TheRPGSite

I've been working on making AI art to fill a TTRPG book I wrote, given I cant afford to pay for art, and have been worried if people will hate my game for using it.

But then that train of thought got me thinking: I've only ever seen complaining about AI art coming from the extreme left crowd, and they already hate my game due to its subject matter. So, if we made a Venn diagram of the two groups, is it just a single circle?

I guess I'm just curious how widespread the violent anti-AI art sentiment is within the hobby, especially towards people who are genuinely too poor to afford buying art.

I don't hate AI art. But it does make cheap, uninspired results. I've used it in my personal projects but that's just for my own use, not for sale.
Stock art is pretty cheap on drivethrurpg. I've bought a few packs.
I won't get "violent" over a for-sale RPG using AI art, but I do think it's a turn-off, especially when the AI art is that samey hyper detailed but boring and slightly off pieces that distract from whatever they're supposed to represent.

Nah, there's a lot of right-leaning people that hate AI Art.

I think more and more people are coming around to the reality of the cost-effectiveness and taking the stance of "well its sub-optimal, but I'll accept it if the product is otherwise good". I know for me, I'm more good with AI art if the art is still basically good (which AI art often isn't) and if the producer puts enough work into their prompts to give it a consistent style that doesn't immediately look like AI Art. Two examples I would give are Elfking: The Immortal and Heroes of Adventure.

I've thought about this a bit and determined that the way I would do it would be to put out an initial edition of the book with the AI art, and then make it clear in the sales listing that if the book makes enough profit, I will use that profit to replace the AI art with real art, and then provide the new edition as a free pdf to people who bought the original.

I more or less used this strategy with my game, albeit a little differently. I released it with very little art, and said that 100% of the proceeds from my sales would go to paying for more art.

But there have been basically no sales, and thus no profit with which to fund more art with, so I've been fiddling with AI art instead to make up for the lack of sales.

I was planning on releasing the version with AI art free for anyone who buys the normal copy of my game.

Depends on the context for me:

• If it's for the games that I DM, they are unpaid games, I am happy to use AI art to highlight and accentuate my game.
• If it's for publication, my company has taken the oer stance of *only* using human produced art in our products.

Our artist contracts specifically include this clause:

• Human produced: BGP believes in the creative power of human artists and does not engage in the manufacture of AI created art for publication. Artist and BGP will both agree that Artist has personally created any/all commissioned art without knowingly engaging in the use of artificial intelligence, except those embedded in software tools (e.g. Adobe Photoshop) and/or other tools agreed upon by Artist and BGP.
 
-In certain instances, BGP reserves the right to ask to view previous draft versions of commissioned art to ensure that the Work(s) are completely the Work(s) of Artist.
 
-In certain instances, BGP reserves the right to provide reference materials that may be partially or entirely generated using artificial intelligence sources. These are for exemplary or inspirational use only and will in no part be used for publication.
 
-In the event that BGP believes, in its sole authority, that Work(s) have been created using unapproved AI tools, BGP reserves the right to reject the Work(s) and cancel this Agreement.

Many of my players and DM in my local community use AI to create a picture of a character or locations and no one criticizes it.

If we are talking about products for money - then in any case the most important thing is its content, rather than art. I do not particularly like AI art in books, since they most often look very similar to each other (different books). But I understand the reason for their use.

I think that the strategy of releasing books without art, and further proceeds for creating art is also one of the possible solutions. But probably the least popular.

I don't care if people use AI personally and I agree that being politically left for whatever that matters. I think more importantly AI art is leading to the death of trash art, which I love. MorkBorgs entire aesthetic is aping the art of a 16 year olds school notebook and it is applauded for its art. If you cant afford to pay for art I say just do your own and let it be terrible. It will be filled with soul and people will see it.

AI art is fine by me, but I agree that in many cases it's of lower quality and thus doesn't add much to the value proposition. if it's consistent and thematic, I really son't care.

I've also bought pdoducts with no art, but then it has to be REALLY good. 

I think I mentioned Heroes of Adventure somewhere before, it's a free game with all AI art and it's fine. BoF is on the other side of the scale for me, I like the art but as I understand it, it was a hassle to train it on specific pieces and style.

How about public domain art?

I am indifferent toward the use of AI art in a game book. 

I use AI art for personal projects, but I have not done so with any commercial products (yet.)

My take on it is similar to the US Copyright Office: AI can not hold a copyright, humans only.  So, significant effort in pre and post production of an image by a human (beyond prompt crafting) would be needed for a copyright.  I have done that as an experiment with various techniques.  If I can spoof several AI detection web sites, I have altered the image enough to call it my own.  :-)

Fun side note, the UK is different.  They give prompt crafters a 10 year copyright on AI generated images.  Something to consider if you are using raw AI images in your projects.

AI art is lazy and lacks the creative spark of a human soul. On the sole reason that your product uses AI art, I will not buy it or even consider buying it. AI LLM programs produce the least common denominator of media material and are definitely not the "next big thing".

I'm right leaning, more libertarian conservative.

Quote from: StoneDev on December 22, 2024, 03:52:05 AMIf you cant afford to pay for art I say just do your own and let it be terrible. It will be filled with soul and people will see it.

This.

I don't hate AI art in published books from small presses, but stock art often is way better, and licences eg on drivethrurpg art packs are cheap.

I don't mind AI art.  Some of it looks really nice.

There's a free game called Heroes of Adventure (https://nameless-designer.itch.io/heroes-of-adventure) that uses AI art, and I think the book looks a whole lot better than, say, the Basic Fantasy rulebook.  Basic Fantasy is full of "real" art, some of which is nice, but some of which is pretty awful.  I'll take good AI art over bad "real" art any day.

I personally would rather see AI art than DEI slop produced in major RPGs.

I personally backed a Kickstarter (having no need for another rpg) since the creator said heck yes I use AI art. The art was good too.

Do I think it can replace human art, no, like others have said it is missing something.

But if you give me a good fantasy art with AI vs. BIPOC wheelchair sideshave adventurers with no males, I will take AI 10 times out of 10.

My compromise, which is likely to please no one on any side of the issue--so you've been warned--is for a real artist to use AI-art sparingly to supplement volume.  Specifically, I want the real artist to vet all the AI pieces, touch up where possible, and reject where necessary.

Ideally, the AI art is used mostly for illustrative purposes, not imagination.  For example, I'd like to have a drawing of each of the weapons and armor in my game.  Most of it is based on historical models.  So the artist just needs to bring his own ability as a draftsman plus whatever imagination and skill is needed to translate a few examples into a fantastical thing that fits the style set by the artist (e.g. elven scale tunic instead of a human scale tunic).  I don't want to blow the whole art budget just for illustrations, and those are the kind of things that the AI art is mostly likely to do an adequate job on.

I'd then rather use whatever art budget I have left on a few good pieces showing dynamic scenes.

I am not an artist. I just know what I like when I see it.  For a real artist, I can see how AI art can sometimes be a useful tool.  Part of it being a useful tool, however, is understanding what is being done and its limitations--and thus where to draw the line and stop using it.

I like AI art. I like it a lot better than bad human-made art. Unless you can commission someone on the level of Tyler Jacobson, I would much rather see AI art in a product than bad human-made art.

I myself do not buy anything with AI art, I would rather support a real illustrator and at this point there are a zillion YouTube videos and Domestika classes out there. Why not try to teach yourself? You are not making AI art, you are putting in a prompt and the engine is searching the internet to take what others have done and an amalgamation is produced that often looks like everyone else's attempt.

ai art looks bad. if you want ai art that doesn't look bad, you need to commission someone to do it for you. but in that scenario you could just commission an artist.

Even if AI art looks superficially good, it is still blasphemy against the human soul, harms the careers of conservative artists, and contributes to the global stupidity epidemic.

The response to my question has been quite surprising given literally nobody in my social circles has a negative opinion about AI art, which is why I assumed the complaining must be entirely coming from left wing individuals.

On the subject of just learning to draw myself, I drew an entire game before and the results are so bad its just embarrassing, and drawing all that art gave me incredible wrist pain that took forever to recover from.

The results I've been seeing from my prompts look really good, hence why I'm planning on using them.

I have no problem with AI art,
I have a problem with crappy art.
A lot of AI Art is crappy,
don't use crappy AI art.

I am generally pro-AI, but also against generating AI content with a cloud platform. For reasons I am about to discuss, if it is at all possible you should generate with local hardware.

There are two problems with AIs; the first is that it doesn't do certain things which you may need for an RPG (notably monsters or highly abnormal landscapes.) AI is not going to be able to do everything for the foreseeable future.

But more to the point, we are giving AI companies a whole lot of trust that they are actually generating material legitimately. If you are using a cloud AI service provider, then unless you set up the cloud yourself you really have no way of knowing if it isn't secretly searching Google for a base image or in the case of an LLM, a base set of text. This would significantly improve the output and decrease the computational needs...but it's also not copyright infringement safe.

So for me, the gold standard for everything AI is locally generated on hardware you physically own and operate, ideally with an open source model. If you meet all of those criteria it doesn't really matter if you trained it on copyrighted material or not.

 

I'm curious where you all sit on AI collaboration in art.  I can't draw for shit.  Tried for decades, it just doesn't happen.  But, I can sketch or do 3d modelling and have the AI work from that.  I can do post processing and filtering to get a consistent styles/results.

Quote from: Fheredin on December 22, 2024, 02:29:17 PMI am generally pro-AI, but also against generating AI content with a cloud platform. For reasons I am about to discuss, if it is at all possible you should generate with local hardware.
 

I've been looking into that but I'm not sure how complicated it is to set up, would you recommend any tutorials?

Been struggling with cloud AI platforms due to the fact my game is set in World War 2 but they all refuse to generate anything resembling a german. I get why they ban it, but it is frustrating if you're trying to make anything set during that time period.

Quote from: Sqeek McDohl on December 22, 2024, 02:48:25 PM

Quote from: Fheredin on December 22, 2024, 02:29:17 PMI am generally pro-AI, but also against generating AI content with a cloud platform. For reasons I am about to discuss, if it is at all possible you should generate with local hardware.
 

I've been looking into that but I'm not sure how complicated it is to set up, would you recommend any tutorials?

Been struggling with cloud AI platforms due to the fact my game is set in World War 2 but they all refuse to generate anything resembling a german. I get why they ban it, but it is frustrating if you're trying to make anything set during that time period.

To be honest the censorship of AI art is its biggest drawback as a tool.
That probably wont last forever but for the time being its a legitimate drawback.
As to pro vs anti AI I'm not sure where I fit in that split anymore to much has gone on in my life what I do know is that I lean pro AI in meany regards. Also don't think its just your friend group that is lacking in opinion out side of the art micro universe of our culture there are a lot of people even fairly young people who don't see AI technology as a thing that is going to effect there lively hoods or there lives in a significant way. That view point may not be based in learned fact or practical reality but that's from what I can tell where most people actually seem to sit on the issue.

Imho I think that AI art does have its benefits for the actual artist in that it can produce something quick on a conceptual level. But it does feel cheap and soulless to me if produced and published purely as is. It's ok for your home campaign as long as you don't look to make any money off it.

Personally I love AI art. A lot of RPG art is crap. Most stock art is crap and overpriced. There's probably like 3 stock art artists that are actually good. Dean Spencer is top notch, but his license only lets you use his stuff once, unless you sub to his patreon. Screw that.

And what gets me is that a lot of stock art companies, like Purple Duck, have basically double their prices for the same images. I mean, they commissioned them years ago, the cost is sunk, why double the prices? I used to use their stuff, some of their artists like Brian Brinlee are good, but it's not cost effective anymore.

Rogue Genius Games is probably the only one that has kept prices low and their art is a mixed bag. Also only comes as a PDF

But the other thing is that stock art can never represent exactly what you want. In many cases, it was written for some other product. AI art lets you specify exactly what you want. it might take 50 tries to get something like what you envisioned but it's what you envisioned, not someone else

Just be honest in the credits, about the sources of your artwork.  Let the consumers decide.

AI art is fine.  Go for it.

And keep in mind that I can do art on my own, albeit only as 3D objects.

Quote from: Sqeek McDohl on December 22, 2024, 02:48:25 PMI've been looking into that but I'm not sure how complicated it is to set up, would you recommend any tutorials?

Fooocus is dirt simple to set up and has one of the easier user interfaces out there.  If your machine has limited performance, you can download one of the lightning XL models and make a profile where you run on 4-6 steps instead of 20-30.

AI art is soulless and shouldn't exist. draw your own. you don't have to be an artist. the consumers will see the spirit of your imagination

Avoid the whole issue by not publishing AI art. You may use AI art to quickly flesh out your ideas (composition, anatomy, structure, texture, etc.) and then use it as a reference to doodle out your art by hand. That way you are still adding your personal ideas and personal touch, but letting the AI guide you through several years of art basics to get a working reference out of your head.

Hint: tracing is not a sin and a shame. You're not a pro artist; you just need to convey your ideas out of your head into a shape recognizable by others. Go get a light box and trace out *enough* of the AI reference and then finish up the piece with your touch.

However I will say an artist's voice is very much an asset. Each discipline has its own vocabulary and logic behind it. Don't let AI be a lasting crutch to any of your future naïf art. A disciplined professional does show in the final product and are worth paying for when you can. However, you as an amateur jumping into professional won't have that full complement of skills yet, nor do we expect you. So enjoy these moments of grace afforded to your beginnings!

AI art good for prototyping and early version of product before release.

If art is optional for autor, publisher or consumer — better to avoid AI art than to place it in a product.

It's my opinion. I guess that White hack is great example of good layout design without unnecessary image.

I have no problem with AI art. As others have said, as long as it looks fine I don't particularly care. I have no interest in looking at bad art. I don't care how much "soul" it has.

I am a hard no because of the copyright aspect of the AI generated art, the original creators are not getting any royalties for training the AI models and that is wrong.
I also totally understand that context appropriate art may be out of the reach of some creators, so I don't hate on the creator for making a financially constrained decision.
I do think that its a huge temptation for a cash strapped creator (I am so so very tempted) and try my best to judge the work on its merits outside of the AI art.

Quote from: Opaopajr on December 22, 2024, 11:15:04 PMAvoid the whole issue by not publishing AI art. You may use AI art to quickly flesh out your ideas (composition, anatomy, structure, texture, etc.) and then use it as a reference to doodle out your art by hand. That way you are still adding your personal ideas and personal touch, but letting the AI guide you through several years of art basics to get a working reference out of your head.

Hint: tracing is not a sin and a shame. You're not a pro artist; you just need to convey your ideas out of your head into a shape recognizable by others. Go get a light box and trace out *enough* of the AI reference and then finish up the piece with your touch.

However I will say an artist's voice is very much an asset. Each discipline has its own vocabulary and logic behind it. Don't let AI be a lasting crutch to any of your future naïf art. A disciplined professional does show in the final product and are worth paying for when you can. However, you as an amateur jumping into professional won't have that full complement of skills yet, nor do we expect you. So enjoy these moments of grace afforded to your beginnings!

This is such a great idea, I wish I had thought of it.

Honestly, everyone has to learn from somewhere, but we don't want to always work from scratch. Artists copying masters in museums is a staple of learning. Artists tracing to skip to the blocking, value, and or color blending practice is essential to save time to get to new lessons. It's the same for so many disciplines, from calculators for engineers to thesaurus for poets. The challenge is using the tool without being "used by the tool" and "being a tool".

I don't get mad at construction for going to Home Depot for pre-fab tools, materials, and plans. Nor do I belittle the DIY off-grid cabin that is a bit derivative or unpolished. I do get mad if you sign your name off about bonded and insured labor, proper licensing and  warranties and instead you end up lying and cheapening out on what you sold me. Be honest about what you are offering.

A lot of us suck at drawing forms, and that's ok. :) It'll probably be less embarrassing than those generic d20 RPG supplements with gratuitous cheesecake that copied Low Rider magazine poses.

The only thing that matters is the artist's vision, and they are free to use any means to achieve that. It's only a problem when there's a complete lack of vision and they rely on AI as a cruch. And this lack of vision includes not being able to see what this technology is capable of, as it goes far beyond prompts, and we're just getting started.

The witch hunts are also not the answer, and even avoiding AI entirely won't prevent you from becoming a target. The art 'community' is in general insufferable, narcissistic, and unreliable, and most folks I see accusing AI of taking their jobs aren't even taking commissions, or if they are it's only for things they want to draw, which are usually IP violations themselves.

There has never been a more 'adopt or die' situation than now, and if indies continue to insist on having the rights to all training data used (which legally is already the case as those rights do not protect against transformative works) then the only ones who will have access to the technology will be those media giants who already have rights to all the training data they'll ever need, and continue to be given more by the very people condemning AI because they don't read the EULA.

Quote from: BuddyscottEntertainment on December 22, 2024, 08:31:08 PMAI art is soulless and shouldn't exist. draw your own. you don't have to be an artist. the consumers will see the spirit of your imagination

This is not your child's fridge art, and the market does not give a damn about the process, only the result. So the only market you will get with this attitude are those who prioritize hand made items, and only the ones willing to take you at your word. If that's what you're going for then more power to you, but let's dispense with the magical thinking that people are actually able to see the 'spirit of imagination' behind a piece when it has been repeatedly demonstrated otherwise.

Quote from: bardiclife on December 23, 2024, 02:43:59 AMI am a hard no because of the copyright aspect of the AI generated art, the original creators are not getting any royalties for training the AI models and that is wrong.

Says the dude with the AI avatar 😅

Quote from: Anon Adderlan on December 23, 2024, 09:40:29 AMThis is not your child's fridge art, and the market does not give a damn about the process, only the result. So the only market you will get with this attitude are those who prioritize hand made items, and only the ones willing to take you at your word. If that's what you're going for then more power to you, but let's dispense with the magical thinking that people are actually able to see the 'spirit of imagination' behind a piece when it has been repeatedly demonstrated otherwise.

see that's where you're wrong brother - the fridge art works. people love it. and they love it because it has charm and soul. not because it's good. I promise you that is the case - I know this because I draw worse than child's fridge scribblings and people adore my art. I'd post it but this blasted forum uses ancient image posting technology and I'm lazy.

Quote from: Sqeek McDohl on December 22, 2024, 02:48:25 PM

Quote from: Fheredin on December 22, 2024, 02:29:17 PMI am generally pro-AI, but also against generating AI content with a cloud platform. For reasons I am about to discuss, if it is at all possible you should generate with local hardware.
 

I've been looking into that but I'm not sure how complicated it is to set up, would you recommend any tutorials?

Been struggling with cloud AI platforms due to the fact my game is set in World War 2 but they all refuse to generate anything resembling a german. I get why they ban it, but it is frustrating if you're trying to make anything set during that time period.

Well, not recently. I was dabbling with Stable Diffusion as an early adopter over 2 years ago, so I have a very old Automatic1111 install. My understanding is that you can still run Stable Diffusion this way with more modern models.

For text AIs, I understand that an open source oLLama install is available as a Docker image from Dockerhub. Messing with Docker is currently above my CSCI paygrade because this is very much enterprise level software.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan on December 23, 2024, 09:40:29 AMThis is not your child's fridge art, and the market does not give a damn about the process, only the result. So the only market you will get with this attitude are those who prioritize hand made items, and only the ones willing to take you at your word. If that's what you're going for then more power to you, but let's dispense with the magical thinking that people are actually able to see the 'spirit of imagination' behind a piece when it has been repeatedly demonstrated otherwise.

That market also includes where you can sell that product with the AI art. Mongoose Publishing doesn't want your product to use its TAS program if it has AI art. OneBookShelf didn't want products with AI art sold on its site last time I checked.

So it isn't just your claim that only the results matter.

Quote from: Fheredin on December 23, 2024, 11:49:57 AMFor text AIs, I understand that an open source oLLama install is available as a Docker image from Dockerhub. Messing with Docker is currently above my CSCI paygrade because this is very much enterprise level software.

Running Docker is really simple actually. You install "Docker Desktop" on your computer, and tell it the name of the image from Dockerhub to run. That's it.

It runs entirely locally, on your computer.

Also free, for solo users.

I don't like seeing AI art in commercial products. It is fine for DMs who need some quick pieces for private games. The artists that are used to train the AI receive no credit or compensation. Not only that but AI produced schlock that mimics a popular artist's recognizable style without any of the soul feels nasty and disrespectful.

If you only care about whether images look superficially pretty, then you've already lost the battle for your soul. You give up your thinking to machines, then the men who own the machines will enslave you. Why wouldn't they automate you too?

I support a broadening of the US government position that a work produced with AI should not be protected. Also, I support a greater examination of what defines a derived work and, we need to consider new legal structures to consider who is responsible for misrepresentations and derivations by and of AI.

The tech industry is all in on AI, and it is going to destroy a lot of jobs.

RPGs are a luxury. We may not be able to avoid a lot of AI use in the future for lack of alternatives, but I won't buy RPGs with AI art. I would much rather see less art, especially when it really isn't necessary for enhancing the 'event' of playing an RPG.

Well, the US Copyright Office already has policy in place similar to that.  The HUGE difference is between all and some.  If it is all AI, no copyright for you.  If it has some and that has been modified by a human, it can still be protected.  I consider that a sensible approach.  It restricts bots and push button bros while protecting humans who use AI tools as part of their workflow.  After all, stuff like Adobe's generative fill is already a thing.

Quote from: zircher on December 23, 2024, 04:59:07 PMWell, the US Copyright Office already has policy in place similar to that.  The HUGE difference is between all and some.  If it is all AI, no copyright for you.  If it has some and that has been modified by a human, it can still be protected.

Sure, and that's not new either. In the early 90s, Corel tried to establish copyright of photos that depicted a straight up copy of many historical (and out of copyright) images. That didn't end well for them.

Quote from: zircher on December 23, 2024, 04:59:07 PMI consider that a sensible approach.  It restricts bots and push button bros while protecting humans who use AI tools as part of their workflow.  After all, stuff like Adobe's generative fill is already a thing.

I think that's where the line has yet to be  completely drawn. Automated systems and even the classic 'fuzzy logic' isn't AI. But where does one end and the other begin? A lot of original content within an image seems to be a factor, but how much?

Quote from: jeff37923 on December 22, 2024, 05:11:35 AMAI art is lazy and lacks the creative spark of a human soul. On the sole reason that your product uses AI art, I will not buy it or even consider buying it. AI LLM programs produce the least common denominator of media material and are definitely not the "next big thing"

I agree with all that. I have no hostility towards ai art, but like cgi movie effects, it doesn't matter how good it is, it illicts no emotional or visceral response from me like actual art (or practical/stop motion effects to continue the analogy).

For an RPG I'm  directly judging it based on it's ability to immerse me in a secondary world. Art can do this. AI art directly impedes it for me.

Quote from: jeff37923 on December 23, 2024, 12:11:38 PMOneBookShelf didn't want products with AI art sold on its site last time I checked.

I don't think that's true anymore. They have a toggle to allow you to show/hide content with AI content. From the site:

QuoteWhat do the different filters mean?
Handcrafted → Artwork was made by an artist practicing their craft, without the use of AI-generation programs.
Contains AI-Generated Content → AI-Generation Programs such as Midjourney were used in creating some or all of the art in the title.
Creation Method Not Chosen by Publisher → The Publisher has not yet selected one of the above options.

Article is dated October 28, 2024.
https://help.drivethrurpg.com/hc/en-us/articles/26794784634007-Customer-Experience-with-AI-Generated-Content-Within-Titles#h_01J97G88WDYDR5K4EXEH739R99

Quote from: Ruprecht on December 24, 2024, 10:47:59 AM

Quote from: jeff37923 on December 23, 2024, 12:11:38 PMOneBookShelf didn't want products with AI art sold on its site last time I checked.

I don't think that's true anymore. They have a toggle to allow you to show/hide content with AI content. From the site:

QuoteWhat do the different filters mean?
Handcrafted → Artwork was made by an artist practicing their craft, without the use of AI-generation programs.
Contains AI-Generated Content → AI-Generation Programs such as Midjourney were used in creating some or all of the art in the title.
Creation Method Not Chosen by Publisher → The Publisher has not yet selected one of the above options.

Article is dated October 28, 2024.
https://help.drivethrurpg.com/hc/en-us/articles/26794784634007-Customer-Experience-with-AI-Generated-Content-Within-Titles#h_01J97G88WDYDR5K4EXEH739R99

Hmmmm, I was wondering how they were going to get around WotC's plan to use AI for content creation when it clashes with their former policy.

I guess conservative artists are fucked then. Why pay them when you can ask Google to generate an image for free?

As long as the rpg is good. Either AI or drawn by a person is not the make or break for my purchasing an rpg.

Politically, I'm a traditionalist/postliberal/integralism-curious conservative, and I don't like AI art as anything more than a toy. It's not a dealbreaker for me on a product, but it's definitely a strike against it.

But I'm also inclined to the belief that a lot of stuff in this hobby is overproduced and too glossy. I started with TSR and ICE products in the late 80s/early 90s, so I both have high tolerance for underwhelming art and an awareness that you don't need full-color art to produce effective and attractive products.

Quote from: StoneDev on December 22, 2024, 03:52:05 AMI don't care if people use AI personally and I agree that being politically left for whatever that matters. I think more importantly AI art is leading to the death of trash art, which I love. MorkBorgs entire aesthetic is aping the art of a 16 year olds school notebook and it is applauded for its art. If you cant afford to pay for art I say just do your own and let it be terrible. It will be filled with soul and people will see it.

You know, "apeing the style of a 16-year old's notebook" doesn't make the art bad.  I can't afford an artist, either, so I made my own art.  I purposely chose an old-school fan-made RPG style, where the art was made by an enthusiastic teenager who has some skills, but lacks discipline.  I don't think that means that the art is axiomatically bad.

(https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/fBwAAOSwDDhmshzR/s-l960.jpg)

Quote from: Cathode Ray on December 24, 2024, 09:52:18 PMI made my own art.

This is exactly the sort of art I prefer to AI-generated.

"Soulless" is a good word, because art is all about soul. Without soul, it's just diagrams.

Quote from: Zalman on December 25, 2024, 06:51:31 AM

Quote from: Cathode Ray on December 24, 2024, 09:52:18 PMI made my own art.

This is exactly the sort of art I prefer to AI-generated.

"Soulless" is a good word, because art is all about soul. Without soul, it's just diagrams.

The one place I'd give as pass on AI art is the equipment catalogue. They're supposed to be diagrams or, at most, still lifes.

Now I am starting to wonder, how many of you can spot soulless AI vs warm and fuzzy human art.  Here's quick test, which ones are AI authored? (All images cropped/resized to 512x512 and meta data removed, no peeking.)

Yes, this is a hypocrite test.  Don't know, don't care, are valid answers, but that proves my point.  Fun fact, this image is copyright-able since it contains significant human generated art, editing, layout, etc.  Not that I care, but I wanted to share that bit of trivia.

(https://www.tangent-zero.com/files/AI_test.png)

Quote from: zircher on December 25, 2024, 02:13:04 PMNow I am starting to wonder, how many of you can spot soulless AI vs warm and fuzzy human art.  Here's quick test, which ones are AI authored? (All images cropped/resized to 512x512 and meta data removed, no peeking.)

Yes, this is a hypocrite test.  Don't know, don't care, are valid answers, but that proves my point.  Fun fact, this image is copyright-able since it contains significant human generated art, editing, layout, etc.  Not that I care, but I wanted to share that bit of trivia.

(https://www.tangent-zero.com/files/AI_test.png)

Given thousands of curators and millions (billions?) of iterations, I'm sure some AI art will fool some people. Maybe even most people. But we're talking specifically about AI art used in commercial game products. That's why AI art is so easily picked out when WOTC uses it. They're not trying to fool anyone. They're just putting it in and hoping no one notices. An amateur putting out a low cost game is not going to have even that level of AI art.

Quote from: zircher on December 25, 2024, 02:13:04 PMNow I am starting to wonder, how many of you can spot soulless AI vs warm and fuzzy human art.  Here's quick test, which ones are AI authored? (All images cropped/resized to 512x512 and meta data removed, no peeking.)

Yes, this is a hypocrite test.  Don't know, don't care, are valid answers, but that proves my point.  Fun fact, this image is copyright-able since it contains significant human generated art, editing, layout, etc.  Not that I care, but I wanted to share that bit of trivia.

(https://www.tangent-zero.com/files/AI_test.png)

A is definitely AI. I've played a lot of the "one is real, one is AI" picture games and that one has all the tells to me (though to be fair I'm only right about 80% of the time).

I want to say B, but its just stupid enough and its textures so badly aligned to have been some rank amateur's first Blender project. I'm guess real, but not something to be proud of.

C is tricky because non-human geometric shapes are easiest for the AI to reproduce without obvious glitches. I'm going to go with real artist though, mainly due to the slight differences in the nacelles that I think AI would have attempted to make even more symmetrical.

D looks like it could be AI art, but its really not detailed enough to tell. The figure in white is definitely a 3d figure model in their neutral pose though so I'm I'm going to guess real.

E is another likely contender for "this is AI" because after porn, cute fuzzy animals is lion's share of internet pictures for AI to be trained on so it does them well, but there's a slight bit of jank with the puppy's right eye that makes me think it's likely to be AI.

F is impossible to tell because the real thing is basically the sort of layout I've seen hundreds of times from 3d modelers laying out their in-progress work and this clearly the mid-stages of a "these are the starships for faction X" type display. The reason its impossible to tell is because that's also something super easy for AI to create from prompts given the sheer number of similar images available.

* * * *

I'm sure I probably scored about 50% on the test above, but that's largely irrelevant because none of those except C would actually be found in a game book. They're just not the right sort of illustrations for such a test.

I don't care if it's ai or not D has an interesting style.

Quote from: zircher on December 25, 2024, 02:13:04 PMNow I am starting to wonder, how many of you can spot soulless AI vs warm and fuzzy human art.  Here's quick test, which ones are AI authored? (All images cropped/resized to 512x512 and meta data removed, no peeking.)

Yes, this is a hypocrite test.  Don't know, don't care, are valid answers, but that proves my point.  Fun fact, this image is copyright-able since it contains significant human generated art, editing, layout, etc.  Not that I care, but I wanted to share that bit of trivia.

(https://www.tangent-zero.com/files/AI_test.png)

My guess is that only D and F are NOT AI art.

*edit*

I was going to put in my guesses, but all these images look like they're designed or chosen to play on AI "tells", and not be an honest representation of AI art vs human art.

Quote from: Ratman_tf on December 25, 2024, 07:55:52 PM*edit*

I was going to put in my guesses, but all these images look like they're designed or chosen to play on AI "tells", and not be an honest representation of AI art vs human art.

Agreed. B and C are the only ones that might be seen in an RPG books. D might be part of a cover for some offbrand Ultraman game.

AI art is here to stay. 

Truthfully, it's far too good at making art that's good enough rather than perfect.  For people on a budget using AI art is probably the way to go. 

For example, this AI castle seems good enough for a fantasy RPG. 

Quote from: Chris24601 on December 25, 2024, 04:42:44 PMI'm sure I probably scored about 50% on the test above, but that's largely irrelevant because none of those except C would actually be found in a game book. They're just not the right sort of illustrations for such a test.

About 50%, but not for the reasons you think.  :-)

But, you do have a point that RPG illustrations have a different focus/style.  I just raided my hard drive for this test.  Will have to work up a more 'realistic' test (but that will take a little time and I was busy cooking Christmas dinner today.)

Answers.

Well crap, the spoiler tag doesn't work on this forum?

I'm hard right leaning and I have no issue with AI art if it's good and it's fully disclosed.   I just want to be inspired and excited by the art in my RPG books and however it gets done is fine with me. 

The problem with AI isn't simply that it can fool viewers. That's just asking for mass misinformation btw. The problem here is that it takes away opportunities from conservative artists. You're too poor to hire an artist. Corpos are too stingy to hire an artist. For conservative artists, it's a lose-lose scenario.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on December 26, 2024, 12:56:12 PMThe problem with AI isn't simply that it can fool viewers. That's just asking for mass misinformation btw. The problem here is that it takes away opportunities from conservative artists. You're too poor to hire an artist. Corpos are too stingy to hire an artist. For conservative artists, it's a lose-lose scenario.

That's the major argument.

But, money is money.  I can also have craftsmen hand build me new kitchen flooring from real hardwood boards.  Or, I can buy pre-manufactured Vinyl flooring slats from Menards that clip together and install them myself.

I chose the 2nd option.  And my kitchen looks great, thanks for asking. 

AI art is going to tank independent artists.  That is inevitable. Or, it already has. 

I'm ok with AI art as I said.  I've even installed Comfy-UI onto my PC so I can generate my own pictures already. 

Can you eliminate a contractor if there was never a contractor in the first place?

Quote from: weirdguy564 on December 26, 2024, 02:02:53 PMAI art is going to tank independent artists.  That is inevitable. Or, it already has. 

Is that really something we want to happen?

Quote from: weirdguy564 on December 26, 2024, 02:02:53 PM

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on December 26, 2024, 12:56:12 PMThe problem with AI isn't simply that it can fool viewers. That's just asking for mass misinformation btw. The problem here is that it takes away opportunities from conservative artists. You're too poor to hire an artist. Corpos are too stingy to hire an artist. For conservative artists, it's a lose-lose scenario.

That's the major argument.

But, money is money.  I can also have craftsmen hand build me new kitchen flooring from real hardwood boards.  Or, I can buy pre-manufactured Vinyl flooring slats from Menards that clip together and install them myself.

I chose the 2nd option.  And my kitchen looks great, thanks for asking. 

AI art is going to tank independent artists.  That is inevitable. Or, it already has. 

I'm ok with AI art as I said.  I've even installed Comfy-UI onto my PC so I can generate my own pictures already. 

Can you eliminate a contractor if there was never a contractor in the first place?

Manufactured items are not AI. A human designed those pre-fab flooring pieces at some point and either got paid for the design, or if he was smart, gets royalties for every one sold.

Quote from: Exploderwizard on December 26, 2024, 02:16:12 PMManufactured items are not AI. A human designed those pre-fab flooring pieces at some point and either got paid for the design, or if he was smart, gets royalties for every one sold.

I think he was using a metaphor.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on December 26, 2024, 02:07:48 PM

Quote from: weirdguy564 on December 26, 2024, 02:02:53 PMAI art is going to tank independent artists.  That is inevitable. Or, it already has.

Is that really something we want to happen?

"Want" is a different thing from excepting something is inevitable because it is cheaper, faster, is getting better and better, and doesn't quit the job but keep your money because it dislikes your politics.

Quote from: Ruprecht on December 26, 2024, 04:03:43 PM

Quote from: Exploderwizard on December 26, 2024, 02:16:12 PMManufactured items are not AI. A human designed those pre-fab flooring pieces at some point and either got paid for the design, or if he was smart, gets royalties for every one sold.

I think he was using a metaphor.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on December 26, 2024, 02:07:48 PM

Quote from: weirdguy564 on December 26, 2024, 02:02:53 PMAI art is going to tank independent artists.  That is inevitable. Or, it already has.

Is that really something we want to happen?

"Want" is a different thing from excepting something is inevitable

We may not like a new technology, we may not think it's fair or reasonable. But if something is going to happen, people best adapt instead of having that new technology blindside them. If AI continues to improve, artists are going to have to contend with that. Even if we have draconian laws against the use of AI, other countries *cough*China*cough* won't.

Eventually, I expect automation and AI to make humanity obsolete. Production and consumption, maybe even philosophy and morality. The whole shebang. I don't know what's going to happen when we hit that threshold. I hope I don't live to see it.

Quote from: Ratman_tf on December 26, 2024, 10:10:45 PM

Quote from: Ruprecht on December 26, 2024, 04:03:43 PM

Quote from: Exploderwizard on December 26, 2024, 02:16:12 PMManufactured items are not AI. A human designed those pre-fab flooring pieces at some point and either got paid for the design, or if he was smart, gets royalties for every one sold.

I think he was using a metaphor.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on December 26, 2024, 02:07:48 PM

Quote from: weirdguy564 on December 26, 2024, 02:02:53 PMAI art is going to tank independent artists.  That is inevitable. Or, it already has.

Is that really something we want to happen?

"Want" is a different thing from excepting something is inevitable

We may not like a new technology, we may not think it's fair or reasonable. But if something is going to happen, people best adapt instead of having that new technology blindside them. If AI continues to improve, artists are going to have to contend with that. Even if we have draconian laws against the use of AI, other countries *cough*China*cough* won't.

Eventually, I expect automation and AI to make humanity obsolete. Production and consumption, maybe even philosophy and morality. The whole shebang. I don't know what's going to happen when we hit that threshold. I hope I don't live to see it.

Uh yeah, that's precisely why people are worried about AI. It is an existential threat. We want to live.

The only way we'll survive is by waging a Butlerian Jihad against machines and the machine attitudes that led anyone to thinking automating art was ever a good idea.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on December 26, 2024, 10:27:17 PMThe only way we'll survive is by waging a Butlerian Jihad against machines and the machine attitudes that led anyone to thinking automating art was ever a good idea.

Can we set up a concentration camp in Oklahoma?  I don't want to be too far from my family.  :-)

Oh, the answer key since the spoiler tag thing is not working.

A. Human created (Nick will be amused that some of you thought he was an AI hallucination)
B. Human created
C. Human created
D. Human created
E. Human created (super cute Snooki girl, an Anatolian Shepherd)
F. Human created

But as mentioned before, a better test would be topics that you would see in a game book.  I'm on vacation next week.  I'll see if I can do better and have an mix of human and AI images for an actual test.

If you're up-front about the use of AI, it should be fine. Most people care more about the actual quality of the writing if they're using it for a session. It's fine if a small company/creator uses AI art because they don't have the funds for an artist, what irks me is big multi-million companies pushing out slop so they can hoard more of the profits for themselves instead of paying for good art.

Also, what the hell is with this thread and some of the others on the forum suggesting only conservative artists will get fucked over by AI art? If conservative consumers/companies don't want to buy from liberal artists, they can just get AI art instead. Corporations don't care about politics, they care about their bottom line.

Quote from: Cathode Ray on December 24, 2024, 09:52:18 PM

Quote from: StoneDev on December 22, 2024, 03:52:05 AMI don't care if people use AI personally and I agree that being politically left for whatever that matters. I think more importantly AI art is leading to the death of trash art, which I love. MorkBorgs entire aesthetic is aping the art of a 16 year olds school notebook and it is applauded for its art. If you cant afford to pay for art I say just do your own and let it be terrible. It will be filled with soul and people will see it.

You know, "apeing the style of a 16-year old's notebook" doesn't make the art bad.  I can't afford an artist, either, so I made my own art.  I purposely chose an old-school fan-made RPG style, where the art was made by an enthusiastic teenager who has some skills, but lacks discipline.  I don't think that means that the art is axiomatically bad.

(https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/fBwAAOSwDDhmshzR/s-l960.jpg)

Im not sure your getting that I love that and think its the coolest shit ever. I wouldn't say its high art or particularly high skilled though. I do think your work will be great if thats what you do, I love it.

Quote from: MoFoCThat on December 27, 2024, 05:49:42 AMIf you're up-front about the use of AI, it should be fine. Most people care more about the actual quality of the writing if they're using it for a session. It's fine if a small company/creator uses AI art because they don't have the funds for an artist, what irks me is big multi-million companies pushing out slop so they can hoard more of the profits for themselves instead of paying for good art.

Also, what the hell is with this thread and some of the others on the forum suggesting only conservative artists will get fucked over by AI art? If conservative consumers/companies don't want to buy from liberal artists, they can just get AI art instead. Corporations don't care about politics, they care about their bottom line.

You don't care about leftist artists losing their jobs, so crying "what about conservative artists?" seems more convincing. Didn't conservatives make a big stink about coal miners being fired and told "learn to code"? Where's your worker solidarity now?

Automating creativity is terrible for humanity, but conservatives seem to be cheering it to "own the libs!" and "so pretty!" You vote to remove regulations on corpos, then cry foul when they hoard wealth and use AI to replace the human workforce.

It's almost like political worldviews aren't based on any consistent value system, but based purely on shallow tribalistic faddish bullshit.

Honestly? AI is a bloated energy, water, and raw materials hog consuming far more than it will ever produce in value.

The only thing presently keeping it afloat is government grants and investors suckered in by the same sort of promises made about VR and every other "paradigm altering" technology in the last two decades that will inevitably fail to deliver as soon as the subsidies run out and the investors start asking where all the money they were promised is.

AI is presently only cheap for the end user because of the costs that are being covered by subsidies and tax deferments. As soon as you have to fully cover the costs of the energy, water use, infrastructure costs, financing of the data centers, paychecks of the support teams, and deprecation of the hardware it's going to not be nearly as cost effective as the public is being led to believe.

My hunch is AI will basically plateau when the subsidies and investor money runs out, then contract into whatever areas might actually be able to turn a profit on their own (mostly government surveillance because they don't care how much it actually costs to operate).

AI turns out to be very useful in hard sciences. It's caused a revolution in materials science, medicine, and pharmaceuticals, among others, but that's not the sort of thing that grabs eyeballs.

Quote from: Chris24601 on December 27, 2024, 11:17:13 AMHonestly? AI is a bloated energy, water, and raw materials hog consuming far more than it will ever produce in value.

Indirectly AI will result in our return to Nuclear energy which is clean and plentiful and far safer than most people suspect. Facebook is reopening 3 mile island to power their AI needs, others are talking about building small nuke plants. When word gets out the left *may* turn on Ai (despite nuclear being the environmentalists dream) because most of the left has communist-spawned anti-nuke in their ideological DNA.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on December 27, 2024, 10:21:34 AMYou don't care about leftist artists losing their jobs, so crying "what about conservative artists?" seems more convincing. Didn't conservatives make a big stink about coal miners being fired and told "learn to code"? Where's your worker solidarity now?

Automating creativity is terrible for humanity, but conservatives seem to be cheering it to "own the libs!" and "so pretty!" You vote to remove regulations on corpos, then cry foul when they hoard wealth and use AI to replace the human workforce.

It's almost like political worldviews aren't based on any consistent value system, but based purely on shallow tribalistic faddish bullshit.

That is a very good point.  AI is useful, and it will put artists out of work, and it isn't something to relish.  But AI is an example of technological advances affecting the workforce.  In contrast, Biden shutting down the coal mines, and the flippant "learn to code" response, is based on government interfering with commerce, making unavailable a product that is in demand, that everyone wants, that is essential to make life work.  All this, to advance a political agenda.

The difference is between sabotaging an industry and the latent adversity of our own innovating.

Quote from: Opaopajr on December 22, 2024, 11:15:04 PMHint: tracing is not a sin and a shame. You're not a pro artist; you just need to convey your ideas out of your head into a shape recognizable by others. Go get a light box and trace out *enough* of the AI reference and then finish up the piece with your touch.

Jesus Christ this term needs to die in Hell!

Using references is NOT "tracing" you absolute fucking morons!

I don't hate it. I would prefer art from a person though.  I do understand wanting to utilize it if you can not afford an artist.

Quote from: Sqeek McDohl on December 22, 2024, 12:29:47 AMI've been working on making AI art to fill a TTRPG book I wrote, given I cant afford to pay for art, and have been worried if people will hate my game for using it.

But then that train of thought got me thinking: I've only ever seen complaining about AI art coming from the extreme left crowd, and they already hate my game due to its subject matter. So, if we made a Venn diagram of the two groups, is it just a single circle?

I guess I'm just curious how widespread the violent anti-AI art sentiment is within the hobby, especially towards people who are genuinely too poor to afford buying art.

I'm not "against it" in an ethical sense, I just think it's not art, by definition, and it does nothing for me, so I won't purchase a book using it.

As to how I lean, well, I think the concept of taking a million completely unrelated social, economic, and legal issues and dividing them arbitrarily into two piles like a shitty cable package deal is frankly retarded, so I guess you could call me the excluded middle.

Me and my daughter had some fun generating it for our dnd sessions. I cannot cool art on my own. I don't think wotc or paizo need to do it though.

The problem is, corpos are gonna use it to hurt workers. This is unavoidable. If they can't profit from it, and it looks like this is the case with a coming bubble burst, then they'll let it die. You might still be able to run gen apps on your computer, but it won't be feasible to train them to the degree that big models got.

I'm indifferent. It comes down to me not giving a shit, and not wanting to find yet another fucking thing to whine about.

Quote from: Omega on December 27, 2024, 12:56:34 PM

Quote from: Opaopajr on December 22, 2024, 11:15:04 PMHint: tracing is not a sin and a shame. You're not a pro artist; you just need to convey your ideas out of your head into a shape recognizable by others. Go get a light box and trace out *enough* of the AI reference and then finish up the piece with your touch.

Jesus Christ this term needs to die in Hell!

Using references is NOT "tracing" you absolute fucking morons!

:D Love you, Omega. But I am actually talking about tracing when I mention using a light box. Light boxes are used for putting enough light for tracing an underneath image. Yes, it is a reference, but the method is not using a proportional divider, grid method, or eyeballing and working on one's perspective skills. It is a direct 1:1 tracing of the image onto another surface.

As long as it is not a 100% copy (including the polyploidy digits) it should be fine for amateur-cum-professional art. Then filling it in by hand should be enough to add human feeling, like a coloring book.

Unless you are talking about something else, I'm at a loss like when I'm listening to comic book fans. :) Is this an issue of tracing used as an epithet among such comic fans like Kevin Smith? Is this jargon friction leading to crossed wires?

QuoteI guess conservative artists are fucked then. Why pay them when you can ask Google to generate an image for free?

Conservative artists are painting actual paintings, make actual sculptures, project beautiful churches and homes.
AI does not strike against them, but against TUMBLR webartists, deviantart furry webcomicers... generally against group that is 97% anti-conservative, perverted and woke. GOOD RIDDANCE.

AI is good to replace graphic of goblin in RPG adventure not actual paintings and other high conservative arts.

QuoteHonestly? AI is a bloated energy, water, and raw materials hog consuming far more than it will ever produce in value.

Indeed. Unfortunately it wastes more energy and water, than humanity earns on starved tumblr yiffers :(

QuoteAI is presently only cheap for the end user because of the costs that are being covered by subsidies and tax deferments. As soon as you have to fully cover the costs of the energy, water use, infrastructure costs, financing of the data centers, paychecks of the support teams, and deprecation of the hardware it's going to not be nearly as cost effective as the public is being led to believe.

That's true alas I think they hope they will manage to make this tech way more energy sufficient. Plenty technologies started as fuel devourers before better methods are developed.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on December 27, 2024, 10:21:34 AMYou don't care about leftist artists losing their jobs, so crying "what about conservative artists?" seems more convincing. Didn't conservatives make a big stink about coal miners being fired and told "learn to code"? Where's your worker solidarity now?

Wow, came home from holiday to read buzzword vomit and someone deflecting with their own personal feelings. Why is it specifically that *I* don't care about lost jobs, liberal or conservative? Yes, that remark was stupid, but *I* didn't say that. To be frank, we as a country should have moved on from Coal long ago, but our government is too stupid to continue using Nuclear Power without cheaping out on maintenance. Art has always been seen as lesser than other Subjects in the business perspective. Big companies will fuck over anyone regardless of political view, in order to rake in more profits for the big wigs.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on December 27, 2024, 10:21:34 AMAutomating creativity is terrible for humanity, but conservatives seem to be cheering it to "own the libs!" and "so pretty!" You vote to remove regulations on corpos, then cry foul when they hoard wealth and use AI to replace the human workforce.

You realize that conservative politicians are also corpo bootlickers? Don't you know that most corporations lean conservative and pay those dumb fucks on the hill to make and back conservative policies that will make them more money? Corpos will gladly kick both of us to the curb if AI could be developed enough to replace us to hoard cold hard cash for themselves (which btw wasn't even the main point I was making in my post).

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on December 27, 2024, 10:21:34 AMIt's almost like political worldviews aren't based on any consistent value system, but based purely on shallow tribalistic faddish bullshit.

Oh wow, something we can agree on. I only wrote that throw-away line in the end because I observed in more than one thread, this line of taking a side on things that fucks over everyone regardless of political view. Companies don't care if they take a job away from a fatass liberal idiot in Seattle or a hard-working conservative hick in Kansas.

Quote from: MoFoCThat on January 04, 2025, 03:44:08 AM

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on December 27, 2024, 10:21:34 AMYou don't care about leftist artists losing their jobs, so crying "what about conservative artists?" seems more convincing. Didn't conservatives make a big stink about coal miners being fired and told "learn to code"? Where's your worker solidarity now?

Wow, came home from holiday to read buzzword vomit and someone deflecting with their own personal feelings. Why is it specifically that *I* don't care about lost jobs, liberal or conservative? Yes, that remark was stupid, but *I* didn't say that. To be frank, we as a country should have moved on from Coal long ago, but our government is too stupid to continue using Nuclear Power without cheaping out on maintenance. Art has always been seen as lesser than other Subjects in the business perspective. Big companies will fuck over anyone regardless of political view, in order to rake in more profits for the big wigs.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on December 27, 2024, 10:21:34 AMAutomating creativity is terrible for humanity, but conservatives seem to be cheering it to "own the libs!" and "so pretty!" You vote to remove regulations on corpos, then cry foul when they hoard wealth and use AI to replace the human workforce.

You realize that conservative politicians are also corpo bootlickers? Don't you know that most corporations lean conservative and pay those dumb fucks on the hill to make and back conservative policies that will make them more money? Corpos will gladly kick both of us to the curb if AI could be developed enough to replace us to hoard cold hard cash for themselves (which btw wasn't even the main point I was making in my post).

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on December 27, 2024, 10:21:34 AMIt's almost like political worldviews aren't based on any consistent value system, but based purely on shallow tribalistic faddish bullshit.

Oh wow, something we can agree on. I only wrote that throw-away line in the end because I observed in more than one thread, this line of taking a side on things that fucks over everyone regardless of political view. Companies don't care if they take a job away from a fatass liberal idiot in Seattle or a hard-working conservative hick in Kansas.

I agree with everything you said.

it's not hatred of AI art but of the theft by publishers of illustrators' work. i don't think that condemns your game if it has qualities. But yes, there is the risk of losing buyers. I'm the first.

I'm fine with people using it for their home games, but I wouldn't like to see it in a published product. That's a thing I quite like about TTRPGs in general is - in the playing of the game itself and outside of publishing anything - there's this generally accepted attitude of just stealing and adapting whatever works for your game, and it doesn't really matter cause it's just you and your friends at home. It's like a little island of post-copyright utopia and I enjoy that.

In my experience though it's really to difficult to get AI image generators to produce anything specific, and it requires so much effort tweaking the prompt that it's almost less work to just go look something up or draw it myself.

Just a couple of comments.  How much water is destroyed by AI?  The answer is zero.  It goes back into the water cycle since it is only used for cooling.  It's not contaminated or bound into other products.  The water goes up in the air or down the drain and returns to the system.  It is borrowed and as long as there is not a shortage, it is not an issue in my opinion.  Energy, yeah, that is a huge draw.

As to AI not producing anything specific, that's true if you are a prompt only user.  But, there is something called image to image and it is fairly common and easy to use.  I'll make a sketch in a setting or pose that I want and let the AI use that as a starting point.  [For example, I can't draw people, but I can mock them up in 3d tools and let the AI polish them.]

Here's a good example of image to image giving you more control over AI.  Robert took an old character drawing and had AI re-imagine it.

(http://www.tangent-zero.com/files/i2i_01.jpg) (Original)
(http://www.tangent-zero.com/files/i2i_02.jpg) (re-do)
(http://www.tangent-zero.com/files/i2i_03.jpg) (re-do)
(http://www.tangent-zero.com/files/i2i_04.jpg) (re-do)
(http://www.tangent-zero.com/files/i2i_05.jpg) (re-do)
(http://www.tangent-zero.com/files/i2i_06.jpg) (Original + re-do)

Quote from: zircher on January 06, 2025, 03:53:28 PMHere's a good example of image to image giving you more control over AI.  Robert took an old character drawing and had AI re-imagine it.

Which program did you use?

I use Fooocus and before that A111 with Stable Diffusion.  When I'm babysitting the grandkids, I'll use Nitecafe.studio when online.  They all support image to image and more control options.

oh, Robert says that he used Midjourney retexturing for those images.

I prefer the original drawing. The AI regens might look superficially more realistic, but the original drawing hews closest to the artist's original artistic vision. The AI regens keep getting basic details completely wrong, like the man's clothing or the robot's arm joints.

I would rather have complete control over the output rather than cede artistic vision to save time. AI only promotes sloth and incompetence.

Yeah, the original old character drawing is better. That sad, the additional AI compositions in posing and background is very useful as thumbnails! If you could trace some of those to "de-render" them into marker art that'd be cooler! Too bad the AI just tossed aside the robot for any old algorithmic hash, the old guy's clothes change-up is more forgiveable.

I'd rather have nothing but middle schooler margin doodles. Anything that was actually made by a human. I don't care if it's not a reasoned position. I won't budge.

I hate companies who say they hate AI art and then sneak it in anyway. Honestly I don't mind either way, but it will affect the overall value of the product to me if the art bears the classic signs of AI. More than anything, just put a damn disclaimer at the beginning of the book and your honesty is more appreciated than that of even some so-called professional companies. AI is like drum machines and autotune-- perfectly fine to do a sketch of something with but more likely to be criticized as a final product, but there are exceptions where it adds to the charm. The Ghostbusters theme was supposed to have real drums and ideally shouldn't have stolen the bass line from Huey Lewis, but it turned out fine, the drums maintaining a certain '80s charm and Huey got his lawsuit money.

That brings up a really troublesome point about AI using in commercial products, lawsuits.  In the US, anyone can sue you for a perceived theft.  Even if you win the case, you are still out the time and cost of the proceedings.  And, the plaintiff probably has inflicted damage to your product and brand regardless of the outcome.

I'm gonna go off on a limb here and say that "worker solidarity" disappeared the moment liberal Twitterati started popping off about learn to code.

That is to say, it's not so much that "worker solidarity" disappeared, but rather liberal Twitterati made people hate them. So when excessively woke, terminally online far left antifa extremists lose their jobs to AI, we all celebrate. It's not just conservatives.

It's not just people who draw, either, it's writers and translators. Most anime fans would rather have a 1:1 Japanese-to-English translation than whatever the localizers spit out. Left-wing artists losing their jobs means no more Man Jaw Industrial Complex. The writers who gave us pronouns and Body Type A / Body Type B? Also out of a job.

Your average normie doesn't think poorly of the coal miner from West Virginia, because that guy never did anything to them. They have some sympathy for that guy losing his job due to automation. Meanwhile, they actually do want to see the insufferable left-wing redditor out of a job because they can't compete with AI at producing tumblr fanart slop.

I have no antipathy towards AI. Most AI art I've seen doesn't impress me, but I don't hate that it exists, and I've used it as a starting point for some of my own uses (non-commercial) because my visual arts skills are potato. I also have no problem with AI being trained by anything put on the Internet (i.e., out in the public sphere).

Heck, things change. We used to need professional photographers for a good looking photo. Now everyone carries a camera with them and the need for a pro has dwindled. Other arts (and industries) will go the same way. Just evolution.

I agree with some of the posters though in that, if you say you won't use AI and you want to use live artists, don't lie. But the "Thou Shalt Not Lie" goes beyond AI.

Quote from: Corolinth on February 06, 2025, 12:47:51 PMIt's not just people who draw, either, it's writers and translators. Most anime fans would rather have a 1:1 Japanese-to-English translation than whatever the localizers spit out.

I find the whole localizers who input their own agendas thing to be extremely vile.  Put me in the literal translation camp with maybe a foot note to explain a little bit of actual culture along the way.

Top Music Attorney actually does a pretty good analysis of the US Copyright Office's recent report.

The short of it is, if you want to register your work for copyright, disclose and include discernable elements of your own human effort.  Prompt only works that are 100% AI generated work will not cut it.

As a professional illustrator (and someone who's done some work in the RPG world) I'm not vehemently opposed to AI art for low budget projects. I think it gives people with little or no money an option to have art in their games.

I think that some of it can look ropey, but if you get the keywords right, it can look pretty damn good too. I really like the way Red Room have used it. And to be fair to those guys, they hired several of us to work on their projects also - so they have a hybrid model.

My only two reservations about AI art are:

First, it will be a big problem for artists if the larger companies who can pay start using it and won't pay.

Last, the way the AI was trained using people's work without their knowledge, consent and with no remuneration. That was extremely unethical. But the genie is out of the bottle now, so-to-speak, so I don't hold any ill will to those small developers who are using it for their RPGs.

And I'm pretty surprised at the way these small devs are being attacked so vehemently.

Quote from: zircher on February 07, 2025, 05:00:52 AMTop Music Attorney actually does a pretty good analysis of the US Copyright Office's recent report.

The short of it is, if you want to register your work for copyright, disclose and include discernable elements of your own human effort.  Prompt only works that are 100% AI generated work will not cut it.

It's my opinion that if this ruling sticks, it will (given a decade or so) lead to a generally post-copyright internet.

The thing is that by enforcing that purely AI generated content is not copyrightable, you create an ocean of public domain content, and people can and will let a lot of AI enhanced workflow material go public domain to get the top quality slots of the AI generated content pool to get notoriety.

Copyright will softly make itself obsolete as licensed content will compete more and more with public domain AI and AI enhanced workflow material. Eventually, there will be so much public domain material out there that there won't be a point defending existing copyrights because the market to sell it to no longer exists as it did when there was a functional copyright market.

My brother likes playing a Tech based wizard in a game we play. 

He's also a fan of gothic anti-heroes.

He used Google's Gemini AI art to make himself a character portrait.

I don't see this as anything to get worked up about.  He would never pay anyone to make a portrait for him. 

Overall, I do see regular artists getting paid less because a lot of what they do can be AI now.  I see a lot of AI thumbnail art these days for example. 

I won't disqualify a full RPG for AI art because I too like to play around with AI art software.  I see its usefulness too much. 

Quote from: weirdguy564 on February 07, 2025, 10:39:08 AMMy brother likes playing a Tech based wizard in a game we play. 

He's also a fan of gothic anti-heroes.

He used Google's Gemini AI art to make himself a character portrait.

That looks pretty cool. Def looks AI generated, it has that soft lighting and abstract background characteristic of it. That's a cools use case for the tool.

Quote from: Zenoguy3 on February 07, 2025, 11:14:18 AM

Quote from: weirdguy564 on February 07, 2025, 10:39:08 AMMy brother likes playing a Tech based wizard in a game we play. 

He's also a fan of gothic anti-heroes.

He used Google's Gemini AI art to make himself a character portrait.

That looks pretty cool. Def looks AI generated, it has that soft lighting and abstract background characteristic of it. That's a cools use case for the tool.

AI is just far too good at what it does now.  There can be no putting it back to the way things were.

That being said, it's still a weird legal area.  I could never publish a commercial product, even a free one, using actual celebrities in the images.  Not Emma Watson as a Jedi, or Conan the Barbarian.

Quote from: Corolinth on February 06, 2025, 12:47:51 PMIt's not just people who draw, either, it's writers and translators. Most anime fans would rather have a 1:1 Japanese-to-English translation than whatever the localizers spit out. Left-wing artists losing their jobs means no more Man Jaw Industrial Complex. The writers who gave us pronouns and Body Type A / Body Type B? Also out of a job.

Not just anime. They have been "fixing" manga for a good while now apparently. I only just recent tripped over one instance last year. There may be alot more out there. Words out of place like "I identify as" and the incessant use of "Queendom" instead of Kingdom are two noticed. 

My thoughts personally:

1) I'm politically weird – I'm very much neither left nor right, so I may not be the audience you want an opinion from.

2) There are at least three options besides going art-free and using AI art:

a) Use human-made public domain art. This was somewhat popular in OSR publications a decade ago – not sure how popular it is now. Even ACKS 1e used Telecanter's "Public Domain Silhouettes" for most of their monster illustrations.

b) Make a profit-sharing deal with an artist.

c) Draw your own art. Depending on the feel you're going for, this may or may not fly, but... have you seen the Original D&D art? Different time, different market, blah, blah, blah, but that sold like hot cakes. It's not impossible, and might even give your game some nostalgic atmosphere – again, depending on the feel you're going for in your game.


3) This has been mentioned before, but, yeah, take into consideration that you won't own the artwork if it is AI generated.

4) I would personally prefer a game with no art to a game with AI art. I'm increasingly concerned that AI is going to be making our lives worse and every time someone uses it we are moving further into a future that sucks for everyone. I'm increasingly on Team Butlerian Jihad.

I might be on the odd end of things, but I would almost prefer game books without art.  I think more people would prefer art instead of no art.  I know there's a lot of public domain art that can be used for free.

I wonder if the question should be "I want to use AI art to help get an idea about how things could look, then I might re-draw some art, but I know it will look bad or amaturish, but maybe that art, even bad, would be more preferable to no art at all?"  And that may be the question, bad art vs no art? 

Quote from: Ratman_tf on December 22, 2024, 12:40:55 AMI don't hate AI art. But it does make cheap, uninspired results. I've used it in my personal projects but that's just for my own use, not for sale.
Stock art is pretty cheap on drivethrurpg. I've bought a few packs.
I won't get "violent" over a for-sale RPG using AI art, but I do think it's a turn-off, especially when the AI art is that samey hyper detailed but boring and slightly off pieces that distract from whatever they're supposed to represent.

I mean alot of older licensed books just used stills (the new Cyberpunk Edgerunners box does the same), still think it's better then AI but ultimatly I don't see too much of an issue with AI if need be, though proper art is obviously better.

Quote from: kosmos1214 on December 22, 2024, 03:22:31 PM

Quote from: Sqeek McDohl on December 22, 2024, 02:48:25 PM

Quote from: Fheredin on December 22, 2024, 02:29:17 PMI am generally pro-AI, but also against generating AI content with a cloud platform. For reasons I am about to discuss, if it is at all possible you should generate with local hardware.
 

I've been looking into that but I'm not sure how complicated it is to set up, would you recommend any tutorials?

Been struggling with cloud AI platforms due to the fact my game is set in World War 2 but they all refuse to generate anything resembling a german. I get why they ban it, but it is frustrating if you're trying to make anything set during that time period.

To be honest the censorship of AI art is its biggest drawback as a tool.
That probably wont last forever but for the time being its a legitimate drawback.
As to pro vs anti AI I'm not sure where I fit in that split anymore to much has gone on in my life what I do know is that I lean pro AI in meany regards. Also don't think its just your friend group that is lacking in opinion out side of the art micro universe of our culture there are a lot of people even fairly young people who don't see AI technology as a thing that is going to effect there lively hoods or there lives in a significant way. That view point may not be based in learned fact or practical reality but that's from what I can tell where most people actually seem to sit on the issue.

Not really an issue if you run it locally, I know my friend uses a local one for his campaign.

I dislike BAD art, not necessarily AI art. A lot of the AI 'art' doesn't look that good to my eye, but I don't hate the fact that it's AI. I'd rather look at AI art than a lot of what made it into a lot of Palladium products over the years, for example.

I draw, but I don't have any natural gift for art. I think I have a lot less potential than average, but I've gotten pretty good. Better than the stuff in ODnD at least.

It's a tremendous bummer to practice something for hours on end for like twenty years only for computers to come along and completely flood the world with AI images. Most of them are dogshit, but some of them are actually good art, which is worse.

I understand how much it must cost to hire professional artists for an RPG, but it still really sucks.

Courts are starting to define AI generators as copyright infringement. The tide might be turning

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on February 13, 2025, 12:24:00 PMCourts are starting to define AI generators as copyright infringement. The tide might be turning

Oh yeah, it often is questionable. Someone would be wise to only train on actual public domain resources, but with the ease of copyright infringement online... I'm not sure it will happen anytime soon. Again, this is why using AI for personal or small projects seems okay to me but a bigger RPG should really invest in real art, if not just to protect themselves.

Well now these fuckers are assisting AI art scamming. Now these things can make a "Speed Draw" video to fool people into thinking the thief actually drew it.


She is right. This "feature" only exists as a scamming tool.

Quote from: D-ko on February 13, 2025, 08:37:48 PMSomeone would be wise to only train on actual public domain resources...

There is such a thing.  I played with it back in the day (SD 1.0?), it was fine for some drawing, wood cuts, and oil paintings on non-modern topics.  Something to consider depending on your art style. 

There was Adobe Firefly back when they claimed that it was trained only on PD and licensed art.  But, that was proven to be a lie since it was learned that some Mid-Journey images were used in its training data.  I should check and see if a more modern PD model was built.

Thats the other reason so many despise AI art and whatever. The incessant attempts at deception. Both from users and especially the creators.

US Copyright Office policy does address that a bit.  If generative art was used in your project, you have to claim that or otherwise your copyright registration will be voided.

Really? I've love a source on that, not that I don't believe you but I'd like to read more on that.

Quote from: D-ko on February 15, 2025, 12:45:41 PMReally? I've love a source on that, not that I don't believe you but I'd like to read more on that.

"It explained that if a work contains more than a de minimis amount of AI-generated material, the applicant should disclose that information and provide a brief statement describing the human author's contribution."  -- Page 11, Para 2.

https://www.copyright.gov/ai/Copyright-and-Artificial-Intelligence-Part-2-Copyrightability-Report.pdf (https://www.copyright.gov/ai/Copyright-and-Artificial-Intelligence-Part-2-Copyrightability-Report.pdf)

I found reading the whole document to be informative on the Office's principles and criteria for copyrightability.