Is AI Art ruining the games industry?

[@oratrovovortaro]

If artist's work is used as a training data to actually create an AI, then every single use of this AI will be eligible for royalty pay to this artist. Which is obisouly very unlikely (to say the least) to happen. And as I understand it - every public AI is like that at the moment, they've scraped the whole Internet to train their models - every artist already have his work used in AI without any conscent. So any royalties are already impossible.

[@kabosune9097]

Adobe firefly trains off adobe stock so they're pretty much doing it legitimately

[@ivancabrera3289]

like I said AI art is just a big example of how little respect people haves for artist even if AI generated stuff cant be copyrighted people will still try to pass AI art as their own

[@doodle9495]

@@kabosune9097there is plenty of stolen content on adobe stock, it is proven unfortunately, and artists can put requests to take it down but they don't really untrain the ai and nobody has the time to go through and putting takedown requests

[@MrMadalien]

At the same time, if royalties were distributed to everyone, the total amount per person would be extremely small, like maybe 5 dollars per month or something.

[@DavidEdwards-e6m]

You expect Royalties for playing a childs computer "game" lol, oh the broken thinking today

[@zinzolin14]

Interesting take on the situation. I've always been trying to stay optimistic for artists in this situation. I don't believe AI will truly replace artists, so long that companies and people still know how to value and appreciate genuine creativity and humanity.

[@SodaPopBot]

People, sure, there'll always be at least a few. Not so sure about businesses heh

[@ivancabrera3289]

except that people don't values art as much as lets say music sadly that is why singers makes a lot more money than artist that is why people don't care about stealing art but would think twice before using a copyrighted song in a video (at least in other platforms that isn't tiktok) AI art is just an example of how little respect people haves for artist

[@kevin_horticulture]

​@@ivancabrera3289 people dont use copyrighted music because its really easy for youtube to detect it. And I dont know where you got the idea that singers get paid more.

[@average3970]

you speak intelligently and candidly on this issue. huge props. hard to find a viewpoint on this that takes the situation as it REALLY IS, versus reducing it psychospiritual fluff or just outright fatalism.

[@artunblock9433]

That soad background is priceless

[@ForrestImel]

This was unintentional, but fits well haha

[@nikoguarro]

5:27 Also, there is added value: why people still want to watch stop motion movies?: because they were made with stop motion. Same goes for everything, I think.

[@DracolyteDota]

Enjoying your content alot. Would love to see more opinion pieces and tutorials!

[@bingbong3084]

the day i cant make money with art anymore is the day i become a terrorist 🗿

[@erolc82]

Says a lot when Hitler was rejected from an art school 😅😅

[@kevin_horticulture]

Basado

[@419chris419]

Then you will never a true artist😅

[@raptorboss6688]

@@419chris419 what do you mean by that? 🤨

[@Murimz]

Me too. Even if i have to become a martyr, if this dystopia comes to be theres no real reason to live then. Might as well try and make a change

[@barbi111]

The cycle will NOT work if we are using Nightshade!

[@Yue4me]

ahhhh, exactly what i'm waiting for, forrest + ai takes.

[@Yue4me]

so will you pivot to other area or stay in as illustrator?

[@ForrestImel]

I'll still be working within the industry, but also I think that I am currently tasked at executing on ideas or idea generation and if you look at the path of most creators and what technology helps people pursue it's to actually quicken the pace of the generation of ideas. This allows artists the opportunity to better art direct for a project and come up with a unique vision because of the amount of work that can be generated to then sift through and narrow down. So, I think eventually that would be the direction I would personally pursue, a more director-like role.

[@Tursiz]

the big bosses use cheap AI art for their shitty mobile games and I'm sick of it

[@barbi111]

Mmm. SOAD at the background...great.

[@FluffyGiraffeOne]

Do you think it’s fair to say that both concept art and final illustration work are safe, but the iterative process in the middle gets automated away with AI?

[@Quillet1992]

do you think creating a new file format would help avoid massive theft by AI image generators?

[@solarmkarus2845]

No, a file format is simply how data is organized. Then you need something to be able to interpret it. You can't make an image with a different file format and expect a website to be able to display it without the website also being able to understand the format. So AI will just need a filter to also search for the new file extension and take it too.

[@sethlynchart]

Holy shit a video!

[@Decimz]

no content generated by AI can be copyrighted, so it is useless for commercial purposes.

[@ForrestImel]

I wouldn't say useless. The current major art generating platforms can't be copywritten. But companies are going to use this technology for their own purposes, using work they own the rights to in order to create AI that'll pump out work within that companies style. This may not be doable for smaller scale companies, but major AAA game companies absolutely will have enough work to get use out of this.

[@Decimz]

​@@ForrestImelin this case, they are still useless for commercial purposes, no content or works generated by AI can be copyrighted. Even if Disney itself created Ai on all of its licensed works, it would still not be able to copyright the content generated by that Ai.

[@why.do.I.even.try.]

​@@Decimzwhy not? They own the rights to those pictures. They legally have the right to do whatever they want with them.

[@Miraihi]

A company can train the model using the images they hold the copyright on. That means that when they use that model they don't steal anyone's art - they own every single piece. And AI can be guided not only by a prompt, but also by a sketch, a bump map, a segmentation map, etc. So the actual human artist may have a place in there to create the base design that will be filled in by AI's rendering capabilities. I think this workflow is possible right now.

[@average3970]

@@ForrestImel this is true. I know artists at Ubisoft who have had their work trained on for internal AI models.

[@sugarplums885]

The funny thing is that , art is just getting hit but other industries have been affected by it a long while ago . Hence the writer strikes in hollywood .

[@doppelkammertoaster]

The only hope I have is, that this sort of business will become even less profitable than it already is. Lawmakers have not stepped up enough yet, and I am not sure they ever will. But copyright breaches in that magnitude can't be fixed by the copyright holders. They have to act. But from what I've read, these AI bros don't make money with it. It sounds like streaming. Prices will be affordable until there is no competition anymore. So far, paying artists is still more efficient, cost wise. Frankly, that should not even be the point. But capitalism is as it is because lawmakers have not stepped in enough so far.

[@BasementMinions]

Very interesting insights.

[@quboqut]

think the reason why ai will not replace human art is not because it couldn't but because humans ENJOY making art! there will be some type of movement in order to keep promoting human creativity. It'd be very dumb to let a robot do what you like to do. Ai is for what you DO NOT like to do. Like if AI could reproduce for us are we going to give up sex?

[@OMGUKILLKENNY2]

No one is taking away your ability to make art as a hobby. But if you are providing art as a service, then you need to compete.

[@Gleichtritt]

I have worked with simple designers and illustrators for just Shirt designs, and I can tell you, many who work in the same field I do, fired their designers and illustrators. If you want more sophisticated designs, with more complex ideas - AI cant do that. But seeing how freaking fast it develops, artists should search for new jobs. ALL the long videos with opinions of artists, why AI will not replace them, are way too optimistic. I am an artist myself and still make designs myself, because I am not happy with what the AI does. But its developing in lighting speed. Just within one year it got crazy. So Give it another 2 years, and it will be at a spot, where you upload an exsting artwork and tell the ai "do this or that" to it, and it will be doing it. I think the absolut top positions and companies will still rely on human creations, but oh boy, the average artists job will disappear. The ONLY hope I have, is that AI will stop developing in this speed, because the pool of learning material will shrink drastically, because the internet will be flooded with AI generated art and if AI's will continue to use that as their source to train, it will become worse and worse. So the only way to avoid THAT is to selectively feed it human created / perfect art and that will be a lot slower than having access to billions of artworks. But yeah, gg - art is dead.

[@kevin_horticulture]

In the doomer scenario every job will be dead so you might as well do something you like. There'll be work still, but trying to figure out what work remains is folly. You cant start studying computer science before the computer is even invented.

[@royalecrafts6252]

AI doesnt design, just makes pretty things, most artists dont design either

[@tamseeltabasum1674]

No it can never be a art ruiner.....

[@JuanThaSilva]

More like running the industry.

[@3emad.305]

Honestly guys idc about how good the art that the machines farts out of its metallic anus, I just hate how assholic and malicious the AI artists can be. Also if a machine can replace you, then you aren’t special in the first place.

[@williammclean6594]

I saw a podcast on AI and they were talking about every time technology is introduced it changes everything. 200 years ago alot of people were farmers. Then industrial revolution happened and most people became office workers. Now with ai the nature of work will change again. People wont need to work anymore and if they do it wil be far less. Most things will be automated with people working 4 or less hours a day. Its a good thing if u don't have to work why would u want to if you don't have to. U can just stay at home and do whatever u want. They might even get rid of money all together and introduce UBI universal income. Witch would mean the end of capitalism

[@Legomicroman]

AI-"Art" is a HORRIBLE thing. i draw not only because it's fun, but i enjoy seeing the art of other people. and if i'm only gonna see AI-Garbage, it'll be really fucking depressing, because if i'm the only one, drawing with my own hands, then how do you think, i would feel? it's KILLING creativity! because when you type prompts into a machine, it'll only be what the MACHINE makes of your prompt, it'll be the MACHINE'S idea of what the prompt means, NOT YOURS.

[@williammclean6594]

@@Legomicroman I don't like it either but it looks like everything's going to be automated in the future not just art. If you ever played metal Gear solid, it'll be like that most likely where AI just does everything and people just exist and do whatever. It's pretty sad because I kind of always wanted to have a fulfilling job and if AI just does everything for us it's kind of boring for me. I have hobbies but you know I just wouldn't want to have a cool job too

[@Murimz]

Money is the whole reason theyre doing this. You really think the .01% would allow tbis to happen? Lmao.

[@williammclean6594]

@@Murimz they also can't stop even if we wanted to. Even if it means extinction of humans, we would still continue with AI Because like if we stop making AI the communist countries like China wouldn't stop and then we would fall behind and full refuse to fall behind China. Just like when the US heard that Russia had nukes it was a race to get nukes before them

[@syedshakaibanwar2698]

Lol nah, no one is gonna hand out money to you bro, no one.

[@ThePele90]

Just wondering what is the difference between when you use other artist's work as your reference to create your piece and AI algorithm to use your piece as his reference? Do you ask for permission or pay all those artist for your reference? That's the first thing that pops into my head. But I am an programmer so don't mind me. 😅

[@eseegi8565]

My thought is AI is not a human. It is a product created for monetary gain. It should not be treated the same as a human being. Even if AI referenced art the same way an artist does (spoiler alert it does not) there would be no benefit to humanity to apply human standards to a company's product.

[@ThePele90]

I agree that AI is not a human. But why is important what is the use of AI in terms of looking at other work and producing another work? If you use a technology to help you do some job quicker and maybe better why not use it? What if Forrest Imel is using reference images to create NFT images and from that money he invest in oil and gas. So the intention does not benefit humanity or Earth. He shouldn't use reference images? I have a feeling we are looking at that with emotional side rather than logical. But again, I am a programmer so I am a bit broken in terms of that xD@@eseegi8565

[@SylvesterLazarus]

You don't use other people's art for reference. Simple as that. Simple etiquette. All artists aim to be their own unique creator and not copycats of their role models.

[@SodaPopBot]

Because it's not just reference. It's coated with your own personal touch. Your own blood, sweat and tears and years of experience. Your way of looking at the world as an individual, a human being. It's part of who you are. Yeah, humans can still be rip-offs or copy things a little too closely in some cases, but at least you went and did it with your own hands. AI has nothing to do with the person creating it. Sure, one can put in descriptions and prompts etc, but it is hollow. The results may be great, but it's a shortcut. Like going to the destination instead of the journey. It doesn't make one an artist using it, just a comissioner, if you will.

[@Mente_Fugaz]

here's a example for you to understand it easily: Did you know that the Anime that we all know nowadays, was a reinterpretation that japaneses made about disney designs? that's what happens when you feed humans with more art, that's inspiration, and it's the characteristic that led the illustration to evolve through history, when you feed AI with disney images, it will give you more disney images... that's the difference, one leads to illustrative stagnation and the other to constant illustrative evolution ~ Also, the world "learning" in machine learning is just an analogy, If you compare it to human learning you fell in the eliza effect, Machines are using works without authorization to create products that has the same purpose of the original artists in the market, It's development depends merely on the explotation of other people works. Humans learning from others is not the same, because all of them are playing with the same rules in a fair competence, With AI you are creating unfair competence, where AI depends on the work of people in order to work, Is not a independent tech like 3d

[@jasontoddler1598]

AI art = 🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮