Render Discussion Thread

[alpha2117]

1 hour ago, Astil said:

A) Humans have morals. This is so catastrophically important in learning that I bristle at  the term machine learning for that reason.

B) Humans iterate, machines replicate sometimes to the point of copying.

C) Looking at other art is a part of the human learning process. It is the entirety of the AI process. People who do art in exactly the same style as another are not called artists. They are called criminals for plagiary.

D) AI art is not influenced by what it sees. It recreates it again and again until the user is satisfied. 

E) I've seen this go around a lot and as someone who dabbled in machine learning for coding and dabbled in art comparing the two is just not factual. I don't think its a malicious argument to be clear just false. 

I worked for Police for 30 years so not sure i agree with your point about humans having morals ( partially kidding).  

I do get your point in regards to creation versus replication.  Arguably the way to learn to create is by first learning how to replicate.  One of the big concerns longterm with AI is it actually learning how to create too well.  

I think we will agree to disagree on the validity of my argument and your argument.  I think we both understand what each other is saying but its unlikely either of us will agree as our viewpoints are fairly far apart.  The good thing is we both seem to get that just because we don't agree doesn't mean we can't interact in a positive way.  Sadly the internet tends to allow us to go a bit negative in disagreements.  I have definitely done that in the past and no doubt will do so in the future even though I know its not great but I think sometimes we can't help ourselves.

Have a good day

 

 

 

[Astil]

1 minute ago, alpha2117 said:

One of the big concerns longterm with AI is it actually learning how to create too well.  

Can you source this, legit never seen this in any research and would be interested to read that perspective. You can PM me to not hijack this thread if you want. 

And yeah keeping it civil is best. No one here is 'the bad guy' regarding ethics (thatd be higher ups at midjourney) and the discussion wont change the final product it seems. Disappointing but I've decided to donate funds to the render artists whose renders I use and buy the game.

I do think if the goal is uniformity and being taken seriously there is a lot of work to be done in both the AI and render side (AI is closer to both though). Hopefully that vision can be achieved so at least the sacrifice of no longer supporting the communities renders with recognition will reap dividends.

 

[alpha2117]

With the concern of AI learning to create too well, that all goes back to Asimov's Laws of Robotics and stuff like that.  The big concern with AI has always been if it actually starts thinking creatively and independently what will it think of us and how will it react.  There tends to be the assumption an artificial intelligence wouldn't like us much because we tend as a species to do a lot of horrible things.  That's why I am ambivalent about the current boom in AI use because if we teach machines to truly think independently do they stop needing us and if they do what do they then do.  I would prefer a more measured approach.  It probably doesn't  matter much in regards to machine intelligence making pictures for a game but longterm what are the greater implications of AI.

[HarmonyOfDissonance]

11 hours ago, Irish Wolf said:

This here is actually what bothers me most. This statement is absolutely true. But with that it goes the other way. Even peeking into the ethical issues of using AI art for a product people are going for pay for, Adam and the developers at Greydog could have used the old non-Ai renders for the base game and then released an AI art pack as a free download that you could choose to use. So no instead of chosing to use AI art or not people are choosing whether to buy the game or not because of the AI art.

I 100% feel like this backlash wouldn't exist if that's the route that was taken. Switching isn't back to the Non-AI renders isn't even feasible at the moment because of the lack of ones for the new characters so while an option, it's clearly not the one they want us taking. 

 

11 hours ago, Astil said:

So GDS did not pay in any way for this AI art?

I guess not, but we're expected to.

[Mammoth]

3 minutes ago, HarmonyOfDissonance said:

I guess not, but we're expected to.

Just to set the record straight, nobody is "expected to" spend money outside of the cost of TEWIX. It's a complete choice. That's like saying people were "expected to" pour 100's of dollars/pounds into DAZ3D when it previously used renders. There's other free resources to produce AI images out there and we've already seen literally 1,000s of alternatives in the few days since the Beta has been released. This is a very active and creative community and the choice has and always will be yours as to which picture pack you wish to use.

[Astil]

12 minutes ago, HarmonyOfDissonance said:

I 100% feel like this backlash wouldn't exist if that's the route that was taken. Switching isn't back to the Non-AI renders isn't even feasible at the moment because of the lack of ones for the new characters so while an option, it's clearly not the one they want us taking. 

 

I guess not, but we're expected to.

 Not what I meant. No one is expected to spend money for tew beyond buying the game. 

[Irish Wolf]

3 minutes ago, Mammoth said:

Just to set the record straight, nobody is "expected to" spend money outside of the cost of TEWIX. It's a complete choice. That's like saying people were "expected to" pour 100's of dollars/pounds into DAZ3D when it previously used renders. There's other free resources to produce AI images out there and we've already seen literally 1,000s of alternatives in the few days since the Beta has been released. This is a very active and creative community and the choice has and always will be yours as to which picture pack you wish to use.

But the cost of TEW includes the art ehich is currently AI art so we are being expected to pay for AI art. Whether or not Adam paid for its use we are now paying for it even if we dont use it later on. And the problem people are having is paying for AI art. If they used the old renders and got permission to take more from as you said the creative community with 1000s of options, and then let the AI art be something you could download for free if you wanted there wouldnt even be this discussion. And honestly a 5 minute google search about using AI art in paid projects would have told any company this was going to be a controversial issue, one that was easily avoided by using the creative community and 1000s of options.

[HarmonyOfDissonance]

9 minutes ago, Mammoth said:

Just to set the record straight, nobody is "expected to" spend money outside of the cost of TEWIX. It's a complete choice. That's like saying people were "expected to" pour 100's of dollars/pounds into DAZ3D when it previously used renders. There's other free resources to produce AI images out there and we've already seen literally 1,000s of alternatives in the few days since the Beta has been released. This is a very active and creative community and the choice has and always will be yours as to which picture pack you wish to use.

 

2 minutes ago, Astil said:

 Not what I meant. No one is expected to spend money for tew beyond buying the game. 

And that's fine, but it's legitimately a moral dillemma that people are in, including me. I get it, that the AI images were free to "create". They are however included in the cost of the game. So yes, I am paying for AI art. 

[The Superman 3 of People]

Point of order in this discussion.

We need to stop using the word "artist" to refer to AI prompters. The amount of work they do to get an image into TEW is functionally identical to the work I do in going to the render thread and right-clicking a .jpeg. The only difference is that I don't have the carbon footprint of a Ford F-350 when I'm doing it.

[Astil]

16 minutes ago, HarmonyOfDissonance said:

 

And that's fine, but it's legitimately a moral dillemma that people are in, including me. I get it, that the AI images were free to "create". They are however included in the cost of the game. So yes, I am paying for AI art. 

Valid. Moreso clarifying my question. 

[Big Roguey]

Because we're getting a few reports from this thread (by design pretty much) I'd like to remind everyone that you can simply choose to ignore a poster if you find their posts to not be to your liking.

[The Superman 3 of People]

5 minutes ago, Big Roguey said:

Because we're getting a few reports from this thread (by design pretty much) I'd like to remind everyone that you can simply choose to ignore a poster if you find their posts to not be to your liking.

Since we've got a mod in the thread, when can we expect to get a response from Adam to this discussion? Aside from saying that he thinks the images were produced through Midjourney he's been silent on the topic of the stolen art assets used in the game. That lack of willingness to comment on the topic, combined with the ethical issue of EdJames cheerleading for AI art in the weeks leading up to the game's release without disclosing that he was the one providing those same stolen assets, points to a serious ethical problem with the way this entire topic has been handled by GDS.

Edited July 29 by The Superman 3 of People

[HarmonyOfDissonance]

2 minutes ago, The Superman 3 of People said:

Since we've got a mod in the thread, when can we expect to get a response from Adam to this discussion? Aside from saying that he thinks the images were produced through Midjourney he's been silent on the topic of the stolen art assets used in the game. That lack of willingness to comment on the topic, combined with the ethical issue of EdJames cheerleading for AI art in the weeks leading up to the game's release without disclosing that he was the one producing those same stolen assets, points to a serious ethical problem with the way this entire topic has been handled by GDS.

Volunteer mods don't just have a complete line of access to Adam, even in communities of this magnitude. If Adam decides to comment he'll comment.

[The Superman 3 of People]

47 minutes ago, HarmonyOfDissonance said:

I guess not, but we're expected to.

The messaging so far from GDS seems to be that creative work holds no value - unless that creative work is performed by Adam Ryland.

[Wonk]

Can I ask those of you 100% against the use of AI art what your desired outcome is? Is it full removal of all AI pieces and replacement with the old images? This is not a provocation or a prod, I'm genuinely curious.

((For context, I am pretty happy with the AI renders, although I have created some 200+ Daz3D renders in the past.))

[The Superman 3 of People]

5 minutes ago, Wonk said:

Can I ask those of you 100% against the use of AI art what your desired outcome is? Is it full removal of all AI pieces and replacement with the old images? This is not a provocation or a prod, I'm genuinely curious.

((For context, I am pretty happy with the AI renders, although I have created some 200+ Daz3D renders in the past.))

Personally?

I would be satisfied with the removal of all stolen art assets from the game, an apology to the community, and a company-level public announcement that AI will not be used as a replacement for human labor on future projects.

And if that means the restoration of the original renders then yeah, I guess that's okay.

Edited July 29 by The Superman 3 of People

[Markw]

Just now, Wonk said:

Can I ask those of you 100% against the use of AI art what your desired outcome is? Is it full removal of all AI pieces and replacement with the old images? This is not a provocation or a prod, I'm genuinely curious.

((For context, I am pretty happy with the AI renders, although I have created some 200+ Daz3D renders in the past.))

Pretty simply I'd like the game to ship with a render pack that uses images created in Daz that this community have produced for the game over the last 20 years. And that in future if a decision is made to purchase artwork for the game that it's artwork that a human being has created by doing more than refining sentences.

[Mammoth]

41 minutes ago, Irish Wolf said:

But the cost of TEW includes the art ehich is currently AI art so we are being expected to pay for AI art. Whether or not Adam paid for its use we are now paying for it even if we dont use it later on. And the problem people are having is paying for AI art. If they used the old renders and got permission to take more from as you said the creative community with 1000s of options, and then let the AI art be something you could download for free if you wanted there wouldnt even be this discussion. And honestly a 5 minute google search about using AI art in paid projects would have told any company this was going to be a controversial issue, one that was easily avoided by using the creative community and 1000s of options.

 

40 minutes ago, HarmonyOfDissonance said:

 

And that's fine, but it's legitimately a moral dillemma that people are in, including me. I get it, that the AI images were free to "create". They are however included in the cost of the game. So yes, I am paying for AI art. 

The moral dilemma is more than justified, as I have it myself. For full clarity, I'm not a fan of the AI myself as anyone who knows me will attest. My whole post was simply in response to the "expected to" as it just didn't sit right with me, that's all. 👍

[HarmonyOfDissonance]

9 minutes ago, Wonk said:

Can I ask those of you 100% against the use of AI art what your desired outcome is? Is it full removal of all AI pieces and replacement with the old images? This is not a provocation or a prod, I'm genuinely curious.

((For context, I am pretty happy with the AI renders, although I have created some 200+ Daz3D renders in the past.))

I think that simply having the 3D renders be the primary and still supported picture pack and simply having the AI art being a free download people can choose if they want would pretty much fix my issue with it. If people want to use AI art, that's fine, and that's their choice. 

Just now, Mammoth said:

 

The moral dilemma is more than justified, as I have it myself. For full clarity, I'm not a fan of the AI myself as anyone who knows me will attest. My whole post was simply in response to the "expected to" as it just didn't sit right with me, that's all. 👍

That's fair, I certainly could've chosen my words better than I did. 

[EdJames]

1 minute ago, The Superman 3 of People said:

Since we've got a mod in the thread, when can we expect to get a response from Adam to this discussion? Aside from saying that he thinks the images were produced through Midjounrey he's been silent on the topic of the stolen art assets used in the game. That lack of willingness to comment on the topic, combined with the ethical issue of EdJames cheerleading for AI art in the weeks leading up to the game's release without disclosing that he was the one producing those same stolen assets, points to a serious ethical problem with the way this entire topic has been handled by GDS.

For clarity, I don’t work for GDS or Adam. My views are entirely my own and unofficial. 

I am simply a long term community member who produced (that seems the safest word) these alternatives as an option for the community well in advance of TEW IX even being a thing.

I was excited for people to have another way to imagine the universe and did my best to bring it to life for that purpose. As such, I was “cheerleading” a lot longer than simply in the weeks leading up to it, and was simply another fan in the build up to release. 

Of course I wanted the use of my pics to be successful and for people to love them - many don’t - and I accept that. Granted, I rationalise it by realising that no matter what anybody would have released, there would’ve been those who would’ve preferred something else, aside from the ethical issues that you’ve raised. Some solutions would’ve undoubtedly raised less issues than others, but few would’ve been perfect. 

I’ve heard your concerns, beyond that, there’s very little I can personally do to address them and at this point, you’re just kicking an already defeated man.
 

[The Superman 3 of People]

2 minutes ago, EdJames said:

For clarity, I don’t work for GDS or Adam. My views are entirely my own and unofficial. 
 

Your name is in the game's credits and you were presenting yourself as just another member of the community, not as someone who had a vested interest in the community remaining uncritical of the use of AI-generated assets in the final product. At best, that's a morally dubious stance to take.

The fact that neither you nor GDS disclosed your involvement in the product while you were actively trashing the old-style renders and presenting the adoption of AI assets as a positive gives the impression that you were astroturfing the discussion ahead of the release, regardless of your intent.

[Astil]

I agree with the ai images being a secondary option as the ideal way to move forward. 

 

Also is GDS aware none of the images in the cverse can be copywritten due to being AI gen'd? At least in America based on Thaler v. Perlmutter. So all the images are fair for any use by a third party.

[KingAj]

I thought there would be a CV Blue background (old style) pack made available on release day? Would that not be a sufficient alternative?

I think it all comes down to personal choice on the picture pack, whether AI or not. Like a lot of things are in life sometimes. It seems like a lot of unnecessary drama, there is more than 1 option right(?)

I do like most of the character designs in this pack but as we saw towards the tail end of TEW2020's life(?), different AI render makes have their own style and design. So the hate on someone who has clearly stated their designs were based on their own choice and not originally intended to be the main focus pack for the new version seems very unwarranted. My personal render favorites have been Shmoe II and Walter Sobchaks, but I can live with this design also.  Its a modable game, so theirs choice of AI or non AI as was the case with 2020.

I like using AI on rare occasion because I can make renders for my own customer characters, but I love the CV Blue design, so I like both.

 

Ps; Don't come at me with hate unless you want to have a civilized conversation like an adult, as its just not worth replying.

[Jaded]

25 minutes ago, HarmonyOfDissonance said:

I think that simply having the 3D renders be the primary and still supported picture pack and simply having the AI art being a free download people can choose if they want would pretty much fix my issue with it. If people want to use AI art, that's fine, and that's their choice. 

This is where I stand, too. I don’t want to support the use of AI in games and by paying for something which has AI as the default art, I’m doing that. There’s a fair chance I WILL do that, tbh, because I’ve been an EWR/TEW player for over 20 years, and my morals are possibly going to get overruled by my general love for the game, but it’s the first time that purchasing it will leave something of a bad taste in my mouth.

[Irish Wolf]

26 minutes ago, HarmonyOfDissonance said:

I think that simply having the 3D renders be the primary and still supported picture pack and simply having the AI art being a free download people can choose if they want would pretty much fix my issue with it. If people want to use AI art, that's fine, and that's their choice. 

That's fair, I certainly could've chosen my words better than I did. 

This if the 3d renders made by a human shipped with the paid game and the AI art was available to download for free for those who wanted I think it would pretty much fix all issues mine included.