I think point 3 might be incredibly helpful while doing pinups/one shots as an artist. I haven't tested it yet since I'm working on something else, but I really want to apply img 2 img tech to a blocked in sketch and see if the AI can save me a couple hours lol

Its in the way that you use it....

I just wanna say, I know there is a whole thing about art stealing and AI steal from artists, but what about Human artists that Use OTHER artists work for refrences? Isn't that considered stealing too? And if not, why is it not? Because they are altering the work of the previous artist?

But when you think about it, isn't that what the AI does too? it mixes and matches pre existing images to create something new?

Personally I think AI art shouldn't be compared to Human generated art, because I don't think they're the same, but I also don't think we should just Outcast AI art entirely, Because let's face it... AI art will NEVER be able to take over human art. (there is too much soul and effort put into human art that AI art cannot replicate. Mainly If you have an OC, AI art can't replicate that OC.)

Also I like the design of this image, it gives me major body horror 1982's "The thing" vibes :P

about Human artists that Use OTHER artists work for refrences?

Furry artists are okay, then?

That was bad, sorry not sorry. Couldn't resist XD

In all seriousness, that's an interesting area to think about, and I don't know how grey it might be.

I remember watching to a youtube vid about a Cuphead clone (wish I could remember the name of the video) with the host talking about how people were wondering how this clone was able to stay afloat and make money, despite being very clearly inspired by Cuphead on both an aesthetic and gameplay level. Turns out the gameplay elements are not copy-writable, but here's the other big thing -- it did not STEAL any of Cuphead's code to be created, it was all created from scratch.

Unless I'm misunderstanding how AI works, in order for it to create something, it has to be exposed to different artists' work and that work has to be coded into it. One could argue that it creates something transformative by mashing it up, but can a machine create something with its own creative license? People using another artist's work as a passing reference, NOT TRACING it, are not doing the same thing, however, though it matters to what degree it is "passing", granted, as verbatum copying is generally not okay.

Thinking back it's kind of funny, Though I personally think this would never hold up in court, one of the ways we used to try to skirt copyright law it a bakery I worked was the artist making the cake would copy, say with a Teenage Mutant Nina Turtle pic, about 70% of the image and change other aspects like hand positions, maybe which turtle was where and alter their colors to be a different green... maybe change the time of day or building names in the background. The reason it probably wouldn't hold up in court is the Trademarks being used and not the copyrightable aspect of the picture, but I've no doubt that's still going on and probably will unimpeded due to the obscurity of the place. Attention itself can be deleterious to operations, which is possibly why AI art has so many cross hairs drawn on on it right now.

This is a very interesting grey area to think about, and if it helps the OP's argument with this whole post, I've got several mathematically inclined family members who're into coding and teaching coding, and say AI can't quite replace actual work. I don't know the truth to that assertion, as all it is is an assertion, but it's a nice thing to think about XD

You Know AI art is a tool right? why do you keep saying human artist?

I think AI's a good novelty, but nothing will ever take the place of real art, tweaking it your self during it's inception or asking the artist you've commissioned to do it for you. It depends on what your priorities are, though, and people who want something RIGHT now can get it, with some of the drawbacks listed above.

People who want free art of well-known characters probably won't care if it's ripping off someone else's work, and would probably throw back that the characters aren't the artist's to begin with (which I think is a wrong way to go about it, but people will justify themselves any way they want).

I'm in it for the art and seeing what gets made when I commission a person to do something or going on a mental journey when I try to create something myself. AI cannot replicate that. Also, I've collected some AI-generated pics for visual references (not of the faces or hands, of course). It creates some interesting mash-ups that look unique, and I ask for pics of people. Though 1/6 to 1/9 of the generated pics are actually usable for anything, that could very well be due to user error XD

Its in the way that you use it...