I'm Getting a Little Bit Artrageous

Apparently I saw the post once when it was at 6k because an artist I admired reblogged it, but at that stage I was very unwell & not experienced enough with Tumblr to realise what effect it might have.

Looking through the notes now I see that in the six years since then-

Several people got the design as a tattoo.

A number liked it enough to want custom designs but didn’t know how to contact me so that’s approximately £300 I didn’t get a chance to earn.

Someone used that art in the front cover of a comic by accident and while the company fixed it after I contacted them that’s exposure that it’s far too late to capitalise on now.

If you like an artwork that you find off tumblr, please, please I am begging you search for the artist’s name and see if they do actually have a Tumblr you could reblogged from instead. If you’re an artist search your username(s) every so often to see if your work has been taken.

The rest of the thread is here.

RAZZMATAZZ = I would share my favorite food with you TIMBERWOLF = I trust youFALLOW = I want to run through the Northern wilderness barefoot with youCOPPER = Your blog content is trash (and I love it)

Other than an accidental misinterpretation of one technicality that I fixed as soon as someone corrected me - please show me what information on my final version of the post is incorrect because I'm more than happy to update it. So far the the current situation is as follows to my knowledge:

❌ DeviantArt will not use your deviations directly for their AI image generators

(I updated the post because I was wrong about this in particular initially, but I said from the get-go to look out for updates as I get more information)

✅ They are however using third parties for their image generator that are known to have unethically sourced data, and are known to have previous issues with art theft

✅ You do have to fill in a manual form to prevent your artist username/alias being used as a prompt, including any evidence that they want you to provide.

This means anyone who is unaware, deceased, or unable to be approved could hypothetically have their art style used as a prompt if they're not opted out. This is how it is phrased by DeviantArt themselves explaining the form:

Whether or not they credit artists in the description doesn't really matter because many artists don't want to be used in image generators at all, this should be opt-in manually if they're trying to be ethical like they claim.

I tested out the generator myself and was quickly able to mimic the style of a popular artist:

Original artist: Peter Mohrbacher

I pretty much solely used his name for the prompt, which I think pretty clearly demonstrates that the AI has recognised his name and pulled his art from somewhere on the internet to generate what it did

✅ Initially every user was automatically opted-in to start giving permission to third-party AI developers to use their work, and for a time this had to be undone manually one deviation at a time until they changed it due to backlash.

This would have meant if there was no backlash and they kept this policy that anyone who was unaware, deceased, or unable to access their account would have had their artworks flagged as okay for use in AI training.

Now that it has been reversed it is no longer an issue, but the lack of foresight from the team on this was callous. It also however has not been reversed for the use of artists names as a prompt, you still have to ask to be opted out.

All in all the situation is largely the same as I initially posted, DeviantArt launched an AI art generator in a very abrupt and unclear way and if you don't fill in the right forms your artist name and style can be used, and they will be pulling from third parties that are known to have mass collected images from the internet without explicit permission.

I got caught up playing DND but I think I can squash in one more post this evening, especially to show off how nicely this finished up

See how your dashboard is covered in posts? Yeah, that's because people reblogged them. Reblog posts. Reblog artwork and gifsets and text posts. If you like a post, reblog it.

"Oh but I'm nervous about social interaction" reblogging isn't social interaction. It's not. It's adding things to a virtual scrapbook by yeeting the additions into a swirling vortex. No interaction necessary. Someone makes a post you like, you reblog it, that's it. Job done. Zero interaction, but a post has made it one step further in finding its way to people that might enjoy it.

I wanted my first-year film students to understand what happens to a story when actual human beings inhabit your characters, and the way they can inspire storytelling. And I wanted to teach them how to look at headshots and what you might be able to tell from a headshot. So for the past few years I’ve done a small experiment with them.

Some troubling shit always occurs.

It works like this: I bring in my giant file of head shots, which include actors of all races, sizes, shapes, ages, and experience levels. Each student picks a head shot from the stack and gets a few minutes to sit with the person’s face and then make up a little story about them. 

Namely, for white men, they have no trouble coming up with an entire history, job, role, genre, time, place, and costume. They will often identify him without prompting as “the main character.” The only exception? “He would play the gay guy.” For white women, they mostly do not come up with a job (even though it was specifically asked for), and they will identify her by her relationships. “She would play the mom/wife/love interest/best friend.” I’ve heard “She would play the slut” or “She would play the hot girl.” A lot more than once.

For nonwhite men, it can be equally depressing. “He’s in a buddy cop movie, but he’s not the main guy, he’s the partner.” “He’d play a terrorist.” “He’d play a drug dealer.” “A thug.” “A hustler.” “Homeless guy.” One Asian actor was promoted to “villain.”

For nonwhite women (grab onto something sturdy, like a big glass of strong liquor), sometimes they are “lucky” enough to be classified as the girlfriend/love interest/mom, but I have also heard things like “Well, she’d be in a romantic comedy, but as the friend, you know?” “Maid.” “Prostitute.” “Drug addict.”

I should point out that the responses are similar whether the group is all or mostly-white or extremely racially mixed, and all the groups I’ve tried this with have been about equally balanced between men and women, though individual responses vary. Women do a little better with women, and people of color do a little better with people of color, but female students sometimes forget to come up with a job for female actors and black male students sometimes tell the class that their black male actor wouldn’t be the main guy.

Once the students have made their pitches, we interrogate their opinions. “You seem really sure that he’s not the main character – why? What made you automatically say that?” “You said she was a mom. Was she born a mom, or did she maybe do something else with her life before her magic womb opened up and gave her an identity? Who is she as a person?” In the case of the “thug“, it turns out that the student was just reading off his film resume. This brilliant African American actor who regularly brings houses down doing Shakespeare on the stage and more than once made me weep at the beauty and subtlety of his performances, had a list of film credits that just said “Thug #4.” “Gang member.” “Muscle.” Because that’s the film work he can get. Because it puts food on his table.