Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
7533 S Center View Ct #4664
West Jordan, UT 84084
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
...thank you, if it thins enough out that is good for me.
but I would like to know is DAZ going to combine AI with it's Genesis models
That would be Perfect
In a way, there already is "ai combined with Genesis models", just in a different way. Thinking of photo to genesis... that's "ai with Genesis models".
Considering from there, one could ask oneself, what routes may be taken on that account.
- DAZ using assets to create ai tools of their own. Not necessarily full image generation as a replacement for buying assets, could be anything. Such will likely need consent of artists. Since auto-rendering is difficult enough, i'd assume it would be no issue to only include packages of PAs who consent (for a specific use within specific tools). Assuming it becoming a side-kick full image generation ai (it in terms of one feature, there will be other tools too, very likely), one might consider if it would make sense, to let PAs render or setup rendering for their own assets, which they let participate as training data in such a context. It's quite a stretch, technically already, unless you make it a buyout decision thing :p, and quite a jump as a project. Such doesn't happen over night, and legalities remain a question, e.g.what with uses for a specific purpose in the context of a dispute.
- DAZ endorsing certain uses of ai for third party producs, possibly later with access to some framework and training ground, plugins, and so on.
- Synthesis: Let third parties build specific ai-based tools to be integrated with Studio, for which DAZ might contribute training data. This could be buying something pretty much finished and adapting to it, or it's more like a joint venture with structural benefits for both. Probably will take some time for something to pop up, or you invest in research, which may have other risks than just waiting, which isn't risk-less either.
I assume we will see a bit of both on the medium run...
The only reason Daz might incorporate AI into DS might be because it's expected and AI is the new blockchain. I don't see AI helping Daz sell more products, which is, you know, how it can afford to support DS.
In the USA AI created imagery is without copyright protection. In my opinion that alone is a morass of trouble and negative issues, magnified exponentially if you are using your images for commercial projects. If AI is implemented in Daz Studio I will no longer use it.
An image created solely with Ai is not protected by copyright (though design elements such as characters may be). If the AI is used as a tool with human intervention involved too then it may or may not be protected.
How much AI use voids an artists authorship or how much human input crosses the authorship threshold sound like lawyer questions to me. Lawyer questions are the last thing I want to be thinking about when I am creating art.
Have you seen the Daz EULA? It runs into several pages. You can't avoid legal implications by just not thinking about them.
@fred9803 I've read every word of the EULA, more than once. I am in full compliance. Every 3d asset I own or have used in a render is fully licensed for my use in 2d imagery, and I have authorship and therefore copyright protection of every piece of art (Fan art is more of a grey area so I don't count that.) that I have ever created, 3D or otherwise. Unless, of course I sold the copyright, which I can do, legaly. I don't need to worry about "lawyer questions" because I read all of the pertinent laws, licenes, and rules and know I am in compliance. I already did my due diligence and am now free to create all the art I wish, worry free. I question if the same can be said about an image created by an AI. That is why it would be a negative thing for me, personally, if AI was implemented into Daz Studio.
Ai is quite fast and have good result when you know how to dose checkpoints/loras and prompts.
Making 3D render with DAZ3D is in the contrary slow to make just 1 piece of render.
Ai is free
Daz3D assets are costly
Ai is fun to use and quick to have (very) good results
Daz3D is technical and need light knowledge and good materials to make something look good.
Ai is ok with older graphic card
Daz3D is monstruously "CUDA-vore"
But ...
Ai steals artists
Daz3D support artists that creates stuff for the store
Ai is spitting on real artists experience by making fun of them with 10 seconds rendition of what might take hours/days to do !
In a nutshell, in my opinion, Ai will steal jobs, artists credits, our knowledge, our electricity bill money, and bankdrupt companies ... yeah it's a bad thing ! But terribly GOOD at the same time !
AND I LOVE IT ! LOL <3
Anyway, I'll go back to my ComfyUI with StableDiffusion stuff where I can render images while I watch TV ... without looking at the computer xD
This post isn't really selling the use of AI, at least not for me. If anything, it is exactly why I won't ever use it or support anyone that does. Why would I want to like or leave a positive comment on a great looking AI image when I know that AI did most of the work. I can truly appreciate a non AI image knowing how much work the artist put into creating it (even if they used plug and play 3d assets), especially if there is a ton of postwork. Even more respect knowing they didn't steal parts from other artists works to create the current one..
The difference between using AI or Daz Studio, is like asking a program to make a picture of ones dream car, instead of building the car oneself and then taking a picture of it.
I like having the car, building and modifying it. I may take a picture of it but that's not what drives me. If I just want to look at pictures of cars, I can find millions of those in the net already.
I guess creating prompts could be considered an art form...
...I was on DA a few nights ago, when an image of two F-100s in Air Force Thunderbirds colours performing an opposing pass caught my eye, Being an aviation geek, I clicked on it pretty much expecting to see AI as one of the tags but was pleasantly surprised to discover it was actual oil painting, and a well done one at that. I of course left a very nice and supportive comment than "Faved" the picture.
I used to paint in oils, often on big canvases and used a variety of techniques which often were quite painstaking but rewarding when I stepped back and looked at the finished work. I feel the same with 3D as I approach it in a similar fashion and really love seeing nice works in teh gallery that obviously took time and effort to create.
I've often found much to my disappointment works that looked like really nice drawings and/or paintings turn out to be AI generated. it's getting harder to believe what I see there is actually done by a human instead of an algorithm anymore.
Is the fine tuning quite difficult? If I fed it enough pictures of the same person, would it be able to produce an image of that person or would it still just make pictures of George Clooney?
Unlike most, I am not afraid of AI taking over in the least, as long as there are humans, there will always be a need for real artists... As artists are compelled to create.
@NylonGirl : For that matter, there are Face swap with AI. You can eventually use multiple images to make your own Lora, but it's tedious and not easy.
As most new revolution, at first it's "Foolish" (most people think it is) and then second phase it's "Dangerous" (Elon M. said it) and then it's "Obvious" : real artists lose their job because companies wants to pay less to have almost the same result as 10 seconds of AI work (in writing or arts, AI is getting all).
You can't go against technology. I think it's a pity that daz3D doesn't take in consideration AI a little bit more.
A logical upgrade of Daz3D would for example a "prompting box" where you could input description of "pose, facial expression" and why not describe objects that could be rendered inside the view !? Even for the background, who needs real hdri ? just generate them instead.
Photoshop has already integrated AI inside their workflow, why not in daz ?
Putting some clothes on your figure in daz doesn't always fits well (AI could be used for that also), you need to take care of that with meshgrabber or whatever plugin you have bought on the store, that's counter intuitive and break your workflow of inspiration in order to make it look right.
Daz3D is a great product but AI is getting better and better very fast too. It's better to take the wagon to avoid being laid off.
AI is a wide field. You may have methods to adapt poses to photos (live camera for instance, confine changes to parts of a body, apply to any figure with body and legs, possibly speech control), directly in DAZ Studio. Could be a plugin or built-in. Upscaling technique for saving memory during render. or whatever one might need them for, better algorithms for background stuff, e.g. create reliefs rendering modes, animation etc. Quick fake/pre render, find similar stuff/poses in the library. Some need ai some don't necessrily need such. Random selection here.
Obviously with the thread title, it looks like the focus should be on full text-to-image generation. However we shouldn't forget about 3D-toolchains at all, there could "happen" a multitude of tools, and falling behind too far, means the same issue in the end. Previously DAZ would allow such in as plugins (not the make art button of course), but maybe they need to make life easier for prototyping and basic setup. A simplified render that runs much faster and uses much less memory on a buttonpress? Could be a thing some day, though likely, such might come from NVIDIA, or some larger open source project, rather.
Thus, i wouldn't discard "ai" in general, in terms of machine learning and generative technique, as there is a ton of potential auxiliary applications that actually make sense. Think of interfacing and speed improvements in the first place. Even generating an ai "render" of your scene could be interesting, though such may be a too huge task in comparison to just learning all images from the internet (at this time).
I have checked the latest features of Adobe Photoshop Elements 2024
and many of them use AI not to create images from prompt,
but the other clever way.
Like with any technology, AI can be used in many different ways.
It is always an individual choice to use AI or not (at the moment, at least).
I use DS and Midjourney AI in conjunction at certain times, building pics in DS of celebs that Midjourney doesn't recognize and feeding them into Midjourney to help me get what I want, and I've done at least one piece of religious art where the foreground was DS and the background was Midjourney.
What killed DS for me was some screwup on my part that sent the sensitivity of the controls way too high to be easily used (I kludged some workarounds but it meant that I had to really really want to make a particular picture), plus the increasing cost (in dollars and computing horsepower) of the new assets, so I kind of bailed on new purchases (being greeted by a splash banner of teenaged Cassidy in fantasy skimpwear armor isn't encouraging me to come back either). I discovered Midjourney sometime after my interest in DS waned, and since it doesn't require much computing horsepower on my end and is about thirty dollars a month for a subscription (a fraction of what I was paying monthly to buy Daz assets in my heyday), it worked out well for me, especially since I'm a very word-oriented person for whom the principles of visual art did not come easily. I am glad to see there is a strong community of Daz/Poser artists out there though, even if it's no longer my thing.
This is the answer, about how to connect Daz Studio with AI:
https://www.daz3d.com/face-transfer-2
For sure, as now you will have to pay to be able to use AI to create art lol
Let's see if it actually works first...
Nice found.
It looks promising ... if it works !
It will kill all the small artists business on zbrush for fanarts XD along the way.
Any HDRi Generator directly inside daz ? it would be super cool ^^.
And also a pose and expression prompt generation would be outstanding ... I feel a bit sorry for the PA artists that sells poses and expressions ...
You can render 360 degree .EXR files out of DS/Iray which are high dynamic range. I'm on my phone right now, but you can choose a speherical lens for the camera (under Camera -> Lens in the Parameters Tab IIRC). You can also render out a beauty canvas as an EXR file. It's been a while, but I think you go to the Render Settings Tab -> Advanced -> Canvases and check "Canvases", then click the plus sign to add a beauty canvas. DS will now create a new sub-directory where you tell it to render to. This dir will contain the 32-bit EXR file (the equivalent of an HDRI).
HTH.
- Greg
That's an interesting thread. Thanks to all who commented! I'm not gonna try any prediction about whether AI will kill the 3D star but seeing Face Transfer 2 in store pushed me to post where I stand on this.
AI has huge practical potential and some of the work created with it is fantastic even while it still gives 7-legged cats and clawed piglets... But I can't seem to get over this feeling of unfairness - betrayal - about the foundations and the mindset behind this technology. Maybe I'm old-school, but for me fairness, consent, privacy and transparency are important. AI generators exist because they stole the hard work of real human workers who never envisioned that their work could be used that way, many of whom are going to get the sucker's payoff: be tossed off their social/professional position by these algorithms that make the people who stole their work rich (and who get away with the theft unless the courts eventually decide otherwise - if someone has enough money and mental support to hold such lawsuit until a formal ruling) or start using this technology like everyone else to stay in the game. How not to be angry seeing how the companies behind commercial AI used "data laundering" to make their software? It's clear that they did this because they were fully aware that it was immoral and likely illegal. Their shielding behind universities and NGOs funded by them to evade responsibility and their hurry to release this technology commercially before legal reactions and regulation can catch up in a ways that would be fair _and_ realistically enforceable could feature in the dictionary under the definition «bad faith».
About data laundering: https://waxy.org/2022/09/ai-data-laundering-how-academic-and-nonprofit-researchers-shield-tech-companies-from-accountability/
Even if I'm tempted to jump in the IA bandwagon, for now the breach of trust is too big for me not to be wary about the companies trying to push this technology. Most companies who develop it seem to do everything they can not to be accountable to the meager legal protection that exists for us lambda citizens to be able to control what we allow and what we don't about the product of our labor and our personal information. How are they going to use whatever data I feed them to use their wonderful tools? Do these pieces of software collect, share information about me and my software use that I'm not aware of? Who do they share what I do know they use with? What rights do I really own on the work I produce that uses the output of their softare?
I like how this article sums up where we're at and asks: "How can artists and AI companies make peace?"
https://www.theverge.com/23444685/generative-ai-copyright-infringement-legal-fair-use-training-data
I hope that the courts will rule against the rogues who commercialized AI text-to-prompt image generators. And I wish to see AI-using companies that tell me what data sets their algorithms were trained on. Companies that retributed the people whose work the algorithms were trained on - or at least who got their informed consent to use it the way they do. Shutterstock and Adobe for example did a step in that direction by training their AI models on content they licensed from their stock image database and setting up agreements with the content providers, but it wasn't a stellar process and it's unclear to me whether the images that people create or modify when they use their software are also used to train their AI in return. If they're uploaded/stocked/shared somewhere else than for the strict purpose of the user in the process. Or how the personal profile of the users is collected/shared as well on information that indicates what subjects they create images about, at what time of day, etc., all things that give clues about someone's personality, lifestyle, interests, mental state; things that can be crossed with other personal data in aggregators and are highly valuable for the companies who want to make money from targeted ads.
I also wish to see companies that tell me in a no-nonsense language, in a place that's easy to find and that doesn't require me to decipher pages and pages of marketing talk or legalese, what cases/conditions allow me to create content using their AI-powered tools that I retain full and exclusive rights about... Or what rights I give up on and grant them in the process of using their services. If I understand correctly for now unless you're a coder and/or own the rights on enough material to feed your own algorithm to learn exclusively with it, it's a sea of uncertainty, with the risk being smaller the greater your input into the final work and the least it risks to cause harm to someone else.
Utopic?
@Fille123 : In my mind there's only one answer to this : SACRIFICES
To make the necessary leap in technology and science, we need to make sacrifices.
This year, it's clearly real artists that are stolen from AI companies. In writings, arts generation, and so much more.
But you have to see the bright side too : technical knowledge is not required anymore to make beautiful art.
You don't even need to understand and know photography to "take" ... snapshots of your computer screen (lol).
With chatgpt, you don't even need to googleit, it will do it for you and give you the best answer with its own solution with it.
No one is prepared for that revolution. Even Law doesn't know what to do with the AI creation "inspired" by others. They don't understand the difference between an human that inspires himself of other artists, and the diffusion of data that are litteraly copies of original work and modified by only words (prompts).
But I think Law takes part with the big fish like ADOBE and also DALL-E that is from openai, supported heavily by Microsoft himself.
In a nutshell, we are doomed if our income money from art can be replace easily by an AI.
You will have to be better than AI which is an impossible race ! Kind of horse vs supercar.
If you can't beat them, join them ! At least you will be able to boost your workflow with the power of AI.
Anyway, as a hobbyist in art, I think that AI is wonderful. But yeah, it comes with sacrifices from others :/
It's like Elon Musk and his approach to space flight. Send up an experimental rocket and keep your fingers crossed it doesn't explode, and even if it does you've learned something and made progress. Probably best not to mention the Titan sub but the philosophy was the same. No progress occurs with risk and sacrifice. As for AI doing people out of their jobs, we may as well lament the passing of milkmen, lamplighters and leech collectors.
So, I tried AI and it was sort of interesting, but I got sick of it REAL quick. I'd rather spend my time placing 3D objects in a scene than writing descriptions and hope the AI software gets what I want in the first 100 iterations.
It's not for me.
In this case, unlike with Elon Musk's space flight, I would say it's more: "To make the necessary leap in technology and science, we need to make sacrificesd."
Taking risks and accepting some damage is fair, especially if those impacted actually consented to take those risks... Stealing and betraying the social contract of the society that provided you with the framework necessary to get where you are, causing harm to whole bodies of professionals and eroding public trust, much less. I have no resentment about the researchers who scraped the web to create the genesis of this technology in an academic framework and for the advancement of humanity's knowledge. That was unambiguously fair use. But I do resent those who set up and use data laundering shemes to commercialize this knowledge while hiding their processes from public view., and individuals like the guru of OpenAI. We're not talking about science or something that will significantly improve the lives of the majority here but about people trying to make money and get power for themselves from software generating pictures, built on a fraud on top of that.
It's not the moral objections and hurt feelings of a few that will change the current situation but if enough people express concern, vote with their wallet and demand that the products they pay them for to be ethically sourced then they might be. If the majority accepts cheating without retribution then we're one step closer to the law of the jungle.
Those are just my philosophical 2 cents and I'm fully aware that they don't weight much beside the possibility for anyone to make pictures, videos, music or texts beyond what one could ever dream of being able to without this tech. I'm tempted by the possibilities too! But I want companies that will allow us to explore these possibilities with ethical AI software, companies that I can trust and play by clear rules and voicing it is a way to contribute to this effort.
If/when anyone knows any, I'm interested and I'll be in the Lurkers' Land. 
I still snark about "getting four legs on the dog" to this day ... my early experimentation left me underwhelmed, to say the least.
I realize art AIs are improving by the minute and once a tool is a good enough to use, I shrug and add it to my toolbox. I've already found great use for story collaboration from AI chat. But as I've stated elsewhere on this thread, until the interface allows predictable, controllable and reproducible results, art AI is not doing the same job as products like Daz, Poser, et al.