Loading...
> >

Anybody else hate . . .

nelsonsmithnelsonsmith Posts: 1,336
edited June 27 in The Commons

[Anybody else hate] Having your work in Daz confused with AI?

Actually I'd had a few people already think some of my stuff was AI before the recent  furor started.  I honestly don't have anything against AI generated art, I'm actually rather impressed with a lot of it that I'm starting to see, and unlike a lot of people seem to think, it doesn't prevent me from picking up a pencil to draw, or  jumping into blender or Zbrush and creating something whenever I feel like it.   However what I'm seeing now are people thinking that any well crafted 3d render is AI generated, followed by totally false name calling negativity.  One of the stupidest comments that is now becoming quite common in comments sections is, "It that AI?"  Well gee, if you can't tell then does it matter and why?  The fact is that now as a creator in a form that many people already didn't view as "real" art, now we're having to deal with idiots that are making assumptions and assertations based on their lack of knowledge and  having to respond to their accussations. 

Seriosuly this epedemic of busybodies wanting to police every aspect of other people's lives is taking the fun out of everything.

Post edited by Richard Haseltine on

Comments

  • xyer0xyer0 Posts: 5,926

    Take it as a compliment. Then gently educate them. They'll leave you alone after that. Or you might make a friend.

    When I lacked control over myself, I sought control over others. When I got control over myself, I wanted everyone else to know this freedom. They left me alone after that.

  • FSMCDesignsFSMCDesigns Posts: 12,754

    Doesn't bother me. I like using AI and even use it for postwork to make renders pop, even if just for sutble details.

  • TimbalesTimbales Posts: 2,332
    No. Other people's ignorance is not my problem.
  • WonderlandWonderland Posts: 6,873

    FSMCDesigns said:

    Doesn't bother me. I like using AI and even use it for postwork to make renders pop, even if just for sutble details.

    Same here. And when you think about it, postwork has always been a bit AI. Using a filter, in a sense is AI. Resizing is AI. Using AI in postwork or AI to enhance renders or AI images still requires a human touch. Some people just post whatever AI spits out untouched and that's very different from using your creativity to enhance it and make it yours. Many of us use brushes others have created or our photos, stock photos, or purchased backgrounds, now we can add AI created backgrounds. It's all still being creative. I think of what we do as being part artist and part art director. Both require skills and creativity. 

  • davesodaveso Posts: 6,998
    edited June 27

    I'm not expert enough to create great AI art. Mainly I'm not going to sit there for hours writing these elaborate prompts to create something worthy. I'm more into a prompt such as " big red car" 
    See, viola ... less than a minute

    big red car.jpg
    800 x 800 - 636K
    Post edited by daveso on
  • Silver DolphinSilver Dolphin Posts: 1,607

    This is the only thing I think AI is good at LOL 

     

  • ANGELREAPER1972ANGELREAPER1972 Posts: 4,505

    it's funny on deviant art few years ago I submitted some renders to a group only to rejected because they thought it looked real like a photo and not daz art provided links to all products to prove wasn't. But yeah it is funny now too with AI everyone thinks everything is AI made now because that's what's always in the news and such and so much of it, same with cgi some people think in movies and tv it's always been cgi used in effects and I see people commenting about poor cheap cgi in movies in old and really old movies and tv that used practical effects and glass paintings for large scenes like American Werewolf In London, Star Wars and even old black and white movies/tv

  • kyoto kidkyoto kid Posts: 41,040

    ..painfully going through all my posts of 3D works on my DA gallery to add a Daz3D Render tag.. 

    Only have 2 AI piece there, my attempt at a NVIATWAS image and a joke image for my D&D gaming group.

  • nelsonsmithnelsonsmith Posts: 1,336

    ANGELREAPER1972 said:

    it's funny on deviant art few years ago I submitted some renders to a group only to rejected because they thought it looked real like a photo and not daz art provided links to all products to prove wasn't. But yeah it is funny now too with AI everyone thinks everything is AI made now because that's what's always in the news and such and so much of it, same with cgi some people think in movies and tv it's always been cgi used in effects and I see people commenting about poor cheap cgi in movies in old and really old movies and tv that used practical effects and glass paintings for large scenes like American Werewolf In London, Star Wars

    and even old black and white movies/tv

    Yeah the CGI thing is a great comparison.   You still see and hear people talking about "movies before CGI".  You might as well be talking about movies before any sfx  ( which there are none ).   People look at CGI in films and television every day and don't know they're seeing CGI wheither it's a set extension, or a billboard in the background that wasn't there.  You don't hear them complaining the CGI is putting craftsmen out of work because now nobody builds actual sets anymore.

    The big difference between the attitude toward CGI and that toward CGI is people are willing to accept unnoticable CGI without question; yet they are scared to death of AI being undetectable which makes no sense when you listen to their arguments about AI " lacking the human touch ", or "looking fake " -- well if AI gets to the point that you can't tell the difference, between art created by AI and a human, or it doesn't look fake; then what does that say about the human touch being all that special except to the artists themselves? 

  • MalandarMalandar Posts: 776

    Just tell them to count the fingers, that's one thing that ai can't do reliable even still. Can't do hands without adding  or suptracting fingers or mutating the hell out of them.

  • MasterstrokeMasterstroke Posts: 1,983
    edited June 28

    Yes, I do hate it like hell.
    It degrates you as an artist and implies, that you did not put any effort into your work and let a software, that steals from the internet, doing the job for you.
    Confusing my work with AI is an insult.

    Post edited by Masterstroke on
  • DeeceyDeecey Posts: 136

    daveso said:

    I'm not expert enough to create great AI art. Mainly I'm not going to sit there for hours writing these elaborate prompts to create something worthy. I'm more into a prompt such as " big red car" 
    See, viola ... less than a minute

     

    If it weren't for the AI hands I'd think that was my brother LOL

  • jdavison67jdavison67 Posts: 645

    AI is to art what the synthesizer is to music.

    People think it all functions in a vacuum, no effort required.

    Meh...

     

    JD

  • CybersoxCybersox Posts: 9,053

    jdavison67 said:

    AI is to art what the synthesizer is to music.

    People think it all functions in a vacuum, no effort required.

    Meh...

     

    JD

    I'd say it's more like AI is to Art what "Digital Sampling of Music Created by Other Musicians" is to Music. Using electronics and computers to re-create the sound of a specific or imaginary instruments and then playing them like an s=instrument to create new music is one thing, copy and pasting music created by other artists without their permission crosses the line from emulation into infringement.  The most sampled drum sequence, for example, has been used in over 2000 other songs since it was originally recorded in 1969, yet the original performer, G.C. Coleman, never received a dime from any of that reuse of his work and ultimately died homeless in 2006.  Likewise, AI engines don't create anything new... they simple steal bits and pieces of the work of other artists and stick them together.  The fact that someone is giving them parameters as to what to do doesn't make that person an artist anymore than pasting a drum solo by an unpaid and uncredited musician into a song makes that DJ a drummer, and there was no reason that a real drummer couldn't have been hired to recreate a similar drum sequence.       

  • xyer0xyer0 Posts: 5,926

    Cybersox said:

    jdavison67 said:

    AI is to art what the synthesizer is to music.

    People think it all functions in a vacuum, no effort required.

    Meh...

     

    JD

    I'd say it's more like AI is to Art what "Digital Sampling of Music Created by Other Musicians" is to Music. Using electronics and computers to re-create the sound of a specific or imaginary instruments and then playing them like an s=instrument to create new music is one thing, copy and pasting music created by other artists without their permission crosses the line from emulation into infringement.  The most sampled drum sequence, for example, has been used in over 2000 other songs since it was originally recorded in 1969, yet the original performer, G.C. Coleman, never received a dime from any of that reuse of his work and ultimately died homeless in 2006.  Likewise, AI engines don't create anything new... they simple steal bits and pieces of the work of other artists and stick them together.  The fact that someone is giving them parameters as to what to do doesn't make that person an artist anymore than pasting a drum solo by an unpaid and uncredited musician into a song makes that DJ a drummer, and there was no reason that a real drummer couldn't have been hired to recreate a similar drum sequence.       

    Thanks for that interesting nugget and link, @Cybersox! I would've guessed Funky Drummer was the most sampled track, but I've heard the Amen Break so much that I might not even recognise it. This reveals that "intellectual property" is the almost exclusive right of corporations and rich people. Po folks have products that can be plundered with impunity in most all cases.

    I would say that the newest music AI goes far beyond what sampling could've ever hoped. It is similar yet beyond drawing from influences, for one can get, say, a Beatlesque track with either Lennon or McCartney singing songs they never sang. 

  • GordigGordig Posts: 10,051

    xyer0 said:

    Thanks for that interesting nugget and link, @Cybersox! I would've guessed Funky Drummer was the most sampled track, but I've heard the Amen Break so much that I might not even recognise it.

    The Amen Break is the foundation of the entire genre of Drum & Bass.

  • CybersoxCybersox Posts: 9,053

    xyer0 said:

    Cybersox said:

    jdavison67 said:

    AI is to art what the synthesizer is to music.

    People think it all functions in a vacuum, no effort required.

    Meh...

     

    JD

    I'd say it's more like AI is to Art what "Digital Sampling of Music Created by Other Musicians" is to Music. Using electronics and computers to re-create the sound of a specific or imaginary instruments and then playing them like an s=instrument to create new music is one thing, copy and pasting music created by other artists without their permission crosses the line from emulation into infringement.  The most sampled drum sequence, for example, has been used in over 2000 other songs since it was originally recorded in 1969, yet the original performer, G.C. Coleman, never received a dime from any of that reuse of his work and ultimately died homeless in 2006.  Likewise, AI engines don't create anything new... they simple steal bits and pieces of the work of other artists and stick them together.  The fact that someone is giving them parameters as to what to do doesn't make that person an artist anymore than pasting a drum solo by an unpaid and uncredited musician into a song makes that DJ a drummer, and there was no reason that a real drummer couldn't have been hired to recreate a similar drum sequence.       

    Thanks for that interesting nugget and link, @Cybersox! I would've guessed Funky Drummer was the most sampled track, but I've heard the Amen Break so much that I might not even recognise it. This reveals that "intellectual property" is the almost exclusive right of corporations and rich people. Po folks have products that can be plundered with impunity in most all cases.

    I would say that the newest music AI goes far beyond what sampling could've ever hoped. It is similar yet beyond drawing from influences, for one can get, say, a Beatlesque track with either Lennon or McCartney singing songs they never sang. 

    To be realistic, though, the ones that people point to when they're talking about really sucessful cloned/altered songs aren't really completely computer generated.  Rather, they shift the tones of one human singer performing the song to sound like another, and in most cases there's an intermediate step where a live singer performs the song doing their best imitation of the singer the song will be performed by, then that intermediate version is altered by AI.  One of the top creators, Dustin Ballard, aka  THERE I RUINED IT... the man behind gems like Elvis singing I like Big Butts, Johnny Cash singing I'm a Barbie Girl, and Hank WIlliams singing Straight Out of Compton among many others, has demonstrated a before and after AI of his process on TIkTok at  There I Ruined It (@thereiruinedit) Official | TikTok and it's clear that a major part of the reason that his conversions work so well is that he's already a very gifted musical impressionist.        

  • kyoto kidkyoto kid Posts: 41,040

    ...I miss the old days of music, like the  Motown era when real instruments were involved (particularly those lovely horn sections and of course, a Hammond B-3) and backup vocals were done by real singers. What's happened to musicianship?  Now its like what Cybersox mentions about digital sampling 

    Digital sampling isn't bad when its involved in say making digital pianos more accurate sounding and performing, Or say a system that aids with symphonic orchestration and can print out the score when finished.  As a tool like that, I have no issue (not everyone can afford a 9' Steinway D series let alone have the room for one but can still effectivly have that incredible sound and feel at a fraction of hte price)..

  • GordigGordig Posts: 10,051

    kyoto kid said:

    ...I miss the old days of music, like the  Motown era when real instruments were involved (particularly those lovely horn sections and of course, a Hammond B-3) and backup vocals were done by real singers. What's happened to musicianship?  Now its like what Cybersox mentions about digital sampling 

    If Berry Gordy could have replaced his musicians with a computer plugin, he absolutely would have done it.

  • xyer0xyer0 Posts: 5,926

    Cybersox said:

    xyer0 said:

    Cybersox said:

    jdavison67 said:

    AI is to art what the synthesizer is to music.

    People think it all functions in a vacuum, no effort required.

    Meh...

     

    JD

    I'd say it's more like AI is to Art what "Digital Sampling of Music Created by Other Musicians" is to Music. Using electronics and computers to re-create the sound of a specific or imaginary instruments and then playing them like an s=instrument to create new music is one thing, copy and pasting music created by other artists without their permission crosses the line from emulation into infringement.  The most sampled drum sequence, for example, has been used in over 2000 other songs since it was originally recorded in 1969, yet the original performer, G.C. Coleman, never received a dime from any of that reuse of his work and ultimately died homeless in 2006.  Likewise, AI engines don't create anything new... they simple steal bits and pieces of the work of other artists and stick them together.  The fact that someone is giving them parameters as to what to do doesn't make that person an artist anymore than pasting a drum solo by an unpaid and uncredited musician into a song makes that DJ a drummer, and there was no reason that a real drummer couldn't have been hired to recreate a similar drum sequence.       

    Thanks for that interesting nugget and link, @Cybersox! I would've guessed Funky Drummer was the most sampled track, but I've heard the Amen Break so much that I might not even recognise it. This reveals that "intellectual property" is the almost exclusive right of corporations and rich people. Po folks have products that can be plundered with impunity in most all cases.

    I would say that the newest music AI goes far beyond what sampling could've ever hoped. It is similar yet beyond drawing from influences, for one can get, say, a Beatlesque track with either Lennon or McCartney singing songs they never sang. 

    To be realistic, though, the ones that people point to when they're talking about really sucessful cloned/altered songs aren't really completely computer generated.  Rather, they shift the tones of one human singer performing the song to sound like another, and in most cases there's an intermediate step where a live singer performs the song doing their best imitation of the singer the song will be performed by, then that intermediate version is altered by AI.  One of the top creators, Dustin Ballard, aka  THERE I RUINED IT... the man behind gems like Elvis singing I like Big Butts, Johnny Cash singing I'm a Barbie Girl, and Hank WIlliams singing Straight Out of Compton among many others, has demonstrated a before and after AI of his process on TIkTok at  There I Ruined It (@thereiruinedit) Official | TikTok and it's clear that a major part of the reason that his conversions work so well is that he's already a very gifted musical impressionist.        

    I was speaking more of what one can get from careful text prompting of Udio or Suno---sans direct musical input. As a former professional composer (advertising), it is staggering, and I would imagine it would be disheartening to any young musicians hoping to pursue music as a trade.

  • xyer0xyer0 Posts: 5,926

    Gordig said:

    xyer0 said:

    Thanks for that interesting nugget and link, @Cybersox! I would've guessed Funky Drummer was the most sampled track, but I've heard the Amen Break so much that I might not even recognise it.

    The Amen Break is the foundation of the entire genre of Drum & Bass.

    Aye, those were the days, my friend. 

  • kyoto kidkyoto kid Posts: 41,040

    Gordig said:

    kyoto kid said:

    ...I miss the old days of music, like the  Motown era when real instruments were involved (particularly those lovely horn sections and of course, a Hammond B-3) and backup vocals were done by real singers. What's happened to musicianship?  Now its like what Cybersox mentions about digital sampling 

    If Berry Gordy could have replaced his musicians with a computer plugin, he absolutely would have done it

    ...I think we are better off that the technology wasn't around back then.   

  • DustRiderDustRider Posts: 2,739

    AFAIK my renders haven't been confused with AI. Maybe that's because I always add details about how I made the image and what was used in the process??

    I don't think it would bother me at all if my images were confused with AI for several reasons. First and foremost there are a lot of very amazing AI images. To have my work confused with those images would be a compliment. I think it's also important to keep in mind that the average person has no real idea what AI generated art really is, and they no idea what an image rendered in DS really is, They just see something they like, and assume it's done via the medium(s) the've heard a lot about. AI is "everywhere" now, so there you go, computer art "must all be AI generated". Of course that doesn't mean if someone did think I used AI I wouldn't take the opportunity to inform them about the differences between AI and 3D generated art wink

Sign In or Register to comment.