I know I’m preaching to the choir here, but I wanted to post the reply I was writing to a comment on a now-deleted thread in @[email protected] (because it was only a screenshot of a post) regarding the Studio Ghibli style AI “art.”

How is that different than a human artist using their eyes to look at some Ghibli art, taking inspiration from the style, and making a unique drawing or painting with the same style? Artists take inspiration from and copy the style of other artists all the time. If I had the ability to copy the style of Leonardo da Vinci and if I made a painting of my daughter posing like the Mona Lisa on a street in New York, would I be counterfeiting the Mona Lisa? Same style, same pose, different character different backdrop, inspired by the original but not a copy of the original.

I won’t talk too much on the copyright aspect, but I want to comment about why I believe it’s different from an artist using “inspiration.”

I stumbled upon this artist’s video a while ago, where she included what I found to be a beautiful anecdote about some of the things that influence us, as human beings, when we produce art.

It’s not the same as with an AI, that processes hundreds of thousands of images (usually without the image owner’s knowledge or consent) and spits something out without feeling or thought. It’s a machine’s recreation that lacks depth.

Aside from “studies” where we try to copy the art exactly, usually used for learning techniques, we will rarely get a perfect recreation of likeness or style. Humans aren’t machines, and expressions of our personality, our life, and our hours or years of practice will show up in our artwork.

When an artist uploads their work, it’s meant for other people, fellow human beings, to see, to empathize with, and to hopefully take inspiration from. We’re happy when other people get inspired by our work and want to try something similar. Artists don’t feel that same joy with AI “art.” Nor were we expecting our work to be used as training data for generative AI.

It’s been a while since I’ve made art, and I haven’t uploaded anything in years, but this is why I strongly empathize with artists’ concerns lately about AI training off of our artwork.

tl;dr I don’t think it’s the same as artists “taking inspiration” from other work because it lacks the depth of human expression.

Sorry for the wall of text. Thank you for listening to my TED Talk.

  • ThefuzzyFurryComrade@pawb.social
    102·
    7 days ago

    Wholeheartedly agree

    I am going to put one of my earlier comments that is fairly relevant

    Ah yes, because when humans do art we never add little touches that make it our own even if we are closely following the source material. Meanwhile AI only closely follows its data

    Take for example this redraw of this meme:

    Source

    Vs the original:

    Source

    While they appear similar you can clearly see where they differ, with the end result being much better vs if they had copied the original more faithfully. Those changes were all intentionally done, based on the artists experiences biases and even mood. When AI makes changes it does not have the same intentions because it does not have artistic intent.

    Art is a foundational way of human communication. AI slop is not that, as it mimics art while losing out on all but the most superficial of its communication.