11 ms·

After using SD heavily for a week, I half agree with this. It is incredibly disruptive, and it's wild how much it accelerates the creative process. I'll give yo

After using SD heavily for a week, I half agree with this. It is incredibly disruptive, and it's wild how much it accelerates the creative process. I'll give you that. But two things I've noticed: First, artists will still have a massive advantage over non-artists with this tool. A photographer who intimately knows the different lenses and cameras and industry terms will get to a representation of their idea much faster than someone without that experience. Without that depth of knowledge, someone might have to rely instead on random luck to create what's in their head. Art curators might be well-positioned here since having a wide breadth of knowledge and point of reference is their advantage. Second, we need the ability to persist a design. If I create a character using SD, I need to be able to persist that character across different scenarios, poses, emotions, lighting, etc. Based on what I know about the methods SD/Midjourney/Dall-E are using, I'm not sure how easy this will be to implement, or if it's even possible at all. There will always be subtle differences and that's where being an artist who can use SD for inspiration instead of merely creation will retain their advantage over a non-artist. That said, holy crap. This tech is insane.

canjobear 4y ago
> Second, we need the ability to persist a design. I See yesterday's Stable Diffusion article: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32643564 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32643564
- michaelchisari 4y ago
  I haven't had a chance to try it yet, I'm optimistic but skeptical that it can have true persistence like I'm referring to. Especially since it requires training your own model which requires multiple images of the same asset/character/object/etc.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - nomel 4y ago
    For what I think you have in mind, I suspect it will eventually not be "image to image", but "<ai thing> to <ai thing> + image", for that guess to be remotely repeatable. That "ai thing" is probably the persistence you're talking about. I think that thing will neccesarily contained representations of dimension, behavior (physics/bones), and "style". Without the "ai thing", if only using an image/text, the character would have to be impossibly represented in the model, so it could guess all of these things predictably. For example, what that character looks like from a side profile, or behind. What if it's an alien, and its arms should always bend backwards? Could a text representation ever be made to completely describe this, with good reproducibility? Probably not. But, I assume some non-human representation would have a better chance. As is, if something known is required, I think the behavior of these models can be considered "destructive" to the input image, more often than not. For this reason, I think artists are safe, for the time being. :)
  - Filligree 4y ago
    Textual inversion seems like it'll eventually cover this space. But bootstrapping is going to be harder than necessary, yes.
- isaacfrond 4y ago
  For face generation, I think there are deep neural networks that can generate multiple views of the same face [1], [2]. Stable diffusion already provides the possibility to generate variations. So I don't think it is a stretch to imagine that these existing capabilities will only get better and/or be applied to SD. [1]: Multi-View 3D Face Reconstruction with Deep Recurrent Neural Networks [2]: Deep Neural Network Augmentation: Generating Faces for Affect Analysis
Kiro 4y ago
What have you been using it for?
Swizec 4y ago
What about using this tech for ideation and artists for production? You could use Stable Diffusion et al to create new characters based on a prompt, then farm the concept out to artists to produce individual works. Kind of like hiring a super expensive agency to design your new logo or brand identity, then using a stable of in-house designers to translate the concept into UI, ads, etc.
- isaacfrond 4y ago
  Like this user, who creates new fashion designs using Dale https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32661515 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32661515
- bergenty 4y ago
  This is useless, you still have humans in the loop.
  - wruza 4y ago
    Useless? One can spend days/weeks/months enumerating different concepts of a design due to a roundtrip between “maybe we try <a prompt>” and an image. Now it’s literally minutes and a designer can draw you some ideas right at your office.
- michaelchisari 4y ago
  That’s where it’ll be truly disruptive. SD for ideation, humanity for the final product.
  - stocknoob 4y ago
    Honestly, I don’t even know if we’ll need humanity for the final product. It’s like using a chess computer to get an idea of a good move… and then a human to approve it? Adjust it? Be inspired by it? Any signals humans give (painting x is better than y) is another signal to encode. Take billions of such ratings and improve the AI’s taste to superhuman levels. In short, anything that humans would add to artistically improve the outcome is just another signal to be encoded. It’s weird to write it, but artistic creativity is deciding what new pixels go where, which is a search problem (in a large search space) which AIs are apparently doing great at. We have a bias: we’re humans, we must be important somehow! But it comes down to a bigger neural net eventually outperforming the one in our heads.
Fordec 4y ago
For every tool, a better output will always be created by people who specialize in a craft. Just as photoshop revolutionized photography, to this day you can tell the difference easily between and bad 'shops. In video games upon release everyone is bad and its an even playing field. But as people practice and gain experience they improve their usage, refine their approaches. You eventually see metas develop and best practices. This will all be exactly the same. Just give it some time and watch professionals create professional outputs compared to paying for some base level work on Fiverr or whatever.
- petra 4y ago
  Have we seen similar behavior in the usage of older GPT-3 based tools, for example in copywriting or using Copilot? How's the story there?
  - BigJono 4y ago
    There's one huge difference between Copilot and stuff like this. Art that's 98% correct is awesome. Code that's 98% correct is completely useless. I think Copilot is going to live off hype for a while then tank and be looked back on as a failed experiment. Whereas I think that this kind of AI will eventually get to a point where it's extremely useful and could change up certain industries (game assets, marketing materials etc).
    - eloff 4y ago
      As a new user of copilot for the last three months, I can't disagree more. I was initially skeptical, and I have noticed it often produces code that looks good but is wrong. However, it still saves me enough time each day to pay for the monthly subscription - in one day. That's a 30x ROI. I imagine it only gets better from here. I wont go back to programming without it.
      - galdosdi 4y ago
        Can I ask what kind of programming you do for it to be so helpful? I mostly do maintenance of legacy codebases (also known as codebases, lol) where a lot of the work is figuring out where the changes need to be made and actually making the changes is frequently just a few lines here and there. When I do have to figure out how to use some API, it's often not an open source one, so Copilot would not have it in its corpus. I think these kinds of conditions are really common since software tends to last for maintenance longer than it is in initial greenfield development. So I'm confused what kind of work benefits from Copilot. Just pumping out greenfield development of new websites/webapps that don't use much legacy or closed source code or services, just using existing popular open source libraries in commonplace ways? The other thing I wonder about is code quality. When I look up API docs and stackoverflow examples, I get to read them all, maybe test some examples out in a CLI/REPL, and then decide carefully exactly what to do myself, what special cases to worry about or not, what errors to handle, etc. Maybe what I end up writing is even the same as Copilot would have written. But in the process, I learn about finer details of the library and make detailed decisions about how to deal with rare edge cases. Might even end up writing a comment calling out a common pitfall I realized might exist. My question is -- in order to save so much time with Copilot, are you still able to do all this extra thinking and deciding and learning (in cases that warrant it)? Or would doing that just end up consuming most of the time Copilot "saved"? In other words do you end up producing code much more rapidly, but at the expense of code that looks more like a junior than a senior wrote it, because it is most concerned with working at all, and does not have time to worry about finer details? At the expense of not being as deeply familiar with the foibles of the API you're working on? Honest questions as I haven't tried Copilot, and these are the thoughts that make me imagine it won't be of value. A lot of what I know I learned from doing the parts of the work that Copilot would be automating. Sure, Copilot would save me time when initially writing it. But would I then have less deep knowledge available when there's a fire in production because I never explored the fine details of my dependencies as much?
babyshake 4y ago
Is it possible to provide another image as a prompt for SD? For example, could you provide a simple drawing of a house and expect it to render a house?
- mlboss 4y ago
  You can do using img2img method based on top of SD. Another option is to create an embedding of a concept based on textual inversion and then use the embedding to guide SD generation. Both methods are possible using this: https://github.com/hlky/stable-diffusion-webui https://github.com/hlky/stable-diffusion-webui
- fragmede 4y ago
  Yes: https://andys.page/posts/how-to-draw/ https://andys.page/posts/how-to-draw/
  - iakov 4y ago
    Thank you for this! I've been playing with the optimizedSD for a while but couldn't get what I wanted out of it. This guide makes sense to me. Gonna give it another shot on the weekend!
m12k 4y ago
I think this can be seen a bit like the invention of an "index fund" for art. Active investors are still needed to generate the market signals that an ETF can aggregate, but for the majority of people an ETF is preferable to the cost of hiring an active investor yourself. And similarly SD needs artists to generate the signal that it aggregates, but for the majority of people it might be (or might soon be) preferable to use SD to get a "generic"/"average" result instead of hiring an artist yourself.
- janandonly 4y ago
  There is bound to be a smart kid who already turned this idea into a shitcoin (meaning a pump and dumb money grab, not an actual attempt to make a art-index and tokenize it). It seems someone indeed did this (the p&d, not the index): https://www.coingecko.com/en/coins/artonline
kfrzcode 4y ago
> artists will still have a massive advantage over non-artists with this tool. Good; I hope the future of software engineering AI generative tooling is also more useful for software engineers.
- taneq 4y ago
  Ultimately software engineering isn’t about code, it’s about describing in sufficient detail exactly what you want. Of course, this just leads to business analysts and ux designers being the next ones to be replaced after coders… :P
fragmede 4y ago
For what you're looking for, inpainting can achieve that continuity without retraining a model.
jcelerier 4y ago
> A photographer who intimately knows the different lenses and cameras and industry terms will get to a representation of their idea much faster than someone without that experience There are already websites which sells tailored "professional" prompts for dall-e, GPT3, etc
systemvoltage 4y ago
I always wondered if we massively overestimate human creativity. Maybe it is ingrained in our culture and our very being. I’ve never heard counter arguments that humans are not that creative. Creativity demonstrated by Alpha zero chess engine blows Magnus Carlsen’s mind (from his recent interview with Lex Fridman), I wonder if at some point in the future, we’ll finally throw in the towel and get out of the denial phase.
- isaacfrond 4y ago
  "AlphaZero would sacrifice a knight or sometimes two pawns, three pawns, you can see that it's looking for some sort of positional domination, but it's hard to understand. It was really fascinating to see. "
- srg0 4y ago
  I believe the creativity is primarily the process, something we enjoy doing, not the method to _produce_ or _generate_ something. Sort of like dogs like playing fetch. Some creative processes do not create permanent artifacts at all, like all performing arts.
- shinycode 4y ago
  Without trained models from human creativity, what can AI do ? These AI emerged because of human creativity. Picasso created it’s new art form from its own creativity. He created something no one ever though of before. Now AI are fueled with Picasso’s drawing and can produce art that looks like his maybe. But what about creating something entirely new that has never been fueled into the engine. Could the AI invent something I’m about to dream tomorrow and this be the exact same copy ?
  - TchoBeer 4y ago
    I think it's undeniable that AI can create novel things, the question is if AI can create novel things that are also interesting. A randomized 600x600 png is novel, but it isn't at all interesting, much of what goes into making a piece of art interesting is not a quantifiable or well-defined goal. That's not to say that AI is better than humans, just the opposite, art is a deeply human object, and I do not know if we would appreciate art made and developed by AI in the same way we do absorbing and creating art in response to each other.
Daub 4y ago
The position of creative oversight that you describe in your second paragraph is effectively that of and art director. Not, unfortunately, an artist.
paraknight 4y ago
I've seen an inpainting technique where you put an existing character then describe what their twin is doing, then crop out the existing, which seems to persist the character at the cost of fewer pixels to work with
bulla 4y ago
https://textual-inversion.github.io/ https://textual-inversion.github.io/ Is this what you mean by the character persisting across scenarios, poses etc?
spaniard89277 4y ago
I've tried too, and honestly I'll hire artists again (I did several times). It's easy to come up with nonsense, so in the end I think this is a tool in the hands of artists more than anything else. For threatening artists it should be much better. Maybe it's not the model, maybe it's the interface human-computer that fails, but in the end it's what we have. Maybe someone with a lot of time in their hands can iterate enough times to come up with something nice and depicting what they wanted. Not for me.
- ekianjo 4y ago
  Thus is just the beginning. Imagine 5 years later what tools we will have.
  - sarchertech 4y ago
    That’s possible, but my gut feeling is that this turns out to the the same as the DARPA grand challenge moment for self driving cars. It was an absolutely amazing accomplishment. I legitimately thought I could hold out long enough that my next car would be fully self driving. Truckers were an endangered species. But here we are 20 years later, and we’re still almost there. We’ve made amazing progress and I love the self driving features I do have on my car, but how many jobs have been replaced by self driving cars?
papito 4y ago
Well, it won't replace creativity, it just makes starting out easier. SQL was designed so that business people could describe queries in English. How did that work out? Now, of course, we have ORM's, which will get you data, sure, but often in egregiously inefficient ways if not used correctly. If you want to to get it right, you still need to pop the hood and adjust things, and you have to know what you are doing. I see this as similar.
jstummbillig 4y ago
> A photographer who intimately knows the different lenses and cameras and industry terms will get to a representation of their idea much faster than someone without that experience. Sure. Only now the gap has been shrunk by a factor of infinity, because the time to representation was infinite for someone without that experience before.
- heartbreak 4y ago
  Photographers also spend a great deal of time shooting real people and events. An AI-generated wedding photo is not a thing.
intrasight 4y ago
Anyone else like me say "2D art? Boring. The real world is 3D"?
Applejinx 4y ago
It'd have to get itself into the dataset, as if it was 'Snoop Dogg' or some other identifiable person that the AI can reproduce. The degree to which you can generate stuff that is deepfake 'Elon Musk' doing whatever you say, is the degree to which you can invent a character and have the AI generate images (or video) of it following (sort of) your script and directions.
earth_walker 4y ago
I think there will likely be better ways to bias the training of specific instances - Something like a 'training library' with biased training data that you can plug in for your use case. For example let's say you're a well known designer with a distinct style, and you train your own instance on your lifetime's body of work. Now you can generate whatever you want in 'your style' (just like you can now ask for a painting in Dali's style). Now you've turned your style and design process into a factory - for every new client you can create whatever they want, in your style, with multiple examples, in a button press. Perhaps you can even sell that 'training library' to other designers?
homarp 4y ago
>we need the ability to persist a design isn't that Textual Inversion (https://textual-inversion.github.io/ https://textual-inversion.github.io/ ) ? It's more or less implemented in some forks (e.g. https://github.com/lstein/stable-diffusion#personalizing-text-to-image-generation https://github.com/lstein/stable-diffusion#personalizing-tex... or https://github.com/hlky/sd-enable-textual-inversion https://github.com/hlky/sd-enable-textual-inversion (discussed previously ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32643564 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32643564 ) )
peoplefromibiza 4y ago
> First, artists will still have a massive advantage over non-artists with this tool that's assuming the people artists sell their expertise to are able to understand the difference or what they are looking at https://www.vice.com/en/article/bvmvqm/an-ai-generated-artwork-won-first-place-at-a-state-fair-fine-arts-competition-and-artists-are-pissed https://www.vice.com/en/article/bvmvqm/an-ai-generated-artwo...

canjobear 4y ago

> Second, we need the ability to persist a design. I See yesterday's Stable Diffusion article: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32643564 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32643564

michaelchisari 4y ago
I haven't had a chance to try it yet, I'm optimistic but skeptical that it can have true persistence like I'm referring to. Especially since it requires training your own model which requires multiple images of the same asset/character/object/etc.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- nomel 4y ago
  For what I think you have in mind, I suspect it will eventually not be "image to image", but "<ai thing> to <ai thing> + image", for that guess to be remotely repeatable. That "ai thing" is probably the persistence you're talking about. I think that thing will neccesarily contained representations of dimension, behavior (physics/bones), and "style". Without the "ai thing", if only using an image/text, the character would have to be impossibly represented in the model, so it could guess all of these things predictably. For example, what that character looks like from a side profile, or behind. What if it's an alien, and its arms should always bend backwards? Could a text representation ever be made to completely describe this, with good reproducibility? Probably not. But, I assume some non-human representation would have a better chance. As is, if something known is required, I think the behavior of these models can be considered "destructive" to the input image, more often than not. For this reason, I think artists are safe, for the time being. :)
- Filligree 4y ago
  Textual inversion seems like it'll eventually cover this space. But bootstrapping is going to be harder than necessary, yes.
isaacfrond 4y ago
For face generation, I think there are deep neural networks that can generate multiple views of the same face [1], [2]. Stable diffusion already provides the possibility to generate variations. So I don't think it is a stretch to imagine that these existing capabilities will only get better and/or be applied to SD. [1]: Multi-View 3D Face Reconstruction with Deep Recurrent Neural Networks [2]: Deep Neural Network Augmentation: Generating Faces for Affect Analysis

Kiro 4y ago

What have you been using it for?

Swizec 4y ago

What about using this tech for ideation and artists for production? You could use Stable Diffusion et al to create new characters based on a prompt, then farm the concept out to artists to produce individual works. Kind of like hiring a super expensive agency to design your new logo or brand identity, then using a stable of in-house designers to translate the concept into UI, ads, etc.

isaacfrond 4y ago
Like this user, who creates new fashion designs using Dale https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32661515 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32661515
bergenty 4y ago
This is useless, you still have humans in the loop.
- wruza 4y ago
  Useless? One can spend days/weeks/months enumerating different concepts of a design due to a roundtrip between “maybe we try <a prompt>” and an image. Now it’s literally minutes and a designer can draw you some ideas right at your office.
michaelchisari 4y ago
That’s where it’ll be truly disruptive. SD for ideation, humanity for the final product.
- stocknoob 4y ago
  Honestly, I don’t even know if we’ll need humanity for the final product. It’s like using a chess computer to get an idea of a good move… and then a human to approve it? Adjust it? Be inspired by it? Any signals humans give (painting x is better than y) is another signal to encode. Take billions of such ratings and improve the AI’s taste to superhuman levels. In short, anything that humans would add to artistically improve the outcome is just another signal to be encoded. It’s weird to write it, but artistic creativity is deciding what new pixels go where, which is a search problem (in a large search space) which AIs are apparently doing great at. We have a bias: we’re humans, we must be important somehow! But it comes down to a bigger neural net eventually outperforming the one in our heads.

Fordec 4y ago

For every tool, a better output will always be created by people who specialize in a craft. Just as photoshop revolutionized photography, to this day you can tell the difference easily between and bad 'shops. In video games upon release everyone is bad and its an even playing field. But as people practice and gain experience they improve their usage, refine their approaches. You eventually see metas develop and best practices. This will all be exactly the same. Just give it some time and watch professionals create professional outputs compared to paying for some base level work on Fiverr or whatever.

petra 4y ago
Have we seen similar behavior in the usage of older GPT-3 based tools, for example in copywriting or using Copilot? How's the story there?
- BigJono 4y ago
  There's one huge difference between Copilot and stuff like this. Art that's 98% correct is awesome. Code that's 98% correct is completely useless. I think Copilot is going to live off hype for a while then tank and be looked back on as a failed experiment. Whereas I think that this kind of AI will eventually get to a point where it's extremely useful and could change up certain industries (game assets, marketing materials etc).
  - eloff 4y ago
    As a new user of copilot for the last three months, I can't disagree more. I was initially skeptical, and I have noticed it often produces code that looks good but is wrong. However, it still saves me enough time each day to pay for the monthly subscription - in one day. That's a 30x ROI. I imagine it only gets better from here. I wont go back to programming without it.
    - galdosdi 4y ago
      Can I ask what kind of programming you do for it to be so helpful? I mostly do maintenance of legacy codebases (also known as codebases, lol) where a lot of the work is figuring out where the changes need to be made and actually making the changes is frequently just a few lines here and there. When I do have to figure out how to use some API, it's often not an open source one, so Copilot would not have it in its corpus. I think these kinds of conditions are really common since software tends to last for maintenance longer than it is in initial greenfield development. So I'm confused what kind of work benefits from Copilot. Just pumping out greenfield development of new websites/webapps that don't use much legacy or closed source code or services, just using existing popular open source libraries in commonplace ways? The other thing I wonder about is code quality. When I look up API docs and stackoverflow examples, I get to read them all, maybe test some examples out in a CLI/REPL, and then decide carefully exactly what to do myself, what special cases to worry about or not, what errors to handle, etc. Maybe what I end up writing is even the same as Copilot would have written. But in the process, I learn about finer details of the library and make detailed decisions about how to deal with rare edge cases. Might even end up writing a comment calling out a common pitfall I realized might exist. My question is -- in order to save so much time with Copilot, are you still able to do all this extra thinking and deciding and learning (in cases that warrant it)? Or would doing that just end up consuming most of the time Copilot "saved"? In other words do you end up producing code much more rapidly, but at the expense of code that looks more like a junior than a senior wrote it, because it is most concerned with working at all, and does not have time to worry about finer details? At the expense of not being as deeply familiar with the foibles of the API you're working on? Honest questions as I haven't tried Copilot, and these are the thoughts that make me imagine it won't be of value. A lot of what I know I learned from doing the parts of the work that Copilot would be automating. Sure, Copilot would save me time when initially writing it. But would I then have less deep knowledge available when there's a fire in production because I never explored the fine details of my dependencies as much?

babyshake 4y ago

Is it possible to provide another image as a prompt for SD? For example, could you provide a simple drawing of a house and expect it to render a house?

mlboss 4y ago
You can do using img2img method based on top of SD. Another option is to create an embedding of a concept based on textual inversion and then use the embedding to guide SD generation. Both methods are possible using this: https://github.com/hlky/stable-diffusion-webui https://github.com/hlky/stable-diffusion-webui
fragmede 4y ago
Yes: https://andys.page/posts/how-to-draw/ https://andys.page/posts/how-to-draw/
- iakov 4y ago
  Thank you for this! I've been playing with the optimizedSD for a while but couldn't get what I wanted out of it. This guide makes sense to me. Gonna give it another shot on the weekend!

m12k 4y ago

I think this can be seen a bit like the invention of an "index fund" for art. Active investors are still needed to generate the market signals that an ETF can aggregate, but for the majority of people an ETF is preferable to the cost of hiring an active investor yourself. And similarly SD needs artists to generate the signal that it aggregates, but for the majority of people it might be (or might soon be) preferable to use SD to get a "generic"/"average" result instead of hiring an artist yourself.

janandonly 4y ago
There is bound to be a smart kid who already turned this idea into a shitcoin (meaning a pump and dumb money grab, not an actual attempt to make a art-index and tokenize it). It seems someone indeed did this (the p&d, not the index): https://www.coingecko.com/en/coins/artonline

kfrzcode 4y ago

> artists will still have a massive advantage over non-artists with this tool. Good; I hope the future of software engineering AI generative tooling is also more useful for software engineers.

taneq 4y ago
Ultimately software engineering isn’t about code, it’s about describing in sufficient detail exactly what you want. Of course, this just leads to business analysts and ux designers being the next ones to be replaced after coders… :P

fragmede 4y ago

For what you're looking for, inpainting can achieve that continuity without retraining a model.

jcelerier 4y ago

> A photographer who intimately knows the different lenses and cameras and industry terms will get to a representation of their idea much faster than someone without that experience There are already websites which sells tailored "professional" prompts for dall-e, GPT3, etc

systemvoltage 4y ago

I always wondered if we massively overestimate human creativity. Maybe it is ingrained in our culture and our very being. I’ve never heard counter arguments that humans are not that creative. Creativity demonstrated by Alpha zero chess engine blows Magnus Carlsen’s mind (from his recent interview with Lex Fridman), I wonder if at some point in the future, we’ll finally throw in the towel and get out of the denial phase.

isaacfrond 4y ago
"AlphaZero would sacrifice a knight or sometimes two pawns, three pawns, you can see that it's looking for some sort of positional domination, but it's hard to understand. It was really fascinating to see. "
srg0 4y ago
I believe the creativity is primarily the process, something we enjoy doing, not the method to _produce_ or _generate_ something. Sort of like dogs like playing fetch. Some creative processes do not create permanent artifacts at all, like all performing arts.
shinycode 4y ago
Without trained models from human creativity, what can AI do ? These AI emerged because of human creativity. Picasso created it’s new art form from its own creativity. He created something no one ever though of before. Now AI are fueled with Picasso’s drawing and can produce art that looks like his maybe. But what about creating something entirely new that has never been fueled into the engine. Could the AI invent something I’m about to dream tomorrow and this be the exact same copy ?
- TchoBeer 4y ago
  I think it's undeniable that AI can create novel things, the question is if AI can create novel things that are also interesting. A randomized 600x600 png is novel, but it isn't at all interesting, much of what goes into making a piece of art interesting is not a quantifiable or well-defined goal. That's not to say that AI is better than humans, just the opposite, art is a deeply human object, and I do not know if we would appreciate art made and developed by AI in the same way we do absorbing and creating art in response to each other.

Daub 4y ago

The position of creative oversight that you describe in your second paragraph is effectively that of and art director. Not, unfortunately, an artist.

paraknight 4y ago

I've seen an inpainting technique where you put an existing character then describe what their twin is doing, then crop out the existing, which seems to persist the character at the cost of fewer pixels to work with

bulla 4y ago

https://textual-inversion.github.io/ https://textual-inversion.github.io/ Is this what you mean by the character persisting across scenarios, poses etc?

spaniard89277 4y ago

I've tried too, and honestly I'll hire artists again (I did several times). It's easy to come up with nonsense, so in the end I think this is a tool in the hands of artists more than anything else. For threatening artists it should be much better. Maybe it's not the model, maybe it's the interface human-computer that fails, but in the end it's what we have. Maybe someone with a lot of time in their hands can iterate enough times to come up with something nice and depicting what they wanted. Not for me.

ekianjo 4y ago
Thus is just the beginning. Imagine 5 years later what tools we will have.
- sarchertech 4y ago
  That’s possible, but my gut feeling is that this turns out to the the same as the DARPA grand challenge moment for self driving cars. It was an absolutely amazing accomplishment. I legitimately thought I could hold out long enough that my next car would be fully self driving. Truckers were an endangered species. But here we are 20 years later, and we’re still almost there. We’ve made amazing progress and I love the self driving features I do have on my car, but how many jobs have been replaced by self driving cars?

papito 4y ago

Well, it won't replace creativity, it just makes starting out easier. SQL was designed so that business people could describe queries in English. How did that work out? Now, of course, we have ORM's, which will get you data, sure, but often in egregiously inefficient ways if not used correctly. If you want to to get it right, you still need to pop the hood and adjust things, and you have to know what you are doing. I see this as similar.

jstummbillig 4y ago

> A photographer who intimately knows the different lenses and cameras and industry terms will get to a representation of their idea much faster than someone without that experience. Sure. Only now the gap has been shrunk by a factor of infinity, because the time to representation was infinite for someone without that experience before.

heartbreak 4y ago
Photographers also spend a great deal of time shooting real people and events. An AI-generated wedding photo is not a thing.

intrasight 4y ago

Anyone else like me say "2D art? Boring. The real world is 3D"?

Applejinx 4y ago

It'd have to get itself into the dataset, as if it was 'Snoop Dogg' or some other identifiable person that the AI can reproduce. The degree to which you can generate stuff that is deepfake 'Elon Musk' doing whatever you say, is the degree to which you can invent a character and have the AI generate images (or video) of it following (sort of) your script and directions.

earth_walker 4y ago

I think there will likely be better ways to bias the training of specific instances - Something like a 'training library' with biased training data that you can plug in for your use case. For example let's say you're a well known designer with a distinct style, and you train your own instance on your lifetime's body of work. Now you can generate whatever you want in 'your style' (just like you can now ask for a painting in Dali's style). Now you've turned your style and design process into a factory - for every new client you can create whatever they want, in your style, with multiple examples, in a button press. Perhaps you can even sell that 'training library' to other designers?

homarp 4y ago

>we need the ability to persist a design isn't that Textual Inversion (https://textual-inversion.github.io/ https://textual-inversion.github.io/ ) ? It's more or less implemented in some forks (e.g. https://github.com/lstein/stable-diffusion#personalizing-text-to-image-generation https://github.com/lstein/stable-diffusion#personalizing-tex... or https://github.com/hlky/sd-enable-textual-inversion https://github.com/hlky/sd-enable-textual-inversion (discussed previously ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32643564 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32643564 ) )

peoplefromibiza 4y ago

> First, artists will still have a massive advantage over non-artists with this tool that's assuming the people artists sell their expertise to are able to understand the difference or what they are looking at https://www.vice.com/en/article/bvmvqm/an-ai-generated-artwork-won-first-place-at-a-state-fair-fine-arts-competition-and-artists-are-pissed https://www.vice.com/en/article/bvmvqm/an-ai-generated-artwo...