I first dabbled with AI image generation back in 2022 and sprinkled a few such images throughout my worldbuilding project. It was easy to look past all of the flaws with the idea that it was nothing more than a novelty. And I never cared nearly enough about my worldbuilding to pay anyone for artwork of it.
Now that I look back at it, those images are obvious slop, which I’ve grown to dislike as much as the next person. But recent comments I’ve seen here and on other sites have made me wonder if my brain has rotted in the same manner that makes some boomers fall for AI slop. There will be videos where the use of AI is not very noticeable to me, but not with deceptive intent. Maybe an illustration to get the point across or a subtle two-second animation. Commenters will very passionately point it out. To be honest, I don’t see the creator either paying for the equivalent human work or drawing anything better themselves.
Does it really just look that bad? Is it an issue with what AI and the companies that sponsor it stand for? Theft of real artists’ work? Does it change at all if the images were generated locally with the creator’s own hardware and resources? What about upscaling images, like I do with old wallpapers so that they look better on new monitors?
I assume what I’ve just said will attract downvotes, but that was my thought process and I do want to understand where other people draw the line and for what reasons. Should we limit it to quick-and-dirty illustrations, pure novelty, upscaling existing images, a model that only incorporates work if the artist consents, or something else?
removing ur ex from that one photo
blurry background art (eg. in a game like hollow knight, where there are thousands of images, i wouldn’t mind if like 100 of them which you barely notice wouldn’t have been made from scratch, saving peoples time)
I see no issue with locally run models like Z-Image Turbo. They take very little resources to run, so there’s no real issue with energy use here. They produce good results when prompted properly.
The whole theft of artist work applies to commercial models where companies are profiting of other people’s work. However, I simply don’t see the argument when it comes to open models that anybody can use freely, and especially in cases where you’re not producing images for profit.
Basically NEVER
Learn using image generation properly rather than accepting slop and use it when you need it’s. Just like with LLMs generating text.
These tools are going to stay and they can be useful. Refusing to use them when they are useful for a good cause is not going to help anybody.
Also, problematic aspects of these tools are always related to capitalism. Artists whose work was used against their interests suffer because of conditions of our current socio-economic system. In a system that doesn’t make relationship with art alienated, it wouldn’t exist.
AI images have this uncanny valley effect to them. They are unsettingly off, because they are not human. I think they are fine for idea generation, but you will lose credibility if you use them elsewhere.
never. ai “art” is theft.
Hypothetically, any time you’d not be able to have a person do it.
Thing is, all the current models out there are built on stolen talent. So you have to decide if that matters to you.
Me? I don’t hate generative software per se. I think it does fine for the exact cases you mention.
It doesn’t necessarily look bad, but it has a certain look. Once you start to recognize AI’s tells you can’t unsee it.
I don’t think individual use matters that much. It’s slop, but if it doesn’t matter then slop is fine. It’s when institutions and companies and governments are using generated images instead of hiring an artist that it becomes a problem; an artist didn’t get paid for what is essentially stolen work and now that slop will be crammed down our throats.
Apple has “GenMoji” and I find that a good use for it. It’s using emojis that they designed for the model, generating other emojis that you can only use on their devices (or sending an image). I use it to make new funny reaction emojis for me and my friends. I cannot use any art for other types of reactions the same way that emojis work (like reacting with an emoji for an image).
Morally: never. It’s built off stolen property and destroys the world with its ecological consequences.
Practically: as a placeholder. A real human will always outperform an AI, but if the intent is not quality but to just get the gist across, then it works in a pinch.
To be clear, it’s not just the quality of the final product that matters. An AI-generated product is unmaintainable and uneditable. You can’t make variations of a generated product. It’s technical debt at its most fundamental
No
If you are very ugly, yet you need a new passport.
It depends on the product. I don’t want to be served slop, designed to generate mindless clicks but if AI is secondary to something being produced by a human, for humans, I’m a little less upset about it.
Examples: SNL used an AI photo as an illustration for a weekend upstate story joke. The star of the show was the news story and the punchline to follow. The illustration helps the delivery, but isn’t the product.
I could also understand (for example) AI-generated background music when creating a video on YouTube, so long as the purpose of the video is worth a damn.
I think it makes sense as temp assets in my field (video games), but ideally, you get a real artist rather than use AI. Temp can help visualize the intent, but a real artist will always out perform a machine on creativity, style, etc. I’ve used it for image quality upscaling—I don’t know how to do this on my own, but I guess I could learn.
There’s likely other cases that are “visual” gen AI but maybe medical (pattern recognition?) or gap filling for something like architecture (like first pass treatments). I’m completely guessing there.
The cost to generate an AI image is something like 60 ml of water (shot glass?) or 1kWh (like watching 2 HD movies via stream).
Sure, yes, at scale, this stuff is bad. I would say the worst element is corporate profit of public goods: these machines were made with mass theft, and therefore, In my opinion, should be nationalized or universalized. In this reality, that is basically a joke.
At an individual level, and a personal level, I know driving my car is bad, especially if it runs on gas. Running ACs in the summer is also bad. Leaving the water running while shaving is bad. So is a myriad of many things I do. AI use is completely optional, but it’s not an automatic marker of anyone’s moral standing, at least not more than the other cases I mentioned. You can also offset these costs as a way to be more morally just.
For me:
- Use for temp art
- Hire a real human
- Offset as best you can.
One of my favorite shows is the Good Place because it highlights how impossible it is to live a perfectly good, moral life in the modern world. I think ascetics who aren’t using the internet or posting on social media are probably closest. I’m sure as hell not.
