I find that i can spot AI Images fairly easily these days, especially the sort of fantastical tableaus that get posted to the various AI communities around lemmy. I’m tired of seeing them; it all looks the same to me. Was wondering if im being too sensitive, or if other people are similarly bored of the constant unimaginative AI spam…

For the record, I block any explicit AI Art communities that pop up in the feed, but there are more every day…

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    675 months ago

    It doesn’t really bother me, but like you I am bored of it and I generally ignore it, or block communities if I’m seeing too much of it.

    It is really cool that the models can generate fairly detailed images, but they’re all so similar and… boring. I once saw someone describe it like corporate art. It just tries to imitate something popular in a very mediocre way. You can keep re-training it, but it can still only imitate.

    Still, if people are into it then that’s ok too. I have used it at work on occasion to create stupid little icons for internal tools I’ve built, so I guess there’s some little bit of utility.

    My guess is that it’ll be used for a while for cheap and low effort branding, but soon companies will want to hire real artists again to differentiate themselves from the ML spam.

    • PlzGivHugs
      link
      17
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Still, if people are into it then that’s ok too. I have used it at work on occasion to create stupid little icons for internal tools I’ve built, so I guess there’s some little bit of utility.

      IMO, thats sort of the main use I see for AI image generation (and a lot of other “art”-AIs). There are plenty of cases where a graphic is needed that doesn’t need to be original, nor have any meaningful thought put into it. This could be a small icon that would normally be a free peice of stock art or programmer art, or it could be adding a unimportant backdrop to some character art that would otherwise just be left blank. Not all graphics have to be “art” and things that are “art” don’t have to be 100% original and hand crafted.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      5
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      It’s because people are lazy. It needs extra work to generate something non generic. Also a lot of people using AI have no sense of beauty, as without AI, they are not very creative.

      Using stable diffusion on a1111 myself, with controlnet, regional prompter, different checkpoints, a ton of Lora and inpainting, one can create much much better stuff. It’s not harder that way, just takes longer than copy pasting prompts and hitting the generate button.

      I know this is true, because I see this daily by now. The amount of generic images uploaded to for example Civitai is proof of it.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      55 months ago

      It’s always interesting when they include specific details in the prompt that just get ignored!

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    545 months ago

    I’ve seen a lot of really cool AI art and a lot of shitty AI art. I don’t mind it as long as it is labelled as AI art

    • Scrubbles
      link
      fedilink
      English
      185 months ago

      Good take here. Quality content is quality content. Spam is spam. AI art can be quality or spam. I say label it as AI but don’t ban, just enforce the rules about spam

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        75 months ago

        I feel like people holding up human made art as some bastion of high quality being encroached upon by the AI scourge have not spent much time delving deep into places like deviantart

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      45 months ago

      My issue with AI art is that it makes laziness easier. I hate seeing shitty AI art where it looks really gross when you look at the details. I’ve seen big companies post really shitty AI art that was horrifying once you look closer. Like Microsoft put a disgusting image of jack-o’-lantern up as the background of Bing for Halloween and the faces were just grotesque and uneasy to look at.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        85 months ago

        You hate it because it makes laziness easier…? It is literally the whole season why technology and science exist: To make things easier. Laziness is your boss’ way of making you feel bad for not working more.

          • Scrubbles
            link
            fedilink
            English
            85 months ago

            There’s an argument that art doesn’t need to be good or bad, that art makes us think and discuss. I would argue that this piece has done that, because here we are discussing it.

            Another way to think of it is you saying “anyone could do it” , which then the response is “but no one did”

            • Lemminary
              link
              fedilink
              25 months ago

              “Yes” scribbled on the ceiling that you can only see if you climb this ladder and look at it with a magnifying glass.

              c/im14andthisisdeep

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          25 months ago

          I didn’t say I hate it, I said it’s an issue for me. The reason why it concerns me is because it makes spam trivial. Anyone with hardly any technical knowledge could easily write a script that produces millions of shitty unreviewed images and spam it all over the place making it hard to find legitimately good stuff.

  • anon6789
    link
    fedilink
    375 months ago

    If it is posted as AI art, I don’t have an issue. As others have commented, there are many valid use cases for it, and like any form of art, it’s not inherently good or bad.

    The problem I have is when it gets mixed in with real images and there is no differentiation.

    I do the bulk of posting at [email protected], and one thing I do is promote raptor rescue operations, so I’m subbed to 60ish Facebook feeds for the various shelters I get news and photos from. As a result, I get recommended near every owl photo posted to Facebook.

    Now, getting real image groups recommended to me is great. I just got a bunch of great images I’d never seen from a photography group it recommended. But I get so many obvious fakes posted as real images, and another larger group where it’s hard to tell.

    I’m just someone that wanted to keep a Lemmy community going after the original buzz died down. I’m not an animal expert or a photographer, so I can’t always pick out what is a really good photo vs post processing, vs downright fake. I want to keep the legitimacy of what I do post intact, because I work hard to keep content factual. I pass on what could be some really great photos because I can’t always say they’re real.

    Plus it would be nice to have them separate from real images in general. Sometimes I would like to see some AI owl pics, but once random groups or repost bots start mixing things in randomly, it makes people question things.

      • anon6789
        link
        fedilink
        95 months ago

        I’m always glad to hear it’s making a positive addition to everyone’s browsing!

        I try to keep it fresh and unique, while being a good balance of fun and education. I’m typically shy with people I don’t know, but the community here, especially during the summer was so friendly and welcoming, I just wanted to step up and do my part to maintain that.

        I like hearing that it means something to you guys though. The time making 1-3 posts a day adds up, and I don’t mind it as long as people are enjoying it.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    305 months ago

    I feel like there are too many ai art communities tbh, I constantly block them and there always seems to be more.

    • FaceDeer
      link
      fedilink
      -105 months ago

      Separate AI art communities get created because the “traditional” art communities are largely banning them. What else do you expect AI art users to do?

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              15 months ago

              I think you should take the time to learn to make fire, don’t rely on the efforts of others who learned to make it for you.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                15 months ago

                Ah, you’re this kind of idiot:

                "Yet you participate in society. Curious! I am very intelligent"

                …who thinks that he’s making an actual point by comparing actual creative expression to heating food.

                You’re also welcome to pick up a pen, or a tablet, or crayons, you don’t have to use just a pencil. But maybe non-toxic edible finger paint is more suitable for you in particular. :)

          • Knitwear
            link
            fedilink
            English
            8
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            Of course they are

            Even supporters of these businesses admit that their foundations are entirely dependent upon stolen art, work, labour, time, training, practice etc. Not only would they not function without it, they wouldn’t exist without it.

  • QubaXR
    link
    fedilink
    265 months ago

    I’m fed up with it, as in: I can recognize AI generated images with ease, and they all look kinda same-y. I have nothing against people using ai or posting the content, but at the same time I think it’s simply bad art

    • FaceDeer
      link
      fedilink
      75 months ago

      I can recognize AI generated images with ease

      Maybe some of it, but there’s plenty that looks just fine. That stuff slips under your radar, so you’re left with the impression that all AI art is recognizable. It’s a sampling bias.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -55 months ago

        If you think stuff slips below your radar, that just makes me question how good your radar is. The problems are obvious if you pay even a little attention, so… Maybe you don’t?

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    245 months ago

    If it’s presented as such, then I’ve no issue at all. Art can be cool, AI or otherwise, and I like looking at cool things.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    22
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Reading through the comments, I think OP’s question is skipping the root of the controversy here, which is whether or not that content even is art.

    As a child of the 90s, a good example that comes to mind would be something like the Windows Media Visualizer - colorful and fun to look at, but it’s just an algorithm interpreting a sound.

    If I sneezed into a microphone, ran that recording through Windows Media Player, then posted a screenshot of the swirly colors here exclaiming “Hey Lemmy - Do you like this art I made?” …would that even be an honest question? It’d probably just get downvoted cuz folks would take one look at it and conclude “You didn’t make that, and it’s not art.”

    If I posted that same picture but instead with the title “Lol I sneezed into Windows Media Player, and the visualizer went nuts!” I’d probably get a more positive response - it’d still be a shitpost, but readers wouldn’t feel like they’re being lied to.

    So… is an algorithm even capable of producing art?

    And if no, is it the end product we have an issue with, or just the perception of being misled? …cuz even if something isn’t “art” doesn’t mean it can’t have beauty or some other feature worthy of our attention. Another poster mentioned sunsets - those aren’t art, but we still admire the hell out of them.

    My take on all of the above:

    • Don’t give a fuck if it’s technically art or not
    • If it’s presented in a dishonest way, I don’t like the post, and will downvote regardless of the content.
    • If the content looks cool, I can appreciate that in-and-of-itself; so, as long as the presentation isn’t misleading, I don’t mind it at all.
    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      45 months ago

      If I sneezed into a microphone, ran that recording through Windows Media Player, then posted a screenshot of the swirly colors here exclaiming “Hey Lemmy - Do you like this art I made?” …would that even be an honest question? It’d probably just get downvoted cuz folks would take one look at it and conclude “You didn’t make that, and it’s not art.”

      I’d argue there is potentially up to three artists here. The creator of the algorithm, the creator of the sound/music, and the person mashing the two together to create the final product. Just because a machine is used in the process doesn’t remove the acts of expression.

      Same with most AI tools. You have the creators of the training material (or culmination of inspiration), the engineers creating the AI, and the person leveraging both to create a derivative work. All artists in their own right, IMO.

      Even if you created an LLM that just took a randomized seed and spit out trash poems and displays them only in an enclosed dark box all without any human interaction, I’d still consider that art. Put that in an art gallery installation and people would stand around and speculate over what was happening in the black box.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      45 months ago

      Anything can be art, it just needs someone to curate it and present it as art. The more important question is if it’s good art.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      25 months ago

      So… is an algorithm even capable of producing art?

      What is it exactly do you think humans do? An algorithm is a sequence(s) used to achieve goal(s). Isn’t problem solving one of the most important aspects of our existence?

  • DumbAceDragon
    link
    English
    185 months ago

    At this point I’ve just blocked every AI art community that I come across. The art itself is rarely interesting and it’s really easy to spot. Kinda wish lemmy had more artists, would love some human-made stuff to balance it out.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      10
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Some of us are a lot more hesitant about internet-publicly sharing work now, since it’ll likely be scraped and used for someone else’s profit.

      Rational worry or not, I know I just don’t post what I’ve been working on because of that. I know I’m not some artistic genius, but I still don’t like my data being hoovered up for any purpose, be they privacy concerns or training models without my explicit consent. Same way when I show my work IRL I wouldn’t be happy if someone was dragging around a photocopier, or taking high-res photos of everything I do. Granted, I have the same concerns about even posting comments, but that’s had the upside of my posting less.

      • @[email protected]OP
        link
        fedilink
        55 months ago

        I totally get this concern. Copyright law seems to barely benefit the small artist when a large tech company can “train” their AI on others work without their consent. I personally would love to see all the LLM producers be held accountable for the IP theft they have perpetrated on such a massive scale.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          15 months ago

          Copyright law shouldn’t be a thing. I personally think LLMs have done a great job showing everyone how bad it is.

          • @[email protected]OP
            link
            fedilink
            -15 months ago

            Its just concentrating power in large tech companies who are stealing to profit. The great job they’ve done is find yet another loophole in an already broken system. They are not “showing everyone” anything… People, largely, dont give a shit about that kind of thing. Thats why there are loopholes to exploit in the first place.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              15 months ago

              Oh sorry I forgot to ask. How is copying the same as stealing? If I take your money you no longer have it, and I do. If I copy your idea do you still have your idea?

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              1
              edit-2
              5 months ago

              I love this strawman so freaken much.

              If the law is unjust does that mean the criminal is good? No.

              If the law is unjust doesn’t that mean the criminal is bad? No.

              Take the worst most vile corporation in human history, partner them with thirty other of the most disgusting inhuman monsters of a corporation. A true legend of doom! Then have your legion of doom take advantage of a small legal hole in the copyright system. Is the copyright system now a good just system because very bad people got around it? Was it a good justice system before that?

              The moral character of a person and how good the law is are seperate independent facts. I don’t care that some big tech is exploiting the hole I don’t care if the nicest person whomever lived was. The law is shit and I won’t defend a shit system. Me attacking a bad law is not me defending a lawbreaker.

              The good news is because it is groups with deep pockets breaking this shit system is regular folks have a shot of being free of it. Me vs a giant media company? I will lose. A billionaire against one? They might win. Once it is understood that running something thru an AI removes the copyright the rest of us can gain.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    185 months ago

    Content created with some thought, attention to quality, and correctly disclosed is fine. Endless waves of mindless garbage taken directly from some automatic generation to post it as fast as possible in as many places as possible? These can’t go away fast enough.

    AI is a tool people can use. Generative AI is far from being the most useful of them. And people posting raw “generated” output that instantly gets spotted as AI garbage should really question themselves about why they’re doing it.

  • Stern
    link
    fedilink
    185 months ago

    I’ve blocked the AI art communities and tend to downvote the art when it shows up as it feels soulless most of the time.

  • Rob Bos
    link
    fedilink
    175 months ago

    I block those communities because low effort images spam up the feed super fast.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    165 months ago

    I think it’s important to keep the ai art inside the communities made specially for it.

    Outside of a specific community, label, label, watermark, and label again.

    I do enjoy messing with ideas in ai generators, it’s most of what I’ve engaged with here. I just don’t want it shoved into everyone’s feed if it’s not something you’re into. Kinda defeats the purpose of a fediverse.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    165 months ago

    No, but I dislike the trends. I don’t want 8 pictures of sailor moon or axolotls doing various jobs or depicted as various characters. One is fine.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    16
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    I do not care at all as long as it’s labeled as AI art. The only problem I have is when people try to pass it off as something they actually made

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -55 months ago

      A lot of AI art is highly controlled. Control net, manually redrawing the noise to guide output, additive models just to name a few ways artists control the output. It’s genuinely more art that some people give it credit.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    165 months ago

    I don’t enjoy it. And I see issue with many of the big AI companies but I don’t object to people posting AI art if that brings them pleasure in this world of ours. I just block the dedicated AI art communities, and let them continue as they were.