Is there a protest going on right now at Artstation?
polycounter lvl 2
Is there some type of organized protest going on at Artstation right now? The site is slow to load, and seems to getting bombarded with this "no to ai" image:
Replies
Probably; I know there's some kickstarter going on that was raising money to more effectively scrape images from artstation, among others, to strengthen their AI dataset. And I know there's been a lot of outcry about it. I would assume maybe it's related to that?
Or could be a call to ban AI art from artstation itself, if it isn't already?
Huh, looks like some folks are also overlaying this image with 50% transparency over top their entire portfolio. I suppose in an effort to "confuse" the AI-scraping algorithms?
Interesting... Yea, it appears to me that this might be a movement specifically targeted at removing ai generated art from Artstation?
If so, then how much ai is too much when creating digital art?
Almost all digital art software have some ai tools that aim to enhance artistic output.
As far as optimization efforts being made at "AI-scraping-algorithms" specifically targeting artists on Artstation. Something doesn't feel right (to me) about profiting off of scraped art data from artists without permission. Collecting so much data without permission doesn't feel humane to me.
From what I gather a lot of the backlash is toward the people who are trying to legitimize their so-called craft by calling themselves "AI Concept Artist", or "AI Prompt Artist" or other BS like that.
For me, while I can certainly be impressed by AI-generated art itself, I don't think I could ever be impressed or in awe of someone's skill at typing in text prompts. In much the same way I couldn't hire HR Giger and tell him to make me "a dark alien scifi scene", then claim his output as my own just because I described it.
Collecting so much data without permission doesn't feel humane to me.
But it is legal. There is not a single law that forbids to look at public available images. I think what you mean is the ethical part. But we are long past this point in human history. We use robots that does the heavy work for us. We use computers that does the thinking and calculating for us. And AI art is just yet another tool in the belt.
That's at least my opinion about it. And i don't think that the feat that AI art will kill the traditional art has a foundation. Photography has not killed the traditional painting neither. It made the world richer, not poorer. The AI solutions are now around for months. And the world is still not collapsed.
For me, while I can certainly be impressed by AI-generated art itself, I don't think I could ever be impressed or in awe of someone's skill at typing in text prompts.
Just try it. Then you might notice why it is in fact art at its own.
The artistic part, the imagination, to create something absolutely unique and brand new, and the knowledge about styles and art history is still heavily needed. It can take days until you have the output that you want. And sometimes you simply loose. SD is still not able to create a useful ladybug for example.
Is a photographer an artist? He just presses a button, you know. There is not even a prompt available ;)
I have tried it (midjourney), and while cool, it didn't feel the least bit artistic (to me).
Yes, a photographer is an artist. But me telling a photographer to take a picture of a "girl standing in a forest", does not mean I can claim his picture as my own creation just because I described the photo I wanted.
To stay in your analogy, no photographer would be allowed to claim the picture since the image is created by chemical processes. He just told the camera to take a picture by pressing a button.
I have held a camera in my hands in the past, and it did also not feel the slightest artistic to me. It is simply not my tool of choice. But i don't think that photographers are no artists just because i don't like to work with cameras or because of moral concerns.
I personally do graphics since many years. And the choice of my tool does not make me a fewer artist. It's the artist who makes the art, not the tool. It is still my skills and imagination that leads to the final result. Typing in text is not different from pressing a button here.
The three biggest issues:
-AI generated reference packs being sold on Art Station.
-Portfolios filled with hundreds of AI generated works from the last few months basically becoming spam.
-Completely AI generated work in Trending
Artstation hasn't really taken any strong stances or made any statements on those issues.
If those anti AI protesters would be smart they would fill their portfolio with pure AI art.
When the AI starts learning from AI Art it either becomes incredibly bad .. or so good it doesn't need us anymore .. and then decides it would be better to kill us all.. hmm
ok scratch that.. if they really would be smart they would pack their bags now and flee as long as they can.
that wont work, because the AIs they are speaking of are not using the internet in its live state. they all just use a database that scraped the web some time ago. while that one is growing occasionally its tons and tons of old data in there that will not be effected by this at all.
@Tiles I agree with you Tiles. A lot of my thoughts right now aren't really well thought out on the subject. It's a lot of "something doesn't feel ok". But in reality most of the uncertainty is likely due to the technology being so new and it feels like it's happening so fast. I am certain ai generated art is art.
When I was a student and 3D-modeling wasn't really taught in colleges. I remember so many of my art teachers in college did not consider digital art "real art" for various reason. I don't want to repeat a similar pattern here.
Personally, I don't mind my art being used to enhance ai that is positively aligned to the publics interest and is freely available. I want my work to be used to do good. When I get "feelings" of something not being right, It's not about whether something is legal. It's more about me receiving affirmation that my data is being used for tools that align with my principles and ethics. That's where asking me for my permission first before hypothetically using my data would be really appreciated.
It's a nightmare for recruiting since now you have to distinguish between AI art and human art and not all of it is labeled.
I do like the fact that it's disrupted the trending algorithm since I never liked that aspect of Artstation.
That said AI to me really counts as spam filling what ought to be a professional space, so unless hiring catches up with recruiting prompt artists, all the AI garbage ought to have its own place elsewhere.
Yes, it remains a difficult matter for sure. And i understand the concerns. But for now this explicit permission is not needed by law. Since it is no copyright problem, but an ethical dilemma: when an artist "steals" the style of another artist, Giger to name a prominent one, then it's okay. But AI can copy the style of every artist that it analyzes. Is that okay or not? And if not, why? Remember, the single artist is allowed to do so. And whole art styles have started with one artist and gots copied and developed on. Kandinsky for example. Or Miro.
The engines itself are based in countries where crawling the net for public data is simply allowed.
For what it is worth, Stable Diffusion has meanwhile reacted to the concerns, and removed quite a few data sets in version 2.0. Several artists names will not work in the prompt anymore in version 2.0. But also here, it was no legal problem, but an ethical solution since they did and do not want to be treaten as the baddies who stole art form the artists. The consequence though is that most people prefers to continue with the old weights 1.5. Version 2.0 is a downgrade.
Figuring out how this is going to fit into the future of art is my concern, I don't see a solution that stops this from happening, Especially when AI will get more advanced, what will we do when the technology is everywhere? What will we do when the public can't recognize AI art from manmade art?
The wave of AI generated art will be to large to moderate, so we will have to figure out how to exist alongside it, artists might even evolve into tool-assisted AI artists.
this instead of sueing (anyone involved btw/all)... okay i followed the kool kids, fun for a bit i guess, eh, not like i got any msgs for work anyway, stick it to all a.i/men? i am late though. salutes btw. < LINK ON MY CONTRIBUTION
For now the best way 2D artists can show their art is 'real' is to also show the process involved, ideally in video form, since AI can't replicate that (at least as far as I've seen).EDIT: Looks like I was wrong. :(
it can, it's tricky, but doable. certainly less work than doing it yourself from scratch.
it can output sketches, various versions of painting stages etc based on your final generated image.
Oh gosh, hell no. This take on things is the same misunderstanding (admittedly coming from a good intention) that got people to believe that NFT peer-to-peer tech would be a way to "authenticate" art and help artists make a living ...
What is actually needed is not mistrust, but trust - that is to say, building on the long-lasting relationships that people have grown over the years. Asking for an artist to show proof of how things were done would be incredibly disrespectful, adding insult to the injury of the AI tools stealing the art in the first place.
Of course some would be ok with doing so and there's nothing wrong with that, as sharing process is indeed fun. But broadcasting it online is not necessarily everyone's cup of tea, and would be just another slippery slope.
(Speaking of which ... sure enough, someone somewhere must be already thinking of scraping youtube content for painting tutorials, in order to create an AI tool that paints in real time ...)
At the moment this really only affects people who sell a finished piece . People who make art as part of a process will be insulated against the problem until the AI gets smart enough to interpret very specific feedback - which will happen eventually.
If you make a living off your style (lois van baarle is the best example I can think of) then an AI that can generate images in your style is a legitimate threat to your livelihood.
I'm of the belief that there should be regulation that makes commercializing a robot trained on specific artist(s) portfolio without authorisation a breach of some sort of IP/copyright protection. it won't stop it happening but it will at least give you somewhere to aim the lawyers when it does (amounting to roughly the same level of protection your work has traditionally had)
Artstation has reacted. They basically state that they will not permit the use of AI. Which is imho a good thing!
https://help.artstation.com/hc/en-us/articles/11451085663501-Use-of-AI-Software-on-ArtStation
not prohibit you mean?
Yes, also that. Sorry for my bad english :)
Artstation only said they will let artists add a tag to any of their portfolio images that they don't want scrapped, but the tag will not be used on art by default (and AI may or may not ignore it).
Also in related stories: https://www.gofundme.com/f/protecting-artists-from-ai-technologies
And now for the ultimate dilemma : contributing to this crowdfunding means being okay with the american way of lobbyists influencing legislation.
For good or bad, AI will change everything (coding aswell).
At the moment, mediocre people are taking advantage of tools that mix images, photos, and artworks without consent. The hilarious thing is that too many of them think they are "artists". They are moved by envy.
I don't like AI, but it can't be helped. People will still use any artwork they like without consent, because is being posted in "the internet".
Two advices:
Watermark your work if you are afraid of theft.
Don't upload hi-res images.
The AI tag won't do anything. People are paying for a service of AI and they will upload the images for the AI. They don't care about copyrights or permissions. instagram is full of reposters, and only a few.. give proper credit. You can write: "do not repost my artwork" and they will ignore you.
Artstation SHOULD be a place for Artists, for portfolios. They don't understand that, nor they can control what people upload.
This will explode. It's sad how too many great artists are taking down their portfolios.
Ah, more changes. Artstation has changed the terms of service now. And disallow the crawlers the use of content that is marked with the NoAI tag.
We have also updated the Terms of Service to reflect that it is prohibited to collect, aggregate, mine, scrape, or otherwise use any content uploaded to ArtStation for the purposes of testing, inputting, or integrating such content with AI or other algorithmic methods where any content has been tagged, labeled, or otherwise marked “NoAI”.
I wonder how this should work, and if it is legal. Looking at images is still allowed in most countries ...
Anyways, i hope this leads to a more relaxed state now :)
Well ... it will not relax anything, because this recent statement of theirs is precisely the reason why the protest is still going ("round 3"), as regardless of such a tag doing what it is supposed to do (technically or legally, both of which are very unlikely), asking artists to tag their work as "nonAI" as opposed to it being the default of the platform is an incredible insult to their user base. This basically makes Artstation less trustworthy than a Furry fansite.
They never needed to announce some fancy antiAI tech from the future, and they never needed to implement such an opt-out tag. All they needed to do was to make a clear announcement about their position and mission statement, which they did not (or rather did in a very insulting way, intentionally or not).
This is far from being the end of it IMHO and it will be hard for them to recover from this.
As usual, i heavily disagree :)
I dare to predict that everything will be back to normal in a week or two.
Well, if we are to make predictions ... mine would be that a few folks from the Concept Art Association are probably already working on an alternate portfolio hosting website with a very clear no-AI mission statement, and this could be ready in a mere few weeks. And It will not need any fancy tech - just the common trust between participating artists. And from there, more tech can be deployed if so needed.
Well, everything is possible. Let's have a look what happens. Exciting times ahead :)
@pior
doesn't mutual trust mean that community has to stay tiny?
If the intent of the site is to host portfolios that people use with intent to get jobs, I don't see how trust could ever be maintained unless everybody literally knows each other. I mean, people will lie for no reason at all and when there is no good reason to lie.
I think you'd end up needing AI to filter out the AI, lol.
What I don't like is that this is kind of thing seems to further break up large communities. Not that artstation was really much of a "community", but if it's like, people feel they need to fragment into smaller, closed communities, the big result is that internet becomes more closed than it once was.
When I started with 3d art around 2018 most forums were way more active. It was never hard for me to engage with professionals and get really valuable feedback. It's still there to some degree, but it seems like now people are more fragmented into smaller communities, so to get help it is more difficult as you have to enter a place where you are seen as outsider, and then also if the community is more specialized, people tend to get weirder if you know what I mean. Like, language becomes pure jargon and people seem to lose ability to explain anything without it.
And to me, this also disincentivizes the desire to try and return what I've learned too. It just doesn't seem like a worthy contribution to share something with a very small group of people (unless we are teammates on a project). Whereas a larger, more general group, if you share something, almost certainly a fair number of people see it and get some use from it. So it doesn't feel like wasted effort.
Another thing about trust - it takes a long time to develop, and can it be developed just by posting on internet? Don't you need to have a working relationship with people to develop trust?
Polycount should have done what "Art-station" did...(Galleries portfolio's is what i meant here if it wasn't clear) Never the less i really enjoy seeing a.s.s. and the battle still going strong, salute brethren it has been an honor to serve. Yes it just breaks up communities seems to always happen every so often, artisans, cgchat, on and on, guess history does repeat, also didn't a.s.s. change hands? tencent purchased it didn't they? https://www.epicgames.com/site/en-US/news/artstation-is-now-part-of-epic-games so since this move these things, meta human, make-human type applications started to increase, "Epic" straight up just takes designs and sticks them into Fortnite, even if i get it, they got "inspired", but that is happening quiet a bit. Epic got "sued" recently for creating an "addictive game". link.
I've noticed all industries getting hit at every turn, idk if anyone else has either, i have my thoughts on events but they are not wanted. Just mention the above points (hand changing and a lot more automation) because it is what I've seen happening over at my side. It was fun (1999/2017). Edit: all top threads seem to be .a.i. automation themed, just another notice.
What hits hardest for me currently is that many of the people who these AI systems could potentially negatively impact, in the immediate future, are some of the most vulnerable.
We have a historically significant term for describing the vulnerability in Wikipedia called "starving artist".
Starving Artist (from Wikipedia): "an artist who sacrifices material well-being in order to focus on their artwork."
I am very optimistically pro-ai. I am an optimist by nature and hope for a better future with tech/ai.
I think the focus should not be about stopping transformational tech, but minimizing harm, especially during transitions. This would include creating new laws/regulations/guardrails (only when appropriate) to maintain societal civility/peace.
Empathy and communication are really important as these kinds of ai concerns/issues become more commonplace.
Note: These are just my opinions, I don't feel like I understand the issue fully to make any definitive statements. (That's why communication is super important)
Hi there @Alex_J
I honestly don't have a well-formed answer to all these valid points - I just know that trust really is the cornerstone of all prized relationships - be it with family, friends, and in business.
And indeed trust only comes with time, but even here on an online forum (a form of communication that many probably find obsolete compared to the speed and bandwidth of current social media) I'd bet that many users can point out who they would trust for career advice for instance - merely based on post history and past online public interactions, all that in basic text form. So even though things aren't always clear cut and building relationships does take time, I do believe this is possible. Of course I can only comment from my own perspective, but even students or self-taught enthusiasts just starting out can quickly form relationships through working together on various projects for instance. As long as other similar-minded people still have the will to work on art projects at all to begin with, that is ...
(On a side note, this is precisely why the use of NFT in art transactions immediately raised red flags for me - because IMHO the last thing one needs between an artists and their audience or clients is some layer of tech attempting to prove authentication. As that literally means that neither party trusts the other.
As for the scope of so-called "online communities" shrinking back down ... Well, I personally don't really have a problem with that really, as one doesn't need an infinite number of online acquaintances in order to feel a sense of belonging to a group of people sharing a common interest.
@Alex_J you kinda underestimate how small this industry at least on a very high level is. You don't have to know everyone, but knowing someone who knows someone is not unlikely. In the western market, at my age group i would say in 3d most people have gone through the "polycount school" chances are high that this alone forms a little trust between people.
This doesn't mean we know everyone in our agegroup world wide, but in the western market it's not like there are tens of thousands of people in leading positions. Its a few hundred.
If you check where someone worked, you will likely find someone you know who worked with that person before.
I agree with Neox, i know that guy.
yeah, there's protest on Artstation, at this point you all probably know that. Thera are also other forms of protests going on: https://www.gofundme.com/f/protecting-artists-from-ai-technologies
Looks like Epic Games took action and shadowbanning/hiding AI posts...
I can still see some. It is simply getting fewer.
No they are actively being removed, plenty folks showed in their galleries
Incorrect, Artstation has been removing posts they feel "violate their TOS".... which so far has been only Anti-AI posts 🤔
https://www.gamedeveloper.com/business/artstation-is-hiding-anti-ai-artwork-images-on-its-platform
I think there's also some kind of slow mode going on regarding messaging. I'm trying to message asset creators in my library to ask for their alternative market stores and after the 10th business message, I keep getting a something went wrong message and now no messages can be sent through the marketplace.
Ah, so they do remove the images? Good thing. It's their house. Not a space for vandals. A week was more than enough to let a minority express their opinion and to block Artstation with it.
Every single post of yours is "AI good", that's it. Notice how you're recieving pushback from a lot of other posters/artists? On an forum dedicated to digital art?
Maybe take a minute to understand.
I hope Polycount removes your inane posts, it's their house after all. A week is more than enough to let you express your opinion.
Speaking as an admin here, we're not in the business of policing people's opinions, no matter how different from our own.
If things get too heated and ugly, then we're likely to step in with a light touch on the shoulder, and ask y'all to take a step back, towards civil discourse again.
Shouting doesn't "win" anything. If I don't like what I'm reading, then I don't need to reply. It can be as simple as that.
We encourage polite respectful discussion on art topics. Please continue in that spirit. <3
I did have a question about AI art on polycount.
Would that be allowed in the 2D section though I don't see why anyone would post AI art here since there likely isn't any meaningful critique to gain
We're not going to stop people from using whatever tools they want.
Personally I find most AI art disrespectful of the original artists.
But speaking as a site admin, in general it's not our job to police content.
Where we do step in, and with prejudice, is when an artist is clearly stealing from another.
It is not clearly established yet whether ai tools are actually stealing. Where to draw the line, which one cannot cross?
This still needs to be handled on a case by case basis. Not as an overall filter.
Maybe a seperate section for AI art would help but better to wait and see how many people actually post AI art in the 2d art section first.
Usually I'd assume most users would ask first.
Just to clarify, I don't want Polycount removing posts, I just wanted to make a point of how ridiculous the statement was.
"But speaking as a site admin, in general it's not our job to police content. Where we do step in, and with prejudice, is when an artist is clearly stealing from another."
Well, this might be one of these edge case where there is indeed a line to be drawn. Because this "we do not police content" position is precisely what led ArtStation to the current situation it is in (or to be precise, the situation it got itself into past "round 3").