A Poll On The Use Of AI Art In TAS Products

[Condottiere]

This is just a symptom.

That's why an informed consumer can choose on what he spends his money on, which supports any ethics or moral code he plans to follow.

 

[Arkathan]

ok how bout this. i went to google and asked Do smat tvs use ai. here is the reply, please check it yourself.
Yes, modern smart TVs increasingly utilize artificial intelligence (AI) to enhance picture quality, optimize viewing experiences, and integrate with smart home ecosystems.

You fail to realize that there is a difference between using AI for mundane things or tech improvements - and using AI to "create art"
None of the examples you claimed to be mike drop moments amount to ANTHING with respect to the topic at hand, which is the use of AI to create products that should be created by people.
You don't provide previews to your work, so your "art" isn't a draw. People look at your product description and decide WHOLLY on that whether to buy your products... which means two things: People don't initially buy your products for the art; and people see the AI creation tag and may avoid the product.

 

[Vormaerin]

There are lots of digital tools that make tasks easier. I have friends in business who use generative AI to create datasets, for instance. They know the AI will get 10 or 20% of the answers wrong, but they know what they are doing and it is faster for them to throw out the bad data and add the right answers the AI didn't get than to generate the whole thing themselves. I am sure that at some point, Generative tools will be a legit part of an artist's tool kit. But right now, they are just theft of other peoples' work.

As far as RPG products go, I'm paying the person for their creativity and effort, especially with PDFs. If they are using AI art, how do I know if they are using AI writing? Why I am paying them to prompt an AI when I can do that myself if I wanted that? So even with clean learning sets (Which don't exist), I wouldn't be interested in buying it. It is not a product I need or want.

 

[Hermit King]

The problem is not AI, but the unethical use of AI. AI should not be taking jobs from people, unless those jobs are really dangerous.
AI should not be a cheat button.

Wait....so an artist picks up a brush and makes a work of art, correct? my brush is words and concepts. are you not seeking to take my job away? is my art not just as worthy of being called art as bob ross? so my palete is words his is a brush and happy little trees. unless you are saying i am stealing art from an artist, which i am certainly am not. you can take this pick and tell me what artist did i rip off?

No my art is not stealing from any artist. if you are just saying i am taking business from an artist, well dont take business from me MY art is just as worthy of being called art as his. play around with ai yourself, you will see its not easy. you have to get the words just right, then if your lucky for every 15 pics you make, maybe you will get one you like. then you have to crop, remove backgrounds, clean it up, color balence it to your other pics used in a publication, resize it, meld it seemlessly into your story. i am an artist but i use words in plave of a brush!

 

[Sigtrygg]

So back to movies and TV programs that make extensive use of generative AI in their CGI effects - some on these boards are willing to boycott small publishers but only one so far has said they do not watch TV (not sure this extends to movies and web streaming services such as Netflix and prime etc.)
To boycott small publishers while still being a consumer of the main players who happily use this technology just strikes me as unjust. If enough boycott the big players something may be achieved.

 

[Hermit King]

You fail to realize that there is a difference between using AI for mundane things or tech improvements - and using AI to "create art"
None of the examples you claimed to be mike drop moments amount to ANTHING with respect to the topic at hand, which is the use of AI to create products that should be created by people.
You don't provide previews to your work, so your "art" isn't a draw. People look at your product description and decide WHOLLY on that whether to buy your products... which means two things: People don't initially buy your products for the art; and people see the AI creation tag and may avoid the product.

So in essence what you are saying is YOU and you alone have the right to choose what ai is aceptable and what is not? AI is ai where is there a difference? is it because you think i am taking a job from an artist? i wont name name but i knew an artist that would take a picture of a door or a paneled wall. he would highlight the grain to bring out pictures of dogs and cats etc. is he an artist? how bout the entire genre of abstract art where the painter just throws pain on a canvas, is this art? then we have a gorilla that paints pictures, i have even seen a duck thats feet were stuck in paint and it walks across canvas, is this art? the world is full of many different art styles so why can my not be just as valid as some random primate? Now i strongly believe that the art be labeled as AI then let people decide what they want to support. but thats not what anti AI'ers want to do. you want to remove my art from the landscape because YOU dont agree with it. that seems a bit Narcissistic to me. I dont mean to sound offensive to you it just seems that people should have the right to sit at the table if they want to.

 

[Sigtrygg]

But right now, they are just theft of other peoples' work.

Where is the evidence of stolen work? Why have there been no prosecutions for IP theft?
What if the AI trainers only used "ethically" sourced art. Is there such a thing as art becoming public domain just like books?

As far as RPG products go, I'm paying the person for their creativity and effort, especially with PDFs. If they are using AI art, how do I know if they are using AI writing? Why I am paying them to prompt an AI when I can do that myself if I wanted that? So even with clean learning sets (Which don't exist), I wouldn't be interested in buying it. It is not a product I need or want.

How do you feel about your posts on a forum like this being taken and used as the basis for adventures, supplements, even whole settings and game lines, and you never so much as get a mention?
I ask because I know for a fact this has happened to stuff I have posted online.
But.
I only post stuff online for the fun of it, and if others want to use any of it good luck to them, it ceases to be mine as soon as it hits the interwebs.

It has been a debate for years, paywalls and subscription for access to the interwebs or open access for all.

What is more insidious to me is companies you buy movies, books and the like from who then claim you are only leasing and you don't own.

I use cloud storage but I don't like it, I always want a copy or three on my hard drives and external storage. What happens when social credit becomes the norm and the government decides you no longer meet the criteria to access your cloud storage? Apple have already caved in to the UK government over encryption.

 

[swordtart]

Back in the day people would have used clip art or barely skirt copyright infringement in low value work. If you only make a few hundred pounds on your product then it is harsh to expect you to give all that to the artist who drew the picture of the dog with a gun on page 4.

And "real" artists rip off real artists as well, they just call them pastiches or works "inspired by..."

 

[Arkathan]

So in essence what you are saying is YOU and you alone have the right to choose what ai is aceptable and what is not? AI is ai where is there a difference? is it because you think i am taking a job from an artist? i wont name name but i knew an artist that would take a picture of a door or a paneled wall. he would highlight the grain to bring out pictures of dogs and cats etc. is he an artist? how bout the entire genre of abstract art where the painter just throws pain on a canvas, is this art? then we have a gorilla that paints pictures, i have even seen a duck thats feet were stuck in paint and it walks across canvas, is this art? the world is full of many different art styles so why can my not be just as valid as some random primate? Now i strongly believe that the art be labeled as AI then let people decide what they want to support. but thats not what anti AI'ers want to do. you want to remove my art from the landscape because YOU dont agree with it. that seems a bit Narcissistic to me. I dont mean to sound offensive to you it just seems that people should have the right to sit at the table if they want to.

No. You are just resorting to name calling after being told that no art is better than cheating.
You are perfectly free to cheat on art.
More than half of the respondents to this poll are free to avoid products that use AI to make images.
It's already a niche field, you are free to further reduce the prospective audience.

That hippo that paints enjoys the treats it gets from nuzzling paper.
The computer just inconveniences electrons, and feels nothing.

 

[Arkathan]

... then if your lucky for every 15 pics you make, maybe you will get one you like...

But you didn't make the image. You had an algorithm sample the works of others to produce an amalgam.
Does the AI pay a licensing fee to the artists who created the original models or images it sampled? No.

Again, you are free to do what you like.
We are free to ignore it.

 

[Vormaerin]

Where is the evidence of stolen work? Why have there been no prosecutions for IP theft?
What if the AI trainers only used "ethically" sourced art. Is there such a thing as art becoming public domain just like books?

How do you feel about your posts on a forum like this being taken and used as the basis for adventures, supplements, even whole settings and game lines, and you never so much as get a mention?
I ask because I know for a fact this has happened to stuff I have posted online.
But.
I only post stuff online for the fun of it, and if others want to use any of it good luck to them, it ceases to be mine as soon as it hits the interwebs.

It has been a debate for years, paywalls and subscription for access to the interwebs or open access for all.

What is more insidious to me is companies you buy movies, books and the like from who then claim you are only leasing and you don't own.

I use cloud storage but I don't like it, I always want a copy or three on my hard drives and external storage. What happens when social credit becomes the norm and the government decides you no longer meet the criteria to access your cloud storage? Apple have already caved in to the UK government over encryption.

There are plenty of lawsuits going on. The AI people are claiming that they can't exist without stealing, basically. So far, the only outcome is that there is a ruling that since you didn't create the art, you can't copyright it yourself. There hasn't been any resolution of the dispute between artists and AI that I am aware of.

Ideas can't be copyrighted. Someone copypasting my exact wording is a potential copyright violation, though I can't imagine I'd bother being concerned about it, which is why I don't register any copyright on it.

People have made AI that is very clearly copies of Ian Snead's work. You can even tell an AI to make it in the style of an existing artist. I'm not going to pay for that.

I don't get to set the rules for society. I do get to set the rules for my own spending. I will buy things made by writers and artists. I will not buy things made by prompters. Other people can make other decisions. That's out of my control.

 

[MasterGwydion]

So back to movies and TV programs that make extensive use of generative AI in their CGI effects - some on these boards are willing to boycott small publishers but only one so far has said they do not watch TV (not sure this extends to movies and web streaming services such as Netflix and prime etc.)
To boycott small publishers while still being a consumer of the main players who happily use this technology just strikes me as unjust. If enough boycott the big players something may be achieved.

I do not even own a tv.

 

[MasterGwydion]

As far as anything I post to this site that I create? It is open source and can be used with My permission by any person.

 

[Arkathan]

As far as anything I post to this site that I create? It is open source and can be used with My permission by any person.

After some things happened on another site, I had to start adding, as long as you don't claim it as your own work, use it non-commercially, and do not include it in any media format that people must pay for.

 

[Sigtrygg]

I do not even own a tv.

But you do have a computer, so you have access to streaming services, YouTube etc. or are you telling me you don't watch modern sci fi series or movies via your computer?

 

[Arkathan]

Careful not to conflate CGI with generative AI. Star Trek the Next Generation and Babylon 5 used CGI shots a lot... Lots of the shots were recycled to save money. That was not a trained AI. That was rendered models that the franchise owned, and all involved were compensated.
Whenever I click on a You Tube video and recognize that it isn't a trailer or concept video, but a vehicle for AI, it gets shut off.

 

[Sigtrygg]

Modern TV shows and movies use generative AI in their CGI. This technology was not used for B5 or DS9 (and it shows) because it didn't exist, both were 1990s.
So I take it you do not watch modern sci fi and fantasy on TV, streaming, or cinema; then there are the re-mastered versions on DVD, bluray and streaming.

 

[Arkathan]

Nope. Currently streaming B5 again on Tubi, because it beats the new stuff. I do cringe at the close up of the guy in a space suit wrangling cargo on the intro, though.

 

[Condottiere]

I use fifty five inch televisions as large monitors.

 

[MasterGwydion]

But you do have a computer, so you have access to streaming services, YouTube etc. or are you telling me you don't watch modern sci fi series or movies via your computer?

I do have access to streaming services, but not much has been put out in recent years worth watching. I may start paying for them again if I find out they are putting out decent content again.