- Mar 7, 2020
- 421
- 397
if it's ai assisted, shame on her. As any fan, I'd rather my followed artists to take a break, even a long one, than cheat their way out a monthly batch.
I've never seen an AI provide these. Can you guys please cool your jets, at least until this pack releases?My amazing patrons will get:
(...)
step-by-step images
PSD file
full coloring video process
Ripping it off is the harsher way to say that the AI "learning the information it was given by the user". I see no reason to disagreebecause AI models just ripping it off
Yeah I agree. Because of this we do have some difficulties with saying is it real or not like with recent pic of Dandon.Ripping it off is the harsher way to say that the AI "learning the information it was given by the user". I see no reason to disagree![]()
Identification AI is useful in these cases.
You can try putting older images and see the results.
which site is that? i tried aiornot.com but doesn't look like yoursUm I honestly can't say is it AI generated or not. But I checked those identify AI with last pack
Hive moderation. Aiornot I used too, and well it more divisive with her art it was like 50/50 (I checked 5 or 6 works, so it's pretty small number).which site is that? i tried aiornot.com but doesn't look like yours
You really can't trust AI image detectors. How they're built will always make them lag way behind the latest generation models. So in order to perform well, they throw many false positives. Additionally, they can easily be tricked by adding an overlay of noise which subtly alters the image.Um I honestly can't say is it AI generated or not. But I checked those identify AI with last pack and well but there's a catch we have step by step procces of process first pic, I didn't check video process but I have question if you do an AI generated art will you be putting an extra effort to do a step by step procces of creation if you just generated it by words?
So my answer is might be just trivial it might be some filter she used that gave it AI feel. For example I put Dandon's previous Bubble picture (which also gave me AI vibes btw but it is not) you see that there some filter plus some post work but it really makes art look different.
Edit: I also wanted to add that I saw a lot of AI art that looked liked Dandond Fuga's work, Cutesexyrobbuts Sakmichan and etc, because AI models just ripping it off, so that's confusion might be understandable.
View attachment 2801192 View attachment 2801193 View attachment 2801199 View attachment 2801200
To be fair, most legal experts seem to think this is going to fall into "ripping it off" in terms of copyright law, once any of those cases make their way through the courts. Hence most of the established companies keeping their machine learning art-gen models private (e.g. Microsoft, Google) and Steam banning games with machine learning art assets. It's unlikely for the courts to count machine learning as enough of a creative departure to not be in violation of fair use, as there is already a legal distinction between using an image as reference and blatantly violating copyrighted material (and a whole lot of grifters are using it for the latter).Ripping it off is the harsher way to say that the AI "learning the information it was given by the user". I see no reason to disagree![]()
Yeah, I get you. That's why I was sceptic with those detectors I didn't mention that but that was my intention. That's why I think Dandon if used AI it's for the either background or to play with it and she might liked some results but reworked it fully for her own.You really can't trust AI image detectors. How they're built will always make them lag way behind the latest generation models. So in order to perform well, they throw many false positives. Additionally, they can easily be tricked by adding an overlay of noise which subtly alters the image.