Decorus AI

@ShitpostGate As predicted. decorus.ai

@TimSweeneyEpic There are still some background issues before we get there 100%, once they're figured out and we have a solid foundation that supports users *and* source artists - the format can flourish.

The first computer art tools were pixel editors, the apex of which was Deluxe Paint for the Amiga. Then Photoshop came in and changed the paradigm to image editing: old schoolers laughed at it because its pixel tools were so weak, but there was magic in changing the conceptual focus to the image and often editing it at a much higher resolution than the display. I’ve come to recognize generative AI art as the next paradigm change, away from drawing the image, towards specifying a scene through a combination of prompts, infills, and hand edits - whatever gets to the best result fastest. Fine Photoshop artists lament it (and shady IP practices warrant their respective criticisms) but ultimately it’s a new tool with a new paradigm that will likely become the predominant one in the future. And though the current tools are all about images, they’re rapidly evolving into video and 3D scenes, the ultimate version of which may be full 3D scene and animated shot synthesis and tweaking at professional levels of quality. For those born after the birth of the personal computer and the internet, it’ll be one’s first contact with a complete technological upheaval. The rapid burst of progress over the past 18 months in chat and art may be a bit misleading though, as they were preceded by 3 decades of directly applicable foundational research. Some areas of future AI application are lacking in these foundations, so we can expect progress to come in fits and starts. But the exponential upward trend is unmistakable.

@KingXerberus @Tenrai_44 @wbariq99 @LocalBateman Yo. decorus.ai

@Tenrai_44 @wbariq99 @LocalBateman Well it's something I reckon will happen in the future as it becomes easier to train AI on your own artstyle. At least for it to be fairly marketable by artists instead of greedy corporations. It'd be a way to use AI while paying artists a fee to legally use it for projects

@blumspew Bad enough when it's your work, but your voice? There *has* to be checks & balances! If interested check out Decorus.ai, artist friendly AI. Ideally this would be the standard model, but until then: we're building a 100% opt-in only platform that compensates fairly

@Ion_Ramaru nah you alone on this one bro. consent is cool

@TimSweeneyEpic The brain can, but until we have a way of transferring that image from our own memory buffers it doesn't pose a threat to artist rights in the "here and now" Much the same as photocopying at a low res can reproduce images, but perhaps not in a way that an artist cares to defend.

An interesting new paper showing that some AI models learn in a way that enables lossy but discernible retrieval of training data. This raises interesting points and counterpoints on rights - after all, the brain does the same, and some artists can recreate work from memory.

@AbandonAmbition @Twitter Will pass that along! Thanks 🙏

Welcome to our @twitter account! We don't have much at the moment, but we're working on developing an #AIArt platform that values human input (and pays artists for their work). In the meantime, please check out our website to see how you can take part: decorus.ai

@SimzArts Hi Would be interested to hear your thoughts about the potential for "virtual commissions" and how things might be done better. There's plenty to work through in the space and a long way to go before things could be considered fair, but that's what we're working toward Cheers!

I'm very disappointed. This is a message from an AI user, straight from the Midjourney Discord server.

@TimSweeneyEpic Finding a balance between allowing the tech to thrive and not screwing over artists needs to happen (perhaps even quicker than we can muster on our current funding level). In #AI utopia, *all* projects would adopt our model so we can focus on advancement. decorus.ai

A very interesting development in the AI art saga: litigation against several commercialized generative AI art sites whose machine learning models were trained on art scraped from the internet without the permission of the artists who made it.

@DragonsofWales Totally - which is where some of the issues lie. Supplanting human artists entirely will cause art to wither and everything will turn into a dreary dystopian novel. Equally artists 100% deserve a say on where their work is incorporated and be paid for their contributions.

@DecorusAI “If” doing a whole load of heavy lifting there. To think that people would only use AI as a route to commissioning a human artist is beyond naive. I suspect you know this.

So far today: National Geographic embracing NFTs, a high profile artist that I follow(ed) using Al, and a (now blocked) follower turning out to be a far-right gun-loving racist. If people could just stop disappointing me for 5 minutes, that would be lovely. Thanks.

@DragonsofWales There's also some interesting uses emerging for upscaling older footage for movies & documentaries. Even some of the AI tooling in Photoshop has some interesting abilities, like rotate a subjects head or change seasons on your own landscapes.

@DragonsofWales The main benefit would be to allow non-artists to try out and test concepts (if if they then have it commissioned properly) - basically stock photography, but with a bit more customization.

@DragonsofWales For artists & teams, using AI to assist work might save some of the repetitive tasks (i.e. after a style has been developed, adapt these 200x sprites to fit) or simply to compose a scene exactly as needed for a work (like @nvidia canvas that lets you "paint" photo landscapes)

@Sarah_Nicolas There's a crossover that can happen: Human artists need to keep pushing the boundaries (AI can make some crazy stuff, but it will never be able to understand what it is to feel). Conversely, AI's power is that it can help novices get started, or help prototype new ideas faster.

I want ai to like do my taxes, delete spam emails, tell me when stuff in my pantry expires, filter out men with fish in their dating profiles. I want art made by humans with emotions

@nixcraft Yeah, but as a programmer, I know that a programmer was compensated for both (perhaps not monetarily, but at least in credit / kudos / etc). A fairer system is needed!

@spookestre Even if only for credit purposes, i.e. a piece of my work was derived: it's still a piece of something the artist poured their soul & energy into. Remembering that BTTF2's use of @CrispinGlover's likeness was also once considered "fair use" and (rightly so) was corrected in law.

@spookestre Fair point! There's some arguments that the training models can be considered fair use, but AFAIK they haven't been proven.

@spookestre Our concern is that artists can approve the use of their work (and if they do derive a full-time income from it, that it isn't impacted).