steal these amazing designs to sell them on Mugs and T-Shirts, I really don’t care, this is AI art that’s been generated,” Bourdages wrote. “Legally there should be no recourse from Disney as according to the AI models TOS these images transcends copyright and the images are public domain.”
- Artists can now opt out of the next version of Stable Diffusion, by Melissa Heikkilä. Technology Review 12/16/22. The move follows a heated public debate between artists and tech companies over how text-to-image AI models are trained.
- Artists stage mass protest against AI-generated artwork on ArtStation, by Benj Edwards. ArsTechnica.com 12/15/22.
- ArtStation draws more backlash by saying it doesn’t want to "stifle AI research and commercialization", by Evgeny Obedkov. GameWorld Observer 12/15/22.
- How it feels to be sexually objectified by an AI, by Melissa Heikkilä. Technology Review 12/13/22.
- Adobe to sell AI-generated images on its stock photo platform, by iconKatyanna Quach. The Register 12/06/22.
- Invasive Diffusion: How one unwilling illustrator found herself turned into an AI model, by Andy Baio. Waxy.org. 11/01/22. Using 32 of her illustrations, MysteryInc152 fine-tuned Stable Diffusion to recreate Hollie Mengert’s style. He then released the checkpoint under an open license for anyone to use.
“I kind of feel like when they created the tool, they were thinking of me as more of a brand or something, rather than a person who worked on their art and tried to hone things, and that certain things that I illustrate are a reflection of my life and experiences that I’ve had. Because I don’t think if a person was thinking about it that way that they would have done it. I think it’s much easier to just convince yourself that you’re training it to be like an art style, but there’s like a person behind that art style.”
- The scary truth about AI copyright is nobody knows what will happen next, by James Vincent. The Virge 11/15/22.
- DeviantArt provides a way for artists to opt out of AI art generators, by Kyle Wiggers. TechCrunch.com. 11/11/22.
- Google to Roll Out App for AI-Generated Artwork, Complicating Copyright Worries, by Tessa Solomon. ArtNews 11/03/22.
- AI-generated art sparks furious backlash from Japan’s anime community, by Andrew Deck. Rest of World 10/27/22. "Kim Jung Gi left us less than [a week ago] and AI bros are already ‘replicating’ his style and demanding credit."
- Shutterstock partners with OpenAI to sell AI-generated stock images using DALL-E, by Katyanna Quach. The Register 10/26/22.
- A.I.-Generated Art Is Already Transforming Creative Work, by Kevin Roose. New York Times 10/21/22.
- AI Data Laundering: How Academic and Nonprofit Researchers Shield Tech Companies from Accountability, by Andy Baio. Waxy.org 09/30/22.
- This artist is dominating AI-generated art. And he’s not happy about it, by Melissa Heikkilä. Technology Review 09/16/22. Greg Rutkowski is a more popular prompt than Picasso.
- NYC artist granted first known registered copyright for AI art, by Adam Schrader. United Press International. 09/24/22.
- U.S. Copyright Office Backtracks on Registration of Partially AI-Generated Work, by Franklin Graves. IPWatchDog.com 11/01/22. "This action from the USCO may serve as an early warning that anyone filing works that contain any portions generated by artificial intelligence must disclose such portions and be prepared to support their registration and prove a degree of human authorship."
- AI-Created Comic Has Been Deemed Ineligible for Copyright Protection, by Brian Cronin. CBR.com. 12/21/22. Reversing an earlier decision, the United States Copyright Office rules that a comic book made using A.I. art is ineligible for copyright protection.
- Midjourney Founder David Holz On The Impact Of AI On Art, Imagination And The Creative Economy, Interview with Rob Salkowitz. Forbes 09/16/22.
- Getty Images Bans AI-Generated Images Due To Copyright Worries, by Harrison Jacobs. 09/03/22.
- An A.I.-Generated Picture Won an Art Prize. Artists Aren’t Happy, by Kevin Roose. New York Times 09/02/22. “I won, and I didn’t break any rules,” the artwork’s creator says.
- Exploring 12 Million of the 2.3 Billion Images Used to Train Stable Diffusion’s Image Generator, by Andy Baio. Waxy.org 08/30/22.
- The First AI-Generated Portrait Ever Sold at Auction Shatters Expectations, Fetching $432,500—43 Times Its Estimate, by Eileen Kinsella. ArtNet News. 10/25/18.
A.I. Art, Human Art and Copyright
Friday, December 16, 2022
AI and Artists -- An Ongoing Compilation of Articles
A.I. (Artificial Intelligence) - A Help or Hindrance to the Artist?
Half of me has that giddy mindset of a "kid-in-a-candy-store", especially when I experiment with Midjourney -- for the unfamiliar, "an independent research lab that produces a proprietary artificial intelligence program that creates images from textual descriptions" -- or see what others can come up with.
In its current state, which is still very much in its infancy (MidJourney beta only being released in 2022), AI-generated art gives a whole new meaning to the phrase, "the imagination is the limit", having the ability to render whatever the user wants, based on a unique prompt. Admittedly there is some level of SKILL required in utilizing the prompts, learning what particular kind and combination of prompts achieves the desired result. But in any case, the images that Midjourney produces -- spanning practically every genre and style and medium -- are absolutely, completely mind-boggling. See, for example, the regular postings to the Official MidJourney Facebook page.
But there's another part of me that is tentative, even fearful, for the potential impact it can have on artists and photographers and illustrators. What does it mean, for instance, when you can render a painted image in a matter of MINUTES, that would take a human literally days or weeks to produce on their own, using skills they have spent the bulk of their lives honing and cultivating as a craft?
What are the implications ... when I read that the first portrait created using artificial intelligence sold at auction in 2018 for $432,500; and that only this year, a Midjourney AI-generated painting won first place in the Colorado State Fair?
According to Kevin Roose, A.I.-generated art is already transforming creative work, both positively and not necessarily so. Some artists are less concerned than others about the impact AI may have on their careers, as in the example of an interior designer who has figured out how to use AI to streamlining their work, fleshing out prospective ideas for office-renovation in real-time. On the other hand you have stories like this:
"Initially, Mr. Waldoch planned to hire human artists to illustrate each day’s rhyming word pair. But when he saw the cost — between $50 and $60 per image, plus time for rounds of feedback and edits — he decided to try using A.I. instead. He plugged word pairs into Midjourney and DreamStudio, an app based on Stable Diffusion, and tweaked the results until they looked right. Total cost: a few minutes of work, plus a few cents.“I typed in ‘carrot parrot,’ and it spit back a perfect image of a parrot made of carrots,” he said. “That was the immediate ‘aha’ moment.”
Mr. Waldoch said he didn’t feel guilty about using A.I. instead of hiring human artists, because human artists were too expensive to make the game worthwhile."
On the other hand, David Holz, the founders of Midjourney, was interviewed by Forbes and was largely dismissive of the idea that AI-generated art would have a negative impact on artists themselves:
... think that some people will try to cut artists out. They will try to make something similar at a lower cost, and I think they will fail in the market. I think the market will go towards higher quality, more creativity, and vastly more sophisticated, diverse and deep content. And the people who actually are able to use like the artists and use the tools to do that are the ones who are going to win.These technologies actually create a much deeper appreciation and literacy in the visual medium. You might actually have the demand, outstrip the ability to produce at that level, and then maybe you'll actually be raising the salaries of artists. It could be weird, but that's what's going to happen. The pace of that demand increase for both quality and diversity will lead to some wonderful and unexpected projects getting made.
A generation of students graduated art schools, many of them heavily in debt, counting on relatively well-paid jobs in entertainment production, videogame production, commercial art and so on. How does the emergence of AI text-to-image platforms impact their future?
I think some people will try to cut costs, and some people will try to expand ambitions. I think the people who expand ambitions will still be paying all those same salaries, and the people who try to cut costs, I think will fail.
Of similar concern are the copyright and privacy issues involved. Take this story of fantasy artist Greg Rutkowski, who found his own original work quickly overtaken and overwhelmed online by AI-generated replications:
Rutkowski was initially surprised but thought it might be a good way to reach new audiences. Then he tried searching for his name to see if a piece he had worked on had been published. The online search brought back work that had his name attached to it but wasn’t his.
The article goes on to describe the experience of others -- illustrators, photographers, models, actors and actresses, directors, cinematographers" -- who are grappling with the fact that their work is being fed into the 5.8 billion dataset used by AI. It is currently the case that artists don’t have the choice to opt in to the database or have their work removed.
Anyway ... no offense intended in this post to those who use Midjourney and are demonstrably very adept at guiding it to producing what they desire. I honestly remain very much enthralled by its potential and entertainment value.
But lurking in the back of my mind are the questions and the issues raised in these articles as well.
AI and Artists -- An Ongoing Compilation of Articles
Corridor Crew's AI Video Is A Moral Betrayal Of Everything Animation Stands For , by Jade King. TheGamer.com. 03/21/23. The US Co...
-
Corridor Crew's AI Video Is A Moral Betrayal Of Everything Animation Stands For , by Jade King. TheGamer.com. 03/21/23. The US Co...
-
As somebody who's (at least somewhat) creatively/artistically inclined , I find myself absolutely stunned by the recent advancements mad...