4 ms·
Depends who you are, I think. I'm watching this space like a hawk. Though I code for a living it's too different from this work and I can't personally do the s
by Applejinx 4y ago
Depends who you are, I think.
I'm watching this space like a hawk. Though I code for a living it's too different from this work and I can't personally do the stuff I need with it, but that stuff is continually happening (if I wasn't based on M1 Mac I might be a little farther along, but I think I'd still be running into obstacles based on how technical all this is)
I've put out an album, pretty recently, based on my collaboration with a modular synthesizer running systems that let it aleatorically generate chords, key changes etc. and you probably would not know the 'machine' wrote the chords for the whole album.
The place where Stable Diffusion becomes interesting for me is when I can feed my own styles and objects into it. Right now, I don't think that's facilitated for me on my M1 Mac in my relatively nontechnical world: I can run DiffusionBee, and explore the ranges of the dataset's collective visual unconscious. I'm learning how to do much more interesting things than 'trending on Artstation, 8k, etc etc etc'.
I have curated collections of images to which I can apply my own language cues, and a 440 episode webcomic that I could annotate the hell out of (my OWN art, not currently even on the internet), and the ability to feed not just 4-5 images but dozens, hundreds of images into the machine.
At that point, it's a private visual imagination that becomes ME diffusion, and I don't have to tell it 'trending on artstation' anymore. Hell, I could teach my copy a whole set of associations based on just feeding its own output back into it, using my own intuition to associate not-generally-useful concepts like 'cold' or 'loud' or 'disappointed' considered as visual abstractions.
If I can reliably associate 'anticipatory' with visual stimuli, I can begin using it as direction for my own use of SD, telling it that I want this panel more 'anticipatory' or less. If I can feed in a language of panels and borders that has variety and I'm able to associate it with language, I can use SD to generate comic panels with the associations 'unsettling' or 'normal' or 'dramatic' and composite them into final output.
Bear in mind that engaging in this behavior means ME feeding in the associations that are relevant to ME as an artist, effectively making an auxiliary visual subconscious much like I made a modular synth into an auxiliary musical composition subconscious.
No, I'm not bored. If you're bored, maybe you're not an artist? Or maybe you don't have a firm intention and motivation towards which to direct your art?
These things should be like a violin. You can give one to any shmoe off the street, but ability to perform on the thing does not come along with just picking it up and plunking at it. I'm convinced that in order to make visual AI a tool you absolutely must let the artist feed in their own associations, concepts, objects etc. and then direct the output towards their own ends.
- sterlind 4y agoI completely agree with your sentiments and enthusiasm. personally, I've been waiting a long time for AI to get to the point where I can generate my own animated cartoons. I can see the pipeline for it now: sketch concept art, mess around with inpainting, use textual inversion to build a "dictionary" of assets like character art, scenes, objects, art styles, use that + simple sketches to storyboard, then put the script in and get keyframes, then tween. and even if the result looks mediocre or a bit weird (for now), the sheer power of solo-animating an entire series is just.. tantalizing.