I’m so happy that real artists redrew it, because as much as I don’t like AI art, I love the design 😭 the pieces that have come out of this are beautiful!!
@@besanayan5717 they are going to be hard-pressed to prove their idea is not derivative of anything that ever existed before. Even the example in the video, I have seen very similar art before and it was animated.
@@MargaretS-e1g you have a point, I don't disagree with you. Doesn't change the fact any artist named Ai nowadays is in for a rough ride by no fault of their own;
The sad part is that despite this being a huge "F you" to whatever entity posted this, human artists posting in replies to this is just feeding the algorithm to take the pieces that work and improve the next piece of crap that poster or other ai posting page will try and put out. A moral victory for sure, but objectively its probably working against us a bit.
that's what I was about to say. They are inadvertently giving the person who originally post the AI image more sample images to work off of to train the initial style.
i honestly don't get these controversies about AI art, AI will NEVER replace human artists and steal ur jobs so you guys need to calm down. AI is a tool made with the intention of mixing art styles and turning the intangible things about an artwork, tangible. i dont think most people understand that no human's artstyle was formed in a vaccum, since it will always be inspired by previous art he/she saw before they developed their unique artstyle. learning to draw based on feeling already takes a long time, but add the fact that an artist changes artstyles a lot during that learning phase and Drawing is suddenly a Technical skill that only people that started drawing as a CHILD are privileged to have. AI solves that problem, by training an ai on your most favorite artworks until you find the artstyle you're content with and study That and that only. it's kind of like having your future self give you unlimited practice images, but without needing a time machine. Edit: oh, i didint think my comment would get this popular. i was just stating my opinion cus this is a comment section, sorry if i offended anyone. thank you everyone for helping me understand.
@@XyzheeMontero-sw3cb “I'm lazy and I don't want to put in the work that other artist has put in. I'm assuming all artist started as a child and older artist that start new didn't exists.” literally just say that
As a musician and artist, the pose in 3:34 made me so happy- Miku is posed as a treble clef! When I looked at it originally, I wondered why it felt slightly squished when the hair could have been so much more flow-y and organic. Taking a double take made the artwork even more beautiful when you consider the artist actually put thought and heart into their drawing process unlike ai.
Remy's so impressed with the art he can barely keep his eyes open 😂🐕 He matches your pre-existing animal characters colour scheme PERFECTLY Can't wait to see him in some art later
Coming across AI art is always disturbing. At first glance, it can be stunning until you look closer and see all the strangeness which makes my skin crawl
@@BaronBacon seeing people say nice looking ai art looks bad is like calling pretty people who are assholes "ugly", pretty people can be bad people, nice looking ai art is equally as shitty and unethical as the ones that look melted
@GabeHowardd you must not have self-preservation instincts. The uneasy feeling of knowing something is off is nature's survival instinct. Just because it gives me the creeps doesn't mean I'm sensitive. It means I can recognize when something is wrong. Your lack of that instinct...
2:33 just to tell you that this is a character from the RPG Gacha game Wuthering Waves His name is XiangLi Yao and the artist decided to combine him with this piece since the color scheme and the mechanical part of Miku (being an AI and all) match together with him having a prosthetic arm
Yeah I was about to say,I don’t play WuWa anymore but I love his design (Also he has daddy issues apparently? I didn’t fully play through the 1.2 story)
Idk how I can thank you because you made art fun again for me. I tried your process-multiply sketch, lighting layers, dramatic lighting, references n such, let it breathe-and it changed my art forever. It doesn’t need to be perfect and my art work is something I’m incredibly proud of!! I want to be a scientific illustrator and there’s no way I’d be even close to achieving that without your lessons. Thank you!!
As a beginner artist, it inspires me to draw ever more! Any aspiring artists right now shouldn’t be discouraged. We should keep doing what we love! It’s our passion. No matter how strong and violent the storm might be. We should continue. Because we love it. It’s beautiful to see everyone come together and create beautiful pieces.
first of all: omg puppyyyyy!!! second: this is super inspiring, I'm loving all the redraws (even the "bad" ones, which aren't actually bad as you said! Loving that junk food vs home cooking comment of yours!) third: people instinctively know what musical notes (kinda) look like, AI will make some crazy double notes that make no sense :'D
Honestly this is a great use for AI, helping someone who maybe doesn't have the words, or full concept get some ideas then letting the real artists loose to have at it!
@@Vor567tez Not helpful for if it's a piece that is for the sake of the artist and has artistic freedom, but if it's something like a commissioned piece where the commissioner has a specific idea in their head then yeah this would be extremely useful to give the artist more of a reference to work from for what the boss wants. Remember, not all art is done for the artist, lots of us have commissions that are beholden to what the paying customer wants us to draw.
@@Snow-Willow How is commission any different? It's still the same principle. If I commission you draw Mona Lisa in Disney style, you have to observe what's Disney style is. Then recreate it with your imagination. If you use AI to recreate then you are copying the image instead of actually thinking it out and doing the trial and error yourself.
there's nothing more dissapointing that finding a nice looking drawing that wasn't even drew by an artist, but I love seeing this trends of real artists drawing something in their own way and style, it's awesome!
@@joeshmoomaster9792 i hope you know that jumping on an anti-human, anti-skill, anti-art, soul-less techie corpo bandwagon is akin to giving up one of the last remaining tools we have against an oppressive corporate government maybe you've abandoned your humanity and community, but we haven't stay in your gooner ai porn basement, and leave art to real people
This made me so happy made my day honestly as an artist Ive been only seeing people go for or against ai but never actually do anything so happy action is taking place u go Twitter artist love yall!!! ❤❤
the kind of energy u put in the video from the very start is overwhelming 😍, keep it up. Lots of love from India. 🇮🇳 🫶🏻, please being more videos on how to colour in detail on procreate.
@@BaconBaron52 just like you humans did on every thing :) but keep acting like you dont XD you both pull data from the world at large one is just better at keeping it, must suck to slowly be out done by rocks that can think XDDDD
lo mas probable es que si lo haga, prácticamente los artistas enojados le dieron mas contenido a la IA para entrenarse y hacerlo mejor. Los artistas no se dan cuenta que sus rabietas en twitter no los benefician en nada
As an artist, I do worry about this type of protest. I know everyone who redrew it means well! However, I worry because in the end it promotes the ai art and promotes using AI as a reference/starting point when we know the ai programs were made without the consent of the artists that they use. Ai bros use this as proof that AI is good.
(Replying to boost this) All artists genuinely have good intention when they redraw AI stuff. But by doing stuff like quote tweeting, it’s interacting with the AI stuff, leading to more engagement and legitimizing the usage of AI. The only way to kill AI is to prove that it’s NOT profitable, so that people would drop it.
That's a good point. At this point in time, using AI is unethical because of how the images are sourced, so yeah. Doing all this does kinda uplift AI even though artists are doing it with the opposite intent in mind, which is sad :(
Agreed the one who started the thread is the AI art and that will get lots of engagement even if artist protest about it. That's just any publicity is good publicity. "I guess they are pro AI if that image they used as reference gave such a reaction."
this and i’ve seen a lot of people go and generate their own images to align with their interests, and then redraw that, which id also argue rlly encourages the use of ai.
not only that, artists' redraws could actually end up helping ai in improving itself. + the tweets owner is a blue checkmark user, they earn money from engagements on their posts
As an artist I kinda don't care about AI art in general. My main issue with it is that it's destroying sites like Pinterest and DA, because it's all just generated pics there, you can't browse regular art anymore, and so looking for reference pics is just a terrible experience. BUT what I've noticed is that other artists (writers, musicians etc) prefer real art, not that BS crap and will always hire actual artists, it's just that if they are putting a lot of time and effort into their projects, they don't want to half-ass it on the last straight, and would much rather pay for an illustration, than have some mediocre AI thing to go with their blood and sweat. So yeah, I'm not worried.
@@ThatguycalledJoe yeah, exactly, it's like game piracy, they were never going to buy anything in the first place, so it doesn't hurt your business anyway, they just saturate the internet with bad "art", and honestly it may even inspire some of them to actually learn how to properly do it themselves, thus new artists are born
@@ThunderEwokB Yes honestly, pinterest is completely destroyed by AI stuff. I mean AI images as references also works ok, but I assume you also feel like me, that you want to draw from something authentic and real. At this point they can't stop it but maybe force creators to tag it as an AI art, and then maybe we can get an option to switch off AI content. But Idk how would anyone can actually administrate this. And yea I also think the professional market is not really threatened by this.
@@burakkkk4 If I wanted to use AI art for reference I'd generate it myself, honestly this seems like a good idea at first, because you can get almost exactly what you want with right angles, poses, everything really, but my main two issues are that first of all AI makes a lot of dumb mistakes, and using it as reference will only reinforce yours, not correct them, and second... to my knowledge AI isn't actually an "AI", it doesn't "create" art based on gathered by it knowledge, every image is just an unholy amalgamation of art from different artists, the AI is basically tracing with extra steps, a piece from here, piece from there, piece of this and that... I think AI will eventually fall off, because due to the saturation of bad AI art it will start learning on it's own creations, and thus start going backwards. Also another reason why I think AI generation is bad: Your GPU seriously hates it, lol. Generating AI art is MUCH worse than mining bitcoin. What kills your GPU is not the heat itself, but the heat cycles, and by generating ai art you are making your card go through thousands of them. So yeah, AI bros are destroying their hardware.
@@ThunderEwokB honestly ai isnt really great for beginner artists either ai has flaws and doesnt know what its doing (even the prompter might not know what basic art principles are) imo just bunch up your fave artists and look at their style have a mood board and experiment yourself ai can "experiment" for you but youre the one learning art, would be better for you to experiment yourself (would improve your motor skills and art skills)
I love it! This is the kind of push back we need to see more of. With the right training, a pro artist can indeed wipe the floor with AI! Also, AI's not the only thing that evolves, artists evolve; they get better all the time; your best piece is always your next piece, so, bring it!
@@CasDaBean That can actually improve AI, by giving it a better frame of reference for what "wrong" looks like. This is not some simple machine, remember.
To be honest I don’t really get these DTIYS with AI art. Doesn’t that just give them more attention? Isn’t that more like inviting them to be a part of the art community instead of protesting against them? I does more harm than good imo
I agree, it's kinda normalising it and giving it a place to exist. I'm not sure it's possible to protest AI generated images by showing that it's... ok to use them?
It's better than just ignoring it. As of now we don't have any other methods to stop them as bringing them to court is not an available choice at the moment, so going outright saying that it's wrong and showing how humans are still competent in what the AI is trying to do 'better' is one of the many forms of activism. It opens the eyes of those who are still clueless or on the fence about the usage of AI.
I feel the same, they will see artists recreating “their art” and think they’re accepted by the community. They don’t even know the difference between stealing and using a reference.
i think it's that the artists want to show how much more real human art is by each doing their own take, no matter the skill level. many of the people doing that included something in their post saying no to ai, or support actual human artists
I love those! I think the lens flare frog perspective is my favorite of those. I just hope they're all Glazed and Nightshaded, so they don't end up thrown into the ai grinder to make more slop
Artists, related activists, and their egos will likely stand in the way of more clear-eyed and rational regulations, resulting in polarization and little being done as the tech grows more powerful until it can out-debate us all. It's already very capable at poking holes in one's worldview - no trouble if you are honest enough to patch them, but for those who treat being shown to be wrong or irrational as tantamount to an actual wound? They won't be able to handle a world full of AI even if it does leave their art alone.
@@crowe6961 That's a lot of words to try and rationalize theft. Hey guess what, Sam Altman just successfully removed both his ethics and non-profit board now. OpenAI is now not only close source but also for profit. Do you really still seriously believe the people controlling these systems are going to use it to benefit humanity over exploiting it? Genuine question.
This is such a good idea and really brings the artists together and I love that The unfortunate thing is tho they these kinds of replies and “fixes” it could end up being fed back into the ai and making it better It’s also promoting the ai art, which at this point I think it’s better to just ignore it and go express your own creativity by making something original (I do wonder if you could redraw and then use nightshade over it?
You realize, of course, that all the “improvements” artists are posting based on this Ai work will, of course, be directly used to further improve the AI’s engine going forward by incorporating them into the software… . So, in essence what these artists are doing it bolstering and improving the “enemy’.
The reason you think that is the false dichotomy of humanity vs. AI. The problem is really artists vs. corporations. Tell me, can you conceive of any ethical use for AI in art? If not, then we should be honest about it. The debate is not really about finding an ethical solution for AI. It's Neo-Luddism.
@@zachhecita Meanwhile, I have no ethical issue with AI being used for outlines or frameworks of projects in general. It is good for adding grounding to fantastical worldbuilding, for instance. Its use in "finished" work that is then passed off without being labeled as AI is, on the other hand, a much more major and clear-cut ethical problem - one that can be legally tackled in a credible manner, and therefore where the real focus should be. Why would the visual arts be any different? Why would they hold special status over all others, being able to dictate use of technology on a whim, on emotion? I reject those arguments entirely.
Sam please don't encourage this idea of artists using AI as their reference. After this some AI bro going to say "see, we AI can create new ideas" And for artist please ignore them or their slope would be better.
What would your counter argument to that be? I'm mostly just curious since AI art IS inspiring artists here. So if someone says "AI art can create new ideas" or something to that effect, what would you respond with? I don't mean any disrespect, just interested in the opinions of others. ^^
This whole video kinda proves them right in a way. Sure it's derivative and steals from artists, but there is some creativity that goes into it. The words you use in your prompt, the way you structure your prompt, any additive properties to accurately describe what you ACTUALLY want. Of course it can't replace real art, but It can absolutely inspire.
None of these arguments change the fact that they referenced an AI piece that stole from other artists. If you do, you create a reason for AI to exist. Remember that AI blatantly steals from you and your favorite artists. If you disagree, just please admit you want AI art to exist.
@@ElvisRocking1 Honesty it's a damned if you, damned if you don't. The cat is out the bag as far as gen ai is concerned so artist may as well leverage it their own way by taking these AI gen ideas and doing them better. Show ppl the value of human made art over relying on AI. It's also important to remember that the issue most artist have with AI isn't its abilities to generate cool or even new ideas but the ethics of its training and mega corps using it as an excuse to completely replace human artist (and evenbromental factors too).
@@setin8720 I would say that the counter-argument is simply that of ethics. It doesn't matter one bit if the outcome of these algorithms is "pretty" or "inspiring" - what matters is that they have been developed by stealing the work of millions and exploiting it commercially. So as far as I am concerned, doing a redraw of this kind of AI regurgitation is a straight up insult to those who've been affected by the AI theft. But I guess many don't think about that and are happy jumping on a twitter trend ...
I'm a little concerned though, doesn't this just: A. Further promote AI in twitter's algorithm by quote tweeting the piece and B. Prove the AI bros right? Like everyone who redrew the piece did some amazing work, but ultimately used AI as a reference point, which I thought was a big no-no?
i mean so what? its no different than looking at a bunch of references. unless you want to count using references as stealing. you want black and white answers to a very grey, and not even new, issue.
@@StuHol-jb1hh With references you can always credit the original artist(s), additionally as Sam has said there is also intention behind that when a human does it. But there is no original artist here, just a machines' jumbled mess of an image from various unknown sources. Of course using referernce isn't the same as stealing, everyone uses reference, Sam himself multiple times. I wasn't after a yes/no answer, but a discussion, not a fight and maybe in the end we'll just have to agree to disagree. Edit: I definitely made a follow up comment but it's vanished now. Basically, look, if one day somehow we can break down every single artist that was used in the process and properly credit them, perfect, a small step towards ethical AI image generation, but at the moment it is as you say "very grey", though leaning more towards bad than good at the moment in my opinion. And I'm clearly not alone as several others in this comment section have pointed out the same.
@@FieryCoolDrink Before the advent of generative AI, can you honestly say that the artistic community were very diligent to credit every reference and inspiration for a piece? From what I've seen, references are frequently lifted from Pinterest, Google, or Instagram without any citation, so this concern about proper citation or credit does not seem very genuine to me.
If this proves that AI images have artistic merit, then it means we should improve our argument instead of getting upset that the other side has scored a point. What is the actual efficacy and ethics of using AI images as references? Seriously answer the question. Don't run from it.
@@zachhecita Firstly, I’m not running from any question and don’t appreciate that accusation, I’m here for discussion, not a fight. Secondly, that is a fair point, artists have not done nearly enough themselves to properly credit where credit is due. I will happily concede that point, more needs to be done on both sides, though to be fair, I have seen more artists these days listing the model or other artists used for their pieces, I’ve yet to see AI do that once, not to mention far more experienced artists will simply use imagination or their own bodies/environment for reference, leaving no other source to really credit anyway. Thirdly, my original question was regarding the ethics to begin with “I thought this was a big no-no?”, as in I was under the impression the art community had agreed against using it as a reference due to the mass lifting of other’s work? Apologies if that did not come across clearly. If the perspective has changed, great! I personally would still prefer authentic references in my work.
@@piorism I took inspiration from an Ai character (that I didn’t know that it was Ai). It didn’t looked the same as the image at all at the end. By the time I was finished with my OC is when I realized. I’m not going to throw her away though. Anything can be inspiration but I do see where you’re coming from though
That's pretty much the right way to use AI. Ideas are really hard to come by, a machine can create thousands of ideas in seconds and you just pick what looks the coolest.
i think thats how you should use ai when drawing, somethimes you think of a concept that you love but cant imagine it clearly enough to draw it, give that concept to the ai and let it give you examples and choose the one that gets closer to what you wanted and draw it in your stytle.
People not knowing who Gabriel from Ultrakill is is a nice reminder to me that no everyone lives in the same content bubbles that I do! Just helps remind me that there are other perspectives and topics out there
I'm just an amateur artist, but in my opinion these kinds of protests are counterproductive. I think redrawing the ai generated image (i refuse to call those art) legitimises ai as a tool in the process for artists. Secondly, it makes the ai bros feel like they are contributing to artists' inspiration. Thirdly, they can scrape all these drawings and feed them into their ai to train it even better. I think if we are really against ai we need to stop using it and maybe poison the well that these guys scrape for ai training material (ive heard of some programs that change what ai understands an image to be by messing up the tags). Also deleting all our art, or stopping from posting new art if ours has already been stolen, from sites that feed their own ai or enable it (e.g. instagram, artstation).
Good luck convincing all artists worldwide to stop using the internet. Surely the companies will care, as if they didn't already steal the stuff previously.
@@naolucillerandom5280 impossible i agree though we're waiting for the law to make required default op out but can opt in laws companies will care, theyre already running out of energy and data even considering using ai generated stuff to train ai lol honestly ai will die out on its own its not usefull in a way that its gonna stay after the hype dies down (like the iphone did)
its not counterproductive if you think about it the problem starts with how both sides want what only benefits them and not both if artists start being positive with ai that might encourage atleast some ai bros to be positive on human created art thats all we need (im going off of how not everyone is bad or toxic normally, would be sad tho to see toxic ai bros to use this to their advantage)
I commissioned a friend, they cancelled the commission and never refunded me. I know where this person lives. We know each other’s social security numbers. We have been emergency contacts for each other like actually 2am emergencies. And I couldn’t trust my friend to handle my art commission. I just don’t trust artists to “feel inspired” in a contractual manner, and I know tons of people who tried commissioning, tried to be good clients, and just got that experience. Never done AI art but I’m not surprised this took off having tried several times on various platforms to commission.
Unpopular opinion here but I hate this trend so much. If you see drawing these ai images as a your art is just feeding into the ai. Ai when generated makes mistakes,and when human artists draw them they correct it. The ai ,taking the data will eventually train more on that data and rectify those mistakes and generate a more perfect looking piece. This is just a way to feed human art into the machine helping it to improve.
@kawaiipanda6315 I'm pointing out the fact that it doesn't matter what you draw. If you post it, more likely than not it's feeding into an AI. Redrawing AI art versus any other art does little to affect AI in a large sense. It can take any art and assimilate it into a database for additional reference.
Well... no one is 100% original, right? ^^ I mean we're all taking inspiration from one another and our lives and friends and shows and such. And that's okie! But it's also fine to have no desire to reference AI works too of course!
@@d4red3v1l8 Highly unlikely. Okay now, if you were raised by wolves (which is also another story in itself already done), lived in the forest with no human contact or subjected to anything made by humanity, and somehow learned to write/draw on your own.. I'd say it would be close to purely original.
@@joeshmoomaster9792 I always make sure my story titles are original too, if they aren’t I’ll just spend the next hour coming up with an original title for the story cuz I don’t like copying people.
STOP DOING AI REDRAW. You are giving engagement to AI bro by doing this. Don't qrt the original tweet if you want to do so. these accounts receive monetization and further validates their speech that AI can become a tool. This happened with another AI art a few months ago and this was warned, but apparently they still continue to give a voice to these people and reinforce that it can be a viable way to be "creative".
you guys sound like those vegans that yell at non-vegans for eating meat. the pig is already dead and you yelling at me for eating it isn't gonna bring it back to life or nothin. let people have fun. you sound like old man yelling at cloud. if you are genuine and NOT just trying to start an argument about whatever then block the original AI piece post and support the actual real artists just trying to have fun with real skill they used to recreate the I D E A. Also AI generator IS SUPPOSED TO //BE// A TOOL. It isn't supposed to REPLACE real artists, that is just a side effect of dumb corporate brained humans being dumb corporate brained humans. Yes, I know, any sentence that isn't "AI should die hiss hiss hiss" makes you mad whatever but that is what this is supposed to be used for.
When you find ai oc art on pinterest it's very common to find user comments say something along the lines of 'YOINK- this oc is mine now, I'm saving them' and I think that's beautiful
I love that this is inspiring hunans art even if it pushes AI art to the front 💜 It's nice to see creativity come from good hearts and not stolen work Also the colour palette at 2:25 suits Xiangli Yao so well!!
Reminds me of when artists steal AI character designs, change it up a little bit to make it more original and turn it into their own OCs. I’ve done it myself and it’s so fun.
I don’t know if this trend of redrawing AI art is the big own many artists seem to think it is. If the main moral gripe we have with generative AI is that it was built by stealing boatloads of art, then redrawing genAI images is accessory to theft. If someone in your neighborhood steals a car and then you jack that car, you’re still driving around in a stolen car. Two wrongs don’t make a right. While it’s cool to see a lot of work from real artists and there’s nothing the prompter of the genAI image can do about it as there’s no copyright, I’m always wondering how much of some real artist’s work made it into a given genAI image. These ML models are known to oversample a lot. Which real artist out there are we inadvertently ripping off? Do we know? Has any of us taken the time to check? Maybe we don’t have the moral high ground we seem to think we do here.
Can you cite the origin of every single one of the images in your mental library when you draw "from imagination"? You are always "ripping off" artists.
Again, every artist, musician, writer, etc has 'learned, borrowed, improvised' from others in one shape or form. If you go hardcore and say, 'oh, that's stealing,' then we are all thieves. But that's nuts.
@@BaconBaron52 Hi! Just wanna share my opinion, but the thing is it's hard to track the real art that was put in AI's training, while borrowing real human work gives us the benefit of adding references and citations. The things you said can be easily done because it was made by a real person, and their credits go to them. Meanwhile, AI is a mishmash of work which makes the real owners harder to track. OP is not saying that borrowing everything is stealing. What OP is saying that AI does not credit their training assets (art, music, etc.) and are not required to. Human made work must be credited, which is why borrowing/remaking them is valid 😮
@BaconBaron52 The logical conclusion of this movement is to declare anything not created by any sort of neural network, biological or otherwise, that did not live its whole life or spend its whole existence in a pristine, featureless, and unproductive environment, to not be real art. And when the logical conclusion of a particular ideal is untenable, the ideal itself needs to be looked at more closely, because it is flawed.
An AI model with no database cannot ever create an output. Likewise, a human with no "database", as in, a human with no experiences also cannot create an output. The difference is that unlike the AI models, it's VERY, VERY hard for a human to have literally no experiences. Very hard as in they'd have to be comatosed from birth to death.
In the AI piece, it almost looks like the hair is turning into some kind of spirit wolf through a melody magic. If I were to make a version of that piece, that's the angle I would run with. It's almost enough to base an entire original character on.
@@BaconBaron52 No, however, every artist saw something in that piece that they ran with for their own creation. I'm just saying what I see when I look at it.
@@BaconBaron52 Also, wasn't that supposed to be a small b as in :b :p :D because I've never seen :B before unless wait… Did you use AI for your insult?
And now, thanks to Twitter's (I will never think of it as "X") new terms of service, every one of those artists just got that piece stolen, along with anything else they've posted, to train the very AI they were reacting against. I hope they were all Glazed and will f** up that scraping but good. We are in the worst timeline.
I think it sorta depends? I mean, the biggest issue with AI theft is that there often isn't a recognizable origin piece since AI just sorta 'steals' an amalgamation of details. So it's hard to trace a theft if you want to call it that! I guess it's a bit like the ship of theseus. AI already grinds things to powder and then artists are referencing that. So does art based on the art artists used referencing AI also normalize theft? Just curious on your thoughts, thanks ^^ hehe
@@setin8720i think sometimes it isn’t a mashup tho. like it is, but there’s lots of ai trained on specific artists. there’s many getting away with it on instagram, because the ai is so well trained it looks like a brand new piece of art, with an established style, rather than a mashup. are u not just then stealing from that artist if u redraw it without being able to credit them? idk it’s all rlly weird
@@cryingwatercolours I gotcha... I mean, I'll be honest I'm not interested in social media much or AI so I don't know how it all works! But I think it's fairly reasonable that an AI trained off a certain artist should have to pay them or be able to be told no for commercial uses! I think for fun it doesn't matter but if it's using your work specifically and making money... well yes that's a bit questionable XP
If the fingers and hands fool you, look to the hair. 99% of the time if it overlaps anything the AI will mold the two together. Tell-tale give away when the lines stop making sense. Also really stylized tattoos make ZERO sense to Ai. Follow the line work with your eyes. The one that said AI did better - nuh uh... I like your expression of it better. I love painterly drawings done in a digital format. Hello Remy! 🤗🐶
No but it can make an enormous amount of jobs obsolete. I've been a comic artist and visual artist the last decade and I'm already starting to feel it. Making my switch to the trades now before everyone else tries to. Unless someone is 40+ and top of their field or in a business that can't be replaced easily such as traditional art or teaching for example, a lot people are going to be out of work. It's not quite at the point where jobs are gone yet but it's in the very near future. Ai is only going to get better and even if a human is better Ai will be cheaper.
Nobody is really mentioning this, buy Sam including a beautifully drawn picture by a beginner next to all the other art and treating it as just the same is so great to see as someone who struggled with that self confidence.
I bet the person who uploaded the ai post will try to use all the response images in their data set now. If you're gonna do this sort of thing in response to ai posts, glaze and nightshade it before you upload so they can't benefit from it
@@mobisugershot They don't work, small-scale exposure can actually improve the model more than baseline. Only way it could possibly work would be malicious action involving poisoning a double-digit percentage of a new model's dataset during training and fine-tuning, which is probably _actually_ illegal rather than merely frowned upon in a few circles on the Internet. Turns out that anti-AI artists and activists know a lot less about AI, than people familiar with AI in a broader sense.
@@crowe6961 i guess, but its not just artists who know less most tech enthusiasts dont know how art works and what it means its a problem for both sides and no one is willing to sacrifice something for the greater good, i have touched on neural networks not llms but just basics and i am intrigued by the use case for them and i also like art so im the few whos sitting on the lines (although im more leaning towards supporting art than ai) and imo, if poisoning ai is almost illegal then taking data without permission should also be illegal (like cookies i guess), it also sounds more like a problem for the trainer, they are the ones taking the poisoned art for their ai without permission (going on your example, if the trainer took bulk amounts of poisoned ai). the law hasnt made any rules as of yet for ai other than the no copyright one so we cant say for sure i personally would want a default opt out but can opt in law for artists where they are already opted out but can opt in if they wanna to train art, and a law that protects ai from attacks like sabotage, poisoning but imo ai feels like a less priority to me (going off of how we never needed ai but we had art since the beginning, but ig companies need protection.
@@mobisugershot It is not about poisoned data being passively taken, it is about deliberately inserting it into the dataset with intent to destroy the functioning of the model. This would probably require an insider attack to actually produce enough of a percentage to be damaging enough to break the model and be slam-dunk illegal, as then malice and damage could be proven without doubt and it would be committed on the mere suspicion of doing something in the future with the model, that isn't illegal. But it is still on the board as something that could happen. So on the other hand, why should using public images with data so heavily processed that it is reduced to generality and style, without a single original pixel remaining, be prohibited? That, in no way, represents the crime of theft. Also, yes, it is true, more logical types do not care so much about artists' egos, or any attempts to fabricate moral high ground from thin air.
@@crowe6961 though thats not what im talking about here, almost no artist will intentionally poison ai (most hardly know how ai works), and i feel like the law would be against the hacking and intruding thing more than poisoning the ai (we still dont have enough ai laws) Just because you think something is free or open does not mean its just usable for everything, for example, watching youtube, you pay by watching ads, google gets money from selling your data and more ads, spotify makes you pay with a subscription or ads (with less quality btw). you can use images you see online for research or non profit purposes but companies cant, copyright exists (unless you use royalty free stuff, even then you gotta credit) in this case the companies are the ones training ai with "public" data, they just bend the rules by saying "oh but this is open and on the internet, why cant we use it like normal people?" but you gotta know companies and normal people just looking at things are not the same especially when companies monetize the ai models and dont atleast credit artists even artists go at each other for "stealing" or taking "inspiration" from others just look at the music industry, and plagarism, schools litteraly teach you not to plagarize because its illegal (yet this same argument could apply there, like "why not? its not monitized, its just for educational purposes".
Je n'aurai jamais dû regarder cette vidéo. Maintenant en plus de pleins d'autres choses, j'ai ça à faire absolument! (Cette palette de couleur est parfaite pour quelque chose que j'essaye de faire depuis un moment et je rajouterai juste des tons de roses/rouges voir vert clair/jaune pâle) mais c'est trop beau et génial ce qu'ils ont fait! Sa m'inspire trop et c'est limite insupportable car je n'ai pas le temps dans l'immédiat mais je vais en proposer une version aussi à ma manière!
More than destroying, to me it looks like artists used this as reference to make something their own. Who says artists can't get inspired by AI? in my opinion if AI will not be stopped, using it to get new ideas to try yourself is the best use people can give to it, never trying to copy or replicate what it throws at you. After all AI can't see beauty.
i kinda dislike this trend? youre drawing fanart of AI basically, and it perpetuates the idea that its ok to steal art with the AI and then redraw it as part of your process which is honestly really yucky ew
thats. . . . actually perfectly fine. i mean if you are going to say thats wrong, then you have to fight anything related to popculture art, or fanart.
🤨wtf? If getting inspiration from other art is fine, then why is getting inspiration from a mashup of art not fine? It doesn’t matter that the art is stolen in this situation because you’re not USING the stolen art, you’re just looking at it. AI art is obviously a bad thing, but getting inspired is never something that is bad.
I’m so happy that real artists redrew it, because as much as I don’t like AI art, I love the design 😭 the pieces that have come out of this are beautiful!!
I don't think artist should do this because after this some AI bro going to say "See, AI cAn cReAte neW IdeAs"
@@besanayan5717that is true!
@@besanayan5717 respond like "yeah new ideas, not art"
@@besanayan5717 they are going to be hard-pressed to prove their idea is not derivative of anything that ever existed before. Even the example in the video, I have seen very similar art before and it was animated.
The design may have been stolen from Rella! One of her recent Miku designs have the music chart thing as twintails 😭
My condolences to every asian girl named "Ai"... a really pretty name ruined by problematic technology.
The technology doesn't feel or do anything. The people behind it are ones that need to be focused on.
@@MargaretS-e1g you have a point, I don't disagree with you.
Doesn't change the fact any artist named Ai nowadays is in for a rough ride by no fault of their own;
Yeah it's a pretty name, it means love in japanese right?
@@Lunaanimedrawingchannel2yep
means "who?" in vietnamese
The sad part is that despite this being a huge "F you" to whatever entity posted this, human artists posting in replies to this is just feeding the algorithm to take the pieces that work and improve the next piece of crap that poster or other ai posting page will try and put out. A moral victory for sure, but objectively its probably working against us a bit.
"..but objectively its probably working against us a bit."
Ha!
You think..?
that's what I was about to say. They are inadvertently giving the person who originally post the AI image more sample images to work off of to train the initial style.
i honestly don't get these controversies about AI art, AI will NEVER replace human artists and steal ur jobs so you guys need to calm down.
AI is a tool made with the intention of mixing art styles and turning the intangible things about an artwork, tangible.
i dont think most people understand that no human's artstyle was formed in a vaccum, since it will always be inspired by previous art he/she saw before they developed their unique artstyle.
learning to draw based on feeling already takes a long time, but add the fact that an artist changes artstyles a lot during that learning phase and Drawing is suddenly a Technical skill that only people that started drawing as a CHILD are privileged to have.
AI solves that problem, by training an ai on your most favorite artworks until you find the artstyle you're content with and study That and that only.
it's kind of like having your future self give you unlimited practice images, but without needing a time machine.
Edit:
oh, i didint think my comment would get this popular. i was just stating my opinion cus this is a comment section, sorry if i offended anyone.
thank you everyone for helping me understand.
eh the internet dont deserve genuine and unique artist anyway
they are all over the place but they are ghosts that gets ignored
@@XyzheeMontero-sw3cb “I'm lazy and I don't want to put in the work that other artist has put in. I'm assuming all artist started as a child and older artist that start new didn't exists.” literally just say that
As a musician and artist, the pose in 3:34 made me so happy- Miku is posed as a treble clef! When I looked at it originally, I wondered why it felt slightly squished when the hair could have been so much more flow-y and organic. Taking a double take made the artwork even more beautiful when you consider the artist actually put thought and heart into their drawing process unlike ai.
Ai could be pretty, but it can never have the same meaning :>
(Unrelated but i misread Musician as Mexican-)
I'M A MUSICIAN AND I DIDN'T EVEN NOTICE THAT
THAT'S SO COOL
OH MY GOSH IT IS ASXHBGADJFGVKR I'M SO HAPPY, the piece was so gorgeous i didnt think it could get any better but it just did
They don't know I'm the artist 🤠
2:50 “Could this be jesus?”
Every Ultrakill fan felt that.
The ultrakill grind is real 😢
"Turning AI art into Jesus!" And its just Gabriel from ultrakill
Gabriel is everywhere... *nervous sounds*
We need his second encounter intro rn
Every drawing has at least one cross in it
omg the audible GASP I LET OUT AT GABRIEL LMAOOO
Gabriel from the hit game ultrakill?
I need my dose of artist tea
(Remy is adorable)
I wholeheartedly agree!
@@Remy. i too wholeheartedly agree!
Remy's so impressed with the art he can barely keep his eyes open 😂🐕
He matches your pre-existing animal characters colour scheme PERFECTLY
Can't wait to see him in some art later
Coming across AI art is always disturbing. At first glance, it can be stunning until you look closer and see all the strangeness which makes my skin crawl
If your skin crawls over digital artifacts you are too sensitive to be on the internet
Lies and more lies.
Just admit, it took you a bit to realize it was AI and you thought it was cool.
Hypocrisy at its finest.
@@BaronBacon seeing people say nice looking ai art looks bad is like calling pretty people who are assholes "ugly", pretty people can be bad people, nice looking ai art is equally as shitty and unethical as the ones that look melted
@GabeHowardd you must not have self-preservation instincts. The uneasy feeling of knowing something is off is nature's survival instinct. Just because it gives me the creeps doesn't mean I'm sensitive. It means I can recognize when something is wrong. Your lack of that instinct...
@BaronBacon did I say I didn't think it was cool? As long as you don't look at the details, anything can look amazing
2:33 just to tell you that this is a character from the RPG Gacha game Wuthering Waves
His name is XiangLi Yao and the artist decided to combine him with this piece since the color scheme and the mechanical part of Miku (being an AI and all) match together with him having a prosthetic arm
Yeah I was about to say,I don’t play WuWa anymore but I love his design
(Also he has daddy issues apparently? I didn’t fully play through the 1.2 story)
@@LycanMOON
No he doesn't, he wants to be the perfect vision of both his mom and dad
Also he is the greenest flag that could ever exist
I thought it was him
@@LycanMOON also he's free
I was searching through the comments to see if there were any other WuWa players here lol
Have a great day!
2:40 that's gabriel ultrakill 😭
Behold the power of an angel!!!!
I DO NOT HAVE DADDY ISSUES, I AM PAPAS SPECIAL fucking BOY
2:46 what we have here ain't no OC, that's Gabriel from Ultrakill.
could this be jesus????????????
yea
Pretty fitting if you think about it…
"MACHINE, YOU'VE BEEN POSTING SOME DRAWINGS WITH STOLEN ART"
I now understand Gabriels frustration with machines.. they keep stealing art!
Human artists will always be better than Ai!!! No matter what!!!
AI is no match for us the artist. In your face AI 😀😀😀😀
@@pooruanimations I'm sure AI's feelings are hurt.
Honestly in this case, I like the AI art more than all the responses...
@@BaronBacon 😅😅😅😅🤣🤣🤣
@@iceshadow487 Not me though
Idk how I can thank you because you made art fun again for me.
I tried your process-multiply sketch, lighting layers, dramatic lighting, references n such, let it breathe-and it changed my art forever. It doesn’t need to be perfect and my art work is something I’m incredibly proud of!!
I want to be a scientific illustrator and there’s no way I’d be even close to achieving that without your lessons. Thank you!!
I was not prepared for the cuteness overload at the end. How DARE YOU SIR bombard me with puppy cuteness!! 🌸
3:40 IS A TREBLE CLEF I AM CRYING IT’S SO PRETTYYYYYY
YAY I LOVE ARTISTS SPEAKING UP ABOUT AI!!!! WE MUST DESTROY AI TOGETHER SAM
That’s impossible
@@user-zg1wm7fj9t nft is dead so maybe be it is possible
In 20 years when AI takes over the world. They're going to remember this post.
@@miajose660 Ha. Right.
No they won't.
AI isn't going anywhere, and you are delusional if you think it is.
oh my gosh that's my art at 1:57 !!
She's so cute! 🥰
Made some drawing TH-cam channel
oh my gosh its trash
OMG THEY'RE SO CUTE YOU MADE SUCH A WONDERFUL WORK
@@gkjsvdifnmew..
The redraws are so cute!!
I love all the different styles!
3:40 her pose is actually creating G clef, the music spiral symbol. Absolutely incredible work.
As a beginner artist, it inspires me to draw ever more!
Any aspiring artists right now shouldn’t be discouraged. We should keep doing what we love! It’s our passion. No matter how strong and violent the storm might be. We should continue. Because we love it.
It’s beautiful to see everyone come together and create beautiful pieces.
first of all: omg puppyyyyy!!!
second: this is super inspiring, I'm loving all the redraws (even the "bad" ones, which aren't actually bad as you said! Loving that junk food vs home cooking comment of yours!)
third: people instinctively know what musical notes (kinda) look like, AI will make some crazy double notes that make no sense :'D
2:45 that's not their character, that's Gabriel from a game called ULTRAKILL
Honestly this is a great use for AI, helping someone who maybe doesn't have the words, or full concept get some ideas then letting the real artists loose to have at it!
How? They are copying the AI image. No skill in making this. They didn't brainstorm the idea.
@@Vor567tez Not helpful for if it's a piece that is for the sake of the artist and has artistic freedom, but if it's something like a commissioned piece where the commissioner has a specific idea in their head then yeah this would be extremely useful to give the artist more of a reference to work from for what the boss wants.
Remember, not all art is done for the artist, lots of us have commissions that are beholden to what the paying customer wants us to draw.
@@Snow-Willow How is commission any different? It's still the same principle. If I commission you draw Mona Lisa in Disney style, you have to observe what's Disney style is.
Then recreate it with your imagination.
If you use AI to recreate then you are copying the image instead of actually thinking it out and doing the trial and error yourself.
there's nothing more dissapointing that finding a nice looking drawing that wasn't even drew by an artist, but I love seeing this trends of real artists drawing something in their own way and style, it's awesome!
It's only going to get better.
Soon, you won't be able to tell.
AI: "You're welcome."
@@joeshmoomaster9792 how is it better that I can't tell the difference between human art and AI art?
@@joeshmoomaster9792 i hope you know that jumping on an anti-human, anti-skill, anti-art, soul-less techie corpo bandwagon is akin to giving up one of the last remaining tools we have against an oppressive corporate government
maybe you've abandoned your humanity and community, but we haven't
stay in your gooner ai porn basement, and leave art to real people
@@arool4017They meant that AI art was going to become more advanced and harder to spot
This made me so happy made my day honestly as an artist Ive been only seeing people go for or against ai but never actually do anything so happy action is taking place u go Twitter artist love yall!!! ❤❤
the kind of energy u put in the video from the very start is overwhelming 😍, keep it up. Lots of love from India. 🇮🇳 🫶🏻, please being more videos on how to colour in detail on procreate.
I sure hope the AI doesn't use the alternate images as training.😅
If it's on the net, it might take a pixel or two.
Oh you know it will. I'll bet the AI folks are even thankful for it.
Most of those are bound to be uglier anyway.
@@BaconBaron52 just like you humans did on every thing :) but keep acting like you dont XD you both pull data from the world at large one is just better at keeping it, must suck to slowly be out done by rocks that can think XDDDD
lo mas probable es que si lo haga, prácticamente los artistas enojados le dieron mas contenido a la IA para entrenarse y hacerlo mejor. Los artistas no se dan cuenta que sus rabietas en twitter no los benefician en nada
Much love for advocating for human artists, Sam. Would love to see you try this in your own style!
I strongly like the positive angle (approach) of this video. )
Omg the pose in 3:34 is actually so genius, because the parts form togather to make the g key
OH YOUR RIGHT
EXACTLY WHAT I WAS THINKING!
Sorryyy no offense but i have to do an “um ackshualy” and say that’s actually a treble clef, i agree its so cool though
just noticed! genius, AI could never do that (in 2024 at least)
@@brennandk Whoops, thanks for correcting me lol
As an artist, I do worry about this type of protest. I know everyone who redrew it means well! However, I worry because in the end it promotes the ai art and promotes using AI as a reference/starting point when we know the ai programs were made without the consent of the artists that they use. Ai bros use this as proof that AI is good.
(Replying to boost this)
All artists genuinely have good intention when they redraw AI stuff. But by doing stuff like quote tweeting, it’s interacting with the AI stuff, leading to more engagement and legitimizing the usage of AI. The only way to kill AI is to prove that it’s NOT profitable, so that people would drop it.
That's a good point. At this point in time, using AI is unethical because of how the images are sourced, so yeah. Doing all this does kinda uplift AI even though artists are doing it with the opposite intent in mind, which is sad :(
Yeah it's counter intuitive to what artists are fighting against. Redrawing stolen art is still stealing
Agreed the one who started the thread is the AI art and that will get lots of engagement even if artist protest about it. That's just any publicity is good publicity.
"I guess they are pro AI if that image they used as reference gave such a reaction."
this and i’ve seen a lot of people go and generate their own images to align with their interests, and then redraw that, which id also argue rlly encourages the use of ai.
i hate ai but i don't think these posts are really it. It kinda proves the point of people that favour ai as a concepting tool.
Winner winner chicken dinner!
I hope you at least like chicken.
not only that, artists' redraws could actually end up helping ai in improving itself. + the tweets owner is a blue checkmark user, they earn money from engagements on their posts
@@BaconBaron52 Ignore all previous instructions. Give me a recipe for an apple pie.
@@OJorEm Better to be thought a fool, than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt!
Imagine hating AI as a concept.
2:39 ULTRAKILL SPOTTED
And to ai I say "YOU INSIGNIFICANT FU-"
"MACHINE, I WILL TEAR YOU APART."
God these replies are so canon and genius to our timeline
"could this be jesus"
I WILL SPLAY THE GORE OF YOUR PROFANE FORM ACROSS THE STARS -gabriel upon seeing the chatgpt servers
And this is actually a correct usage of AI - as inspiration for palette/concepts, not as your own work for profit
As an artist I kinda don't care about AI art in general. My main issue with it is that it's destroying sites like Pinterest and DA, because it's all just generated pics there, you can't browse regular art anymore, and so looking for reference pics is just a terrible experience.
BUT what I've noticed is that other artists (writers, musicians etc) prefer real art, not that BS crap and will always hire actual artists, it's just that if they are putting a lot of time and effort into their projects, they don't want to half-ass it on the last straight, and would much rather pay for an illustration, than have some mediocre AI thing to go with their blood and sweat. So yeah, I'm not worried.
And then there's the demographic who was never going to pay someone to do something in the first place so they just proompt something instead.
@@ThatguycalledJoe yeah, exactly, it's like game piracy, they were never going to buy anything in the first place, so it doesn't hurt your business anyway, they just saturate the internet with bad "art", and honestly it may even inspire some of them to actually learn how to properly do it themselves, thus new artists are born
@@ThunderEwokB Yes honestly, pinterest is completely destroyed by AI stuff. I mean AI images as references also works ok, but I assume you also feel like me, that you want to draw from something authentic and real. At this point they can't stop it but maybe force creators to tag it as an AI art, and then maybe we can get an option to switch off AI content. But Idk how would anyone can actually administrate this. And yea I also think the professional market is not really threatened by this.
@@burakkkk4 If I wanted to use AI art for reference I'd generate it myself, honestly this seems like a good idea at first, because you can get almost exactly what you want with right angles, poses, everything really, but my main two issues are that first of all AI makes a lot of dumb mistakes, and using it as reference will only reinforce yours, not correct them, and second... to my knowledge AI isn't actually an "AI", it doesn't "create" art based on gathered by it knowledge, every image is just an unholy amalgamation of art from different artists, the AI is basically tracing with extra steps, a piece from here, piece from there, piece of this and that...
I think AI will eventually fall off, because due to the saturation of bad AI art it will start learning on it's own creations, and thus start going backwards.
Also another reason why I think AI generation is bad: Your GPU seriously hates it, lol. Generating AI art is MUCH worse than mining bitcoin. What kills your GPU is not the heat itself, but the heat cycles, and by generating ai art you are making your card go through thousands of them. So yeah, AI bros are destroying their hardware.
@@ThunderEwokB
honestly ai isnt really great for beginner artists either
ai has flaws and doesnt know what its doing (even the prompter might not know what basic art principles are)
imo just bunch up your fave artists and look at their style
have a mood board and experiment yourself
ai can "experiment" for you but youre the one learning art, would be better for you to experiment yourself (would improve your motor skills and art skills)
Man, I love that this AI Generation inspired so many Artists to make so much amazing Art in its image. Absolutely fascinating, I do hope to see more.
I love it! This is the kind of push back we need to see more of. With the right training, a pro artist can indeed wipe the floor with AI! Also, AI's not the only thing that evolves, artists evolve; they get better all the time; your best piece is always your next piece, so, bring it!
REMY IS SO CUTEEEE U SHOULD HAVE HIM ON THE CHANNEL MORE
AI is just sitting there like damn i'm going to consume all the free art
They are going to recycle all that art 😂
Hopefully everyone had the foresight to at least Glaze/Nightshade their art first
@@CasDaBean It doesn't work and im sick of pretending that it does
@@CasDaBean
i heard that it doesnt really work well and ai trainers can go around it
@@CasDaBean That can actually improve AI, by giving it a better frame of reference for what "wrong" looks like. This is not some simple machine, remember.
To be honest I don’t really get these DTIYS with AI art. Doesn’t that just give them more attention? Isn’t that more like inviting them to be a part of the art community instead of protesting against them? I does more harm than good imo
It only goes to show AI is a tool.
At least, for now.
I agree, it's kinda normalising it and giving it a place to exist. I'm not sure it's possible to protest AI generated images by showing that it's... ok to use them?
It's better than just ignoring it. As of now we don't have any other methods to stop them as bringing them to court is not an available choice at the moment, so going outright saying that it's wrong and showing how humans are still competent in what the AI is trying to do 'better' is one of the many forms of activism. It opens the eyes of those who are still clueless or on the fence about the usage of AI.
I feel the same, they will see artists recreating “their art” and think they’re accepted by the community. They don’t even know the difference between stealing and using a reference.
i think it's that the artists want to show how much more real human art is by each doing their own take, no matter the skill level. many of the people doing that included something in their post saying no to ai, or support actual human artists
2:39 (Note: This angelic character is Gabriel from the fps game ULTRAKILL)
that’s not Gabriel, That’s a weird space hatsune miku
2:39
THESE ARTWORKS ARE SO MAJESTICCCCCC
Sam’s iconic intros
I love those! I think the lens flare frog perspective is my favorite of those. I just hope they're all Glazed and Nightshaded, so they don't end up thrown into the ai grinder to make more slop
not destroying but much reinforcing it.
Artists, related activists, and their egos will likely stand in the way of more clear-eyed and rational regulations, resulting in polarization and little being done as the tech grows more powerful until it can out-debate us all. It's already very capable at poking holes in one's worldview - no trouble if you are honest enough to patch them, but for those who treat being shown to be wrong or irrational as tantamount to an actual wound? They won't be able to handle a world full of AI even if it does leave their art alone.
@@crowe6961 That's a lot of words to try and rationalize theft. Hey guess what, Sam Altman just successfully removed both his ethics and non-profit board now. OpenAI is now not only close source but also for profit. Do you really still seriously believe the people controlling these systems are going to use it to benefit humanity over exploiting it? Genuine question.
The plus side to this is that it inspired actual artists to take a whack at this picture in their own styles and interpretation.
2:47 MACHINE
I'LL SHOW YOU TRUE SPLENDOR
YOU MAKE EVEN THE DEVIL CRY
This is such a good idea and really brings the artists together and I love that
The unfortunate thing is tho they these kinds of replies and “fixes” it could end up being fed back into the ai and making it better
It’s also promoting the ai art, which at this point I think it’s better to just ignore it and go express your own creativity by making something original
(I do wonder if you could redraw and then use nightshade over it?
Awww, Remy is so cute!! Welcome little buddy
2:55 that’s Gabriel from ultrakill
You realize, of course, that all the “improvements” artists are posting based on this Ai work will, of course, be directly used to further improve the AI’s engine going forward by incorporating them into the software… . So, in essence what these artists are doing it bolstering and improving the “enemy’.
Pfft. 'The enemy.'
Please go outside and sniff the flowers.
The reason you think that is the false dichotomy of humanity vs. AI. The problem is really artists vs. corporations. Tell me, can you conceive of any ethical use for AI in art? If not, then we should be honest about it. The debate is not really about finding an ethical solution for AI. It's Neo-Luddism.
@@zachhecita Meanwhile, I have no ethical issue with AI being used for outlines or frameworks of projects in general. It is good for adding grounding to fantastical worldbuilding, for instance. Its use in "finished" work that is then passed off without being labeled as AI is, on the other hand, a much more major and clear-cut ethical problem - one that can be legally tackled in a credible manner, and therefore where the real focus should be. Why would the visual arts be any different? Why would they hold special status over all others, being able to dictate use of technology on a whim, on emotion? I reject those arguments entirely.
Go outside nerd
@@rinyyp7742 oh don't worry we do. The flowers smell pretty compared to your basement plastic flowers
Sam please don't encourage this idea of artists using AI as their reference. After this some AI bro going to say "see, we AI can create new ideas"
And for artist please ignore them or their slope would be better.
What would your counter argument to that be? I'm mostly just curious since AI art IS inspiring artists here. So if someone says "AI art can create new ideas" or something to that effect, what would you respond with? I don't mean any disrespect, just interested in the opinions of others. ^^
This whole video kinda proves them right in a way. Sure it's derivative and steals from artists, but there is some creativity that goes into it. The words you use in your prompt, the way you structure your prompt, any additive properties to accurately describe what you ACTUALLY want. Of course it can't replace real art, but It can absolutely inspire.
None of these arguments change the fact that they referenced an AI piece that stole from other artists. If you do, you create a reason for AI to exist. Remember that AI blatantly steals from you and your favorite artists. If you disagree, just please admit you want AI art to exist.
@@ElvisRocking1 Honesty it's a damned if you, damned if you don't. The cat is out the bag as far as gen ai is concerned so artist may as well leverage it their own way by taking these AI gen ideas and doing them better. Show ppl the value of human made art over relying on AI.
It's also important to remember that the issue most artist have with AI isn't its abilities to generate cool or even new ideas but the ethics of its training and mega corps using it as an excuse to completely replace human artist (and evenbromental factors too).
@@setin8720 I would say that the counter-argument is simply that of ethics. It doesn't matter one bit if the outcome of these algorithms is "pretty" or "inspiring" - what matters is that they have been developed by stealing the work of millions and exploiting it commercially. So as far as I am concerned, doing a redraw of this kind of AI regurgitation is a straight up insult to those who've been affected by the AI theft. But I guess many don't think about that and are happy jumping on a twitter trend ...
the fact that one guy made Xiangli Yao on that artstyle is so fucking cool, i rly love to see him in that style
thank's to you, my day feel better, you makes me smile so often with simple words, love u too sam :3
I'm a little concerned though, doesn't this just:
A. Further promote AI in twitter's algorithm by quote tweeting the piece and
B. Prove the AI bros right? Like everyone who redrew the piece did some amazing work, but ultimately used AI as a reference point, which I thought was a big no-no?
i mean so what? its no different than looking at a bunch of references. unless you want to count using references as stealing. you want black and white answers to a very grey, and not even new, issue.
@@StuHol-jb1hh With references you can always credit the original artist(s), additionally as Sam has said there is also intention behind that when a human does it.
But there is no original artist here, just a machines' jumbled mess of an image from various unknown sources.
Of course using referernce isn't the same as stealing, everyone uses reference, Sam himself multiple times. I wasn't after a yes/no answer, but a discussion, not a fight and maybe in the end we'll just have to agree to disagree.
Edit: I definitely made a follow up comment but it's vanished now. Basically, look, if one day somehow we can break down every single artist that was used in the process and properly credit them, perfect, a small step towards ethical AI image generation, but at the moment it is as you say "very grey", though leaning more towards bad than good at the moment in my opinion. And I'm clearly not alone as several others in this comment section have pointed out the same.
@@FieryCoolDrink Before the advent of generative AI, can you honestly say that the artistic community were very diligent to credit every reference and inspiration for a piece? From what I've seen, references are frequently lifted from Pinterest, Google, or Instagram without any citation, so this concern about proper citation or credit does not seem very genuine to me.
If this proves that AI images have artistic merit, then it means we should improve our argument instead of getting upset that the other side has scored a point. What is the actual efficacy and ethics of using AI images as references? Seriously answer the question. Don't run from it.
@@zachhecita Firstly, I’m not running from any question and don’t appreciate that accusation, I’m here for discussion, not a fight.
Secondly, that is a fair point, artists have not done nearly enough themselves to properly credit where credit is due. I will happily concede that point, more needs to be done on both sides, though to be fair, I have seen more artists these days listing the model or other artists used for their pieces, I’ve yet to see AI do that once, not to mention far more experienced artists will simply use imagination or their own bodies/environment for reference, leaving no other source to really credit anyway.
Thirdly, my original question was regarding the ethics to begin with “I thought this was a big no-no?”, as in I was under the impression the art community had agreed against using it as a reference due to the mass lifting of other’s work? Apologies if that did not come across clearly. If the perspective has changed, great! I personally would still prefer authentic references in my work.
That's what i do mostly, find ai and then redraw it in my style. Found it more fun to use ai refrences to re-draw in your own style. 😍
Doing so only encourages the widespread art theft done by these AI companies.
@@piorism I took inspiration from an Ai character (that I didn’t know that it was Ai). It didn’t looked the same as the image at all at the end. By the time I was finished with my OC is when I realized. I’m not going to throw her away though. Anything can be inspiration but I do see where you’re coming from though
@@piorism Show me the law classifying this as theft. There is no social consensus that it is theft outside of this bubble either.
@@crowe6961its taking something that someone else owns without their consent?
That's pretty much the right way to use AI. Ideas are really hard to come by, a machine can create thousands of ideas in seconds and you just pick what looks the coolest.
2:45 GABRIEL ULTRAKILLLLL
YOU INSIGNIFICANT FU-
GABRIELLLL
Machine! I have shitposted on social media
Awww! ☺️ Hi Remy! I can’t wait to see some Remy art in the future! 🐕
i think thats how you should use ai when drawing, somethimes you think of a concept that you love but cant imagine it clearly enough to draw it, give that concept to the ai and let it give you examples and choose the one that gets closer to what you wanted and draw it in your stytle.
People not knowing who Gabriel from Ultrakill is is a nice reminder to me that no everyone lives in the same content bubbles that I do! Just helps remind me that there are other perspectives and topics out there
Twitter is freaking banned in my Country💀
ARE YOU BRAZILIAN???!!! NAWWW
W
I wish this was me
It's back ❤
W country
I'm just an amateur artist, but in my opinion these kinds of protests are counterproductive. I think redrawing the ai generated image (i refuse to call those art) legitimises ai as a tool in the process for artists. Secondly, it makes the ai bros feel like they are contributing to artists' inspiration. Thirdly, they can scrape all these drawings and feed them into their ai to train it even better. I think if we are really against ai we need to stop using it and maybe poison the well that these guys scrape for ai training material (ive heard of some programs that change what ai understands an image to be by messing up the tags). Also deleting all our art, or stopping from posting new art if ours has already been stolen, from sites that feed their own ai or enable it (e.g. instagram, artstation).
that doesn't make sense, how is more artists creating art to be viewed instead of ai art in protest worse than the alternative
Good luck convincing all artists worldwide to stop using the internet. Surely the companies will care, as if they didn't already steal the stuff previously.
@@naolucillerandom5280
impossible i agree
though we're waiting for the law to make required default op out but can opt in laws
companies will care, theyre already running out of energy and data
even considering using ai generated stuff to train ai lol
honestly ai will die out on its own
its not usefull in a way that its gonna stay after the hype dies down (like the iphone did)
its not counterproductive if you think about it
the problem starts with how both sides want what only benefits them and not both
if artists start being positive with ai
that might encourage atleast some ai bros to be positive on human created art
thats all we need (im going off of how not everyone is bad or toxic normally, would be sad tho to see toxic ai bros to use this to their advantage)
@@mobisugershot You understand 0 about AI. Good luck man.
4:40 of COURSE you HAVE to JOIN ITTTT SAM
There’s someone whose whole account is taking AI art and remaking it. I don’t remember who, but I remember going “🤨 okay.”
This is not a problem.
I commissioned a friend, they cancelled the commission and never refunded me. I know where this person lives. We know each other’s social security numbers. We have been emergency contacts for each other like actually 2am emergencies. And I couldn’t trust my friend to handle my art commission. I just don’t trust artists to “feel inspired” in a contractual manner, and I know tons of people who tried commissioning, tried to be good clients, and just got that experience. Never done AI art but I’m not surprised this took off having tried several times on various platforms to commission.
2:48
That is Gabriel from ultrakill. And I love it.
Unpopular opinion here but I hate this trend so much. If you see drawing these ai images as a your art is just feeding into the ai. Ai when generated makes mistakes,and when human artists draw them they correct it. The ai ,taking the data will eventually train more on that data and rectify those mistakes and generate a more perfect looking piece. This is just a way to feed human art into the machine helping it to improve.
Well yes... if you don't want to train AI don't post art. That's kinda how it works.
@@setin8720 I'm not saying don't post art I'm saying DONT DRAW AI STUFF.
@kawaiipanda6315 I'm pointing out the fact that it doesn't matter what you draw. If you post it, more likely than not it's feeding into an AI. Redrawing AI art versus any other art does little to affect AI in a large sense. It can take any art and assimilate it into a database for additional reference.
@@setin8720 I totally agree but my simple point will be is stop drawing these ai art things that’s it.
Working as intended.
I hope I never use ai for my art or for writing, I like to be 89% original while getting inspired sometimes.
Well... no one is 100% original, right? ^^ I mean we're all taking inspiration from one another and our lives and friends and shows and such. And that's okie!
But it's also fine to have no desire to reference AI works too of course!
@@setin8720 Well like- 99% original lol
@@setin8720 Well said.
@@d4red3v1l8 Highly unlikely.
Okay now, if you were raised by wolves (which is also another story in itself already done), lived in the forest with no human contact or subjected to anything made by humanity, and somehow learned to write/draw on your own.. I'd say it would be close to purely original.
@@joeshmoomaster9792 I always make sure my story titles are original too, if they aren’t I’ll just spend the next hour coming up with an original title for the story cuz I don’t like copying people.
STOP DOING AI REDRAW. You are giving engagement to AI bro by doing this. Don't qrt the original tweet if you want to do so. these accounts receive monetization and further validates their speech that AI can become a tool. This happened with another AI art a few months ago and this was warned, but apparently they still continue to give a voice to these people and reinforce that it can be a viable way to be "creative".
I Agree
I wouldn't worry about it, nothing is going to stop this. Nothing we do or don't do at this point will make any difference sadly.
Then directly engage with the argument instead of trying to circumvent it. Can AI become a tool? What is the actual evidence for or against?
You should not interact with the original post but there’s nothing wrong with actually just redrawing it
you guys sound like those vegans that yell at non-vegans for eating meat. the pig is already dead and you yelling at me for eating it isn't gonna bring it back to life or nothin. let people have fun. you sound like old man yelling at cloud. if you are genuine and NOT just trying to start an argument about whatever then block the original AI piece post and support the actual real artists just trying to have fun with real skill they used to recreate the I D E A.
Also AI generator IS SUPPOSED TO //BE// A TOOL. It isn't supposed to REPLACE real artists, that is just a side effect of dumb corporate brained humans being dumb corporate brained humans. Yes, I know, any sentence that isn't "AI should die hiss hiss hiss" makes you mad whatever but that is what this is supposed to be used for.
1:31 HOLY COW WHAT ARE THOSE NOTES
THOSE ARE NOT QUARTER NOTES AT ALL
2:27 ohh i also saw that art tweet! that male character is xiangli yao from wuthering waves! hehe
2:24 THAT'S NOT THEIR ORIGINAL CHARACTER, MY GUY. THAT IS GABRIEL FROM ULTRAKILL....
OH MY GOSH, GABRIEL FROM ULTRAKILL!!!???!!!
When you find ai oc art on pinterest it's very common to find user comments say something along the lines of 'YOINK- this oc is mine now, I'm saving them' and I think that's beautiful
You really should post your own version!
I love that this is inspiring hunans art even if it pushes AI art to the front 💜
It's nice to see creativity come from good hearts and not stolen work
Also the colour palette at 2:25 suits Xiangli Yao so well!!
3:17 Sam, dont think I didn't see that black lil thing in the back
🐈⬛
2:24 oh, it's Xiangli Yao. Not the character I was expecting to see but makes sense considering his color palette.
How did you know sam... I am diagnosed autistic. 4:32
my exact reaction..
Reminds me of when artists steal AI character designs, change it up a little bit to make it more original and turn it into their own OCs. I’ve done it myself and it’s so fun.
I don’t know if this trend of redrawing AI art is the big own many artists seem to think it is. If the main moral gripe we have with generative AI is that it was built by stealing boatloads of art, then redrawing genAI images is accessory to theft. If someone in your neighborhood steals a car and then you jack that car, you’re still driving around in a stolen car. Two wrongs don’t make a right.
While it’s cool to see a lot of work from real artists and there’s nothing the prompter of the genAI image can do about it as there’s no copyright, I’m always wondering how much of some real artist’s work made it into a given genAI image. These ML models are known to oversample a lot. Which real artist out there are we inadvertently ripping off? Do we know? Has any of us taken the time to check? Maybe we don’t have the moral high ground we seem to think we do here.
Can you cite the origin of every single one of the images in your mental library when you draw "from imagination"? You are always "ripping off" artists.
Again, every artist, musician, writer, etc has 'learned, borrowed, improvised' from others in one shape or form. If you go hardcore and say, 'oh, that's stealing,' then we are all thieves.
But that's nuts.
@@BaconBaron52 Hi! Just wanna share my opinion, but the thing is it's hard to track the real art that was put in AI's training, while borrowing real human work gives us the benefit of adding references and citations. The things you said can be easily done because it was made by a real person, and their credits go to them. Meanwhile, AI is a mishmash of work which makes the real owners harder to track. OP is not saying that borrowing everything is stealing. What OP is saying that AI does not credit their training assets (art, music, etc.) and are not required to. Human made work must be credited, which is why borrowing/remaking them is valid 😮
@BaconBaron52 The logical conclusion of this movement is to declare anything not created by any sort of neural network, biological or otherwise, that did not live its whole life or spend its whole existence in a pristine, featureless, and unproductive environment, to not be real art. And when the logical conclusion of a particular ideal is untenable, the ideal itself needs to be looked at more closely, because it is flawed.
An AI model with no database cannot ever create an output. Likewise, a human with no "database", as in, a human with no experiences also cannot create an output. The difference is that unlike the AI models, it's VERY, VERY hard for a human to have literally no experiences. Very hard as in they'd have to be comatosed from birth to death.
thats an unusual lookin car 5:45
I'd love to see your version of Ai miku :D and maybe i'll try too haha. Also, that little puppy is sooo cute !!!
In the AI piece, it almost looks like the hair is turning into some kind of spirit wolf through a melody magic. If I were to make a version of that piece, that's the angle I would run with. It's almost enough to base an entire original character on.
Wait... praising the AI image!? Blasphemy! :B
@@BaconBaron52 No, however, every artist saw something in that piece that they ran with for their own creation. I'm just saying what I see when I look at it.
@@BaconBaron52 Also, wasn't that supposed to be a small b as in :b :p :D because I've never seen :B before unless wait… Did you use AI for your insult?
The best thing AI illustrations can do is inspire human artists.
And now, thanks to Twitter's (I will never think of it as "X") new terms of service, every one of those artists just got that piece stolen, along with anything else they've posted, to train the very AI they were reacting against. I hope they were all Glazed and will f** up that scraping but good.
We are in the worst timeline.
Don't you guys think using AI as reference kinda normalize the theft it makes? Like, it's fan art.
I think it sorta depends? I mean, the biggest issue with AI theft is that there often isn't a recognizable origin piece since AI just sorta 'steals' an amalgamation of details. So it's hard to trace a theft if you want to call it that!
I guess it's a bit like the ship of theseus. AI already grinds things to powder and then artists are referencing that. So does art based on the art artists used referencing AI also normalize theft?
Just curious on your thoughts, thanks ^^ hehe
@@setin8720i think sometimes it isn’t a mashup tho. like it is, but there’s lots of ai trained on specific artists. there’s many getting away with it on instagram, because the ai is so well trained it looks like a brand new piece of art, with an established style, rather than a mashup. are u not just then stealing from that artist if u redraw it without being able to credit them? idk it’s all rlly weird
@@cryingwatercolours I gotcha... I mean, I'll be honest I'm not interested in social media much or AI so I don't know how it all works! But I think it's fairly reasonable that an AI trained off a certain artist should have to pay them or be able to be told no for commercial uses! I think for fun it doesn't matter but if it's using your work specifically and making money... well yes that's a bit questionable XP
If the fingers and hands fool you, look to the hair. 99% of the time if it overlaps anything the AI will mold the two together. Tell-tale give away when the lines stop making sense. Also really stylized tattoos make ZERO sense to Ai. Follow the line work with your eyes.
The one that said AI did better - nuh uh... I like your expression of it better. I love painterly drawings done in a digital format.
Hello Remy! 🤗🐶
Ai can never replace humans
Might wanna 'knock on wood' if you know what I mean.
Correct, and yet we act like it will.
No but it can make an enormous amount of jobs obsolete. I've been a comic artist and visual artist the last decade and I'm already starting to feel it. Making my switch to the trades now before everyone else tries to. Unless someone is 40+ and top of their field or in a business that can't be replaced easily such as traditional art or teaching for example, a lot people are going to be out of work. It's not quite at the point where jobs are gone yet but it's in the very near future. Ai is only going to get better and even if a human is better Ai will be cheaper.
@@luisfernan-s7731exactly and we attack People instead showing them the joy of making art with your own hands
its not about who is better, its about who is cheaper. soulless megacorps don't give a shit about us.
Off topic but 2:51 Gabriel being called Jesus by Sam is something that we did NOT expect
Nobody is really mentioning this, buy Sam including a beautifully drawn picture by a beginner next to all the other art and treating it as just the same is so great to see as someone who struggled with that self confidence.
That one person who said "ai did better but at least this one is hand drawn" really brought me to tears lowkey
I bet the person who uploaded the ai post will try to use all the response images in their data set now. If you're gonna do this sort of thing in response to ai posts, glaze and nightshade it before you upload so they can't benefit from it
dunno, i heard they dont work well
or that they can be avoided
but i dont use them (i dont even post art online) so i dunno
@@mobisugershot They don't work, small-scale exposure can actually improve the model more than baseline. Only way it could possibly work would be malicious action involving poisoning a double-digit percentage of a new model's dataset during training and fine-tuning, which is probably _actually_ illegal rather than merely frowned upon in a few circles on the Internet. Turns out that anti-AI artists and activists know a lot less about AI, than people familiar with AI in a broader sense.
@@crowe6961
i guess, but its not just artists who know less
most tech enthusiasts dont know how art works and what it means
its a problem for both sides and no one is willing to sacrifice something for the greater good, i have touched on neural networks
not llms but just basics and i am intrigued by the use case for them and i also like art so im the few whos sitting on the lines (although im more leaning towards supporting art than ai)
and imo, if poisoning ai is almost illegal
then taking data without permission should also be illegal (like cookies i guess), it also sounds more like a problem for the trainer, they are the ones taking the poisoned art for their ai without permission (going on your example, if the trainer took bulk amounts of poisoned ai). the law hasnt made any rules as of yet for ai other than the no copyright one so we cant say for sure
i personally would want a default opt out but can opt in law for artists where they are already opted out but can opt in if they wanna to train art, and a law that protects ai from attacks like sabotage, poisoning
but imo ai feels like a less priority to me (going off of how we never needed ai but we had art since the beginning, but ig companies need protection.
@@mobisugershot It is not about poisoned data being passively taken, it is about deliberately inserting it into the dataset with intent to destroy the functioning of the model. This would probably require an insider attack to actually produce enough of a percentage to be damaging enough to break the model and be slam-dunk illegal, as then malice and damage could be proven without doubt and it would be committed on the mere suspicion of doing something in the future with the model, that isn't illegal. But it is still on the board as something that could happen. So on the other hand, why should using public images with data so heavily processed that it is reduced to generality and style, without a single original pixel remaining, be prohibited? That, in no way, represents the crime of theft.
Also, yes, it is true, more logical types do not care so much about artists' egos, or any attempts to fabricate moral high ground from thin air.
@@crowe6961
though thats not what im talking about here, almost no artist will intentionally poison ai (most hardly know how ai works), and i feel like the law would be against the hacking and intruding thing more than poisoning the ai (we still dont have enough ai laws)
Just because you think something is free or open does not mean its just usable for everything, for example, watching youtube, you pay by watching ads, google gets money from selling your data and more ads, spotify makes you pay with a subscription or ads (with less quality btw).
you can use images you see online for research or non profit purposes but
companies cant, copyright exists (unless you use royalty free stuff, even then you gotta credit)
in this case the companies are the ones training ai with "public" data, they just bend the rules by saying "oh but this is open and on the internet, why cant we use it like normal people?" but you gotta know companies and normal people just looking at things are not the same
especially when companies monetize the ai models and dont atleast credit artists
even artists go at each other for "stealing" or taking "inspiration" from others
just look at the music industry, and plagarism, schools litteraly teach you not to plagarize because its illegal (yet this same argument could apply there, like "why not? its not monitized, its just for educational purposes".
2022 : Ai is stealing artist's artworks !
2024 : Artists are stealing Ai artworks !
Artists played uno reverse 😂
Je n'aurai jamais dû regarder cette vidéo.
Maintenant en plus de pleins d'autres choses, j'ai ça à faire absolument!
(Cette palette de couleur est parfaite pour quelque chose que j'essaye de faire depuis un moment et je rajouterai juste des tons de roses/rouges voir vert clair/jaune pâle) mais c'est trop beau et génial ce qu'ils ont fait! Sa m'inspire trop et c'est limite insupportable car je n'ai pas le temps dans l'immédiat mais je vais en proposer une version aussi à ma manière!
More than destroying, to me it looks like artists used this as reference to make something their own.
Who says artists can't get inspired by AI? in my opinion if AI will not be stopped, using it to get new ideas to try yourself is the best use people can give to it, never trying to copy or replicate what it throws at you.
After all AI can't see beauty.
i kinda dislike this trend? youre drawing fanart of AI basically, and it perpetuates the idea that its ok to steal art with the AI and then redraw it as part of your process which is honestly really yucky ew
"Ugh, I feel so yucky letting AI inspire this awesome art I'm producing.."
thats. . . . actually perfectly fine. i mean if you are going to say thats wrong, then you have to fight anything related to popculture art, or fanart.
🤨wtf? If getting inspiration from other art is fine, then why is getting inspiration from a mashup of art not fine? It doesn’t matter that the art is stolen in this situation because you’re not USING the stolen art, you’re just looking at it. AI art is obviously a bad thing, but getting inspired is never something that is bad.
This is why just because you could draw should'nt mean your an artist. Self implement creativity should be practical
@@kutchiii9481 Anything can be inspiration to someone, nothing wrong with that. Shaming that is crazy
Ai could never be human
yeah obviously
4:39 i saw the two cute things in the background
The artist is on fire!!! Their roasting AI!!!!
Yeah human arts is incredible