2.png)
AI crap in compo entries?
category: general [glöplog]
Quote:
Apology rejected. You didn't answer the question and went back to reiterating your opinion. =)And here I go about the prod again, and I said we shouldn't. Sorry Krill.
What was the question?
This?
I don't know. Maybe. Probably. How could I predict that?
Personally, I can see several other problems not connected to the use of generic "whole internet trained" AI, you can read some of them above, you certainly don't want me to "reiterate my opinion". And I won't.
You sore about something man? Chill, it's just a prod, some like it some don't. I apologize if I twisted your knobs.
Quote:
I guess the pushback against this production would have been minimal or even non-existant had the artist trained a generative AI on their own material and then used that to AI-fill in the blanks on pencil drawings.
This?
I don't know. Maybe. Probably. How could I predict that?
Personally, I can see several other problems not connected to the use of generic "whole internet trained" AI, you can read some of them above, you certainly don't want me to "reiterate my opinion". And I won't.
You sore about something man? Chill, it's just a prod, some like it some don't. I apologize if I twisted your knobs.
...and for the record, I actually "reiterated" nothing.
I was referring to la_mettrie's question referring to "direction" vs "AI" usage in demos in general, which you quoted, then went on the olden way without really answering the question.
I wonder why so many got stuck on the TM2 demo using AI. The winning Amiga demo Deep Meet is full of it too. :)
Now I haven't read everything here in this thread so I could have missed it being mentioned. If so, I'm sorry.
Now I haven't read everything here in this thread so I could have missed it being mentioned. If so, I'm sorry.
What a stew we stirred up.
It seems that the main problem, of using a fake poem (of Jay Miner) shouldn't have been our main concern.
The first episode clearly states it. Graphics are AI-based, improved by human hand (GIMP in my case). I might be putting up a "workshop" or making-of of TM2. Simply because it was not that easy and fast as many here seems to think.
I personally started to favour non-computerized art method during the process ;)...
Like I stated at the TM2 comments page, a whole lot of boring hours were also spent when fixing the AI stuff. Our production didn't have automated character consistency.
Other thing worth mentioning is that only preview images were used during the process.
What comes into art and artists. Is it really that cool to shoot the pioneering guys on the back?
What is my solution is that AI compo will emerge ... sooner or later.
AI story-telling compo, please
Ps. Keep the level of conversation civilized (unless drunk as hell).
It seems that the main problem, of using a fake poem (of Jay Miner) shouldn't have been our main concern.
The first episode clearly states it. Graphics are AI-based, improved by human hand (GIMP in my case). I might be putting up a "workshop" or making-of of TM2. Simply because it was not that easy and fast as many here seems to think.
I personally started to favour non-computerized art method during the process ;)...
Like I stated at the TM2 comments page, a whole lot of boring hours were also spent when fixing the AI stuff. Our production didn't have automated character consistency.
Other thing worth mentioning is that only preview images were used during the process.
What comes into art and artists. Is it really that cool to shoot the pioneering guys on the back?
What is my solution is that AI compo will emerge ... sooner or later.
AI story-telling compo, please
Ps. Keep the level of conversation civilized (unless drunk as hell).
Quote:
I guess the focus was on TM2 because it's so blatant about AI usage (then some mob pile-up, perhaps?) - if used in other demos, it was more subtle or ironic/satire and went mostly unnoticed.I wonder why so many got stuck on the TM2 demo using AI.
Quote:
I wonder why so many got stuck on the TM2 demo using AI. The winning Amiga demo Deep Meet is full of it too. :)
That is what bothered me the most in that compo.
But it is not about any single production. It is about a trend, if you can call it that, and it feels people see that.
Deep Meet is super obvious with the AI images. The fish, the squids, maybe the eye. Also the starting image with the android is probably AI but pixeled over. The other stuff is just converted from AI images.
So probably close to zero hand made graphics.
But as Frost says, it's bigger than just these demos. It's a very concerning trend and the audience need to start seeing the difference between hand made stuff and AI prompted shit.
The rules for Revision says NO AI for graphics compos, this should really be in demos too since its graphics in the same way there too and its such a sheet towards us who does it all by hand.
So probably close to zero hand made graphics.
But as Frost says, it's bigger than just these demos. It's a very concerning trend and the audience need to start seeing the difference between hand made stuff and AI prompted shit.
The rules for Revision says NO AI for graphics compos, this should really be in demos too since its graphics in the same way there too and its such a sheet towards us who does it all by hand.
Quote:
Let's get back to the point about the technology itself vs. its current implementation.It is about a trend, if you can call it that, and it feels people see that.
The main problem is not remixing prior art in an automated process, but that the data corpus used to do that was obtained without the consent of millions of original authors, yes?
In other words, AI-enhanced remixing of your own material is okay, as is remixing of some properly-licensed set of material, yes?
Or is there some more general objection to the technology itself rather than its current use?
Quote:
Respectfully disagree. For graphics compos, your point is obvious.The rules for Revision says NO AI for graphics compos, this should really be in demos too since its graphics in the same way there too and its such a sheet towards us who does it all by hand.
But demos require more freedom in every way. Maybe a rule to mention specific technologies/tools/etc., but not an outright ban.
I guess there was a reason why the current Revision rules are rather specific to graphics compos when it comes to AI usage.
Quote:
Quote:Let's get back to the point about the technology itself vs. its current implementation.It is about a trend, if you can call it that, and it feels people see that.
The main problem is not remixing prior art in an automated process, but that the data corpus used to do that was obtained without the consent of millions of original authors, yes?
In other words, AI-enhanced remixing of your own material is okay, as is remixing of some properly-licensed set of material, yes?
Or is there some more general objection to the technology itself rather than its current use?
You have a valid point concerning the data collected.
But for me. And I speak for many. It's also an artistic level and that is the most important thing. Craftmanship and honesty. Read back on what I posted earlier. It's not the tech itself, it's more spiritual. :)
Wait. So, pixeling over an AI generated image is a no-no, while painting over other people's work is totally fine? How 'craftmanship' and 'honesty' are served in the case of the latter but not the former? (hint, De Profundis X Die Toteninsel iii)
I meant to write 'pixeling over other peoples' [...] :)
Quote:
and it feels people see that
Damn, missed a few words here. It should say "and it feels like people fail to see that."
Quote:
In other words, AI-enhanced remixing of your own material is okay, as is remixing of some properly-licensed set of material, yes?
I've stated that before and even gave a solid example of something I'm OK with. It was traditional art in that case, but I think the same is true for artwork in demoscene productions.
It is not the technology in itself that I don't like, as I have stated before. It is how it is used.
It isn't a question with definitive yes/no answers. It's more complex than that.
Quote:
Wait. So, pixeling over an AI generated image is a no-no, while painting over other people's work is totally fine? How 'craftmanship' and 'honesty' are served in the case of the latter but not the former? (hint, De Profundis X Die Toteninsel iii)
It isn't a question with definitive yes/no answers. It's more complex than that.
Show us the complexity. Opinions must be elaborated.
Quote:
Show us the complexity. Opinions must be elaborated.
I guess you haven't read anything in this thread.
Quote:
So, pixeling over an AI generated image is a no-no, while painting over other people's work is totally fine?
I missed that being said anywhere. I might have already said this, in that case sorry for repeating: if the source is credited, all is fine. The audience will decide if the un-originality bothers them or not. But they deserve to know. Trouble with AI is that it’s perfect for the liars among us because it’s way harder to trace it back to the original. So, some act like it’s an open invitation to lie, deceive and present lame fake workstages even.
@Krill - I answered exactly about the art direction. I’m on the verge of kindly asking you to stop addressing me, and I’ll stop addressing you and your wonderful prod with satisfaction. It seems to me you have some odd beef and don’t care about reality.
Quote:
In my book, no, at least not in graphics compos. But I have more or less given up on that particular discussion.painting over other people's work is totally fine?
Quote:
I guess you haven't read anything in this thread.
Keep the level of conversation civilized (unless drunk as hell).
At this point, I think my aim is more to booze myself to death.
@Frost
I feel you man.
I feel you man.
@4gentE, that's what I am saying. In Toxic Modulo it was made clear about the use of generated content from the very beginning, I think. On the other hand, were Bocklin or Magritte (among other people I'd further guess) credited in any way in the case of De Profundis? So, is it the medium that drives intentions, or the other way around?
@grip. Yeah, I think I can relate to the given up feeling. That's perhaps the reason I'm highlighting the irony in this.
@grip. Yeah, I think I can relate to the given up feeling. That's perhaps the reason I'm highlighting the irony in this.
OK. You can booze, I hope not to death, but I would appreciate if any sober graphician elaborate over rexbeng's question.
Thanks in advance.
Thanks in advance.