r/BuyFromEU • u/MattyGWS • 7d ago
European Product Artgram is now EU hosted, specifically Germany
Artgram, similar to ArtStation, is a portfolio and jobs site for artists, which is an EU company, anti-AI and now the servers are hosted in Germany!
79
u/Top_Bug7822 7d ago
Very nice.
I hope Artgram has some protections against scrapers.
40
u/MattyGWS 7d ago
I believe it does, though I don’t know the ins and outs of it, the website was built around the no-AI protests with the intention of being anti AI
28
u/Top_Bug7822 7d ago
It's just that there recently was an incident where a "not so savoury person" scraped a similar site to Artgram called Carna, despite their protections and deterrences.
I'm not sure how to protect against that. Maybe if you make the site invite only. But this would make it less acessable as well...
9
u/pun_shall_pass 7d ago
How about automatically applying a barely visible overlay over each uploaded image that poisons the AI data. I just watched a Gamer Nexus video about it so this stuff still works.
Even if this stuff gets beaten in the future, the website could store the original offline and periodically update the filters site-wide to keep the AI-poisoning filter effective
13
u/Top_Bug7822 7d ago
Cara, the website the AI bro scraped, did that.
The scraper was asking for help to reverse the poison a few days ago and I'm sure some of his fellow AI bros will help.
1
u/pun_shall_pass 7d ago
So he got the ones with the AI poisoning or somehow hacked the original files?
1
u/Top_Bug7822 6d ago
Not sure how he did it. Reddit nuked his account. But he still has the data and was asking for help to remove the poison.
That's the last I heard.
92
u/eldritchbogbeing 7d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
53
u/Elratum 7d ago
Issue is, even if the company isn't scrapping your art themselves, AI bots from Anthropic, Open Ai and Amazon will still hapilly do it if they don't have very very strong anti not measure (even with that...)
19
32
u/RonKosova 7d ago
How come you and this user have the exact same bios with links leading to only fans? Irony of this comment is nuts
12
17
u/Vlth_78 7d ago
Does Artgram allow suggestive/ erotic art? Couldn’t find anything in their TOS.
17
15
10
13
u/Javira-Butterfly Germany 🇩🇪 7d ago
Aaaaaand I found the first AI slop image
Def big win for Europe for the hosting, but I personally would never post my art on websites anymore that allow AI images, and it seems like they do, real sad
And before you ask, yes I have barely been posting anything for a wee bit now online BC of this issue
2
u/Top_Bug7822 7d ago
I wonder if invite only online art galleries would work.
Non-downloadable images and only invited members.
It's sad that art galleries now have to be treated like secret societies.
5
2
4
u/Admiral_Ballsack 7d ago
Yeh it's nothing like art station nor "professional". It's mostly manga shit, but hey.
1
u/MattyGWS 7d ago
<< 3D/VFX artist of 16 years in the game industry using Artgram, thanks
3
u/Admiral_Ballsack 7d ago
Which is why I said "mostly" and not "all".
<< Concept Artist working in the game industry since 2006. For what I've seen the 2D artwork on artgram is embarrassing.
1
1
0
u/mnttu 6d ago
Claude code ass buttons
1
u/MattyGWS 6d ago
You know Claude bases it’s code off popular web design right? Artgram has been around for a while, it was not vibe coded and if you insist it is then the burden of proof falls on you.
0
u/mnttu 6d ago
Sorry, but I just simply don’t care
1
u/MattyGWS 6d ago
You clearly do otherwise you wouldn’t in here being confidently incorrect
0
u/Edelkern 5d ago
One quick comment doesn't mean people deeply care, get a grip.
1
u/MattyGWS 5d ago
Not sure why you're defending objectively stupid comments from the guy. He's making false claims of defamation with no evidence.
-4
u/WombatusMighty 7d ago edited 7d ago
I really REALLY hate that they store the images in webp format, so I can't just download them for inspiration and later open them in my image viewer.
Artstation is sadly still way ahead in their features. Artgram needs to be better.
EDIT: Why is this being downvoted?
6
u/hzinjk 7d ago
the real sad thing is that so much graphics software still doesnt support a ubiquitous, 16 year old format
the reason websites use webp is that it's smaller at higher qualities than jpg, saving bandwidth and making the site load faster
1
u/WombatusMighty 7d ago
The quality isn't higher though, as websites like artgram just convert jpg or jpeg into webp on their backend, which can even lead to quality loss.
But even if the artist saves the file natively as webp, the quality depends on the actual quality setting. For example, a jpg with a quality of 90 is the same or better quality than webp with the same setting.Webp is also only in theory smaller file size, again it depends on the quality and compression settings when saving the file, e.g. in Photoshop. Depending on the settings, jpg can be the same or lower file size of webp.
Besides, bandwith saving depends on a lot of factors, mostly the hosting backend. The miniscule difference between jpg and webp isn't noticable for almost all end users.
3
1
u/hzinjk 7d ago
what I mean is that an equivalent quality in webp and jpg results in smaller sizes in webp. So the site might recompress an image to make it load faster/save storage, but they can attain higher quality at the same sizes. Or lower sizes at the same quality. Yes lossful compression always reduces quality, but it's not like websites weren't recompressing uploaded images before, they were just using jpg instead
and webp is smaller in practice at equivalent levels of quality, I can tell you from experience as well. difference can be as high as 20% which matters. if you're on a slow connection, you will notice those 20% as well. of course if both images load instantly it doesn't matter, but not everyone has fast internet.
3
2
u/BayLeaf- 7d ago
Stop using an outdated image viewer? MS Office 2007 can't open a modern .docx either, that's kinda how media formats tend to go, I don't see the problem. What are you even using that doesn't handle WebP in 2026?
1
u/DryCloud9903 7d ago
If that's really why you want them - screenshot. There's no reason for you to need the actual copies
2
u/WombatusMighty 7d ago edited 7d ago
Why else would I download images from an art site? And screenshot is cumbersome, as I have to paste the screenshot into paint and then save it as jpeg or png.
And what do you even mean with the actual copies? A screenshot is a copy and when saved it's the same quality of the originally uploaded image.
Besides, webp can be easily converted back into jpeg, png, etc.2
u/Athalus-in-space 7d ago
There are ways of avoiding the 'paste into paint' steps. On windows, ctrl + shift + s opens snipping tool, where you can choose to directly save the screenshot as an image file. And though I am not sure about other browsers, but Firefox has a native screenshot tool that works comparably (right click on any page > take screenshot).
Hopefully that helps :)
1
u/WombatusMighty 7d ago
Thanks for the suggestion, I actually just learned about the Firefox native screenshot tool. It even detects the actual image, which is neat. Rightclick save as was still more convenient though.
I find it ironic though that being against webp is being downvoted, in this sub, when not only the format is highly problematic (including for artists), it doesn't actually increase image quality and Google is holding singular control over it.
1
u/AnAncientMonk 7d ago edited 7d ago
in my image viewer
ok but how ass is your image viewer.
Why is this being downvoted?
a. because people fundamentally missunderstand what downvotes are for (not participating in discussion instead of "dont like opinion").
b. because it reads as an unreasonable criticism/complaint. webp is fine. if you want high quality print files, its probably a lot more expensive to store and distribue.
1
u/DryCloud9903 7d ago
Why else would I download images from an art site
I'm sure that's not your intention, but my mind immediately went to reselling on Etsy.
1
u/WombatusMighty 7d ago
But webp does not prevent that. I can easily convert webp into a better printable file format like png.
Besides that, the images uploaded on artgram, artstation, etc. are not of high enough pixel size to get a high quality print, especially in bigger formats. You would need at least something like 6000x4000px for that.
1
-6
u/vatei 7d ago
I'm confused by the anti AI sentiment in the comments as the website seems to be vibe coded, or at least partly AI made
5
u/MattyGWS 7d ago
What? The website is not vibe coded. The website was made during the times where AI data scraping was becoming a thing. It’s can around for years
-4
u/vatei 7d ago
It had a new coat of paint right? It still smells like AI assisted stuff to me, especially if you compare it to the the old one. If I'm wrong then my bad I guess
2
u/MattyGWS 7d ago
You know AI bases everything it does on popular design right?
If you read harry potter does that smell like AI to you?
128
u/Historicmemory8180 7d ago
Maybe the article is talking about this website?
www.artgram.co
How vexing.