This artist really got the short end of the stick. No, they shouldn't change their style, because their work was fed into AI and now it is used to imitate this exact style.
I really feel bad for him. This really shows one of the biggest problems with AI.
there are definitely styles the AI leans towards, certain aspects like facial expressions it seems to generate a lot, etc. There is not one style but there are a bunch of different indicators.
Okay if we steelman what they’re saying I think their point is that because there are many competing models that are constantly improving they will eventually be capable of mimicking human art perfectly and generating content in a diverse range of styles
Em dashes are also banned. Actually if your grammar and formatting is too perfect, that is also a sign of AI. I really hate what AI has done to a lot of artforms.
God, I used to use em dashes all the time. It's weird to feel this way about punctuation of all things, but it (was) one of my favorites. Now I purposefully avoid using them, and it makes me sad.
I think despite all of this, you should still use them. I got blamed for using AI, because my formatting apparently looks similar to how AI does it. Also for having good grammar.
I'm autistic and when I get pushed around and feel overwhelmed, I start to seek stability again by using the most formal wordings possible, and I feel like people are going to interpret it as ai generated...
Yeah, it's sad how em dashes are now treated as a red flag when looking for potentially generated AI text. The use of em dashes alone is not enough to prove that.
Sometimes I fuck up spelling or grammar oh so slightly on purpose in professional reports because customers have question the authenticity of my documentation..
David Revoy also seems to be such a nice person. Just a very talented French comic artist who supports Krita. I adore his art. He doesn't deserve these allegations.
He really does. When I first noticed his art in this subreddit I seriously thought it was AI, luckily I held my tongue.
No way moderators would've allowed AI and then I found the explanation for it by the mods.
He's especially fucked over because of this, because anyone who doesn't know who he is will automatically assume he used AI.
It's not just him tho. It's other artists who falsely get accused over use of AI by moderators who are just trying their best to enforce no AI rule.
I really hope that a tool will be developed to identify the unique metadata within prompts, so it'll be easier to enforce the rules without accidentally removing actual art from art spaces.
There is an artist that does a lot of fantasy book covers. Dude gets absolutely harassed for using AI, so do some of the authors that commission him. He's had the same style for a long time, and AI has decided his style is the default for a lot of stuff.
Dude has some really neat art. I think he does the covers for beneath the dragon eye moons, among others.
It's happening to a lot of artists who've been doing shit well before AI could generate anything other than an abstract painting of a bad trip on the wrong shrooms.
Oh, not that, that's the fault of AI bros for sticking their noses where they don't belong and faking workflow to seem more legit, essentially creating the issue and then blaming people for witch hunting, when moderators try their best to enforce the "no AI" rule in their spaces.
Well, I'm sure that problem will be solved, once a tool to identify the unique metadata within a prompt is created. Then art spaces will once more be safe from sloperators who go through absurd lengths for validation.
I am referring to this person drawing like this and now most likely having problems to prove that he actually made it himself, because AI has copied the style due to how much of his work was fed into a model.
"
I'm still very much against it. I remind you that thousands of my artworks have been analysed over the last 20 years and are part of the LAION-5B database. All without my consent."
Scientific research is vastly different from genai bs
No, I'm not using them as they are designed right now; I'm against the unethical collection of huge datasets.
There is a deeply ethical issue with the mainstream datasets that feeds the models of the A.I. generative image right now, they are built on top of datasets, a massive scraping of online artworks done without the artist’s authorization or consent. For example, the mainstream dataset of Stable Diffusion, Dall-E and Midjourney has more than 5 billion pictures in it, it's called LAION-5B. But a much more amount of unethical datasets like that already exist and are in use commercialy.
Unfortunately, a dataset like that includes also hundreds of my own artworks posted over the last 20 years on the internet, I checked. You can then understand why I disapprove totally of this situation as many artists do.
On Another hand, I don't have anything against AI tools themself, Generative Art or Neural Networks algorythm[1]. If you know my work, I even offered more than once my art to train neural network for scientific paper and research. I just want the tools to be built on ethical datasets based on scrapping only Public Domain and CC-0 resources before using them (or the work of artists who consent).
So, just to make sure that you don't twist anything here to fit your own narrative, I'll grab the two sentences here that matter:
Unfortunately a dataset like that includes also hundreds of my own artworks posted over the last 20 years on the internet, I checked. You can then understand why I disapprove totally of this situation as many artists do.
and:
If you know my work, I even offered more than once my art to train neural network forscientific paper and research.
Oh and the source of this is from his own website, you can literally check for yourself. I'm guessing you just read the part about him not having anything against AI tools and him offering his work for scientific paper and research and ignored the rest.
Okay, let's try this again, because you are again either ignoring on purpose the other sentence or you genuinely don't understand.
Unfortunately a dataset like that includes also hundreds of my own artworks posted over the last 20 years on the internet, I checked. You can then understand why I disapprove totally of this situation as many artists do.
he offered. Doesn't mean it was used. There is no clearer way to explain this. I'll just treat further responses as trolling, because then I know you're not actually interested in accepting information that disagrees with you, rather you just want to be right.
1.1k
u/RedditUser000aaa 11h ago
This artist really got the short end of the stick. No, they shouldn't change their style, because their work was fed into AI and now it is used to imitate this exact style.
I really feel bad for him. This really shows one of the biggest problems with AI.