Welcome to Inkbunny...

To view member-only content, create an account. ( Hide )

Just because I use AI doesn’t mean I want to replace any artist

Recently I have seen more and more comments against AI works, and I couldn’t help but want to express my opinion.

I thought about this article for a long time, trying to avoid irrational statements, but I finally found that most of the opponents were motivated by emotions rather than legitimate reasons.

On the Internet, I can see everyone’s opinions on AI drawing, both positive and negative. But in most cases, everyone always treats us as rats on the street. Once any user is stupid, they will laugh at us. And use them as examples to promote how evil AI drawing is.

Fortunately, I don’t have such extreme people among my close friends. Although they often ridicule this matter, and some don’t like to see AI drawings, they don’t attack me (I’m very grateful).

I believe everyone who follows me knows that my art (I know some people hate AI drawing users claiming to be creators or artists, but I do Creation) is a story-oriented work,I am not particularly interested in how to present beautiful pictures, but how to create stories and imagination.

I once showed my work to an artist friend of mine. After reading it, he replied to me: You are the one who can truly threaten artists.

He didn’t mean any harm, and I know he thought it was a compliment, but I could also feel his fear of AI drawing. I was a little surprised and sad. I know that AI drawing can’t be called painting, but I still hope to be recognized as one of the creators by others, and I believe this is true for all AI artists.

I can create, but I'm not good at drawing, so I use tools as an aid. They always say that we plagiarize artists, but the fact is that even if the painting style is similar, it still does not constitute plagiarism. I don't know that everyone Are the copyright laws in different countries the same? However, the style of painting is not protected by copyright. What is protected is the idea, composition and production method.

In addition, the ideas are generated by ourselves, and the parameters are entered by ourselves. Many people even use PS to edit pictures themselves. However, most haters always deliberately ignore this part.

AI drawing is a very polarizing thing on the Internet. It is always full of fierce collisions of ideas in the fan circle. Every day we are novel and excited about what AI can do, but outside the circle it seems like What a heinous crime,like cub porn, like Furry, like gay,like all the things that are easily misunderstood.

This is human nature. We always define the whole thing from a single point, because we don’t have extra time to understand. We have various standards for things. These are all OK, but please, please Shut up and don't attack things you don't understand.

We have not actually harmed anyone, but we are always condemned. Compared with this, you should care more about war, environmental protection and humanitarian crises, otherwise you should spend time improving yourself.

Viewed:	169 times
Added:	2 months, 1 week ago 22 Mar 2024 18:58 CET

19 Comments on this Journal

Leave a Comment...

VarraTheVap

2 months, 1 week ago

link

Edited 2 months, 1 week ago by Owner

History repeats.. Did you know that when sewing machines were invented in the 1800ies, a mob of tailors raided the factory and destroyed all machines?
Humans are selfish like that by nature :/ So don't take it too hard. This work with AI is being apreciated.

picker52578

2 months, 1 week ago

link

@ VarraTheVap

I think technological progress will indeed change the ecology of certain professions, but it will also give rise to better quality. Nowadays, every one of those "purely handmade" things is extremely expensive.

VarraTheVap

2 months, 1 week ago

link

Edited 2 months, 1 week ago by Owner

@ picker52578

Indeed indeed. Like custom art is technically expensive currently (and I'm saying that as someone who still commissions artists very regularly xD ). Especially for companies where e.g. a good logo easily costs a few thousands to commission.

KevinSnowpaw

2 months, 1 week ago

link

@ VarraTheVap

This is actually the origin of the term ludite today it means an ignorant person afraid of technological progress but it dates back to the event you mentioned, the people responsible called themselves ludites, hense the term in use today.

VarraTheVap

2 months, 1 week ago

link

@ KevinSnowpaw

Wow, I never heard that term before (and it exist in my mother language too). Interesting!

Balmung

2 months, 1 week ago

link

I don't think AI can replace artists. AI works much better when you can provide a sketch for it, so anyone with artistic skill will always be at an advantage.

At any rate, don't worry too much about it, all new developments are scary for somebody out there. Things will quiet down eventually.

I also dabble in AI and it hasn't diminished my interest in getting commissions.

RNSDAI

2 months, 1 week ago

link

Edited 2 months, 1 week ago by Owner

The anti-AI movement is a vocal minority. It has some good arguments, but often some that question the whole movement and thus destroy themselves. Part of the truth is that most people don't care. Just as there were many problems before AI, but now AI is the scapegoat for everything.

First of all, as far as the furry community is concerned, a lot of people, especially younger people, like to use it. A lot of what concerns furry AI comes from the furries themselves, of course. They are a huge part of the community. Tens of thousands of them on Discord.

In the overall context, it has been in our lives for years. In graphics cards, televisions and mobile phones for ages. Just looking at the companies that use it: Nvidia, AMD, Microsoft, LG, Sony, Samsung, Apple, Google, Reddit, Twitter/X, Facebook/Meta, Intel, Yamaha, Panasonic, Philips, LEGO, Epic/Unreal, Unity, Adobe, Tesla, BMW, Amazon, Disney, Netflix, Marvel ...the list is endless.

Many of those who are against AI have only now become aware of it, now that it is far too late. Who can still remember the old online captcha "are you human?" when they were introduced? That was the beginning. They should have reacted then, not 10 years too late. You can't stop it anyway, because it's built into almost every product and has been analysing images for years.

Only now that it's affecting artists is there a huge outcry... but it's too late. A lot has already been written about this here on InkBunny. Some people would like to have the old InkBunny back, like a time machine. But nobody wants to admit that there were so many problems before, and there always have been. It's easier to blame a technology, a tool, than to look at the whole thing. If you look at old forums, you'll see that many of the problems are not new, but that the artists themselves are partly to blame, as in the classic example: Offering art cheaper and cheaper, almost worthless in terms of money.

Otterball

2 months, 1 week ago

link

Very good writing. AI art has enabled me to finally create, by myself. I know it's a limited crutch, a wheelchair of sorts. But it's my only way of mobility. So AI art hate is cruel in this sense.

FauxPika

2 months, 1 week ago

link

This is why I try to stick to styles and themes I rarely if ever see known artists doing. At the very least I try to AVOID obviously hand drawn styles of art. The "furry cinematic" style is heavily computer program reliant in the first place, so, it's the thing I'm most comfortable copying. If I had to liken it to music, it would be like being a copycat in the world of sample based music genres.

Unfortunately, AI will put a lot of artists out of business. It's a choice this society is making and I don't pretend I can change anyone's mind about it on either side of the argument. Traditional art will likely go the rout music has been going for years. It will be replaced by stuff made by machines and that has and will continue to piss people off. Because art isn't like plastic cups or loafs of bread, there are many people who want the constantly variable "imperfect" nature of art made by human hand. I'll let other people fight over it the issue though.

fourward

2 months, 1 week ago

link

to start off, I do love your works, and I do like AI gen if used for non-commercial uses. I use AI gen personally for fun, but won't post it or share it. As an artist, I also understand the fear that the artists have.

Some artists I see here have issues with the AI gen being in the "popular" section, preventing X amount of hand drawn art being up in that section, reducing the probability of exposure. This could easily be addressed by making a new section strictly for AI gen.

Another issue that artists have is the, like you addressed, the plagiarism section. It doesn't take a genius to know that the LORA used to generate the piece was used without the artists' consent, and that most artists don't like that.

Now, I have to remind you that I said I don't mind it if used non-commercially, but there are some bad actors out there who: take commissions without saying that it's AI, uses AI art to get hired in a concept design work, companies using AI gen for advertisements, uses FANBOX, Patreon, Subscribestar and monetize their AI gen, Fake that AI Gen is an actual hand-drawn artwork by showing a fake "drawing" video. If people already don't have enough money to support artists, overflowing the market with paywalled ai gen doesn't really help. There are also impersonators that uses artist specific loras to create AI gen pieces of the artist to harass them, but that's (I hope) an outlier on bad apples.

anybody can create. anybody can draw. all it takes is drawing daily and trying to improve. Sure, improvement will take several years even if you draw everyday, but it's possible. Then why don't they? it's "easier" to make a stunning piece and editing it a bit in PS. It doesn't take hours or days of constant struggle. Instead, you have minutes of prompt input, and probably an hour of rolling the gen die until you get a good piece. It uses other users' struggles that took years to craft (without their consent) so you can save time and not struggle as much. Art has always been accessible, but it's a struggle, and most people don't want to struggle. This is another major point in AI gen that artists hate.

As for the copyright, I think you got it backwards. Copyright protects composition (to an extent), but doesn't protect ideas, production methods, and painting styles. But, I think using any "laws" when it comes to art is useless since those laws weren't made with AI gen in mind. just remember: just because it's legal doesn't mean it's morally right.

Ai gen certainly is a tool, but because it's just a tool doesn't mean it doesn't do any harm.

picker52578

2 months, 1 week ago

link

@ fourward

Yes, I cannot deny the possibility of illegal data collection with the information I use
I can't convince artists not to be afraid or angry.
Until the real AI decree comes out, this is really a gray area, so I can only speak to the current situation.
The main purpose of my article is not to claim my legitimacy, but to tell you that most of us users are not malicious.

I know there are bad people using AI generation to make improper profits, but like you said, they are the bad apples
But what they are attacking now is not companies or commercial operators, is the end users. Anyone who is not malicious will be excluded and attacked. I think this part is unfair.

There was once a skilled artist in Japan who was strongly rebuked and attacked by opponents because he was "suspected" of using AI as an auxiliary tool to draw hair.

And the part about harassment by copycats, since I'm not the one making the mods, I can't speak for their side.
But the example I see more often is that there are opponents of AI who deliberately use AI to hurt others to prove to everyone that AI is poisonous.

There was once an opponent who stole the live-streamed sketches of a painter and used AI to complete the finished product. Although the final two products were very different, the copyright only protects the finished product, so there is no legal conflict but a moral conflict.

If we take moral controversies as an example, cub porn, furry, and gay are all wrong in some countries and in the values of some people and should not exist. I think this is a double standard to some extent.

That’s why I advocate that you don’t have to like it, but don’t interfere,Otherwise, once moral standards are raised, they will be the next victims.

And there are many reasons why people use AI generation, money is not the only issue,artists and commissioners don't always match up.
Maybe the artist you like doesn't want to do your type of work.
Maybe the other party can’t fully understand your needs.
Or maybe you just have a simple case of social anxiety.

Some people may say, in this case why not learn to draw by yourself, you just need to take the time to learn.

OK, suppose one day you want to make an animation or story, but you can only draw. You don’t know screenwriting, storyboarding, or other parts other than drawing. At this time, a screenwriter jumps out and says, Why don't you do it yourself, you just need to take the time to learn and don't use ChatGPT

If you choose ChatGPT, you also meet all the accusations faced by AI artists
Even if you never thought about plagiarizing anyone,but ChatGPT did it, so you should be blamed for it.
This is the problem we face.

We have a powerful tool right in front of us, but we can’t use it because it would hinder other creators
At the same time, those powerful companies can ignore this. They use tools to significantly reduce costs and produce one after another works that you have thought of but are restricted from doing. Then those creators who have been infringed have continued to Turn around and scold end users simply because they are easy to bully.

fourward

2 months, 1 week ago

link

@ picker52578

Well, the thing about illegal data collection, is that it's not a "possibility", but a "reality". And yes, I do understand that most AI gen users aren't malicious, but the issue is that the platform clumps ai gens and hand-drawn art as the same category, which hinders exposure of artists.

The issue of attacking non-malicious ai gen users as if they are malicious, just comes down to immorality of the lora. Can you say, with 100% guarantee, that all artists consented for their art to be used for ai gen? if not, even if you're not using it for malicious purpose, it's existence is immoral and techbros trying to justify it doesn't really help the case.

was it the artist that is getting death threats from an impersonator using the artist specific lora daily to the point they had to go on an indefinite hiatus?
or the AI gen user hiding that it's AI and taking money as if it's a normal commission?

My point is, anti-AI people do harass and have loud opinions, but the bad apples in the AI gen users definitely causes more problems and anti-AI.

"There was once an opponent who stole the live-streamed sketches of a painter and used AI to complete the finished product. Although the final two products were very different, the copyright only protects the finished product, so there is no legal conflict but a moral conflict."
if you're talking about , and is genuinely saying that the pieces look very different, I don't know what to say. They look EXTREMELY similar due to:
- same color scheme
- same pose (silhouette)
- same lighting

being wrong does not mean it's immoral. But furries and homosexuals being "wrong" isn't a social immorality, but rather a political (furries = extremists) or religious (furries = zoophilia / homosexual = anti-god) immorality which is a whole another can of worms.
Now, if you openly state you're into cub porn, you WILL get attacked because it is socially accepted that it is immoral. and just because you're ok with 1 immoral value doesn't mean you need to accept ALL immoral values. Just because I enjoy ryona and gore, doesn't mean I should be ok with theft.

idk what point you're trying to make, but cub porn are already in the crosshairs. So many people getting cancelled for fictional drawing.

-"maybe the artist you like doesn't want to do your type of work" <- in this case, do you use an artist specific LORA or use a specific term to generate a piece that looks similar to their work? (like "(artist:XXX))
-"maybe the other party can't fully understand your needs" <- that's why you talk to them and confirm the draft? regular commissioners usually tries to avoid this situation.
-"social anxiety" <- maybe. but if your social anxiety is so bad you can't commission someone, idk if they would rather plunge themselves into a community that is pretty publicly hated.

EXACTLY. animators and artist just does it themselves. Sure, their animation might fail, but they use the opportunity to learn. Most animators, artists, manga artists don't use chatgpt for storyboarding, and I've never met an artist who uses chat gpt to storyboard, so if you have someone in mind that does that, please let me know because I am interested. At this point, this is a big "what if" situation and doesn't really do anything for the discussion.

And yes, if you use chatgpt to write a book, it's plagiarism. and guess what? there's a shit-ton of those being sold on amazon.

No, artists and other users have also been yelling at big companies that's using AI. hell, that was part of the palworld discourse. People also yell at Wizard of the coast (mtg company) for using AI. People have been using and will keep using it even if others dislike it.

SherlyKaru

2 months ago

link

@ picker52578

Another reason to generate AI art even for yourself, is because one might live in a poor country, where Art is not only a luxury but also the difference between eating or not for a few days. Everybody needs money, but not everybody can earn enough to spend on art, even by working 10 hours a day.

Ronoae

1 month, 3 weeks ago

link

@ fourward

I know this is two weeks old, but IB doesn't have any other way for me to say "I appreciate this comment," sooo... apologies!

picker52578

2 months ago

link

Edited 2 months ago by Owner

"but the issue is that the platform clumps ai gens and hand-drawn art as the same category, which hinders exposure of artists.
"
Which platform? Or how far do you want to achieve it?
As far as I know, the websites that currently allow AI-generated uploads have done the best possible balance they can, such as PIXIV and inkbunny. They have formulated relevant regulations and require uploaders to affix AI-generated tags for classification.

In this way, users of the website can choose whether to watch AI-generated images. It is not our problem that the exposure swamps ordinary painters, but that users are willing and accept them to appear together.

As I'm sure you know, most of the opponents call for the total annihilation of AI generation.

AI-generated users are not all stupid. We usually avoid words that refer to a specific painter. Although there will still be a certain degree of similarity, but normally, no one would use their name to commit fraud.

The best way at present is to promote the establishment of laws related to AI so that we can standardize the scope of use of AI. There are also some painters on the Internet who are willing to provide their own training materials. In the future, those large companies will also have to pay for learning objects. If possible, of course many people are willing to spend money to purchase those materials, just like the brush styles in drawing software.

celestialjade

2 months ago

link

I'll toss my two cents in.

I think IB has hit a good medium between not banning AI outright, and not letting it go wild. We just need to adhere to the ACP. The problem is that there bad actors (as was mentioned) that use artist names, or those that openly bully those who use AI. The only problem now is that sometimes, someone makes a mistake and forgets the AI tag. I have done that 3 times, and each time it was corrected the moment I was aware. Twice the people telling me where quite polite, I PM'ed them saying thank you. The third person never replied to my thank you PM, but that is better than getting the anti-AI blabber. I have also seen a mistyped tag and someone get pounced because of that, not because of AI. There are also new people to AI, and only need to be shown the ACP section on AI and informed where they went wrong.

I have also seen mention of anti-AI people not correcting a post (suggested tags), but instead reporting it, and supposedly get others to report it too. That does not solve the problem, only gives the moderators multiple tickets for one issue. I see that as part of the reason they are soliciting for more moderators right now. It needlessly increases the support ticket count when a PM, suggested tag, or comment could have solved the problem without moderator interaction at all.

Something that I want to add is that AI has allowed me to make art again. I had a work place injury a few years ago, and it left me unable to paint, nerve damage. I did traditional on canvas and miniature painting. I've slowly improved again, adaptive equipment allows me to use a keyboard and mouse. And my physical therapy has let my sign my own name with a stencil and large pen. I see AI as giving back something I lost. I'm hopeful that one day I can sketch again, and put that into the AI. Better still is if I can paint again.

AI has not taken anything from me, it has given back my creativity. Sure, I can spend a few minutes making something simple, or I can spend a few hours on and off balancing lora, hypernetwork, embeddings, and prompt weights. If I want to add a theme, typically using another lora, I add it and make minute adjustments to the prompt. I would equate that to the YCH that artists sell. I'm not saying YCH is a bad thing, quite the opposite in fact, but it is something that speeds up the process and is repeatable.

For the separate section idea for AI, like for audio and stories, a moderator said that is in addition to the popular section, not instead of. I've seen an interesting lizard/incest thumbnail today in the popular section and found out that it was a story. I think in part the people arguing that it should not be in the popular section are also the ones not using the block list. Sure, it may bug out at times, but it generally works. Also, perhaps it's because of messing with AI for over 6 months now, but I can generally tell an AI image by the thumbnail. There is a "colour" pallet and shapes that seems to make them stick out.

picker52578

2 months ago

link

@ celestialjade

I'm touched to see you get such positive feedback from AI drawing. While opponents shout about how evil AI drawing is, some people use it to realize their dreams.

Garak

2 months ago

link

I think it is important to be aware that the threat to artists' livelihood is very real as a result of AI, and the ensuing backlash isn't without reason. But, I'm of the opinion that AI, digital and traditional artists can eventually find synchrony when the ethical wrinkles are eventually ironed out, and maybe even harmony. It is, however, the responsibility of both communities to sew the seams of which bind that potential harmony.

AI directors need to actively discourage bad actors in their community who's behavior only serves to poison the well with debates on ethical and responsible use of the technology; directors that openly antagonize artists, train data on works without permission and cry foul when they're chastised for breaking rules that are in place to maintain civility between groups. In return, it is artists' responsibility to harness more empathy towards people who are simply just excited to be able to create for the first time, genuinely don't mean any harm and try to see AI as what will be a new gateway to creativity for a lot of people. I've already seen a number of AI directors growing more and more frustrated with its limitations and have been steadily increasing their use of their digital pens without even realizing whats happening.

Again, there are genuine ethical considerations for the use of AI that shouldn't be ignored, important to acknowledge and absolutely should be addressed. But, we also shouldn't let the process towards doing so overshadow the benefits of its existence: more art, more beauty, more furry waifus, and, most importantly, better access to creativity for more people. And, personally, I don't think it would hurt to have more creativity in the world.

Coercer1730

1 month, 3 weeks ago

link

Edited 1 month, 3 weeks ago by Owner

I think everything has been said here, but I'll also express my thoughts, as I think this is the place where they fit the most.

Technology has always been the drive propelling productivity forward - I know it isn't the one and only key to improving our lifestyle, but it's clear it plays a pivotal role. Here, again, a lot of factors come into account, like the uses these advances are given by those who have the neccesary knowledge to stay in the loop.

As it happens with breakthroughs in general, and I'd say tech in particular, is that first, a stage of incomprehension arrives when it's presented to the average commoner. The irrational yet instictive feeling of watching some machine do something you could never have though before produces a fearful reaction, as one can't yet undestand the reach of such technology.

After some more time, people start fidding with it, starting a second stage of massive use. Here is the moment where two clear groups, followers and detractors form. While the first ones defend it can be used to almost solve any problem that may arise in life, the later ones think it will conduct to the armageddon in mere weeks. Anyway, such breakthrough transforms from good news to a controversial topic.

Fast forward to the moment where that first wave of users have already lowered their voices, people become familiarized with both, the pros and the shortcomings of whatever has been invented. People in the 'opposite' team also do so, as they see how they life continues, their dark predictions nothing more than mere wrong conjectures, and then, everything stays as it is until the next breakthrough arrives. Rinse and repeat.

I don't know if I've been clear enough, as english is not my mother tongue, but think about it. This has happened in almost every 'big' improvement since the 19th century. From the aforementioned sewing machines, to the moment when newspapers editors were against radio, or when TV arrived to our lives.

Computers? It was exactly the same, I can relate. I remember when I started as a teacher back in the 80s, older teachers, who were around their sixties, basically thought that any person who dare to stare at that square box of idiocy named television would have their brain wiped out. Middle aged teachers back then (Who were more familiarized with it) weren't so radical, but oh, if they were asked how they felt about computers... it was almost the same rant over again.

Fast forward to this moment, have schools cease to exit because computers have replaced teachers? No. Has the internet hindered our ability to research or innovate? No. But I think it is obvious all the good it has brought to our lives by now. Think that internet stopped working forever in this moment. No comments.

AI will follow the same path. This is the idea I want to convey. Embrace it, and wait until people become familiarized with it. Then, it will be adapted wherever it is neccesary to ease the life of everyone who was against it, probably including artists. If you consider yourself in the 'against' group, then I advice you to dive a bit deeper into it. Watch some tutorials, run some tests, and then, tell me if it can replace you in everything you do - I'd like to hear from you.

I want to finish by explaining my own situation. I've came to know this world only five years ago -after a long ordeal that doesn't belong here- and I got the knack of animation quite easily, as it can be basically controlled by keyboard. But drawing is a different thing. I've tried tutorials for a couple years, but I'm in a point where it is physically impossible to me to hold a pen for over 10 minutes without wobbling. I think that, in english, this is named 'Action tremor', and generally affects people who, like me, are aged over 60. It's not a rare occurence, yet it completely negates the ability to create almost any type of hand-drawn art. Not everyone using AI does so out of laziness. Remember that.

New Comment:

Move reply box to top ↑

Log in or create an account to comment.

Help

Information

Policy & Legal

All artwork and other content is copyright its respective owners.

Powered by Harmony 'Gravitation' Release 80.

Content Server: Virginia Cache - provided by Inkbunny Donors. Background: Blank Gray.

The Inkbunny web application, artwork, name and logo are copyright and trademark of their respective owners.