affinity designer No, it's not AI!

[Kasper-V]

I could have called this Many hands (and feet) make light work. We're all getting browned off with Artificial Intelligence stealing copyright works. I thought it was time I made a stand and made my own AI image. In this case, it probably means Astonishing Inaccuracies.

[AffinityJules]

Oh Kasper! You jester, you!

[walt.farrell]

I like it

Someone else is fighting back, too. Here's an article about an artist who lets users upload prompts to his site, and then he illustrates them: https://www.fastcompany.com/91014929/this-new-image-generator-is-like-midjourney-except-a-human-illustrates-your-prompts

 

[Kasper-V]

11 hours ago, walt.farrell said:

Someone else is fighting back, too.

 

Thanks @walt.farrell!

[William Overington]

14 hours ago, Kasper-V said:

... We're all getting browned off with Artificial Intelligence stealing copyright works. ...

 

I asked Bing Chat Ai about copyright issues in artwork that it generates some time ago and the reply was that the system learns the style of an artist from licensed databases and that the pictures generated are originals generated using the style information.

I have had a quick look to find the response but I have not found it at this time, I saved it in a WordPad file. I do not know if I posted the response in one of the threads about AI in Alfred's forum.

https://punster.me/serif/viewforum.php?id=11

I have prompted Bing Chat AI to produce a number of original paintings.

I am amazed at what has been produced. Yet Bing Chat AI usually offers four pictures, sometimes fewer, and some of them are indeed muddled in some way, yet some of them are, in my opinion, truly beautiful.

I have framed prints of a few of them.

Though, in fairness, I am not an expert in art appreciation.

Alas, work produced using Affinity Designer that starts with using an AI generated image is not allowed in this forum, but anyone interested may like this link.

https://punster.me/serif/viewtopic.php?pid=4141#p4141

William

[Alfred]

4 hours ago, William Overington said:

I asked Bing Chat Ai about copyright issues in artwork that it generates some time ago and the reply was that the system learns the style of an artist from licensed databases and that the pictures generated are originals generated using the style information.

I have had a quick look to find the response but I have not found it at this time, I saved it in a WordPad file. I do not know if I posted the response in one of the threads about AI in Alfred's forum.

A search for a key phrase such as licensed databases should find what you posted. 

[PaulEC]

4 hours ago, William Overington said:

I asked Bing Chat Ai about copyright issues in artwork ...

Which, of course, like everything generated by AI, is accurate and completely reliable! 😁

 

[William Overington]

31 minutes ago, PaulEC said:

Which, of course, like everything generated by AI, is accurate and completely reliable! 😁

 

But it is not.

I have found that Bing  Chat Ai is very good for some things, but cannot be relied upon to always be correct.

I find that it is necessary for me to look at the result provided and decide whether it is correct.

Yet Bing Chat AI can provide useful ideas of where to look.

The art is of variable quality. Some paintings seem excellent to me, yet some get in a muddle, for example, sometimes an okapi has been depicted with horns somewhere between a gazelle and an ibex, which is not correct.

But, yes, I did rely on what Bing Chat AI told me about copyright and its claim that the paintings are originals. So I need to try to check those claims in some way.

William

 

[Alfred]

52 minutes ago, PaulEC said:

Which, of course, like everything generated by AI, is accurate and completely reliable! 😁

 

7 minutes ago, William Overington said:

But it is not.

I have found that Bing  Chat Ai is very good for some things, but cannot be relied upon to

You seem to have either conveniently ignored, or failed to understand the implications of, the emoticon that @PaulEC included in his post!!

[William Overington]

Possibly.

 

 

Please note, replying "Possibly" is an attempt at humour. Alfred knows to what I refer, namely a character in one of my novels who says "Possibly" when she is avoiding saying "Yes".

 

[v_kyr]

1 hour ago, PaulEC said:

Which, of course, like everything generated by AI, is accurate and completely reliable! 😁

• https://xkcd.com/2451

[Alfred]

54 minutes ago, William Overington said:

Possibly.

Don’t you mean “!81812345679”?

[Alfred]

43 minutes ago, v_kyr said:

• https://xkcd.com/2451

Just to add to the fun, the ‘alt’ text for that image says:

[Kasper-V]

3 hours ago, William Overington said:

. . . a character in one of my novels who says "Possibly" when she is avoiding saying "Yes".

 

"Up to a point, Lord Copper"!

[Ash Eldritch]

Like it. 🤣 Funnily enough I just posted something on the forums but was really torn, whether to or not, for this very reason. It does worry me that anything posted on this site becomes part of a repository for people who can't be bothered to put the effort in and have no qualms about stealing someone else's work.

[walt.farrell]

4 hours ago, Ash Eldritch said:

It does worry me that anything posted on this site becomes part of a repository for people who can't be bothered to put the effort in and have no qualms about stealing someone else's work

In your other post you seemed concerned about AI corporations using your work to train their AIs. The way you phrased it here seems more like a concern about individuals. If you have any particular license in mind, you could express it with your post. There's at least a good chance that humans would respect it, even if AIs probably wouldn't.

[Ash Eldritch]

To me, Walt, it's the same concern. The individual using an AI app, that has sourced its material without asking permission, is just as bad as the AI corporation. The one is stealing, the other is handling stolen goods. Just my opinion.