Robin - the difference between AI & you *purchasing* items for reuse is exactly that - you bought the item from a creator/designer who agreed in a TOU to allow you to reuse the item.
The vast majority of items AI uses to create things is scraped from the entire web, meaning for many creators, be they artists or writers, their material is being used WITHOUT their knowledge, permission, or payment.
I see nothing wrong with buying CU items & reusing them - you have a contract with the creator to use them as you will (or as the TOU allow). And using AI would not be an issue for many of us IF the original creators gave permission for use & were paid for that use.
Even major companies, like the NY Times, have had their archives scraped & added to various AI archives WITHOUT permission.
And it's the lack of permission & compensation that really bothers me, not the usage of AI to create things (though I'm not really a fan of most of what it can do right now).
TO LABEL A GRAPHIC AS "AI GENERATED" IS NOT THE PROBLEM...BUT THE ENTAILING IRRITATION SOME HAVE TOWARDS THE ART ITSELF...
I don't know what to say anymore regarding this, just as people pay to buy cu products to create unique designs and call it their creations, I (I'm speaking ONLY for myself here) have a paid subscription to several design sites, as well as an AI image generator site, I too am paying to create unique items to be used as cu items; so reading again and again words like 'theft', 'stealing', and the like is getting pretty annoying.
Of course, unfortunately, you can't credit anyone for ai graphics, which seems to be a big issue, apart from the monetary compensation. And justifying using cu items because a designer is compensated monetarily, the fact still stands that the "unique" item you created as an end product from buying cu products were made using items created by someone else, no matter how much you may tell yourself otherwise!
I don't think you can create ai graphics to be used as cu items, so graphics uploaded in the Commons were created by designers who have a PAID subscription to use them as cu items, at least I do.
Completely concur with Robin's thoughts...and as far as I know, ai items are uploaded only in the Commons. No one is paying for items downloaded from the Commons, they're for pu only.
Also, many designers from a few years back have closed shop because they couldn't keep pace with the changing times & tastes and new techniques and tools...so, AI is a new and innovative tool which is here to stay and its not going to disappear just because some feel the art is "theft" and "stealing"; it's only going to get better and better.
*edit* Yes, some ai items may be in the Graphics section also.
This posted twice - but with an addendum on this one
Robin (& Chitra) - the difference between AI & you *purchasing* items for reuse is exactly that - you bought the item from a creator/designer who agreed in a TOU to allow you to reuse the item.
The vast majority of items AI uses to create things is scraped from the entire web, meaning for many creators, be they artists or writers, their material is being used WITHOUT their knowledge, permission, or payment.
I see nothing wrong with buying CU items & reusing them - you have a contract with the creator to use them as you will (or as the TOU allow). And using AI would not be an issue for many of us IF the original creators gave permission for use & were paid for that use.
Even major companies, like the NY Times, have had their archives scraped & added to various AI archives WITHOUT permission.
And it's the lack of permission from & compensation for the original artists/musicians/creators that really bothers me, not the usage of AI to create things (though I'm not really a fan of most of what it can do right now).
PS Even if you are paying the AI company to use "their" images & material, THEY are likely not paying the creators, many of them individual designers, like those who create here, whose items they scraped. And as I've said, my concern is for the small scale creators whose material is being used by huge companies to make money, with no compensation to the original creators.
@Sarah & others - with respect, we can all argue back and forth till eternity without arriving at a consensus about ai artwork.
I just feel that it's a wonderful tool that gives me a chance to translate my prompts into the image that I had in mind, and why not use them as a part of digital scrapping?
I understand about the lack of permission & compensation, but it's what it is. And like you said, many have a problem with it, it's only fair. But do you see a satisfactory solution to it? If at a later time, there is one, well and good, all will welcome it surely.
I jumped on the A.I. wagon for about a week, searching for clip art. I was impressed at how much was offered, results in seconds, crafty little things, it was perfect! Then it wasn't. When I started looking closer at all the images, there were so many flaws and so much work to be done to correct them. Trying to blend the colors, seamlessly, was also an issue. The more work I had to put in, the more I realized, I would be better off just making my own.
Even the "crafty site" (I'll not mention but starts with an E) had 90% of their clip art in A.I. format. Although it's working great for them, it made me less interested in any of their products. They didn't have flawed images, but the whole "I made this" fell flat. If I had found a seller that used A.I. I would still run into problems if I wanted that specific style in another theme.
Last year, an individual online was using A.I. to give her content for her freelance writing job. I remember thinking, a good writer won't need A.I. to generate work for them and eventually this job is going to catch on and probably not use her work anymore.
Now, I prefer A.I. as an inspiration tool, not a solution. If it's going to be used, you should at least have half of your own work in it, and it should be clearly labeled.
I think it should be clearly labeled. Doing so gives me the ability to buy it if I want, but I would prefer to buy the beautiful, hard work of a designers creativity.
I do support labeling but I see nothing wrong in using it for design creation or development, if that is what designers want to do. It is a tool. like photoshop.
Chitra, I do understand your point but I also hope you understand that many, many people created items that you are using but got paid nothing for it & get no credit.
I have so many friends who are creative with small businesses & decent careers who are now struggling horribly trying to deal with all this. And several have stopped creating for anyone other than themselves because they can no longer afford to make this their life's work. We lose so much beauty when creative people can no longer afford to create. While I know a very few people who make a lot of money being creative (top ten songs & things like that), most are making a living but not by much.
AI reminds me very much of Spotify - a company (& CEO) which/who makes masses & masses of money but pay the actual writers & artists virtually nothing. I can't remember the exact numbers but Peter Frampton testified before the US Congress that he was paid something like $8-10,000 dollars several hundred over the air radio plays then got a check for some very tiny amount (like $5-10) for nearly a million plays on Spotify.
He is angry about this but more worried about the ability of young musicians to be able to afford to be musicians.
I know AI is fun & easy & that you feel you want/need it but it's also hurting your fellow creatives (I really love your vintage posts).
I have no real life solutions because the only one that might work is for people to pressure the AI companies to get permissions to use items in AI & to pay the creators for that use. If everyone who uses AI pushed for that, it might make a difference.
Definitely yes, only con artists use AI, it’s been destroying opportunities and dreams for many real artists from different industries and creative fields. Labelling it is a great step towards transparency regarding AI generated designs, but still, I will only be back to being an active member of this website after you ban it completely.
This is what I wrote on my Facebook page:
Please, do not use A.I. generated images, video, voice, and text, it's taking jobs away from real artists, voice-over actors, CGI specialists, and writers in the fields of Animation and Movies, Comic Books, Web and Graphic Design, Illustration, and even Fine Arts. People with no skills or talent are being accepted into Colleges and Universities by using AI-generated content in their application portfolios. My super-talented daughter wanted to have a career as an Animation and 3D model artist, but now she wants to give up of her dream because of stupid AI. The more AI is used the more it improves, every additional prompt you enter helps its machine-learning algorithms make AI look more like art made by real humans by copying and studying every pixel of every piece of any type of media that can be found by any internet search engine.
Ann, I've purchased some really cool pages to download that had weird people, cats in clothes, just really different, interesting graphics that I had never seen before, and I love them.
I had no idea that they were made with AI until I started doing it myself, and now I make my own! But I did purchase the first ones I collected, and I have no issue with that.
The people I bought them from did create them using the option of many different programs, may different options on some programs, and they still had to come up with an idea and formulate the prompt that would make the other options work.
I'm fine either way, and if I'm purchasing art, wouldn't care how and with what format the art was created. The important thing to me is that I love it.
It's such a difficult topic, but I do think AI is here to stay especially with adobe getting into it. But as this thread shows some people have strong feelings about it. I really hope that the poll leans more to it being labelled. If you are using a CU product that is made with AI, and the place you sell at needs you to label it, or not use it at all then it becomes a guessing game and often then product isn't being used. I think that Wendy Page creates some beautiful AI work but always labels it as such and I think that is so super helpful. Thank you so much for opening this conversation up!
I agree with much of what Daniela said on her FB page. I know so many people whose careers have been hurt, or stopped before they got very far, because large corporations prefer huge profits over paying people for their work.
It's not just AI, though that's the issue here, but also Spotify paying a tiny portion of a penny per play, companies hiring "contractors" (who have no benefits) rather than employees, etc. Profits over people will destroy not only the creative community but jobs for many of us - especially work we might dream of doing, like Daniela's daughter.
Chitra David expressed exactly the way I feel about AI.
I am a creator of hand's-on artwork with my own paints, brushes, papers, and a hundred other tools to make art (I have a studio chock-full of tools), but right now, I'm loving AI. I create all kinds of things, tweak them using all the loras, models, aspect ratios, run times, etc.; it's more complicated than some people think. And I love what I create.
When I'm doing challenges, I'll create the base artwork using an AI image creator, then download it, move it to one of my other three computer art programs, and add, delete, and/or change the artwork, put a frame on it, maybe a short poem or haiku (ChatGPT), whatever I think will be best. When it's complete, it's mine. I've created it from start to finish.
Like most people creating AI generated art, I can tell the difference. When I come here to Digital Scrapbook, I'm usually looking for a specific kind of graphic, not the whole piece of art. I want something specific I can use on MY AI artwork. But for those who don't like AI art, if it's labeled as such, they will continue to ignore those pieces. But for others, who might be looking for a more finished piece and don't want to get into creating it themselves, it will be available here. They can use it alone, or work it like I do.
PS: I almost always use Inked Edges from Digital Scrapbook for my frames. They just seem to finish the creation and add something extra that works! And they are available in every color I've ever wanted! 😁
Barbara, that’s not making art, that’s keyword writing. I see many people here have no idea what AI actually is and how these images and designs are generated. I urge all of you to please educate yourselves about it.
Chitra, because you are not using any real skills, you are just writing some words or sentences, the artistic skill lies in actually translating your ideas into an image by your own hand, you are skipping that step, it’s lazy and disrespectful to real artists.
@Chitra the satisfactory solution is not using AI at all, be it to generate images or using the finished product, and to boycott corporations that have been using AI to cut jobs and increase profits.
Robin - the difference between AI & you *purchasing* items for reuse is exactly that - you bought the item from a creator/designer who agreed in a TOU to allow you to reuse the item.
The vast majority of items AI uses to create things is scraped from the entire web, meaning for many creators, be they artists or writers, their material is being used WITHOUT their knowledge, permission, or payment.
I see nothing wrong with buying CU items & reusing them - you have a contract with the creator to use them as you will (or as the TOU allow). And using AI would not be an issue for many of us IF the original creators gave permission for use & were paid for that use.
Even major companies, like the NY Times, have had their archives scraped & added to various AI archives WITHOUT permission.
And it's the lack of permission & compensation that really bothers me, not the usage of AI to create things (though I'm not really a fan of most of what it can do right now).
all ai should be clearly marked. and not only here, but everywhere
YES!
TO LABEL A GRAPHIC AS "AI GENERATED" IS NOT THE PROBLEM...BUT THE ENTAILING IRRITATION SOME HAVE TOWARDS THE ART ITSELF...
I don't know what to say anymore regarding this, just as people pay to buy cu products to create unique designs and call it their creations, I (I'm speaking ONLY for myself here) have a paid subscription to several design sites, as well as an AI image generator site, I too am paying to create unique items to be used as cu items; so reading again and again words like 'theft', 'stealing', and the like is getting pretty annoying.
Of course, unfortunately, you can't credit anyone for ai graphics, which seems to be a big issue, apart from the monetary compensation. And justifying using cu items because a designer is compensated monetarily, the fact still stands that the "unique" item you created as an end product from buying cu products were made using items created by someone else, no matter how much you may tell yourself otherwise!
I don't think you can create ai graphics to be used as cu items, so graphics uploaded in the Commons were created by designers who have a PAID subscription to use them as cu items, at least I do.
Completely concur with Robin's thoughts...and as far as I know, ai items are uploaded only in the Commons. No one is paying for items downloaded from the Commons, they're for pu only.
Also, many designers from a few years back have closed shop because they couldn't keep pace with the changing times & tastes and new techniques and tools...so, AI is a new and innovative tool which is here to stay and its not going to disappear just because some feel the art is "theft" and "stealing"; it's only going to get better and better.
*edit* Yes, some ai items may be in the Graphics section also.
This posted twice - but with an addendum on this one
Robin (& Chitra) - the difference between AI & you *purchasing* items for reuse is exactly that - you bought the item from a creator/designer who agreed in a TOU to allow you to reuse the item.
The vast majority of items AI uses to create things is scraped from the entire web, meaning for many creators, be they artists or writers, their material is being used WITHOUT their knowledge, permission, or payment.
I see nothing wrong with buying CU items & reusing them - you have a contract with the creator to use them as you will (or as the TOU allow). And using AI would not be an issue for many of us IF the original creators gave permission for use & were paid for that use.
Even major companies, like the NY Times, have had their archives scraped & added to various AI archives WITHOUT permission.
And it's the lack of permission from & compensation for the original artists/musicians/creators that really bothers me, not the usage of AI to create things (though I'm not really a fan of most of what it can do right now).
PS Even if you are paying the AI company to use "their" images & material, THEY are likely not paying the creators, many of them individual designers, like those who create here, whose items they scraped. And as I've said, my concern is for the small scale creators whose material is being used by huge companies to make money, with no compensation to the original creators.
Should be labeled so customers know.
Absolutely should be marked..
Yes they should be labeled. It gives the option to use them or not use them.
Yes it should be marked.
Yes, they should be marked. Someday a "designer" will just have his robot create "art" under multiple names, and then take credit.
@Sarah & others - with respect, we can all argue back and forth till eternity without arriving at a consensus about ai artwork.
I just feel that it's a wonderful tool that gives me a chance to translate my prompts into the image that I had in mind, and why not use them as a part of digital scrapping?
I understand about the lack of permission & compensation, but it's what it is. And like you said, many have a problem with it, it's only fair. But do you see a satisfactory solution to it? If at a later time, there is one, well and good, all will welcome it surely.
I jumped on the A.I. wagon for about a week, searching for clip art. I was impressed at how much was offered, results in seconds, crafty little things, it was perfect! Then it wasn't. When I started looking closer at all the images, there were so many flaws and so much work to be done to correct them. Trying to blend the colors, seamlessly, was also an issue. The more work I had to put in, the more I realized, I would be better off just making my own.
Even the "crafty site" (I'll not mention but starts with an E) had 90% of their clip art in A.I. format. Although it's working great for them, it made me less interested in any of their products. They didn't have flawed images, but the whole "I made this" fell flat. If I had found a seller that used A.I. I would still run into problems if I wanted that specific style in another theme.
Last year, an individual online was using A.I. to give her content for her freelance writing job. I remember thinking, a good writer won't need A.I. to generate work for them and eventually this job is going to catch on and probably not use her work anymore.
Now, I prefer A.I. as an inspiration tool, not a solution. If it's going to be used, you should at least have half of your own work in it, and it should be clearly labeled.
Yes. Definitely!
I think it should be clearly labeled. Doing so gives me the ability to buy it if I want, but I would prefer to buy the beautiful, hard work of a designers creativity.
it should be clearly marled as AI.
I do support labeling but I see nothing wrong in using it for design creation or development, if that is what designers want to do. It is a tool. like photoshop.
Chitra, I do understand your point but I also hope you understand that many, many people created items that you are using but got paid nothing for it & get no credit.
I have so many friends who are creative with small businesses & decent careers who are now struggling horribly trying to deal with all this. And several have stopped creating for anyone other than themselves because they can no longer afford to make this their life's work. We lose so much beauty when creative people can no longer afford to create. While I know a very few people who make a lot of money being creative (top ten songs & things like that), most are making a living but not by much.
AI reminds me very much of Spotify - a company (& CEO) which/who makes masses & masses of money but pay the actual writers & artists virtually nothing. I can't remember the exact numbers but Peter Frampton testified before the US Congress that he was paid something like $8-10,000 dollars several hundred over the air radio plays then got a check for some very tiny amount (like $5-10) for nearly a million plays on Spotify.
He is angry about this but more worried about the ability of young musicians to be able to afford to be musicians.
I know AI is fun & easy & that you feel you want/need it but it's also hurting your fellow creatives (I really love your vintage posts).
I have no real life solutions because the only one that might work is for people to pressure the AI companies to get permissions to use items in AI & to pay the creators for that use. If everyone who uses AI pushed for that, it might make a difference.
Definitely yes, only con artists use AI, it’s been destroying opportunities and dreams for many real artists from different industries and creative fields. Labelling it is a great step towards transparency regarding AI generated designs, but still, I will only be back to being an active member of this website after you ban it completely.
This is what I wrote on my Facebook page:
Please, do not use A.I. generated images, video, voice, and text, it's taking jobs away from real artists, voice-over actors, CGI specialists, and writers in the fields of Animation and Movies, Comic Books, Web and Graphic Design, Illustration, and even Fine Arts. People with no skills or talent are being accepted into Colleges and Universities by using AI-generated content in their application portfolios. My super-talented daughter wanted to have a career as an Animation and 3D model artist, but now she wants to give up of her dream because of stupid AI. The more AI is used the more it improves, every additional prompt you enter helps its machine-learning algorithms make AI look more like art made by real humans by copying and studying every pixel of every piece of any type of media that can be found by any internet search engine.
Ann, I've purchased some really cool pages to download that had weird people, cats in clothes, just really different, interesting graphics that I had never seen before, and I love them.
I had no idea that they were made with AI until I started doing it myself, and now I make my own! But I did purchase the first ones I collected, and I have no issue with that.
The people I bought them from did create them using the option of many different programs, may different options on some programs, and they still had to come up with an idea and formulate the prompt that would make the other options work.
I'm fine either way, and if I'm purchasing art, wouldn't care how and with what format the art was created. The important thing to me is that I love it.
I think they should be labeled but still available to us as an option.
It's such a difficult topic, but I do think AI is here to stay especially with adobe getting into it. But as this thread shows some people have strong feelings about it. I really hope that the poll leans more to it being labelled. If you are using a CU product that is made with AI, and the place you sell at needs you to label it, or not use it at all then it becomes a guessing game and often then product isn't being used. I think that Wendy Page creates some beautiful AI work but always labels it as such and I think that is so super helpful. Thank you so much for opening this conversation up!
I agree with much of what Daniela said on her FB page. I know so many people whose careers have been hurt, or stopped before they got very far, because large corporations prefer huge profits over paying people for their work.
It's not just AI, though that's the issue here, but also Spotify paying a tiny portion of a penny per play, companies hiring "contractors" (who have no benefits) rather than employees, etc. Profits over people will destroy not only the creative community but jobs for many of us - especially work we might dream of doing, like Daniela's daughter.
Yes, definitely. If a product is generated by AI, it should be labeled as such.
Chitra David expressed exactly the way I feel about AI.
I am a creator of hand's-on artwork with my own paints, brushes, papers, and a hundred other tools to make art (I have a studio chock-full of tools), but right now, I'm loving AI. I create all kinds of things, tweak them using all the loras, models, aspect ratios, run times, etc.; it's more complicated than some people think. And I love what I create.
When I'm doing challenges, I'll create the base artwork using an AI image creator, then download it, move it to one of my other three computer art programs, and add, delete, and/or change the artwork, put a frame on it, maybe a short poem or haiku (ChatGPT), whatever I think will be best. When it's complete, it's mine. I've created it from start to finish.
Like most people creating AI generated art, I can tell the difference. When I come here to Digital Scrapbook, I'm usually looking for a specific kind of graphic, not the whole piece of art. I want something specific I can use on MY AI artwork. But for those who don't like AI art, if it's labeled as such, they will continue to ignore those pieces. But for others, who might be looking for a more finished piece and don't want to get into creating it themselves, it will be available here. They can use it alone, or work it like I do.
PS: I almost always use Inked Edges from Digital Scrapbook for my frames. They just seem to finish the creation and add something extra that works! And they are available in every color I've ever wanted! 😁
Barbara, that’s not making art, that’s keyword writing. I see many people here have no idea what AI actually is and how these images and designs are generated. I urge all of you to please educate yourselves about it.
I think it should be marked for sure.
Chitra, because you are not using any real skills, you are just writing some words or sentences, the artistic skill lies in actually translating your ideas into an image by your own hand, you are skipping that step, it’s lazy and disrespectful to real artists.
I don't know enough about AI in scrapbooking graphics to have an opinion. It would be interesting to see some side-by-side comparisons.
Yes, it should be marked. Make it easy to sort them out
@Chitra the satisfactory solution is not using AI at all, be it to generate images or using the finished product, and to boycott corporations that have been using AI to cut jobs and increase profits.
Pages