I have a question about people's thoughts on AI.

I'm completely against use of AI to create artwork. The "learned" art is the same as stealing IMO, and the output requires zero artistic talent.

But AI can also be a useful tool in terms of image processing and cleaning, can it not?

I ran into a project that used old Public Domain Black and White horror movie images. They sharpened and colorized the images using AI. A tool to save time, as that is a huge labor intensive project if done by 'hand.'

This is there AI statement:

quote:

Use of AI
As an artist, I’m aware of the sensitivity to the use of AI. AI was used on this project to improve resolution and assist in colorizing the photo images which were otherwise unsatisfactory for print. All the writing and the cartoon illustrations on each card back were created by human.

Does this scream AVOID? Or since they are open about the use and not creating artwork with AI do you consider the set to be OK?

I'm on the fence on this one, and curious what the collectors out there think.

Ed

That would be great if AI were used only to eliminate time-consuming clean-up work but that artist knows what's coming. My brother is a graphic artist in his late 50's. He has a lot of experience but he's looking at new career options. He says AI will bring an end to photoshoots.

I would be happy with that usage

It seems the artist is giving full disclosure here so no issues at all. AI has its place in certain applications.

quote:

Originally posted by Scifi Cards:
The "learned" art is the same as stealing IMO,

Tangible objects can be stolen. If you steal my car, you have it and I don't.

What is being stolen here?

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Mullins:

quote:

Originally posted by Scifi Cards:
The "learned" art is the same as stealing IMO,

Tangible objects can be stolen. If you steal my car, you have it and I don't.

What is being stolen here?

Original art is protected by copyright and as such can be stolen even if in digital form.

Use of such art without credit and compensation is stealing from the original artist.

Ed

Stealing and theft are crimes. You can go to jail or prison for them. Copyright infringement is a civil tort. You can get sued for doing it. Both are against the law, but they are different things.

Plus, in the recent Bartz vs. Anthropic lawsuit, the court found that using copyrighted works to train AI systems was Fair Use, so it's not even infringement.

quote:

Originally posted by Scifi Cards:
I have a question about people's thoughts on AI.

I'm completely against use of AI to create artwork. The "learned" art is the same as stealing IMO, and the output requires zero artistic talent.

But AI can also be a useful tool in terms of image processing and cleaning, can it not?

I ran into a project that used old Public Domain Black and White horror movie images. They sharpened and colorized the images using AI. A tool to save time, as that is a huge labor intensive project if done by 'hand.'

This is there AI statement:

quote:

Use of AI
As an artist, I’m aware of the sensitivity to the use of AI. AI was used on this project to improve resolution and assist in colorizing the photo images which were otherwise unsatisfactory for print. All the writing and the cartoon illustrations on each card back were created by human.

Does this scream AVOID? Or since they are open about the use and not creating artwork with AI do you consider the set to be OK?

I'm on the fence on this one, and curious what the collectors out there think.

Ed

Hi Ed, I'll try to answer you without legality arguments

I am not a fan of AI "art" at all. To me, personally, I feel that using photos or novels and such that are online (whether or not they are copyrighted) to train AI to create new "art" based on the actual art created by human beings THAT HAVE NOT GIVEN THEIR PERMISSION TO HAVE THEIR ART USED is highly unethical. I have capped that part because permission is the key. Whether or not it is legal doesn't matter to me (I have not looked it up as it will not change my mind on AI, so no point in arguing the legality of it with me, not directed at you, Ed).

If you have used someone's art to create something you are gaining $ off of (be it from selling or social media) without permission from the artist it is unethical.

In regards to the use of AI to sharpen and colorize images that are Public Domain - I don't think I see issue with that. The only thing is that it takes a job away from someone who would normally do that manually but I honestly don't think that matters in this case as it seems to be a small project done by one person.

But personally, I just steer away from certain AI programs (depending on how the AI was trained, see why above) and anything they are used for completely. It is just easier for me.

I am not an expert on AI or how AI is trained. Just putting that out there.

If anyone remembers a few years ago dont remenber how many there was a eruption about the coming and use of AI .
It died down and AI was tucked away and left to smoulder.
But it was a hell of an eruption in the end nothing really happened.
Now there seems to be acceptance, what happened ?

At the end of the day AI is just a tool. Personally I don't care if they use it in a card set I will just be happy that card sets continue to be produced. Ultimately I think they're going to be a range of different things that happen with AI and cards. Some of the cards will look awesome and some will look terrible. I would imagine at some point people don't even consider whether or not AI was used and just tried to determine if they like what was produced or not.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: webjon,