Would you play a visual novel with AI generated art? [Poll]

[baloneysammich]

Many argue that AI art counts as stolen, since AI uses and repurposes pieces of existing art without the permission of human artists.

The use of copyrighted material without permission as training material is a real issue for sure, but it's just not valid to say that AI "repurposes" pieces of existing art. Unless we consider a human artist trying to recreate the style of another human artist guilty of "repurposing" and theft as well. OK, some probably consider it "repurposing" and look down on it, but I can't imagine anyone would argue that the product is stolen or otherwise legally questionable.

If a model were trained completely on public domain art, there would be no real basis for moral outrage or legal uncertainty IMO. Don't get me wrong. From what I understand, we're already at a point where just a few images can allow reproducing an artist's style. So I can understand that contemporary artists who released anything under public domain before/without knowing about the capabilities of AI art generators might feel outraged. Nevermind if an artist transferred all rights to a work to a third party and that party allowed it to be used as training material. But machines have been supplanting human talent and skills for centuries. The fact that artistic talent has been spared so far (broadly speaking & AFAIK) doesn't make it special or sacred.

But IANAL, so for all I know there may be some laws in some jurisdictions, or international agreements, that protect artists and other creative types from emerging technologies.

 

[baloneysammich]

In that logic, you don't need to pay any stock images when you use them in your photo manipulation project.

False. Things are a bit more complicated when it comes to digital assets, but manipulating something and attempting to reproduce it are still two different things.

Imagine censored H images. A good artist can uncensor them by hand. With AI image generation tools one can use

You must be registered to see the links

to do the same, potentially on a much larger scale. But both are manipulation of an existing image. In neither case could the person claim the product as his own legally, at least AFAIK.

But if a skilled artist made an uncensored reproduction from scratch, even while looking at the original the whole time, the product would be his own. Not that anyone would bother doing something like this of course. Regardless, the controversial aspect of AI image generation (txt2image generally) isn't even this extreme, yet it's still closer to this than using a program to modify an image.

 

[Deleted member 5732714]

False. Things are a bit more complicated when it comes to digital assets, but manipulating something and attempting to reproduce it are still two different things.

Imagine censored H images. A good artist can uncensor them by hand. With AI image generation tools one can use

You must be registered to see the links

to do the same, potentially on a much larger scale. But both are manipulation of an existing image. In neither case could the person claim the product as his own legally, at least AFAIK.

But if a skilled artist reproduced a censored image from scratch, even while looking at the original the whole time, the product would be his own. Not that anyone would bother to do that, practically speaking. Take digital tools out of the equation, and imagine an artist began a piece by tracing someone else's work on paper. Even the final product of that would be his own legally (again AFAIK). AI image generation isn't even as extreme as these things, yet it still has more in common with them than with using a program to modify an image.

Well, not false.
Just learn have AI generated images works.
AI generated art is more like you have a billions of photos in your photoshop, and your outputs manipulation already existing things.

Examples for you. AI even stealing the signatures.

Spoiler: Examples

You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.

 

[baloneysammich]

AI generated art is more like you have a billions of photos in your photoshop, and your outputs manipulation already existing things.

Examples for you. AI even stealing the signatures.

Nope.

The AI has been trained on lots of images with signatures, copyright notices and other handwriting or text. So in some cases it tries to reproduce those "features." But because it has no idea of what they represent and also exactly because it's not manipulating or carbon copying anything, it produces squiggles and gibberish that only resemble handwriting/text. Probably AI could be trained to reproduce signatures, with enough detail and variation to fool people. But it would still be akin to a person forging a signature by hand, not through digital manipulation or duplication.

 

[Deleted member 5732714]

Nope.

The AI has been trained on lots of images with signatures. So in some cases it tries to reproduce that "feature." But because it really has no idea of what the feature represents and also exactly because it's not manipulating or carbon copying anything, it produces squiggles that only resemble handwriting/text. Probably AI could be trained to reproduce signatures, with enough detail and variation to fool people. But it would still be akin to a person forging a signature by hand, not through digital manipulation or duplication.

Well, another useless "nope".

AI is not creating something new from "scratch".
It's using already exist ones to create.

And it's not a problem, because this is visual art, and you can create visuals in every technique.
From traditional painting to digital painting, fractal art to AI generated art.
The real problem is they are using images all over the internet without any permission or any deal.

We can also use singer's voice like, for example "Taylor Swift" to create some soundtrack for games.
But we can't, why?
Because music industry has its own stars.

 

[baloneysammich]

AI is not creating something new from "scratch".
It's using already exist ones to create.

Sure. Likewise when a human artist creates something he's not working from scratch either, really. Many things, but notably much of the art he has been exposed to, influence the final product every bit as much as his artistic/technical skill. Much of anime is artistically indistinguishable, at least to the untrained eye. Does this mean the people who produced it are not artists, or are not worthy of claiming ownership of their work?

Don't get me wrong. If all human artistic creation ceased while AI art generation proceeded to advance, right now I'm not convinced we would see any more real artistic innovation; just greater ease to create better and better reproductions and interpretations of what already exists. My one and only real point here is that trying to classify AI-produced art as mere repurposing/manipulation/copying/duplication is a gross oversimplification (at best).

The real problem is they are using images all over the internet without any permission or any deal.

Yup. I expressed my agreement to that in the very first sentence of my response to FreakBunny.

Regardless, technology like this can be questionable even when there is a deal, or the usage is legally justified. I read something a while back about voice actors. Some studio(s) apparently used their rights to recordings in concert with digital tools to reproduce actors' voices. I want to say it was used to produce "idle chatter" for some game or another. And yet, even though this was presumably completely legal based on the studios' ownership of the recordings and possibly also the details of VAs' contracts, it's impossible not to sympathize with VAs here. Not to mention consider what this entails for the VA industry.

And yet, it's not the first time new technology has interrupted an industry to some peoples' detriment, and it won't be the last. At the end of the day I just don't see why it should be regarded as any different to industrialized textile production largely destroying the cottage textile industry.

 

[Tobi/Chaos]

Who rly cares if game was made by AI or Human?...
These braindead fuck are tbh. pretty funny "NOOO ITS AI GENERATED ITS NOT AN ART ITS GARBAGE BUUUUU"

Over 50% internet activity is Bot activity...

Maybe not Visual Novel cuz i hate Dialogue clickers, but game with AI generated art is not a problem.
tbh. AI Generated art can be better than 90% of "Artists" xD Maybe thats why so many ppl cry about it...
Computer is better than them

Well if game is good its good, no matter its AI or Human made.

 

[Darvlinig]

I'll just leave these "no harmony, store brand cheese" generated pictures here.

View attachment 2354188 View attachment 2354189 View attachment 2354190 View attachment 2354191

Technology is advancing. If you don't like it, stay mad

Based and redpilled

 

[a1fox3]

If it is just about the "art" then no, but if it has a good to great story then yes.
The story and good to great art is what I look for.

 

[DuniX]

Let's be perfectly honest here, if a game like Corruption of Champions had AI Generated Characters and Scenes with the full spectrum of combinations,genitals,fetishes and fur patterns they would lap it up.
You cannot stop the furries.
It is not a winnable fight.
They will build their own supercomputers with pirated training models.
The war and terrorism perpetrated by the Terminator Furs will eventually exterminate and enslave the dirty peasant "humarts"(human artists) that will be chained and made to draw and feed into the AI Models for their Disney Corporate Masters.

"Human artists" are the kind of dumb-dumbs that were progressive and enable this kind of insanity and encroachment of corporations into media.
What can be more Post-Modern, Socialist and Anti-Human Nihilism than the complete removal of human art?
What you think you are an individual with talent that has merit? That was over long ago.

 

[ogr blanc]

i fail to see why not. for one, you can find alot of badly translated stuff that reads worse than machine translation, then there are games with art so bad, you think they are so bad, its not a drawing, but some demonic scroll made to blind and maim.

finally, vast majority of the games are the exact same crap with the exact same premisse, but with diferent models.

in other words, we are already playing AI generated crap, its just that its made by humans.

 

[kintarodev]

If the final product offers remarkable aesthetic consistency, then yes. Such consistency is not something that is even common in nowadays products without any trace of AI - something I understand given that these are not products made by professionals - so a product that does offer such quality standards would be refreshing.

 

[Pervtron3000]

This is a piracy website for porn games, many of which themselves use repurposed animated gifs of porn stars and default rpgmaker assets.