AI technologies have advanced greatly since the release of this replacer. Would you be interested in remakink this mod and the cards replacer using newer technology? I just think that AI artifacts on the older AI stuff like this is much too obvious. I'm not demanding anything, just asking and suggesting. I will continue using this replacer either way
This mod is opted-in to receive donation points yet you use scraped artwork from a myriad of different artists whose permissions are unknown, essentially profiting off work that isn't yours. That doesn't seem very fair to me. You took the time to find the permissions for everything else, as I can see in the credits, but you couldn't be bothered to find beautiful artwork by actual artists and get those permissions too? You not only missed a chance here to uplift other creators but deliberately disrespected their hard work instead.
Judging from the other comments, you come off as someone who doesn't really care either way, so this comment is really for the benefit of everyone else as well as artists like me when I say this sets a REALLY bad precedent for modding in general. Please be better than this.
1. I am an artist in both traditional and digital media, and I can say 99% of "human art" is emulating previous works. "artstation" is a style, and countless soulless landscapes of the same style is found in homes all around the world. Nothing is new under the sun. Should the old masters have intellectual property rights over the snapshots of their work in my brain?
2. Beyond arguments about "the soul", "humanity" or "quintessence", the only difference here between "human art" and "ai art" is quality and how they are made. If a human produced the exact same art that an AI generated by copying the style of other artists and someone tries to sue that art for copyright infringement, the accuser would get laughed out of court.
3. Transformative works is protected under fair use. Whether or not AI models count as transformative work is being debated in the courts. Maybe you should wait for the results of that ruling before passing judgement. How AI models used data mining is already explicitly legal in jurisdictions such as germany, and the only way to stop it legally is via a robots.txt, which stable diffusion already respects:
Copyright and Related Rights Act (Copyright Act) Section 44b Text and Data Mining (1) Text and data mining is the automated analysis of one or more digital or digitized works in order to obtain information, in particular about patterns, trends and correlations. (2) Duplications of legally accessible works for text and data mining are permitted. The copies are to be deleted when they are no longer required for text and data mining. (3) Uses according to paragraph 2 sentence 1 are only permitted if the right holder has not reserved them. A reservation of use for works accessible online is only effective if it is in machine-readable form.
Analogous american rulings in the past:
The transformative nature of computer based analytical processes such as text mining, web mining and data mining has led many to form the view that such uses would be protected under fair use. This view was substantiated by the rulings of Judge Denny Chin in Authors Guild, Inc. v. Google, Inc., a case involving mass digitisation of millions of books from research library collections. As part of the ruling that found the book digitisation project was fair use, the judge stated "Google Books is also transformative in the sense that it has transformed book text into data for purposes of substantive research, including data mining and text mining in new areas".
4. It sounds like much of the arguments comes from a position of financial anxiety. Even if stable diffusion, dall-e, or midjourney's current models are found to be not transformative, it only takes a few years at most for someone else to retrain a new model that does the same thing using a different data set. This technology is here it stay, and there isn't much you or I can do to stop it any more than a carriage driver can do to stop automobiles.
5. If worries about the future of art as a career is the real concern here, artists should question why they cannot survive in the current system without the already meager wages they are earning now. We should join the countless other workers whose careers are endangered by computers and automation and demand the human right to life not tied to wage slavery.
Thank you @wskeever. People that are scared of AI art clearly never have realized how humans learn to draw in the first place. We literally ALL "copy" someone else's art to create our own things. No one would really recognize that one specific stroke in the left corner was "stolen" from this one specific artist lmao
For a long while I chose not to respond because I'm tired of having this argument, but if people are going to continue to necro my post I might as well bite the bullet.
My concern is about protection of creators' rights. If these images were trained off a set of art that artists gave their explicit consent to be trained on, I wouldn't care. You have not specified what model these were trained off but I'm going to guess that since this is fairly new technology it is a set that did not ask for artist consent (and lack of consent is not consent). The same issue exists right now for voice actors and voice AI. Nexus' recent post on their stance on AI was actually fairly surprising to me given their staunch policy on permissions and rights in modding. Similarly, you seemed more than willing to give details on permissions in your description to ensure no other modders' work was stolen, yet failed to acknowledge those same permissions issues with the AI dataset you used. Why is that?
I don't have a problem with AI. As someone who is married to a leading expert in the field, I am well aware that AI image generation can have some really cool uses. But ethics is a huge concern in the field too, and that is what I'm addressing here. My point is that if you could go out of your way to credit other modders it would not be hard to find art by actual artists you could use with credit in the same fashion, but you didn't. Instead you are encouraging usage of scraped artwork without artists' permission and setting a precedent that modding would inevitably suffer for. That is disappointing to me, especially as someone who enjoys many of your mods and never had an issue with you before.
As for your last point, come on man. Artists have been fighting for better wages for a long time. Artists continue to drop their rates because people already think art is too expensive. Most artists do not live comfortably. Even the comments on this page prove how little people actually value art. You are encouraging these kinds of people by using trained datasets that did not obtain consent.
That's all I'm going to say on the matter and I won't respond to this further. I'm tired of doing this dance, and people who are too caught up in the excitement of future technology will never change their mind based on what artists say anyway.
Thank you Kabunouveau for your mention of artists. This is just a comment about artists who need more money for their had work. I come from a family of artists. My uncle turned out good, by any standard, post modern abstract art. He was the first student to get a Fulbright scholarship to study in France as an undergraduate. He was good but not great. The abstract are that he created is loved by a few who enjoy that period. Some of his stuff hangs in local museums. But, when most people see abstract art, to them it looks like someone sneezed on the artists palate and sprayed the canvas. For his art, the paintings are worth 500.00 dollars at best. He finally quit and to go to work for my grandfather. They don't call the art sales of yore, "Starving Artist Sales" for no reason.
I'm going to download this mod 1. Because I like it and 2. Because the comments on here are completely stupid. Some people here need to "go touch grass" ...You are on here complaining about a FREE mod that you DON'T have to install on a video game. There are SO many other things to use your energy on...people can't afford food, go help in a food kitchen...people can't get to medical apps, give someone a ride...when you get out into real life hopefully you'll find out how silly your comments seem.
I will NOT argue the point of AI generated art because it is here...like it or not. As long as people disclose that is AI generated I see no problems.
I will also NOT argue about my opinion...it is mine and I'm allowed to have one. Don't like my opinion, move on and enjoy your day.
Lol. Art by definition is "I-generated" as in created by intelligence. AI has to be guided to get an aesthetically pleasing result. It's just another tool in the hands of the artist. I don't get why people are getting so bent out of shape about all this stuff.
This mod is beautiful and it's not a bunch of naked anime girl pics. I like it.
As a fellow modder, are you unaware of the "Preview file contents" button? I could see what's included in your mod without having to download it. I use Oldrim anyway. I've used Artisanix's paintings in my mods before, so I know the name of the folder they're in and the names of the files. And they are in your file contents. Folder: ax/paintings, files: canvaslc0101.dds, canvaslc0101_n.dds, canvaslc0102.dds, canvaslc0103.dds etc. Just like in the file contents of Artisanix's modder's resource.
Um...you do realize that texture replacer mods have textures with same filenames as the ones they're replacing. That's literally how texture replacer mods work, and have always worked. As a fellow modder you should know that.
You do realize that it would be nice to credit the original creator, whose assets have been used? That's all I'm trying to say here. Yes, I saw that they have been changed. I'm not complaining about that part.
The funniest part about this whole thread after reading it is that the OP is claiming that Skeever stole someone's assets, but after looking at the images of the mod they linked it's actually base LOTD that uses those images, not this mod. Gave me a laugh.
I wish someone would come out with a mod that would let us put our own screenshots in the paintings. The original mod told us how but it was complicated and you had to save them in a particular format using GIMP and they had to be trimmed to fit the size of each painting. I did it but it was a pain to figure out. Maybe if you're a digital artist it would be easier but I felt like a monkey herder LOL. It was nice tho when I got it done. having pics of me and inigo and dragons and monsters and some really cool buildings and scenes was pretty cool. hint hint LOL.
Lol...This was worth downloading just from the comedy value of reading the comments alone! Jeez.....Do you think Canvas painters had the same uproar when they saw the first photograph taken?
Times change, opinions change. One day there'll be no paper magazines or newspapers because of the internet, no engine mechanics because of electric cars, no CD's/Vinyl because of Spotify and probably no people, due to killing each other over the last toilet roll during the next Pandemic.
Are you scared AI will take over the world, enslave us and forbid humans to draw ever again? I wonder if that's how people reacted when cars were invented and people were scared horses would go extinct or smth lol
71 comments
Judging from the other comments, you come off as someone who doesn't really care either way, so this comment is really for the benefit of everyone else as well as artists like me when I say this sets a REALLY bad precedent for modding in general. Please be better than this.
2. Beyond arguments about "the soul", "humanity" or "quintessence", the only difference here between "human art" and "ai art" is quality and how they are made. If a human produced the exact same art that an AI generated by copying the style of other artists and someone tries to sue that art for copyright infringement, the accuser would get laughed out of court.
3. Transformative works is protected under fair use. Whether or not AI models count as transformative work is being debated in the courts. Maybe you should wait for the results of that ruling before passing judgement. How AI models used data mining is already explicitly legal in jurisdictions such as germany, and the only way to stop it legally is via a robots.txt, which stable diffusion already respects:
5. If worries about the future of art as a career is the real concern here, artists should question why they cannot survive in the current system without the already meager wages they are earning now. We should join the countless other workers whose careers are endangered by computers and automation and demand the human right to life not tied to wage slavery.
My concern is about protection of creators' rights. If these images were trained off a set of art that artists gave their explicit consent to be trained on, I wouldn't care. You have not specified what model these were trained off but I'm going to guess that since this is fairly new technology it is a set that did not ask for artist consent (and lack of consent is not consent). The same issue exists right now for voice actors and voice AI. Nexus' recent post on their stance on AI was actually fairly surprising to me given their staunch policy on permissions and rights in modding. Similarly, you seemed more than willing to give details on permissions in your description to ensure no other modders' work was stolen, yet failed to acknowledge those same permissions issues with the AI dataset you used. Why is that?
I don't have a problem with AI. As someone who is married to a leading expert in the field, I am well aware that AI image generation can have some really cool uses. But ethics is a huge concern in the field too, and that is what I'm addressing here. My point is that if you could go out of your way to credit other modders it would not be hard to find art by actual artists you could use with credit in the same fashion, but you didn't. Instead you are encouraging usage of scraped artwork without artists' permission and setting a precedent that modding would inevitably suffer for. That is disappointing to me, especially as someone who enjoys many of your mods and never had an issue with you before.
As for your last point, come on man. Artists have been fighting for better wages for a long time. Artists continue to drop their rates because people already think art is too expensive. Most artists do not live comfortably. Even the comments on this page prove how little people actually value art. You are encouraging these kinds of people by using trained datasets that did not obtain consent.
That's all I'm going to say on the matter and I won't respond to this further. I'm tired of doing this dance, and people who are too caught up in the excitement of future technology will never change their mind based on what artists say anyway.
I will NOT argue the point of AI generated art because it is here...like it or not. As long as people disclose that is AI generated I see no problems.
I will also NOT argue about my opinion...it is mine and I'm allowed to have one. Don't like my opinion, move on and enjoy your day.
You're also free to be wrong, too.
This mod is beautiful and it's not a bunch of naked anime girl pics. I like it.
Gave me a laugh.
It was nice tho when I got it done. having pics of me and inigo and dragons and monsters and some really cool buildings and scenes was pretty cool. hint hint LOL.
Times change, opinions change. One day there'll be no paper magazines or newspapers because of the internet, no engine mechanics because of electric cars, no CD's/Vinyl because of Spotify and probably no people, due to killing each other over the last toilet roll during the next Pandemic.