Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

wen_mars t1_irglz05 wrote

Reply to comment by Tanglemix in We are in the midst of the biggest technological revolution in history and people have no idea by DriftingKing

On the other hand, you can now take a picture, import it into blender, delete some part of it and tell the AI to generate something else in that place that fits in with the rest of the picture.

1

Tanglemix t1_irjjgh2 wrote

I can do that with photoshop already, with considerably more control over the final image.

There is a basic problem with your proposition that in the future AI Art programmes will offer a similar level of control as a graphics tablet. If that were to happen then in order to exert that control the user of the AI would need skill and experience to do so. And people who use skill and experiance to create images are called 'Artists'.

So increasing the ability of an AI to respond to more complex and nuanced instructions does not eliminate the need for a skilled human , it makes that human more important, since they will be required to craft those complex and nuanced instructions.

In order for your prediction that skilled human Artists will not be required in the future to happen, you need to do the opposite of what you propose- you need to take control away from the human and give that control to the AI- so it is the AI that controls what the final image looks like, not the human.

In this scenario the human is more like an 'art director' who instructs the AI as to what he wants to see, and the AI is smart enough to deliver that result. But it is rare that a 'first pass' result will be exactly what the Art director requires, so a process of interation and refinement then takes place with the final Art being an emergent property of this process.

I'm not saying that this may not one day happen- but it cannot be achieved by increasing the control of the Art Director- it can only be achieved by increasing the comprehension of the AI- it is the AI's ability to understand the subtle nuances of the Art Directors intent and to implement that intent faithfully that will determine how useful AI Art will be as a replacement for human Artists.

But this level of comprehension does not exist in the current models and something akin to true AGI would seem to be required.

1

wen_mars t1_irk6ae6 wrote

AI and a graphics tablet aren't mutually exclusive. You can sketch with the tablet and add as much detail as you want, and then let the AI do the rest.

You're putting a lot of words into my mouth but I'll address your last two paragraphs. AI's ability to follow directions has improved tremendously over the past several years. I think it will continue to improve and get close to AGI-level performance on a wide range of tasks this decade. For actual AGI my guess is next decade.

1

Tanglemix t1_irkinh2 wrote

I've seen people using very simple sketches as prompts which work ok to get fairly simple compositions that try to match the sketch. I haven't yet seen examples where the inital sketch is more sophisicated and includes things like specific lighting or perspective foreshortening- but you may be right that some hybrid input of human plus AI may evolve in the future- it's an interesting idea.

I'm less convinced on the AGI side. At present AI Art is a kind of trick- it looks impressive but is less than it seems to be because the AI has no actual understanding of the things it is depicting- it deals in patterns of pixels that correlate to word combinations- it has no idea that these patterns represent volumes in 3D space that have surface material qualities that interact with the light sources in the scene.

To be a truly viable substitute for human artists AI would have to move beyond 2D and be able to understand that the scenes it generates are abstractions from a 3 Dimensional reality.

I can at least imagine a sort of autonomous version of Blender or 3D Max that in response to a prompt then builds a complete 3D scene, including geometric objects, textures, materials, light sources and volumetric effects like mist and ariel perspective- and from this render 2D images from any perspective desired.

The thing I find harder to imagine is how such a system could conjure 3D representations of imaginary objects and scenes that do not exist- where would the training data come from to make this possible?

1

wen_mars t1_irkunsa wrote

I don't know where they source the training data from but we can already see early examples of AI that can generate 3D models from 2D input.

1

Tanglemix t1_irp3vk9 wrote

I have seen those and they are amazing-but seem to rely on multiple images of the same existing object to generatethe 3D model

The real trick would be to create a convincing 3D model from a single image of something that did not exist- something imaginary.

If an AI were able to do this it would be replicating what a human concept artist might do when presented with a single sketch as a starting point.

1