This happens to me as a writer. There are some topics where I’m the only one who has published in English and I can see the AI using my phrases. It’s so annoying. Great topic.
The issues that I have with specific companies is that they'll claim that they're against a.i. and that they refuse to use it but if you look at their charts a ton of it is. When they're called out they'll claim they "didn't know" and that they will pull the charts ASAP only to turn around and release more and start the charade again. Personally, if I choose to make a chart through AI and use it for myself only I don't find issues with that. But I would never sell or push it as human made. I would think extremely carefully as to purchasing any charts or going through specific companies that do sell but don't disclose. Also, I have to say I love your videos and they're always a highlight of the day when you do put them out. My kids think your voice is a "calm lady" voice and like to watch your videos during their TV time.
Thanks for talking about this! I also wish AI art was being fully disclosed, but a lot of people generating this art are being somewhat dishonest about it. And I agree too that companies will get bit by the oversaturation of AI art, because it's everywhere, and it's so easy to generate! And I've noticed people are REALLY bad at recognizing AI art. :( I feel like I notice so much of it because it has this "shiny" quality, or overly detailed, or hyper realistic.
Yes! For me it’s pretty easy to spot, but so many people don’t notice it at all. And they are LOVING the AI Art and don’t care about the morals behind it
@@the_stitchy_veg morals? you mean like how EVERY SINGLE art student who ever goes to college has atleast 1 project where there asked to replicate a art style or piece to show there understanding but never once do they ask the artist for permission to learn from and emulate there work? atleast ai generates arguable unique pieces instead of making yet anouther campbells soup painting
@@the_stitchy_veg but there not whats the difference? both are using other peoples copyrighted works to learn and imrpove the only difference is purists hate ai the same asshats who hate on photoshop or any other method of people creating stuff that isnt there way
Thanks for speaking up about this topic. I have been watching some new floss tubes and have been horrified at their disregard for artists in regards to this topic.
Thanks for sharing your viewpoint and opinions. It’s always helpful to hear things from different perspectives since I personally haven’t taken the time to look into it. Your points are very valid!
Thank you for making this video, Jamie. That was a very good explanation about AI and how the ramifications might impact our whole industry. Since I knew nothing about it, I really appreciated your thoughts!
Thanks for bringing this topic up. I'm glad (a tiny bit :D ) that I'm not the only one being negative about the way that AI is used in the arts. People around me usually don't care or are just happy to buy patterns as cheaply as possible. But it really complicates things for people like me (newbies to cross stitch). Sometimes it gives me a hard time knowing where to buy patterns to actually support the artists.
I really feel for all creators because I think the horse has bolted, I don't know how it can all be reversed now. What's also frustrating is that a lot of the artists that some of the cross stitch companies have in their portfolio have a ton of art that hasn't been charted yet, and are slow to release anything by them, meanwhile the AI art is being pumped out.
I SO appreciate you making this video, I will absolutely be switching to using unconventional XStitch! I’ve been disappointed in people embracing AI without understanding how those AI images are created and the inherent theft involved
I was so glad to see this video pop up as I think more awareness of this topic is needed, regardless of whether you agree with AI art or not. People just need to be able to make an informed decision and you make a lot of really good points that people dan have a think about. I have had pretty much the same thoughts and concerns as you, and personally would not stitch AI images. The problem with this is, as you say, being able to tell if it's AI! Thanks for a fab video and discussion 1😄
I think the courts need to make it against the law for AI to 'steal' artists work. Hopefully they will get it changed so that copyright will cover all artists all the time. Only my personal opinion. 🤗🇬🇧
Just to play devil's advocate; the argument that would be made is that it's not "stealing", it's "taking inspiration from"...which every artist does or has done. I think the law should be involved if something is blatantly the same and ripped off/stolen. Music copywrites is a good example where artists have won in lawsuits from someone clearly stealing. If it's not blatantly the exact same thing then someone/something taking inspiration from it shouldn't be a problem.
I'm doing my best to avoid the AI charts, I have accidentally bought a couple before noticing they were AI and I will be stitching them since I already paid for them, but I'm getting more and more careful and even reluctant to buy more charts, not knowing if they'll be AI or not. I'm happy that HAED has started listing if a chart is made with AI or not but seeing the amount of new AI charts they put out has made me want to support them less despite HAEDs being my favorite charts to stitch. It's no longer fun to search for new charts because it always turns into a game of detective, trying to find out if AI has been used or not if it's not listed in the description. I'm happy to know Unconventional X Stitch is against AI so I will probably look for new charts there in the future.
Thank you for this. I don’t really understand ai, but I understand art and artists. Imitation is NOT the sincerest form of flattery to an artist. I respect and admire original art and I love and appreciate the work and creativity that goes into a piece. It’s a gift. I don’t even change out colors on a pattern out of that kind of respect. That was the way it was envisioned then that is the way I do it. 😊 it’s my way of giving a hats off to the artist. So I agree with your stand and you speaking out in this way. We need to encourage original artists.
I so appreciate you talking about this! I’m against AI and I’ve decided that I will not purchase from HAED in the future, due to the recent events. They are charting AI now after promising in the past that they won’t ever do that. It feels backwards and like a cash grab to me.
I think I would only feel comfortable buying AI patterns if laws were passed to force the creators to paying a percentage to the original artists the database used inspiration from, or if the AI database could not use artwork as inspiration if the original artist has not explicitly provided permission for it to be used in that manner
Thanks for talking about this! I personally don't support AI art and appreciate seeing people share their personal morals on topics like this. There are so many incredible artists out there that I'd rather put my money towards. I agree that Artecy has been very transparent about their art and I appreciate that! I also love UnconventionalXStitch and didn't know they had taken that stance. That is insteresting to know. On their free charts they dont list an artist and I was suspecting AI since they didn't disclose it. 🤨 I asked on their Instagram who the artist of their current free unicorn piece is and they havent responded. If they're not disclosing an artist on multiple pieces I'm not going to trust them saying its not AI. So I didnt download the piece just in case. But I'll continue to support and buy their other pieces obviosuly.
UnconventionalXStitch made the statement about not using AI on their Facebook earlier this year. I hadn't seen that free chart but just went and looked it up. I did a reverse image search, and it is from a stock photo website and unfortunately it doesn't say how it was made. The one thing that makes me think it might not be ai is that the upload date is 2018 but I really don't know when AI started being used in artwork. www.istockphoto.com/vector/watercolor-design-with-unicorns-and-rose-vignette-gm913202930-251383023
This is a hot topic. I do my best not to buy AI charts, I feel sorry for the artist out there all those years they've spent in college/uni to get a degree and then the time, money and effort they put into getting their careers up and running and then these people come along and use computers type in a few words and use a software programme which another person has designed to then create a chart and make easy money off... I think it is daylight robbery! That's my opinion. Then you've got the photographers who spend hours and hours taking loads of photos for that perfect picture, yes it gets turned into a chart using a software but they've spent hours and days in all weathers to get the perfect photo where again someone can just type a few keywords into a computer to get a computer generated picture or even bits stolen from their pictures, it makes my blood boil as you can tell. If I were to do a flosstube about it I think I'd rant too much and lose half my subscribers and I don't have many as it is lol. But I'm with you and darling bluebell ❤
It is definitely a topic that each and everyone should think about. When on comes to taking parts or inspiration from other artists, that is leagal and other artists, not only AI does this, the bookshelves are a perfect example of this. And artist has always taken inspiration from each other, and with that, they have made similar artwork l, I am an art teacher, and inside a certain period, you always find lot's of similarities. I understand the artists are mad at AI and want to stop it, but I personally don't think it is a good enough reason. I also don't think AI even thou it can be pumped out in bulk will overtake the artist. But I do think the company's should clearly state if it is AI or not, in the same way they should clearly say who the artist is. I am very much an optimist and think we eventually will get the best from both worlds. The best artist and their artwork and pictures from AI. It is sad if companies will put money over quality and just try and push out as many patterns as they can. I don't think this is AI's fault. I have said for years that one of the biggest FC companies charting has gotten worse. The original person that charted their artwork did leave and start their own business, and I can clearly see in the charting of what was made before and after that person. And the quality, in my opinion, has just gone downhill from there from that company. While other smaller FC companies have just gotten better and better in their charting. So I don't think we can fully blame AI for that one. But as I said in the beginning, it is a good topic to think about. And because people usually are a species that think a lot, and we all are different. That is what makes me think we will end up with the best of each world 😊❤ looking forward to your next stitchy progress update 😊
I totally agree that it takes away from the real artists that spend their time and effort creating a beautiful piece of artwork that has way better detail. I will be honest I'm not entirely sure how you tell the difference but I sure would like to know before purchasing if it is or not.
I will not stitch any AI, and really shock me when heaven and earth design had AI artwork because I remember, they gave us a freebie on the FB group last Christmas and the post was removed because z they said that they will not support AI, so mades me wonder what changed… 😅
I think this is interesting but what about all the "inspired" stuff that people stitch...Pokémon, Nintendo, Disney, HP, Anime like seriously aren't we splitting hairs? I have consumed these as well so no judgement but most of the people stitching these inspired charts aren't drawing the same distinction and in many cases are using exact images from the media and copywrite infringing all over the place but using a different filter or are changing the image slightly, making it a collage, or in many cases just making the image bigger. I guess I just see it as this is where art is going just like when digital art first became a thing and photoshop, how is that art was a huge argument. It is easy to beat up a company like HAED, but Michele, in my opinion, is trying to get ahead of the ball on a lot of this b/c she has the foresight to see where this is going ultimately. It is going to be clumsy along the way but it is also going to be harder and harder to distinguish images. Would love to hear anyone's thoughts on this
I'm stitching a lot of fan art and it is something that I've been questioning recently but it's another thing that I feel goes back to the charting companies. The first fan art I purchased was from companies like HAED, Tilton Crafts, and Charting Creations that always talk about how important copyright is. So, me not looking into it just assumed that if they were selling the charts than it must be ok. I am now seeing that the companies really only care about copyright when it comes to people sharing their charts but that otherwise they are going to chart what gets them sales even if it might be copyright infringement. It's now put on the consumers what we are comfortable with.
Forgive me if this is rather long winded. I find this an interesting subject as both a science and art lover. I use both AI and my own original art in my charts. Usually I use AI as more of inspiration, but then I work my own art from there. Even when I use AI, I can guarantee that what comes out is rather crude and full of flaws. This is when I use my own artistic input and make changes/fine tune. Then, depending on the size, I either hand chart it, or use charting software. If I use the software, that's another hour or so taking out random "confetti" stitches and other things that don't look like I want them to. So, even though I may use AI, there is still A LOT of work I put in myself, so it does bother me that everyone who uses AI is painted with the same brush. Remember inspiration can come from a lot of places. As someone commented before me, artists have been copying those before them since the beginning. One of the reasons I love art is the embracing of inspiration and the challenging of putting your own mark on what you make of it. There are always big changes being made in the art work. Take photography, for example. When photography first came out; plenty of artists weren't happy about the fact that there was this new machine that captured images in a very short time, which were much more true to life. Gone were the days were if you wanted your family portrait, you had to hire an artists. But painting hardly disappeared. There were new movements such as abstract art, and cubism, and Fauvism, which photography couldn't produce which a simple click. As someone working with various medium of art from a young age, I can fully understand the frustration that comes from putting love, inspiration, knowledge, spirit not to mention time and effort into a piece, just to have a machine crank a similar image out in 5 seconds. But, ask much ask yourself, is it the same? This video mentions a few times that AI is spottable. If this is true, and I certainly think it is with the AI I have made, then the true quality still lies with the artist. Computers have long been doing what humans can do, but this does not mean they are us, or are able of stealing the human essence which is what art comes from. I think the thing we have to remember is that this concept of a "cheaper and quicker" seeming to win over the "higher quality but expensive and time consuming" is nothing new. There was a time when a blanket would have had to been hand knitted or a rug hand woven. This meant time, as well as potentially costly wool, dye, machinery (loom), etc. Now, any of us can pop to the local mall or even online (think Temu) and get one that has taken a machine 5 minutes and less that £10 of supplies to make. Yet, how many of use have the same reaction to this as we do AI? With the age of industry, a lot of textile art was taken over by machines producing quick, cheap knockoffs what used to take some real work and talent. Yes, it did mean a lot of hand textile workers/artists were replaced, and you bet there was outcry ( as well as a lot of other woes due to industry). However, because of this, these days we have a choice. There are plenty of people who will make a hand crocheted blankets and I have friends who shear wool, hand dye it and weave rugs. These skills are still with us. Sadly, we can easily be out matched by machines in time and cost. For example, for me to make a king sized crocheted blanket, it usually takes me a month, if not more depending on what is going on in my life. The cost of supplies can run from £70 to £250 or even more depending on the yarn. Do I get a lot of sales for these blankets? NOPE! Why? Because at Temu you can buy a similar looking blanket for £10 and have it arrive at your door next week. Why spend over a hundred pounds/dollars and wait a month? Good question. My answer is quality. Quality that comes from the love, sweat, spirit, talent, all the things I mentioned easier. Yeah Temu is cheap and quick, but that's all they have. My blankets can be passed down generations. You think a Temu one is going to hold up more than 2 years? Doubtful. I think it's important not to get to carried away by fear of novelty and the unknown. It is easy, and has been a repeated theme throughout history. Fear of technology has always been a theme, yet here we are still are., adapting and evolving. Yes, AI is a threat in certain ways, but AI is no match for what truly makes us human. In time, I am sure AI will be seen for what it is. Cheap and easy maybe, but far from quality and any real long term monetary gain. That spirit, innovation, talent, emotion, experience can not and won't be matched by AI. I believe that art is about being human and is made from these qualities. I agree with those who say, why not combine the two and make it a choice? Very few people are being forced to use AI, and those who are are being done so by the greed of humans, not machines or AI. I see AI as one of the many tools I have when making my art. Like a certain brush or medium. I can use it, but I don't have to or fully rely on it when I do. It's a small tool that can be useful when used correctly and with respect.
Thank you for talking about this important topic. I promise I was listening but you sweater was so distracting to me.... it is so beautiful. As a fellow knitter all I can think about was if you made it or not? If you did I must know all details so I can also have one.
Thank you so much for letting us know about this. This was a real eye opener. I know you said you won't talk hard on AI. Well, I WILL talk hard on companies who use AI in this way and unapologetically too. I am not talking hard on you. You have blessed us with this knowledge and I thank you. No I'm talking hard on the companies who sell artwork made with AI. They are making a profit on artwork without the artists knowledge or permission. Just bc they have the ability to do it, doesn't mean it's alright. This is highly unethical. Would a company be able to copy parts of a Thomas Kinkade and parts of an Andy Worrall in an actual painting and say it's theirs? Would a company be able to take a parts of a Taylor Swift song and parts of a Kanye West song and claim it's their's in an actual song? NO THEY WOULD NOT. They would be SUED! Oh, but they can turn right around and do it in AI? REALLY!? Just bc it's AI doesn't mean it's any different. It's ridiculous that this is not treated exactly the same as copyright infringement cause that's exactly what it is!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
My son who has a PhD in Physics and I have had intense arguments about AI art. At the very least it should be like GM food. There should be a very clear disclaimer!
Like it or not, AI is here to stay. AI is something that people are going to have to eventually embrace. I do think the laws regarding AI needs to work itself out, which it will within the next few years. People and companies just need to be more upfront about the use of AI instead of trying to hide the fact whether they use it or not. I do believe that there will one day be a law that will require companies to disclose if the artwork is AI generated. In regard to patterns, I'm not really a huge fan myself just because the artwork being generated is not my style. As of right now I can confidently say that none of the patterns I own are AI generated. However if I were to see one that I wanted to stitch on I do think I would purchase it. The issue for me is not AI, but with the companies/people who lie about the use of AI.
i dont actually see any issue with ai and copyright and neither should any artist because as a artist lets be honest youve nver had a 100% original all your own idea even your most original ideas have had inspiration behind them youve gone out on the web and youve searched for hours to build inspiration youve taken notes of things you like things you dont like perhaps styles and techniques you enjoy you then go forward and you make your original work you didnt straight copy you used it as inspiration say your a painter you may have taken the style for doing trees from a picture you saw a method of doing lighting from anouther you enjoyed mixed that with perhaps a castle style you found appealing at no point have you coppied anything but youve used all this works as inspiration now the crucial question when did you email all those people and ask if you could use there work as inspiration? if your learning a drawing style did you contact those artists to ask if you could learn from them? no no you did not because of course you didnt unless you going to be copy and pasting elements from there work you dont need permission to observe and learn from there work in order to improve your own skills ai is the same ai isnt copying and pasting its training data into images and calling them its own the ai generates a piece of art then the trainer program compares that to the training data to see if it did well and itterates the ai tuning it to make it better the ai isnt trying to make pixel perfect knockoffs of piccassos its trying to learn how to draw a decent cat or face or vehicle then when the user sits down and gives the prompt it generates a 1 of a kind unique image now i can apreciate why some artists may not want there work to be used by some big company as training data but was that a courtesy you extended to every other artist whos work youve observed and used to learn from and build upon? did you ask if theyd be ok if you learned from there work? no and if its ok for you to learn from others work its fine for others to learn from your work
This happens to me as a writer. There are some topics where I’m the only one who has published in English and I can see the AI using my phrases. It’s so annoying. Great topic.
The issues that I have with specific companies is that they'll claim that they're against a.i. and that they refuse to use it but if you look at their charts a ton of it is. When they're called out they'll claim they "didn't know" and that they will pull the charts ASAP only to turn around and release more and start the charade again.
Personally, if I choose to make a chart through AI and use it for myself only I don't find issues with that. But I would never sell or push it as human made. I would think extremely carefully as to purchasing any charts or going through specific companies that do sell but don't disclose.
Also, I have to say I love your videos and they're always a highlight of the day when you do put them out. My kids think your voice is a "calm lady" voice and like to watch your videos during their TV time.
I was not aware that AI was being used this way. Thanks for enlightening me. I will be very careful in the future.
Thanks for talking about this! I also wish AI art was being fully disclosed, but a lot of people generating this art are being somewhat dishonest about it. And I agree too that companies will get bit by the oversaturation of AI art, because it's everywhere, and it's so easy to generate! And I've noticed people are REALLY bad at recognizing AI art. :( I feel like I notice so much of it because it has this "shiny" quality, or overly detailed, or hyper realistic.
Yes! For me it’s pretty easy to spot, but so many people don’t notice it at all. And they are LOVING the AI Art and don’t care about the morals behind it
@@the_stitchy_veg morals? you mean like how EVERY SINGLE art student who ever goes to college has atleast 1 project where there asked to replicate a art style or piece to show there understanding but never once do they ask the artist for permission to learn from and emulate there work?
atleast ai generates arguable unique pieces instead of making yet anouther campbells soup painting
@@Sarge92 totally different in my opinion
@@the_stitchy_veg but there not whats the difference?
both are using other peoples copyrighted works to learn and imrpove
the only difference is purists hate ai
the same asshats who hate on photoshop or any other method of people creating stuff that isnt there way
@@Sarge92 I don’t agree at all, but I can’t be bothered to discuss this with you.
Thanks for speaking up about this topic. I have been watching some new floss tubes and have been horrified at their disregard for artists in regards to this topic.
Thanks for sharing your viewpoint and opinions. It’s always helpful to hear things from different perspectives since I personally haven’t taken the time to look into it. Your points are very valid!
Thank you for making this video, Jamie. That was a very good explanation about AI and how the ramifications might impact our whole industry. Since I knew nothing about it, I really appreciated your thoughts!
Thanks for bringing this topic up. I'm glad (a tiny bit :D ) that I'm not the only one being negative about the way that AI is used in the arts. People around me usually don't care or are just happy to buy patterns as cheaply as possible. But it really complicates things for people like me (newbies to cross stitch). Sometimes it gives me a hard time knowing where to buy patterns to actually support the artists.
I really feel for all creators because I think the horse has bolted, I don't know how it can all be reversed now. What's also frustrating is that a lot of the artists that some of the cross stitch companies have in their portfolio have a ton of art that hasn't been charted yet, and are slow to release anything by them, meanwhile the AI art is being pumped out.
I SO appreciate you making this video, I will absolutely be switching to using unconventional XStitch! I’ve been disappointed in people embracing AI without understanding how those AI images are created and the inherent theft involved
Well said! I completely agree!
Good points to discuss Jamie. For now, just one day a t time. One stitch at time.
I was so glad to see this video pop up as I think more awareness of this topic is needed, regardless of whether you agree with AI art or not. People just need to be able to make an informed decision and you make a lot of really good points that people dan have a think about. I have had pretty much the same thoughts and concerns as you, and personally would not stitch AI images. The problem with this is, as you say, being able to tell if it's AI! Thanks for a fab video and discussion 1😄
I appreciated hearing your thoughts.
Good short and to the point, well done. Thank you 🥰
I think the courts need to make it against the law for AI to 'steal' artists work. Hopefully they will get it changed so that copyright will cover all artists all the time. Only my personal opinion. 🤗🇬🇧
Just to play devil's advocate; the argument that would be made is that it's not "stealing", it's "taking inspiration from"...which every artist does or has done. I think the law should be involved if something is blatantly the same and ripped off/stolen. Music copywrites is a good example where artists have won in lawsuits from someone clearly stealing. If it's not blatantly the exact same thing then someone/something taking inspiration from it shouldn't be a problem.
I'm doing my best to avoid the AI charts, I have accidentally bought a couple before noticing they were AI and I will be stitching them since I already paid for them, but I'm getting more and more careful and even reluctant to buy more charts, not knowing if they'll be AI or not. I'm happy that HAED has started listing if a chart is made with AI or not but seeing the amount of new AI charts they put out has made me want to support them less despite HAEDs being my favorite charts to stitch. It's no longer fun to search for new charts because it always turns into a game of detective, trying to find out if AI has been used or not if it's not listed in the description. I'm happy to know Unconventional X Stitch is against AI so I will probably look for new charts there in the future.
Thank you for this. I don’t really understand ai, but I understand art and artists. Imitation is NOT the sincerest form of flattery to an artist. I respect and admire original art and I love and appreciate the work and creativity that goes into a piece. It’s a gift. I don’t even change out colors on a pattern out of that kind of respect. That was the way it was envisioned then that is the way I do it. 😊 it’s my way of giving a hats off to the artist. So I agree with your stand and you speaking out in this way. We need to encourage original artists.
I so appreciate you talking about this! I’m against AI and I’ve decided that I will not purchase from HAED in the future, due to the recent events. They are charting AI now after promising in the past that they won’t ever do that. It feels backwards and like a cash grab to me.
Thank you for talking about this! I am a new sub! Found you from this topic!
WOW love your videos ❤
Thanks for bringing attention to this. I will be more careful when purchasing charts.
Thank you
I think I would only feel comfortable buying AI patterns if laws were passed to force the creators to paying a percentage to the original artists the database used inspiration from, or if the AI database could not use artwork as inspiration if the original artist has not explicitly provided permission for it to be used in that manner
Thanks for talking about this! I personally don't support AI art and appreciate seeing people share their personal morals on topics like this. There are so many incredible artists out there that I'd rather put my money towards. I agree that Artecy has been very transparent about their art and I appreciate that! I also love UnconventionalXStitch and didn't know they had taken that stance. That is insteresting to know. On their free charts they dont list an artist and I was suspecting AI since they didn't disclose it. 🤨 I asked on their Instagram who the artist of their current free unicorn piece is and they havent responded. If they're not disclosing an artist on multiple pieces I'm not going to trust them saying its not AI. So I didnt download the piece just in case. But I'll continue to support and buy their other pieces obviosuly.
UnconventionalXStitch made the statement about not using AI on their Facebook earlier this year. I hadn't seen that free chart but just went and looked it up. I did a reverse image search, and it is from a stock photo website and unfortunately it doesn't say how it was made. The one thing that makes me think it might not be ai is that the upload date is 2018 but I really don't know when AI started being used in artwork.
www.istockphoto.com/vector/watercolor-design-with-unicorns-and-rose-vignette-gm913202930-251383023
I appreciated this ❤
This is a hot topic. I do my best not to buy AI charts, I feel sorry for the artist out there all those years they've spent in college/uni to get a degree and then the time, money and effort they put into getting their careers up and running and then these people come along and use computers type in a few words and use a software programme which another person has designed to then create a chart and make easy money off... I think it is daylight robbery! That's my opinion.
Then you've got the photographers who spend hours and hours taking loads of photos for that perfect picture, yes it gets turned into a chart using a software but they've spent hours and days in all weathers to get the perfect photo where again someone can just type a few keywords into a computer to get a computer generated picture or even bits stolen from their pictures, it makes my blood boil as you can tell. If I were to do a flosstube about it I think I'd rant too much and lose half my subscribers and I don't have many as it is lol. But I'm with you and darling bluebell ❤
I feel you so much!! That is exactly how I feel about this!
It is definitely a topic that each and everyone should think about.
When on comes to taking parts or inspiration from other artists, that is leagal and other artists, not only AI does this, the bookshelves are a perfect example of this. And artist has always taken inspiration from each other, and with that, they have made similar artwork l, I am an art teacher, and inside a certain period, you always find lot's of similarities. I understand the artists are mad at AI and want to stop it, but I personally don't think it is a good enough reason. I also don't think AI even thou it can be pumped out in bulk will overtake the artist. But I do think the company's should clearly state if it is AI or not, in the same way they should clearly say who the artist is. I am very much an optimist and think we eventually will get the best from both worlds. The best artist and their artwork and pictures from AI.
It is sad if companies will put money over quality and just try and push out as many patterns as they can. I don't think this is AI's fault. I have said for years that one of the biggest FC companies charting has gotten worse. The original person that charted their artwork did leave and start their own business, and I can clearly see in the charting of what was made before and after that person. And the quality, in my opinion, has just gone downhill from there from that company. While other smaller FC companies have just gotten better and better in their charting. So I don't think we can fully blame AI for that one. But as I said in the beginning, it is a good topic to think about. And because people usually are a species that think a lot, and we all are different. That is what makes me think we will end up with the best of each world 😊❤ looking forward to your next stitchy progress update 😊
Great video Jamie! I agree about everything you said.
I totally agree that it takes away from the real artists that spend their time and effort creating a beautiful piece of artwork that has way better detail. I will be honest I'm not entirely sure how you tell the difference but I sure would like to know before purchasing if it is or not.
I will not stitch any AI, and really shock me when heaven and earth design had AI artwork because I remember, they gave us a freebie on the FB group last Christmas and the post was removed because z they said that they will not support AI, so mades me wonder what changed… 😅
I think this is interesting but what about all the "inspired" stuff that people stitch...Pokémon, Nintendo, Disney, HP, Anime like seriously aren't we splitting hairs? I have consumed these as well so no judgement but most of the people stitching these inspired charts aren't drawing the same distinction and in many cases are using exact images from the media and copywrite infringing all over the place but using a different filter or are changing the image slightly, making it a collage, or in many cases just making the image bigger. I guess I just see it as this is where art is going just like when digital art first became a thing and photoshop, how is that art was a huge argument. It is easy to beat up a company like HAED, but Michele, in my opinion, is trying to get ahead of the ball on a lot of this b/c she has the foresight to see where this is going ultimately. It is going to be clumsy along the way but it is also going to be harder and harder to distinguish images. Would love to hear anyone's thoughts on this
I'm stitching a lot of fan art and it is something that I've been questioning recently but it's another thing that I feel goes back to the charting companies. The first fan art I purchased was from companies like HAED, Tilton Crafts, and Charting Creations that always talk about how important copyright is. So, me not looking into it just assumed that if they were selling the charts than it must be ok. I am now seeing that the companies really only care about copyright when it comes to people sharing their charts but that otherwise they are going to chart what gets them sales even if it might be copyright infringement. It's now put on the consumers what we are comfortable with.
Forgive me if this is rather long winded. I find this an interesting subject as both a science and art lover.
I use both AI and my own original art in my charts. Usually I use AI as more of inspiration, but then I work my own art from there. Even when I use AI, I can guarantee that what comes out is rather crude and full of flaws. This is when I use my own artistic input and make changes/fine tune. Then, depending on the size, I either hand chart it, or use charting software. If I use the software, that's another hour or so taking out random "confetti" stitches and other things that don't look like I want them to. So, even though I may use AI, there is still A LOT of work I put in myself, so it does bother me that everyone who uses AI is painted with the same brush. Remember inspiration can come from a lot of places. As someone commented before me, artists have been copying those before them since the beginning. One of the reasons I love art is the embracing of inspiration and the challenging of putting your own mark on what you make of it.
There are always big changes being made in the art work. Take photography, for example. When photography first came out; plenty of artists weren't happy about the fact that there was this new machine that captured images in a very short time, which were much more true to life. Gone were the days were if you wanted your family portrait, you had to hire an artists. But painting hardly disappeared. There were new movements such as abstract art, and cubism, and Fauvism, which photography couldn't produce which a simple click.
As someone working with various medium of art from a young age, I can fully understand the frustration that comes from putting love, inspiration, knowledge, spirit not to mention time and effort into a piece, just to have a machine crank a similar image out in 5 seconds. But, ask much ask yourself, is it the same? This video mentions a few times that AI is spottable. If this is true, and I certainly think it is with the AI I have made, then the true quality still lies with the artist. Computers have long been doing what humans can do, but this does not mean they are us, or are able of stealing the human essence which is what art comes from. I think the thing we have to remember is that this concept of a "cheaper and quicker" seeming to win over the "higher quality but expensive and time consuming" is nothing new. There was a time when a blanket would have had to been hand knitted or a rug hand woven. This meant time, as well as potentially costly wool, dye, machinery (loom), etc. Now, any of us can pop to the local mall or even online (think Temu) and get one that has taken a machine 5 minutes and less that £10 of supplies to make. Yet, how many of use have the same reaction to this as we do AI? With the age of industry, a lot of textile art was taken over by machines producing quick, cheap knockoffs what used to take some real work and talent. Yes, it did mean a lot of hand textile workers/artists were replaced, and you bet there was outcry ( as well as a lot of other woes due to industry). However, because of this, these days we have a choice. There are plenty of people who will make a hand crocheted blankets and I have friends who shear wool, hand dye it and weave rugs. These skills are still with us. Sadly, we can easily be out matched by machines in time and cost. For example, for me to make a king sized crocheted blanket, it usually takes me a month, if not more depending on what is going on in my life. The cost of supplies can run from £70 to £250 or even more depending on the yarn. Do I get a lot of sales for these blankets? NOPE! Why? Because at Temu you can buy a similar looking blanket for £10 and have it arrive at your door next week. Why spend over a hundred pounds/dollars and wait a month? Good question. My answer is quality. Quality that comes from the love, sweat, spirit, talent, all the things I mentioned easier. Yeah Temu is cheap and quick, but that's all they have. My blankets can be passed down generations. You think a Temu one is going to hold up more than 2 years? Doubtful.
I think it's important not to get to carried away by fear of novelty and the unknown. It is easy, and has been a repeated theme throughout history. Fear of technology has always been a theme, yet here we are still are., adapting and evolving. Yes, AI is a threat in certain ways, but AI is no match for what truly makes us human. In time, I am sure AI will be seen for what it is. Cheap and easy maybe, but far from quality and any real long term monetary gain. That spirit, innovation, talent, emotion, experience can not and won't be matched by AI. I believe that art is about being human and is made from these qualities.
I agree with those who say, why not combine the two and make it a choice? Very few people are being forced to use AI, and those who are are being done so by the greed of humans, not machines or AI. I see AI as one of the many tools I have when making my art. Like a certain brush or medium. I can use it, but I don't have to or fully rely on it when I do. It's a small tool that can be useful when used correctly and with respect.
Great thoughts! Short term benefits and cheaper prices are not always a good thing. It puts a lot of LNS’s out of business as well.
💕💕💕
👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼
Thank you for talking about this important topic. I promise I was listening but you sweater was so distracting to me.... it is so beautiful. As a fellow knitter all I can think about was if you made it or not? If you did I must know all details so I can also have one.
the free haed chart is an AI image, look at here eyes.
It is, it’s disclosed on the website
Thank you so much for letting us know about this. This was a real eye opener. I know you said you won't talk hard on AI. Well, I WILL talk hard on companies who use AI in this way and unapologetically too. I am not talking hard on you. You have blessed us with this knowledge and I thank you. No I'm talking hard on the companies who sell artwork made with AI. They are making a profit on artwork without the artists knowledge or permission. Just bc they have the ability to do it, doesn't mean it's alright. This is highly unethical. Would a company be able to copy parts of a Thomas Kinkade and parts of an Andy Worrall in an actual painting and say it's theirs? Would a company be able to take a parts of a Taylor Swift song and parts of a Kanye West song and claim it's their's in an actual song? NO THEY WOULD NOT. They would be SUED! Oh, but they can turn right around and do it in AI? REALLY!? Just bc it's AI doesn't mean it's any different. It's ridiculous that this is not treated exactly the same as copyright infringement cause that's exactly what it is!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
My son who has a PhD in Physics and I have had intense arguments about AI art. At the very least it should be like GM food. There should be a very clear disclaimer!
Like it or not, AI is here to stay. AI is something that people are going to have to eventually embrace. I do think the laws regarding AI needs to work itself out, which it will within the next few years. People and companies just need to be more upfront about the use of AI instead of trying to hide the fact whether they use it or not. I do believe that there will one day be a law that will require companies to disclose if the artwork is AI generated.
In regard to patterns, I'm not really a huge fan myself just because the artwork being generated is not my style. As of right now I can confidently say that none of the patterns I own are AI generated. However if I were to see one that I wanted to stitch on I do think I would purchase it. The issue for me is not AI, but with the companies/people who lie about the use of AI.
i dont actually see any issue with ai and copyright and neither should any artist
because as a artist lets be honest youve nver had a 100% original all your own idea
even your most original ideas have had inspiration behind them youve gone out on the web and youve searched for hours to build inspiration youve taken notes of things you like things you dont like perhaps styles and techniques you enjoy
you then go forward and you make your original work you didnt straight copy you used it as inspiration say your a painter you may have taken the style for doing trees from a picture you saw a method of doing lighting from anouther you enjoyed mixed that with perhaps a castle style you found appealing
at no point have you coppied anything but youve used all this works as inspiration
now the crucial question
when did you email all those people and ask if you could use there work as inspiration?
if your learning a drawing style did you contact those artists to ask if you could learn from them?
no no you did not
because of course you didnt unless you going to be copy and pasting elements from there work you dont need permission to observe and learn from there work in order to improve your own skills
ai is the same ai isnt copying and pasting its training data into images and calling them its own
the ai generates a piece of art then the trainer program compares that to the training data to see if it did well and itterates the ai tuning it to make it better
the ai isnt trying to make pixel perfect knockoffs of piccassos its trying to learn how to draw a decent cat or face or vehicle
then when the user sits down and gives the prompt it generates a 1 of a kind unique image
now i can apreciate why some artists may not want there work to be used by some big company as training data
but was that a courtesy you extended to every other artist whos work youve observed and used to learn from and build upon?
did you ask if theyd be ok if you learned from there work?
no and if its ok for you to learn from others work its fine for others to learn from your work