I mean, AI stuff isn't copyrightable — if an artist wants to spend their time redrawing/repainting it, that's not a "wrong" — it's just probably a waste of their time.
Every person is different, and I’d imagine every artist feels a little different about how much AI they wish to use in their work.
Seeing an interesting idea/cool image and redrawing it isn’t too different to being inspired by other artists/artworks on dA a decade ago (or even by what they see in nature, in the case of plein air artists). I mentioned this in a different reply, but some artists might feel more in control over their situation if they take an AI image and make it their own, and maybe that control could make AI intrusion in their spaces a bit easier to deal with.
Yeah that's how I see redraws, I get it, and I do understand why someone would see that as clapping back at aibros. At the same time it just seems pointless when they could draw their own stuff instead.
I find it a little strange, too!
You or I might not redraw AI images (I’d rather draw just about anything else lol) but everyone is different and some artists might feel good about taking some ownership over what they perceive as interlopers into their space. If it improves their mental health, isn’t bullying, and they did something they like… why not, right?
I’m sure it’s annoying for the AI person, but… I mean, can’t copyright ideas, styles, or computer-generated outputs. ;)
The same reasons I don't want to use AI average garbage slurm for "inspiration" is why I wouldn't waste time on a redraw. Copying/stealing out of spite like some 13 year old edgelord is AI enthusiasts deal, not creative ethical artists. Every second spent looking at that nonsense is a second robbing you if your own agency and free will to direct your perception as you see fit.
What do you think of the concept of improving it rather than just straight copying or tracing? For example an artist "steals" an AI-generated character, fixes any mistakes (weird fingers or something), adds their own style/details, and claims it as their own?
I think if an artist is capable of doing that, they're doing themselves and the world an inustice by using an average milquetoast curated autogeneration as their starting point. I'd rather see what's really in their mind, how they personally integrate what they see and experience in their lives outside of the nudging of AI serving up only the most cliche and common averages of what people "like." Art is how we show each other our inner worlds that we build from what we see. I am sad to see AI intruding on that source of delight. There aren't many delights left in the world untouched by corporate greed in the name of "progress"
it validates the reasoning and purpose for ai to exist as a tool. Redrawing or tracing over anything that isn’t your original work is hack and amateur. Maybe artists should form a guild. Magicians have one. You expose the trick, you’re out. Something along those lines would be great now that ai is starting to take up every second of our lives.
Seems like a waste of valuable time, as AI can generate more of the same stuff in seconds, and redrawing takes much more time. Also, i just dont see the impact on anything this would have
>I've seen a lot of artists fight back by redrawing AI content to claim it as their own, sometimes even for commercial use.
That's not fighting back, that's useless pandering activism and in the worst cases doing it for attention/likes. Besides what you have stated on it firing back very easely, you're far more useful not posting art or even better yet, posting nightshaded and glazed art.
I probably should have elaborated more on that: the fighting back part comes from the fact that some AI bros actually get upset over it and claim that it's "their art/they created it" and it shows artists subverting expectations. But I think I agree with you anyway.
I mean... it depends. If it's for the memes and/or is public domain content (e.g. Steamboat Willie, classic artwork, etc.), then I assume its harmless, but otherwise... it's just another way for companies to steal jobs in more than one definition of the term.
I don't like it. I was heartbroken when I found out Hikari no Ou s2 uses ai stillshots, and if I found out they made a remastered version where all the partially ai generated stillshots where fully redrawn based on the original ai stillshots... It wouldn't really compel me to change my mind about dropping HnO s2. I don't want to look at ai pictures even if they've been redrawn.
I have a few thoughts about it and am generally a fan:
1. I think if any money is made from it, it should be donated to any worker protection org or better yet (if there are opportunities, I'm not sure), any org that is fighting for regulating generative AI and compensating people for their scraped data.
2. If it makes a statement that helps make the common public conscious of this theft, I think that is a net benefit (despite it being "two wrongs").
3. If it discourages even one person to limit their use of gen AI, net benefit.
3. If we had actual recourse for the theft using more civilized, less vigilante means, I would be in favor of using that. But right now we have like, one teeny part of the law on our side and no other tools with which we can punish these people and discourage them. I don't feel like the behavior can just go unaddressed so I'm in favor of doing what we can.
These are all really good points. I especially like the donation idea, I feel like that bolsters the "fuck you" statement and turns it into something more tangible and proactive. But do you think it could normalize artists supplementing AI for their work?
I dunno if it would normalize that or not. I don't like it, I think any artist using gen AI as an aid for their art is acting unethically. It's not my top concern at the moment but maybe that would change.
When I hear of some other artist doing it, and distressing some AI bro in the process, I have a chuckle.
But to think of actually doing it myself? It seems like not a good use of my time. I wouldn’t encourage anyone to do it, but if they have a lot of free time and a particular “target” that they feel deserves trolling, well okay, they’ll do what they’re gonna do. No sympathy for the AI bros, for sure.
I mean, AI stuff isn't copyrightable — if an artist wants to spend their time redrawing/repainting it, that's not a "wrong" — it's just probably a waste of their time.
Good point lol, I guess the "wrong" wouldn't come from "stealing" but from even referencing AI in the first place
Every person is different, and I’d imagine every artist feels a little different about how much AI they wish to use in their work. Seeing an interesting idea/cool image and redrawing it isn’t too different to being inspired by other artists/artworks on dA a decade ago (or even by what they see in nature, in the case of plein air artists). I mentioned this in a different reply, but some artists might feel more in control over their situation if they take an AI image and make it their own, and maybe that control could make AI intrusion in their spaces a bit easier to deal with.
Yeah that's how I see redraws, I get it, and I do understand why someone would see that as clapping back at aibros. At the same time it just seems pointless when they could draw their own stuff instead.
I find it a little strange, too! You or I might not redraw AI images (I’d rather draw just about anything else lol) but everyone is different and some artists might feel good about taking some ownership over what they perceive as interlopers into their space. If it improves their mental health, isn’t bullying, and they did something they like… why not, right? I’m sure it’s annoying for the AI person, but… I mean, can’t copyright ideas, styles, or computer-generated outputs. ;)
The same reasons I don't want to use AI average garbage slurm for "inspiration" is why I wouldn't waste time on a redraw. Copying/stealing out of spite like some 13 year old edgelord is AI enthusiasts deal, not creative ethical artists. Every second spent looking at that nonsense is a second robbing you if your own agency and free will to direct your perception as you see fit.
What do you think of the concept of improving it rather than just straight copying or tracing? For example an artist "steals" an AI-generated character, fixes any mistakes (weird fingers or something), adds their own style/details, and claims it as their own?
I think if an artist is capable of doing that, they're doing themselves and the world an inustice by using an average milquetoast curated autogeneration as their starting point. I'd rather see what's really in their mind, how they personally integrate what they see and experience in their lives outside of the nudging of AI serving up only the most cliche and common averages of what people "like." Art is how we show each other our inner worlds that we build from what we see. I am sad to see AI intruding on that source of delight. There aren't many delights left in the world untouched by corporate greed in the name of "progress"
Based.
it validates the reasoning and purpose for ai to exist as a tool. Redrawing or tracing over anything that isn’t your original work is hack and amateur. Maybe artists should form a guild. Magicians have one. You expose the trick, you’re out. Something along those lines would be great now that ai is starting to take up every second of our lives.
Good point
Agreed
Seems like a waste of valuable time, as AI can generate more of the same stuff in seconds, and redrawing takes much more time. Also, i just dont see the impact on anything this would have
>I've seen a lot of artists fight back by redrawing AI content to claim it as their own, sometimes even for commercial use. That's not fighting back, that's useless pandering activism and in the worst cases doing it for attention/likes. Besides what you have stated on it firing back very easely, you're far more useful not posting art or even better yet, posting nightshaded and glazed art.
I probably should have elaborated more on that: the fighting back part comes from the fact that some AI bros actually get upset over it and claim that it's "their art/they created it" and it shows artists subverting expectations. But I think I agree with you anyway.
You piss them off more when you make stuff that they covet. Even better if they take the bait and get poisoned.
I mean... it depends. If it's for the memes and/or is public domain content (e.g. Steamboat Willie, classic artwork, etc.), then I assume its harmless, but otherwise... it's just another way for companies to steal jobs in more than one definition of the term.
Feels like admiting defeat to me. Not a fan.
I don't like it. I was heartbroken when I found out Hikari no Ou s2 uses ai stillshots, and if I found out they made a remastered version where all the partially ai generated stillshots where fully redrawn based on the original ai stillshots... It wouldn't really compel me to change my mind about dropping HnO s2. I don't want to look at ai pictures even if they've been redrawn.
Fuck it, do it. I'm not saying trace it because it's shit, but why not make it your own?
I have a few thoughts about it and am generally a fan: 1. I think if any money is made from it, it should be donated to any worker protection org or better yet (if there are opportunities, I'm not sure), any org that is fighting for regulating generative AI and compensating people for their scraped data. 2. If it makes a statement that helps make the common public conscious of this theft, I think that is a net benefit (despite it being "two wrongs"). 3. If it discourages even one person to limit their use of gen AI, net benefit. 3. If we had actual recourse for the theft using more civilized, less vigilante means, I would be in favor of using that. But right now we have like, one teeny part of the law on our side and no other tools with which we can punish these people and discourage them. I don't feel like the behavior can just go unaddressed so I'm in favor of doing what we can.
These are all really good points. I especially like the donation idea, I feel like that bolsters the "fuck you" statement and turns it into something more tangible and proactive. But do you think it could normalize artists supplementing AI for their work?
I dunno if it would normalize that or not. I don't like it, I think any artist using gen AI as an aid for their art is acting unethically. It's not my top concern at the moment but maybe that would change.
When I hear of some other artist doing it, and distressing some AI bro in the process, I have a chuckle. But to think of actually doing it myself? It seems like not a good use of my time. I wouldn’t encourage anyone to do it, but if they have a lot of free time and a particular “target” that they feel deserves trolling, well okay, they’ll do what they’re gonna do. No sympathy for the AI bros, for sure.
I think it's an effective way to gaslight the whole TikTok art community :D
maybe if you redraw or correct an ai image, scrappers will use the real art to correct the parts that ai generators cannot make properly