Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login
The John Byrne Forum
Byrne Robotics > The John Byrne Forum << Prev Page of 5 Next >>
Topic: AI Art Post ReplyPost New Topic
Author
Message
John Byrne
Avatar
Grumpy Old Guy

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 132580
Posted: 26 June 2023 at 5:11pm | IP Logged | 1 post reply

…no Studebaker love?

•••

Aside from the fact that those look nothing like Studebakers, how many times have I asked Forum members not to play that card?

sigh

Back to Top profile | search
 
Michael Roberts
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 20 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 14825
Posted: 26 June 2023 at 7:01pm | IP Logged | 2 post reply


 QUOTE:
 Michael, your statements are regarding Artificial Intelligence as a technology where Dave’s and my comments are specific to AI art. For now, there is a difference between the two designations.

I’d suggest that is a distinction without a difference. 


 QUOTE:
As I understand it, generating art leverages a small part within the scope of Artificial Intelligence as a technology. The Manhattan Project comparison to AI art generation falls short by quite a distance, but is perhaps appropriate for machine intelligence and reason.

In a world that relies on visual media for information, weaponizing AI art generation is an inevitability. And that’s just in the ways we can think of now. We won’t be able to understand the full capabilities and impact of AI until it’s too late to put the genie back in the bottle. 
Back to Top profile | search
 
Rodrigo castellanos
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 03 July 2012
Location: Uruguay
Posts: 1483
Posted: 29 June 2023 at 1:27am | IP Logged | 3 post reply

For the record, I think AI art is crap. 

And the whole thing has a "Revenge of the Nerds" stench, giving tech people the idea that they can be creative without doing any of the work. Something that has clearly been on their left leaning brain (not in the political sense, obviously). 

They control 90% of the world, but they couldn't write or draw their ideal episode of Battlestar Galactica until now. They still can't, but this is the try.

It won't work, at least in the way they expect.

But... in the context of this particular series, I think it was a good idea for the intro. An idea that was obviously conceived by creative people, just executed with AI.

You would think the tech geniuses would find a way to end monotonous jobs or inequality, but no. Their goal is to take the creative jobs apparently. 

Talented potential writers and illustrators that work a barista day job are some kind of "elite" that needs to get pushed off their high horse when you hear these "AI Experts" talk.

Sad!

  


Edited by Rodrigo castellanos on 29 June 2023 at 1:32am
Back to Top profile | search
 
Conrad Teves
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 28 January 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 2195
Posted: 13 July 2023 at 9:58pm | IP Logged | 4 post reply

The lure of AI as applied to corporate greed (related to the SAG/AFTRA strike):

"In a statement about the strike, the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers (AMPTP) said that its proposal included “a groundbreaking AI proposal that protects actors’ digital likenesses for SAG-AFTRA members.”"

The studio proposal to background actors for use in AI art was to pay them one day's pay for a scan of their likeness (now owned by the studio), which the studio would then get to use forever for free without consent.


Uh huh.
Back to Top profile | search | www e-mail
 
Rodrigo castellanos
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 03 July 2012
Location: Uruguay
Posts: 1483
Posted: 18 July 2023 at 11:27am | IP Logged | 5 post reply

I agree with the actors' position regarding their digital image and such, but why does it suddenly fall under the "AI" category?

"AI" is becoming a meaningless buzzword (surprise, I know). Nobody said Luke in THE MANDALORIAN was AI, nor Leia in RISE OF SKYWALKER and such. 

They were digital special effects, not even using deepfake technology (which also isn't AI).

Large Language Models and image generators such as Midjourney or DALL-E fall into the "AI" category but they also really ought not to. There's no "intelligence" there, at all.

When this gets regulated and the "AI" can no longer mix-n'-match existing stuff without accountability this whole thing will be over, IMHO. 

Kudos to the actors and especially the writers for taking a stand. But what we call "AI" these days will be as meaningless a term as "metaverse" and "cryptocurrency" sooner than later.



Back to Top profile | search
 
Conrad Teves
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 28 January 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 2195
Posted: 18 July 2023 at 1:52pm | IP Logged | 6 post reply

>>Large Language Models and image generators such as Midjourney or DALL-E fall into the "AI" category but they also really ought not to. There's no "intelligence" there, at all.<<

All of these use neural networks, which is as AI as AI gets.
For anyone who missed how these work, 3 Blue 1 Brown has a nice primer video assuming no previous knowledge: Link

As to what you are defining "intelligence" as, I have no idea what you are suggesting would qualify.
Back to Top profile | search | www e-mail
 
Michael Roberts
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 20 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 14825
Posted: 18 July 2023 at 2:27pm | IP Logged | 7 post reply


 QUOTE:
I agree with the actors' position regarding their digital image and such, but why does it suddenly fall under the "AI" category?

Because of deepfakes.


 QUOTE:
"AI" is becoming a meaningless buzzword (surprise, I know). Nobody said Luke in THE MANDALORIAN was AI, nor Leia in RISE OF SKYWALKER and such. 

They were digital special effects, not even using deepfake technology (which also isn't AI).

They did use deepfake technology for Luke in THE BOOK OF BOBA FETT, however.

The "deep" in deepfake comes from deep learning. ML does fall under AI.


 QUOTE:
Large Language Models and image generators such as Midjourney or DALL-E fall into the "AI" category but they also really ought not to. There's no "intelligence" there, at all.

Again, ML falls under AI. Perhaps you are thinking of AGI (artificial general intelligence) or what used to be called "Strong AI".


 QUOTE:
But what we call "AI" these days will be as meaningless

What we call AI? If you study AI in school, you cover topics like neural networks and machine learning, the things you insist aren't AI. Anyone going into AI expecting talking robots will be disappointed by having to spend a lot of time on linear algebra and eigenvectors.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Oliver Denker
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 18 August 2018
Location: Germany
Posts: 216
Posted: 22 July 2023 at 8:10pm | IP Logged | 8 post reply

That's coming out when you tell Mid-journey ""1940s bat mobile, comic book style by John Byrne"

Back to Top profile | search
 
Oliver Denker
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 18 August 2018
Location: Germany
Posts: 216
Posted: 22 July 2023 at 8:11pm | IP Logged | 9 post reply

Back to Top profile | search
 
Rebecca Jansen
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 February 2018
Location: Canada
Posts: 4635
Posted: 29 April 2024 at 6:06pm | IP Logged | 10 post reply

I wonder if that other John Byrne artist is getting in there on some or all of those results?

I used to be able to draw but it would be a frustrating/sad struggle nowadays... I wonder, could I input all my old art and direct AI to create new things based upon just it? That could be a good use of AI for someone in my position.

Edited by Rebecca Jansen on 29 April 2024 at 6:08pm
Back to Top profile | search | www
 
Conrad Teves
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 28 January 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 2195
Posted: 30 April 2024 at 12:11am | IP Logged | 11 post reply

Rebecca>>I wonder, could I input all my old art and direct AI to create new things based upon just it? <<

Sure, but that's the difference between cooking and ordering out.  You aren't really learning much by ordering out, and in the case of AI art, your work is being recombobulated by something that doesn't actually understand what it's looking at.  So just from an art appreciation standpoint, you're getting less than you would commissioning an artist, who makes actual choices you can try to understand.

You can learn to cook by practicing, studying, and puzzling out why things went amiss.  Same with drawing.

I'd encourage you to just pick up a pencil or brush or stylus and make mistakes. The journey is worth it.
Back to Top profile | search | www e-mail
 
Bob Harvey
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 19 November 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 222
Posted: 30 April 2024 at 12:33am | IP Logged | 12 post reply

Three of those cars look like they're driving backwards. I guess my mind is mistaking textures for speed lines. 

"In the style of" works a lot better for artists with exagerrated styles, I've found. I've gotten Ai to turn out sad knock-offs of Mignola, Charles Burns, Chris Ware, but with more conventional cartoonists it just gives a generic comic book look.
Back to Top profile | search
 

<< Prev Page of 5 Next >>
  Post ReplyPost New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login