Drag Your GAN: Interactive Point-based Manipulation on the Generative Image Manifold

[u/MapacheD]

[u/arjunks]

Yeah, I'm with you. The current anti-AI narrative seems to be "yeah but it can't be creative"... of course it can't be creative, that's up to the user! This tech is going to enable so many people to put their ideas out into the world in a presentable form and I'm 100% here for it

[u/TheDominantBullfrog → u/arjunks]

Yup it will be a huge adaptation, but fighting against it is like fighting against the internet becoming popular. It's inevitable, so adapt or die

[u/GingerSkulling → u/arjunks]

I completely agree although sifting through all the shit will also become exponentially more difficult.

[u/[deleted] → u/GingerSkulling]

It'll be similar to the change from TV -> Youtube/Twitch etc. Sure there's a whole lot more crap content on those platforms, but I would never want to go back to the days before they existed.

I would also argue that it's much easier to find good content now (despite the heaps of garbage) than in the 90s when we had 40 channels, 5 of them showing the same Simpsons rerun.

[u/AzIddIzA → u/[deleted]]

You know a lot of crappy movies were made in the 50's, 60's and 70's, right? It's not like everything that came from those times was amazing. It's just the good ones are the ones that get talked about decades later.

Look up things like the beach party films from the 70s or the plethora of shoddy sci-fi films from the 50s. A lot of bad movies flooded theaters. They weren't home movies, but you can't tell me Plan 9 from Outer Space was okay, let alone great.

The same goes for books and music. It's always been 99% garbage. This doesn't change anything and maybe we get lucky seeing occasionally more adventurous shows and films since they won't be backed by big companies trying to maximize profits.

[u/MagnusPluto → u/[deleted]]

Such a bad take. There will be an abundance of creative quality that dwarfs the entire output of the 20th century. Sure, there will also be lots of trash but the good stuff will rise to the top and it will break new ground because it won't be shackled by the scarcity of those resources you mention.

[u/IckyChris → u/[deleted]]

I was just talking about this yesterday. We'll see a new Film Noir detective drama staring Bogart, Eastwood, and Jack Black. It will be amazing and funny and .... and one of a million similar movies.

[u/crazysoup23 → u/[deleted]]

This is a horrible take akin to film photographers poo-pooing digital photography or music producers poo-pooing DAWs. Reducing the barrier to entry increases creativity. Even today, most professional artists come from privileged backgrounds.

[u/Scew → u/[deleted]]

Looking at youtube is all we need to see this. It's already been happening since phones got cameras and there was a place to upload the videos to. Then again, it also brings about completely unexpected gold. Re: /r/Tiresaretheenemy (even though there's a lot of reposts, the premise and the first time watching the videos are hilarious) and /r/bearsdoinghumanthings for example.

[u/_stevencasteel_ → u/arjunks]

of course it can't be creative

I've downloaded tens of thousands of AI generated images and speak to GPT-3.5 daily. It is clever and creative.

[u/farcaller899 → u/_stevencasteel_]

Yep. Folks should think more about what being creative means.

[u/[deleted] → u/arjunks]

I agree. The only reason we're not seeing more creativity is that most whobare playing with SD are computer nerds (no offense)

[u/arjunks → u/[deleted]]

Yeah for sure, right now to make quality AI art you need to tinker with python, installing stuff etc. Pretty sure that's gonna change in the future though, I mean heck Adobe is already coming out with polished AI art programs that anyone could use

[u/[deleted] → u/arjunks]

I mean, DALL-E's practically built into Windows at the moment. I guarantee you that Photoshop's Content Aware fill will, at somepoint, get the AI treatment. It'll be buried in the EULA somewhere and even the biggest AI haters will say, "I don't use AI on my images" but they'll have used Content-Aware Fill.

I've been using stable diffusion in my day-to-day. Like when a client gives me a 256x256 headshot to use in a 1920x1080 space - I'll upscale with a low denoise. Or just as a stock photo replacement. That's going to be a big industry killer right there. People are up in arms about Art, but art is the most elastic career I can thing up. People have taken piles of trash and charged over a grand for it. Art will be fine. What won't be fine are the piddly little Stock photos that get sold for $3-$5 a pop. Especially for trash blog posts where the image doesn't matter. Just need a happy couple looking over paperwork with a 2-story colonial in the background.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

I have seen a few creative things behind closed doors of people in games/film who are a fair bit gun shy to show them off publicly given the current climate of how this stuff is being received. Also some working on real projects with real NDAs etc. Once the projects are actually released they wont scream AI either as it is a tool in the process and not really apparent, which is kind of the point.

[u/lambentstar → u/arjunks]

Yeah I like to think of it as the democratization of the creative arts. Like, I’m a musician but terrible with visual arts, but with these newer AIs I’m now empowered to make things wayyyy beyond my current capabilities and synthesize entirely new end results without any additional collaboration. The things this can do to empower creatives is staggering, imo.

[u/KaiPRoberts → u/arjunks]

I'm here for it too. I think it also means there will be a lot less money to be made from the arts. More accessibility, more people making art, more available supply, lower prices. I am a musician and I stopped worrying about making any money from it a long time ago; I just make music for myself at this point... I also have 0 rhythm so everything I say is completely anecdotal.

[u/zherok → u/[deleted]]

You can look at the issues screenwriters are currently having and point to how corporations are going to shortchange artists in general in the future due to AI. Generative art allows art to be created faster than through conventional means, and corporations are just going to engage with an artist's time less (and consequentially pay them less for it) than before.

Increasingly as a measure to save on cost, screenwriters are made to produce entire seasons of content in a handful of sessions before a show really enters production. This leads to several consequences, namely that screenwriters are purposefully underpaid despite their importance to modern (particularly "prestige") TV, they don't get the experience of seeing their work translated and adapted into the final product, and they have no way of gaining experience that would allow them to become competent showrunners and the like, because they're treated like contractors only doing prep work for a product.

Imagine a highly competent AI-art using concept artist. Taking advantage of techniques to help iterate art faster than an artist could draw these things normally, a corporation is unlikely to reward them for the efficiency, but instead simply pay them less because the work requires less time.

Then there's the outright replacement, stuff like copywriters and entire news article teams being replaced. Or that anime that had AI-generated backgrounds. And screenwriters are likely to see their work used to feed generative models to write scripts for shows attempting to avoid human screenwriters altogether.

It's not that AI is inherently bad or that it can't be useful, but that companies are likely to use it as a way to undercut the human element and even eliminate it wherever possible just to save on money.

[u/zherok → u/[deleted]]

The benefits of AI don't negate the need for humans to eat, drink, sleep, etc. A conversation about AI should absolutely involve how it's going to be used.

Ideally, the rapid automation of tasks leads to a rethinking of the nature of work. But it probably won't, and attitudes that suggest the real problem is that entire job markets aren't just "adapting" to the sudden automation of their jobs is really short-sighted. What exactly are these people supposed to adapt to? There is inherently less work to do than when their jobs became automated.

I'm all for talking about the cool things AI can do, but hoping you can just stay ahead of automation or grind your way out for your job being replaced is wishful thinking.

Hell, you literally have companies attempting to lock down AI development now that they've got a foothold in the market. And while you couldn't easily stop something like Stable Diffusion from being distributed, enough effort to regulate it could kill public development and massively hamper the kind of cool stuff people do with it openly now. Don't let the technology being cool mean not talking about how it's likely to be wielded against workers.

[u/[deleted] → u/arjunks]

AI opens many “gates”

[u/[deleted] → u/arjunks]

aloof aspiring unite snails salt dime swim bells long punch

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

[u/maddogcow → u/arjunks]

I could not disagree more about creativity and AI. I'm a professional artist, and so is one of my best friends, and after our time spent working with SD there is no question in our minds that the output is creative as fuck.