Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

ChatGPT Now Lets You Generate Two Images Per Day For Free

ProbablyDylan said:
Isn't that just like learning how to draw, paint, photograph? Where do we make the distinction? There are whole schools built on teaching (or training) people in these fields, based on the works of others within them.
Click to expand...
The big difference is people vs software. As a society we accept that people will use what they see and learn to create new things. The software is mathematically generating it from data. The former is needed because that is life the later is theft using software. I don't give two Fs what people think but any code based off my open source code that is generated by ML is a violation of my code licenses (not to mention that ChatGPT does not follow attribution requirements). Artist, authors (OpenAI is being sued for using pirated ebooks to tran ChatGPT), etc all have a claim against this. STOP COMPARING HUMAN LEARNING to this ML crap!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Stenik
ChrisA said:
First of all, if the work is properly attributed then by definition it can not possibly be plagiarism. So even if I make a dead-on photographic copy of the Mona Lisa it is not plagiarism if I acknowledge that the work is by Di Vinci.

AI art could be plagiarism if a person fails to give credit to ChapGPT and claims he painted the image himself. Even if the image is 100% not like any other on Earth.

This is not theft by any legal definition of the term. For example what if you go to art school and study art history and then look at the work of many artists over the centuries? Are you not being trained using the work of others? You can argue that those works you looked at were "in public" the same applies to ChatGPT.

Again with no examples, you are just "making stuff up". Or to use Ng's example "worrying about overpopulation on Mars". In other words a problem that might not ever exist. It would be so easy to make your point if you had an actual example of plagiarism.

All that said, it is possible to force ChapGPT to make artwork that is VERY MUCH like a copywritten work. It will do it if asked. But how is this different from simply using a camera to make a copy? Also, either way, asking GPTchat to make the copy or using your camera is not plagiarism if you properly acknowledge the source.

But all search engines will aid in plagiarism if you askit something like "Find an image of Micky Mouse as drawn by Walt Disney". The artest did not authorize this search. He has been dead for decades. The images would be unquestioned plagiarism if you claimed to have created them. AI art is not different from a simple Google search.
Click to expand...
This is complete and utter BS. ChatGPT and Dalle do not credit the source and taking credit for when Dalle produces from what it steals is not plagiarizing ChatGPT but the original artists. ChatGPT is not a person or even intelligence but a huge database of scraped information (essentially).
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: EedyBeedyBeeps, eltoslightfoot and Stenik
iPhoneFan5349 said:
Serious question. Why is chatGPT so expensive? Are these guys serious?

20 a month for a search engine? Wtf? And that’s on top of you needing an account and they monetizing all your info and your queries
Click to expand...
Not a search engine, $20 saves me hours of coding time. Well worth it
 
  • Like
Reactions: citysnaps
ChrisA said:
First of all, if the work is properly attributed then by definition it can not possibly be plagiarism. So even if I make a dead-on photographic copy of the Mona Lisa it is not plagiarism if I acknowledge that the work is by Di Vinci.

AI art could be plagiarism if a person fails to give credit to ChapGPT and claims he painted the image himself. Even if the image is 100% not like any other on Earth.

This is not theft by any legal definition of the term. For example what if you go to art school and study art history and then look at the work of many artists over the centuries? Are you not being trained using the work of others? You can argue that those works you looked at were "in public" the same applies to ChatGPT.

Again with no examples, you are just "making stuff up". Or to use Ng's example "worrying about overpopulation on Mars". In other words a problem that might not ever exist. It would be so easy to make your point if you had an actual example of plagiarism.

All that said, it is possible to force ChapGPT to make artwork that is VERY MUCH like a copywritten work. It will do it if asked. But how is this different from simply using a camera to make a copy? Also, either way, asking GPTchat to make the copy or using your camera is not plagiarism if you properly acknowledge the source.

But all search engines will aid in plagiarism if you askit something like "Find an image of Micky Mouse as drawn by Walt Disney". The artest did not authorize this search. He has been dead for decades. The images would be unquestioned plagiarism if you claimed to have created them. AI art is not different from a simple Google search.
Click to expand...

You see, without preexisting art DALL–E and friends are nothing. A computer can’t be “inspired”. Sure anybody can go instruct an image generator to picture a subject/setting “in the style of [blank]”, but unlike a human it’s all conjured up from scraped data that humans annotated for it in the first place.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Stenik, eifelbube and eno12
ChrisA said:
I think it has to do with the requested style. "felt" is expected to be very simplified and cartoonish. It would be interesting to ask for another style, such as "photo realist".
Click to expand...
He was obviously joking. I don't mean to pry, but...
6o9c3a.jpg
?
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: eltoslightfoot and LockOn2B
iPhoneFan5349 said:
Serious question. Why is chatGPT so expensive? Are these guys serious?

20 a month for a search engine? Wtf? And that’s on top of you needing an account and they monetizing all your info and your queries
Click to expand...

Honest question, once Apple Intelligence is fully baked into MacOS, do you think penny pinching Tim will charge any less?
 
Seems reasonable for people who really understand what it's about. Though it appears many don't.
 
Pakaku said:
Image generation is plagiarism. This stuff was built on art theft and needs to be banned, and they need to be forced to compensate the artists they stole from.
Click to expand...

Artists always take ideas from other artists. I don’t think it’s plagiarism.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: eno12
ProbablyDylan said:
Isn't that just like learning how to draw, paint, photograph? Where do we make the distinction? There are whole schools built on teaching (or training) people in these fields, based on the works of others within them.
Click to expand...
I've played with stable diffusion and while it's fun to create image I couldn't ever do on my own, I know it's a cheat and has no value other than for my own amusement. Doesn't matter how much time I spend with prompt engineering and other techniques coaxing it to create the thing I have it mind. There'll be a tool to make it even easier coming down the pipe. It reminds me of what Jeff Goldblum's character in Jurassic Park said: "I'll tell you the problem with the power that you're using here: it didn't require any discipline to attain it."
 
  • Like
Reactions: LockOn2B
ChrisA said:
You need to show us an example. Using ideas from other artists is not "plagiarism". To be plagiarism you must use someone else's work and call it your own. There are some legal definitions of how close you can copy before you cross the line and there is also the concept of fair use.

Please show us instances of actual plagiarism. (I am not saying plagiarism does not exist but only that you will not make your point without showing that plagiarism is common)
Click to expand...
LLM theft of established work is well documented. The onus is on YOU to prove that it’s not true.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LockOn2B
thebart said:
I've played with stable diffusion and while it's fun to create image I couldn't ever do on my own, I know it's a cheat and has no value other than for my own amusement. Doesn't matter how much time I spend with prompt engineering and other techniques coaxing it to create the thing I have it mind. There'll be a tool to make it even easier coming down the pipe. It reminds me of what Jeff Goldblum's character in Jurassic Park said: "I'll tell you the problem with the power that you're using here: it didn't require any discipline to attain it."
Click to expand...

Entirely fair take. In the end, I can see generative models just being another brush or button in photoshop.

Though now I wonder how people felt about Photoshop and other computer-image editors coming to market.
 
Pakaku said:
Gen-AI isn't anything that can generate something from nothing, it has to be trained on data. That data needs to be provided from somewhere. I don't have specific examples, but scraping the internet for millions of images to use without artists' permission is plagiarism and theft.
Click to expand...
With your "logic" Google and every search engine would be committing plagiarism.

The Fair Use Doctrine trumps your entire argument. The images generated within ChatGPT are considered for educational use.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: eno12 and LockOn2B
Pakaku said:
Image generation is plagiarism. This stuff was built on art theft and needs to be banned, and they need to be forced to compensate the artists they stole from.
Click to expand...
Exactly.

It is so hard, especially these days, for artists to make a living. While it is wrong of ChatGPT to steal from rich and successful artists, it is downright reprehensible that ChatGPT steals from poor and struggling artists.

I am sickened to know that the work of poor and struggling artists is plagarized by ChatGPT, just so corporate scumbag billionaires like Sam Altman and Tim Cook can become even more rich.
 
I asked ChatGPT to create an image but it answered that it could not ('I don't have the capability to generate images directly, but I can help you brainstorm ideas and guide you through creating them!')
 
Will the OpenAI integration include Advanced Voice Mode?

Flux is the new Midjourney killer and best by far for image generation—and it's open-source. Founded by fourteen of the top engineers from StabilityAI, including the inventor of Stable Diffusion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back