Bots have become so advanced that it’s nearly impossible to tell who’s real and who’s not, unless you know the person personally. :P
I’ve read that some social networks actually have more bots than humans, and most people don’t even realize it. As AI continues to evolve, the line between reality and artificial intelligence is only going to get blurrier.
I never shared any A.I. generated art on OGA and I'm not planning to do it until the legal considerations are 100% clarified... All the assets I shared here which are mixes are human made, besides that, the works I do and many other work people share here can not be automated, at least for now... and I would bet not even in 10 years. A.I. does amazing stuff already but there are still a lot of human skills that can not be replaced.
yes, that spritesheet generator is an awesome tool and if in the good hands, combining it with an A.I. you can get great personalized results for your assets and you spare the time of creating the base images for the dual conditioning. Good advice to combine both worlds! I don't think we would see a software that combine generative art with that sprite sheet generator any time soon, but using the best of those tools and combining them manually should not be too hard I think.
Hi, I want to share what I've learnt about A.I. and copyright in this regards with the hope it would be of any use:
- A.I. art of any type can not be copyrighted.
- The only way to copyright content generated with A.I. as CC0 or any creative commons license would be by making sure that the model used was trained with CC0 or content or any compatible license.
- It is impossible to prove the source of any generated A.I. content, you can never know how any derivated content has been achieved or which model was used and how it was trained.
In my opinion, if the new chord that you generated does not exist and is not copyrighted, it should be fine to use , but I'm afraid I have none to say about what is permited in OGA and I'm also not a lawyer so this is not by any means advice.
To me a chord that does not belong to any copyrighted song is a new chord and it doesn't matter if it came out of your mind of an A.I. and who will be able to know how you did it?
I guess you know the story of the A.I. generated art that won a price in colorado (more info in wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Th%C3%A9%C3%A2tre_D%27op%C3%A9ra_Spatial), it is relevant I think because the person who won the prize and generated the art tried to copyright the art and this was what happened:
"the Copyright Office Review Board made a final determination and found that Théâtre D'Opéra Spatial was not eligible for copyright protection as the human creative input was de minimis, with the AI-generated elements dominating."
So according to what happened in that case, if the A.I. does not "dominate" the work you are doing it should not be considered A.I. generated, otherwise yes.
actually it would not be safe to share anything no matter if A.I. or not A.I. generated because there is no way you can prove how it was generated.
There are instances of stable diffusion in which you can choose what are so called "checkpoints". According to what I found on internet this is the definition of checkpoints: "Checkpoints and models are fundamental concepts in machine learning that are related but distinct... A checkpoint is a snapshot during the training that captures the state of a model at a specific stage in the training process. In other words, checkpoints are a type of AI models. Think of checkpoints as save points in a video game, allowing you to capture the state of your model at specific intervals during training. When you use a checkpoint, you are able to generate images using the concepts and knowledge it has learnt up to the checkpoint."
There are thousands of those checkpoints you can find on the internet and choose to achieve and accomplish specific requirements and results.
So if I understand right, you can choose models that are trained exclusively on cc0 materials and also make checkpoints specific to any type of realism or art type you want, but the question specific to licensing is: how do you prove you used the right model and checkpoint to license any A.I. generated art as cc0?
The answer to this question is to me clear: you can't, and actually you can not prove either if a so called "non A.I. generated" assets was really made by a human. You can try to figure out and get close to the real source of the assets based on some patterns, but you can not assure anything. You can even make the A.i. draw like an amateur artist and make the A.I. make the same mistakes a human would make and make art with the A.I. indistinguishable from real human art if you train it with the right set of assets (for instance by feeding it with amateur assets).
you are welcome. I love games with integrated level editors, well done!
I don't know which assets would fit because you can theme the game with anything you like, but there are pretty good filters you can use, simply type in the filters the theme you are interested on (for instance "space") and you'll find all kind of art with that theme, you'll find almost any theme in this site which is great!
hi there, the game looks pretty cool. Regarding the art, you can pick pretty good art for the game here on OGA.
If you want to use A.I., my advise is not to replace the whole workflow with single prompts results because it usually looks inconsistent and random, instead, try to use human made art and then use dual conditioning (art + prompts). On top of that, if you want to refine more the results I advise to generate the art based on individual concepts / elements (do not try to do several arts at the same time because the A.I. would probable mix all the wrong way and you'll end up with a mess) and then edit the results (clean them, remove what is not needed etc).
I know the advise I'm giving results in spending even more time sometimes than drawing it yourself (in some cases) but if the goal is to achieve good art there's no magic A.I. that can replace a whole workflow without messing things up in my opinion.
I hope this helps and good luck with the project, it looks pretty cool!
Maybe he’s not just using AI—maybe he is an AI.
Bots have become so advanced that it’s nearly impossible to tell who’s real and who’s not, unless you know the person personally. :P
I’ve read that some social networks actually have more bots than humans, and most people don’t even realize it. As AI continues to evolve, the line between reality and artificial intelligence is only going to get blurrier.
I never shared any A.I. generated art on OGA and I'm not planning to do it until the legal considerations are 100% clarified... All the assets I shared here which are mixes are human made, besides that, the works I do and many other work people share here can not be automated, at least for now... and I would bet not even in 10 years. A.I. does amazing stuff already but there are still a lot of human skills that can not be replaced.
yes, that spritesheet generator is an awesome tool and if in the good hands, combining it with an A.I. you can get great personalized results for your assets and you spare the time of creating the base images for the dual conditioning. Good advice to combine both worlds! I don't think we would see a software that combine generative art with that sprite sheet generator any time soon, but using the best of those tools and combining them manually should not be too hard I think.
I love both statues, very nice lighting, textures and shadows, well done!
I used the older statue, this is some art I created, rendered with a shader in realtime in a game.
I love them, I thogh you may like to see how they look in my game: https://codeberg.org/glitchapp/MadWheelZ
Hi, I want to share what I've learnt about A.I. and copyright in this regards with the hope it would be of any use:
- A.I. art of any type can not be copyrighted.
- The only way to copyright content generated with A.I. as CC0 or any creative commons license would be by making sure that the model used was trained with CC0 or content or any compatible license.
- It is impossible to prove the source of any generated A.I. content, you can never know how any derivated content has been achieved or which model was used and how it was trained.
In my opinion, if the new chord that you generated does not exist and is not copyrighted, it should be fine to use , but I'm afraid I have none to say about what is permited in OGA and I'm also not a lawyer so this is not by any means advice.
To me a chord that does not belong to any copyrighted song is a new chord and it doesn't matter if it came out of your mind of an A.I. and who will be able to know how you did it?
I guess you know the story of the A.I. generated art that won a price in colorado (more info in wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Th%C3%A9%C3%A2tre_D%27op%C3%A9ra_Spatial), it is relevant I think because the person who won the prize and generated the art tried to copyright the art and this was what happened:
"the Copyright Office Review Board made a final determination and found that Théâtre D'Opéra Spatial was not eligible for copyright protection as the human creative input was de minimis, with the AI-generated elements dominating."
So according to what happened in that case, if the A.I. does not "dominate" the work you are doing it should not be considered A.I. generated, otherwise yes.
actually it would not be safe to share anything no matter if A.I. or not A.I. generated because there is no way you can prove how it was generated.
There are instances of stable diffusion in which you can choose what are so called "checkpoints". According to what I found on internet this is the definition of checkpoints: "Checkpoints and models are fundamental concepts in machine learning that are related but distinct... A checkpoint is a snapshot during the training that captures the state of a model at a specific stage in the training process. In other words, checkpoints are a type of AI models. Think of checkpoints as save points in a video game, allowing you to capture the state of your model at specific intervals during training. When you use a checkpoint, you are able to generate images using the concepts and knowledge it has learnt up to the checkpoint."
There are thousands of those checkpoints you can find on the internet and choose to achieve and accomplish specific requirements and results.
So if I understand right, you can choose models that are trained exclusively on cc0 materials and also make checkpoints specific to any type of realism or art type you want, but the question specific to licensing is: how do you prove you used the right model and checkpoint to license any A.I. generated art as cc0?
The answer to this question is to me clear: you can't, and actually you can not prove either if a so called "non A.I. generated" assets was really made by a human. You can try to figure out and get close to the real source of the assets based on some patterns, but you can not assure anything. You can even make the A.i. draw like an amateur artist and make the A.I. make the same mistakes a human would make and make art with the A.I. indistinguishable from real human art if you train it with the right set of assets (for instance by feeding it with amateur assets).
it looks fantastic, the final result looks as if it was made in 3d. I love it.
you are welcome. I love games with integrated level editors, well done!
I don't know which assets would fit because you can theme the game with anything you like, but there are pretty good filters you can use, simply type in the filters the theme you are interested on (for instance "space") and you'll find all kind of art with that theme, you'll find almost any theme in this site which is great!
hi there, the game looks pretty cool. Regarding the art, you can pick pretty good art for the game here on OGA.
If you want to use A.I., my advise is not to replace the whole workflow with single prompts results because it usually looks inconsistent and random, instead, try to use human made art and then use dual conditioning (art + prompts). On top of that, if you want to refine more the results I advise to generate the art based on individual concepts / elements (do not try to do several arts at the same time because the A.I. would probable mix all the wrong way and you'll end up with a mess) and then edit the results (clean them, remove what is not needed etc).
I know the advise I'm giving results in spending even more time sometimes than drawing it yourself (in some cases) but if the goal is to achieve good art there's no magic A.I. that can replace a whole workflow without messing things up in my opinion.
I hope this helps and good luck with the project, it looks pretty cool!
Pages