And AI once again

brianvds

Well-known member
Messages
990
Apparently this software:


works well to prevent AI from imitating the style of works of art. It applies a "cloak" to your image, which introduces changes to the images that are imperceptible, or almost imperceptible, to the human eye, but completely confuses AI.

Haven't tried it yet, so I have no idea whether it works, but it may be of some worth. In theory, if you "glaze" all your images before uploading them to the web, no one will be able to use AI to make images in your style.

On the same subject, there is now an alternative to Instagram called Cara.


It works and looks quite a bit like Instagram did in the good old days, before it became completely useless. Moreover, it prohibits AIs from using images uploaded there for training, and is partly integrated with Glaze, so you can glaze your images when uploading them (though apparently not any and all images; there is some limit, and I haven't read up on yet). I promptly joined up (waved IG farewell some weeks ago) but it's too early to tell where, if anywhere, Cara will be going.

Sad news for StLukes is that for the moment, they don't allow NSFW images (though I see plenty of figure studies on there anyway).
 
Brian, how do they define NSFW? Both Facebook and Instagram defined NSFW as photographs and videos displaying nudity... which is usually defined as showing female nipples, primary sex organs, and the back alley. Such limitations were not to apply to paintings of sculpture... only explicit displays of sexual acts. But we know these rules have not been followed. Classical nudes by Michelangelo, Rubens, etc... have ended up censored... and even more so, contemporary nude painting/sculpture, etc... At the same time, truly artistic nude photographs have been censored while the most suggestive photos and videos evade the censoring algorithms. Recently, Instagram has been beset by girls using the exceptions for breastfeeding to fully expose their breasts while feigning breastfeeding of plastic dolls. For quite some time, the best site for posting the nude in art was Tumblr... until Apple threatened to remove the app from their app store. As usual, the excuse given was a concern for children. Instead of deleting and blocking any pornography, Tumblr eliminated all "adult" content... which included drawings and paintings and sculpture by Michelangelo, Titian, Rubens, William Blake, Degas, etc... :rolleyes:
 
ps... I liked the idea of the app that put not merely a filter on posted works of art blocking AI from stealing these... but actually downloaded something akin to a virus causing all sorts of problems for the AI pirates.
 
I would be honored if AI used my stuff. I would be happy to see it out there somewhere benefitting all mankind. Or at least the freaks and weirdos.

I'm serious. Art is about culture which belongs to all, or at least should. Share first to find riches. I doubt any Military Industrial Facist Complex is going to profit from my watercolors. I know I'm not making any money off of them. :)

AI is essentially about human culture and knowledge. Yeah that's some scary stuff.
 
Apparently this software:


works well to prevent AI from imitating the style of works of art. It applies a "cloak" to your image, which introduces changes to the images that are imperceptible, or almost imperceptible, to the human eye, but completely confuses AI.

Haven't tried it yet, so I have no idea whether it works, but it may be of some worth. In theory, if you "glaze" all your images before uploading them to the web, no one will be able to use AI to make images in your style.

On the same subject, there is now an alternative to Instagram called Cara.


It works and looks quite a bit like Instagram did in the good old days, before it became completely useless. Moreover, it prohibits AIs from using images uploaded there for training, and is partly integrated with Glaze, so you can glaze your images when uploading them (though apparently not any and all images; there is some limit, and I haven't read up on yet). I promptly joined up (waved IG farewell some weeks ago) but it's too early to tell where, if anywhere, Cara will be going.

Sad news for StLukes is that for the moment, they don't allow NSFW images (though I see plenty of figure studies on there anyway).
I'm just about to check Cara out. Will look it up, but what's NSFW stand for? In case you're faster than me. And, I like the idea of online protection. But, I feel it's a bit like a game of cat and mouse that never ends.
 
I'm just about to check Cara out. Will look it up, but what's NSFW stand for? In case you're faster than me. And, I like the idea of online protection. But, I feel it's a bit like a game of cat and mouse that never ends.
Found it ... Not Safe For Work? As I don't work anymore, I've probably ignored it many times.
 
I'm just about to check Cara out. Will look it up, but what's NSFW stand for?

As you found out, "not safe for work," in other words, the kind of pictures you don't want your boss to see you looking at. What it usually comes to is nudes, though I see people upload their figure drawings anyway. :)

What I like about Cara is the sheer technical standard of the work posted there. Of course, it leaves me feeling a bit like a stupid amateur, but that's not a bad thing. :)

In case you're faster than me. And, I like the idea of online protection. But, I feel it's a bit like a game of cat and mouse that never ends.

No doubt it will be. The AI developers will find ways around apps like Glaze, and then the Glaze folks will develop new forms of protection, and so on and so forth.

In the longer run the AI genie is out of the bottle.
 
I would be honored if AI used my stuff. I would be happy to see it out there somewhere benefitting all mankind.

AI functions off of mass plagiarism. Most artists would bristle at the notion of another artist stealing their images... their hard-earned labor. AI is no different. It functions by constructing "new" images built upon thousands of images stolen from others. How does this benefit mankind... beyond the "artists" stealing from others?

I'm serious. Art is about culture which belongs to all, or at least should.

How does AI belong to all? In the end it will only be the wealthy publishers who benefit.
 
I would be honored if AI used my stuff. I would be happy to see it out there somewhere benefitting all mankind.

AI functions off of mass plagiarism. Most artists would bristle at the notion of another artist stealing their images... their hard-earned labor. AI is no different. It functions by constructing "new" images built upon thousands of images stolen from others. How does this benefit mankind... beyond the "artists" stealing from others?

Well, it may or may not be ethical, but it is not clear to me that it violates copyright law.

I'm serious. Art is about culture which belongs to all, or at least should.

How does AI belong to all? In the end it will only be the wealthy publishers who benefit.

Alas, genie's out of the bottle. I don't think fine artists (i.e. artists who sell originals) will be much affected. Illustrators may be in far more trouble, and it is conceivable that within a decade or two, they will become about as common as wagon makers or street lamp lighters - but I wouldn't bet on it.
 
I was looking on art sites for public domain and lately they are filled with AI generated art and hosted as AI

I think that in legal terms it has been recognized that AI works were "created" using images plagiarized from other artists... and as such, they cannot be afforded copyright protection. That creates a huge wealth of images for artists to use in creating their own works of art. :LOL:
 
I feel bad for the pro illustrators and the commercial artists making their living on it that will be displaced. But for everyone that I know that are artists I don't think that they will negatively affected. Firstly because most of them don't rely on sales of their art to survive, and the ones that do are not going to lose sales. They do large canvases and portraits etc. and collectors will still want to buy the real unique physical item, made by a person. I know I've been asked to do a large painting where instead they could just get a print on canvas of it. They don't want a print.

Locally speaking ....stluke for example: AI is not going to make a large multi medium painting with gold leaf. There is inherent physical value to it. AI isn't going to hang my paintings at the food market and sell them. Sno's buyers aren't going to use AI to paint a nice portrait. AI might skim off Arty's and OliveOyl's unique images but again, their buyers will still want their personal art. They are not going to lose their places in the galleries.

And art has always been about borrowing from the prior art. The cave painting guy probably watched his wife draw something with a stick in the dirt. None of it is truly unique unless all of it is.

Personally, I've wondered why I paint and the reason isn't for money, it's for personal satisfaction but included in that is the desire to simply have the works seen. Yes fame would be cool I guess, great for the ego, but what good is a safely sequestered piece of art that no one else sees.

I think there is lot of fear about AI as there was with all the profound new things in humanity's progress. They have all been a scary unknown but ultimately they have all been good overall. It will catapult mankind forward. In the areas of medicine and energy production alone it will be huge. It's modeling biochemical and nuclear fusion reactions already.

Reminds me of Turner's painting of the steamship towing the sailboat.

1718826082343.png


The Fighting Temeraire. 1839, by Joseph Mallord William Turner. Measures 3' x 4'
 
Last edited:
Back
Top