There have been many questions about the future of AI art and text within the TTRPG industry. The short answer is: Paizo stands with artists and writers against progress.
So in few years, drivethruRPG tier shit like FATAL will have pages and pages of mindblowing imagery produced for pennies per shot, and Paizo will be paying artists over a $1000 per sketchy picture.
Good! We shouldn't be mocking them for using real artists any more than we would a company refusing to outsource to China. It's one thing if an indie or hobbyist game designer uses AI art because they lack the capital to hire real artists, but we should not want Paizo and their peers to destroy the industry you're using to train that AI in the first place.
destroy the industry you're using to train that AI in the first place.
My moral issues with the datasets they were trained on aside, this is the other big concern yes, that it will become recursive. Not just art, but everything we do. Oh sure we can create a new painting in the existing style of x. But nobody will spend the decades of building their skills to be able to create new style y. Not when the market is flooded by infinite free art far better than you can produce for the first 20 years, when previously it was a viable side-earner after a few years.
Conservativism in this is not a vice. There are some real concerns here, for art and for society more broadly. All industries.
And that's before we get into the biases that sillicon valley and the gov is putting into AI. The last thing anyone here should want is AI being developed here and now. During peak woke? Are you fucking insane?
"Paizo stands with artists and writers against progress."?
But nobody will spend the decades of building their skills to be able to create new style y
Considering 99% of artists waste their entire life to produce nothing of value, other than being starving artists draining society along the way, I feel like we are still in the net gain. The truly passionate will still create even in obscurity because that's what makes able to create things that will change the game.
Like, these are issues that applied to literally every industry ever as machines began to exist. Clockmakers were nearly wiped out, despite being better artists than almost anyone, just for the digital. But I bet everyone who is against AI art has never bought a handcrafted clock over the same principle.
Your point about the government and the techindustry abuses though is completely valid and I agree.
I don't disagree entirely, but I don't think the "peak woke" argument applies to diffusion-generated art. The code is free and competing models are already out there. If anything the derivatives of Stability are based and make the wokies seethe.
If you're talking about locked down ChatGPT then yes we need to fight that becoming the standard as hard as we can, at least until we have a non-pozzed alterative.
I don't blame them; if they're paying someone for art, they shouldn't be outsourcing that to a computer. I'm not sure what the community ban is about. They can't stop you from doing whatever you want on your tabletop?
For premium content that they're making and selling I don't think this is a bad thing, but depending on how community content works on their service, that could be kind of lame.
Fixed it for them.
So in few years, drivethruRPG tier shit like FATAL will have pages and pages of mindblowing imagery produced for pennies per shot, and Paizo will be paying artists over a $1000 per sketchy picture.
This is Pazio we're talking about, they would still be paying artist pennies per shot.
Good! We shouldn't be mocking them for using real artists any more than we would a company refusing to outsource to China. It's one thing if an indie or hobbyist game designer uses AI art because they lack the capital to hire real artists, but we should not want Paizo and their peers to destroy the industry you're using to train that AI in the first place.
My moral issues with the datasets they were trained on aside, this is the other big concern yes, that it will become recursive. Not just art, but everything we do. Oh sure we can create a new painting in the existing style of x. But nobody will spend the decades of building their skills to be able to create new style y. Not when the market is flooded by infinite free art far better than you can produce for the first 20 years, when previously it was a viable side-earner after a few years.
Conservativism in this is not a vice. There are some real concerns here, for art and for society more broadly. All industries.
And that's before we get into the biases that sillicon valley and the gov is putting into AI. The last thing anyone here should want is AI being developed here and now. During peak woke? Are you fucking insane?
"Paizo stands
with artists and writersagainst progress."?Good.
Considering 99% of artists waste their entire life to produce nothing of value, other than being starving artists draining society along the way, I feel like we are still in the net gain. The truly passionate will still create even in obscurity because that's what makes able to create things that will change the game.
Like, these are issues that applied to literally every industry ever as machines began to exist. Clockmakers were nearly wiped out, despite being better artists than almost anyone, just for the digital. But I bet everyone who is against AI art has never bought a handcrafted clock over the same principle.
Your point about the government and the techindustry abuses though is completely valid and I agree.
I don't disagree entirely, but I don't think the "peak woke" argument applies to diffusion-generated art. The code is free and competing models are already out there. If anything the derivatives of Stability are based and make the wokies seethe.
If you're talking about locked down ChatGPT then yes we need to fight that becoming the standard as hard as we can, at least until we have a non-pozzed alterative.
Butlerian Jihad when?
I don't blame them; if they're paying someone for art, they shouldn't be outsourcing that to a computer. I'm not sure what the community ban is about. They can't stop you from doing whatever you want on your tabletop?
For premium content that they're making and selling I don't think this is a bad thing, but depending on how community content works on their service, that could be kind of lame.