AI generated textures in products
FantastArt
Posts: 313
I have a question. Just out of interest. Does DAZ accept AI generated textures in its products? I have sometimes noticed that some products seem to contain AI generated textures. At least that's what it looked like to me. Is that declared in the readme file? Just to be clear, I don't have a problem with that in principle. I just wanted to know how it works. If I'm working on a project for a customer who specifically doesn't want AI in their product, it would of course be good to know.
Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
7533 S Center View Ct #4664
West Jordan, UT 84084
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
No idea. But if DAZ does, they won't be sourced from the current generation of DAZ AI Studio. Here's one trial I had using the prompt 'Seamless texture for Abalone Shell Scale Armour' tiled as a 2x2 to check on how seamless the seams were:
I'd rate it as 'Needs Work'
Regards,
Richard
Moved to the Commons as it is a question, not a product suggestion.
No, AI elements are not allowed as far as I know.
I've seen some shaders that looked like they might be using AI. I don't want to name specific products, in case they're not. But I do avoid anything that strikes me that way.
AI is not allowed
Can you post an off-site example of what an AI-generated texture looks like? Genuinely curious about how to tell (AI Art is still largely obvious as a whole but texture files I'm not sure about)?
And no, Daz doesn't allow any AI-genereated content in its products (neither Daz Original nor PA products).
well these are the sorts of AI generated textures I do with Stable Diffusion using Automatic 1111
I personally would not be able to tell
that's the point. I'm not sure how far the proofment goes. There are AI generated images on many stock pages and maybe not everyone knows what he/she is using to create something. I'm also not talking about tiled and seamless textures, but maybe an image at a wall in an environment or an image at a shirt for your models... I already saw some things, and I'm quite sure it's AI.
^Images with people are a little easier to spot (though getting harder all the time). The examples WendyLuvsCatz posted could just as easily have been hand painted.
In the meantime, you either need a very reliable source, or create your own in something like Substance designer or FilterForge (which now has an AI version called 'Ultraforge', but at least that's clear what it's using).
That prohibition is to make people feel better. It's not a practical or enforcable prohibition. It's honor system and relies on professional pride.
Think about it. How would anyone actually know or prove ai was or was not used in creation of a texture? The "looks like" test only takes one so far. We already see that has limits. Experiments I've conducted with so-called AI detectors have told me small images of my painted work are ai, that some ai work I borrowed for test is not ai. It's whack-a-mole at this point and only going to get worse. If part of an ai image is integrated into another image or processed into a texture, it will be increasingly possible - May already be very easy - to slip it by unnoticed. Plus we already have paint tools that use integrated AI in the painting workflow. How does one judge the effect of that? It's present in AI enlargement and zoom tools, in photo processing tools, etc. It is and will be increasingly difficult to know with any certainty.
As an aside, I am also well-aware that any work I had online is part of the AI training data - We're all in that boat. So that's fun.
I would also point out, procedural and algorithmic textures have been around forever. These can be used to create amazing textures, and the texture may have no paintwork in it. Just about any glob of pixels can be baked into a texture. Much of the time, no one is really going to worry much about how it got there or where it's from. This is not a complaint. It's more a statement of fact. Digital art incorporates various digital technologies in its creation. At least some of that, especially in texture work, could be best described as machine-made. It's interesting.
Exactly. I see a lot of products using textures that look like they came straight out of Filter Forge, but I don't consider that to be an issue as FF isn't just pulling random images off the internet to use as a base. Personally, I wouldn't use anythig that one knows is coming from an AI program, as there are too many conflicting opinions on it right now... from those advocating that the maintaining of really tightly controlled pools of source materials is fine to the "copyrights, libel laws, and personal rights to your own likeness be damned" of certain others. Eventually it's all going to be settled in court and a lot of people aren't going to be happy with however it turns out.
I think there's a big difference between 'it would be hard to catch people at breaking the rules' and 'there's no rule against it.'
A rule that can't be enforced is not actually a rule. It's more of a guideline or request. Sorry. See that every day in regular job.
What can we do if we spot generated AI textures or reference images in products purchased from here (And if the 2 months(?) refund period is expired?)? Should we report the products somewhere or make a public thread where the PA in question (in my case 2 separate PAs) have a chance to prove that that texture is actually not AI generated?
Also, what about cases when the PA states in their product description that the texture packs they sell is made with machine learning (which in 2023-24 means gAI)?
The return period is 30 days. I suppose, as with so many things, you would need to open a ticket to lodge your complaint. I don't think PAs are going to come to the forum to prove anything. That's not the way it usually works here. There was a case where hair by a PA here was found to come from ArtStation. Someone did start a thread to present what they had found and ask about it. Even then, mods took it to the next level and the situation was resolved behind the scenes.
This doesn't really matter but I see many product descriptions now that clearly look like they're from Chat-GPT. Some are pretty funny, over the top and don't really relate to 3D, but hopefully it's just the description that's AI and I suppose it could be helpful for those whose first language isn't English.
According to those AI checker sites, my 100% original text is 95% written by AI, and the stuff I've had Chat GPT generate to test those same checkers show 90% written by humans.
beep boop bee... I mean, I am a human dangit.
That depends upon your definition of "can't be enforced." After all, roughly half of all murders go unsolved, yet the penalties imposed when somone is found guilty tend to at least serve as a deterant.
That seems a bit out of scope for the discussion. Not touching it.
On the positive side, one does not purchase the product description so it will probably not affect their own art. However it might serve as a red flag to doublecheck the product contents, before purchasing.
AFAIK many ai checker sites are biased to positive answers for reasons. Also there are many false positive claims by humans because many gAI pics are generated in specific artists' styles so occasionally the original or similar pics are flagged az ai-generated too. Why I'm hesitant and would love a clear protocol what to do in case of such a catch.
For example one of the products released this week seems to contain a bunch of suspiciously AI-generated textures. It's subtle tho and I'm not 100% sure and while I find it pretty immoral of selling such products (partially because of the problems it may cause to the buyer if they use it for their own artwork) I'd rather not have the seller getting falsely accused either, so dilemma...
WIthout identifying the specific product or the PA, what sort of material are we talking about? Textile, metal, skin? And what are the telltale signs you see of the texture being AI-generated?
Just keep in mind that procedural textures that are generated by programs like substance painter and Filter Forge and the like are not AI textures, they are all math and could be easily confused
Seemingly generated images used as a surface of an object (not talking about a pattern). For example (actual and significantly more glaring example from another product being sold on another daz online shop that rhymes with the word city): like if someone generated an image and then used that image as part of their product, for example as a movie frame on a tv screen.
Ninjaedit: no, it's totally not a procedural texture or such.
Oh, and the usual suspects, uncanny little inconsistencies, seemingly nonsensical parts or randomness. It's not a 100% stable diffusion generated something like my television example above, so really not sure. Maybe it is a regular image plus a bunch of filters, hence my hesitation. But also this suspicion makes me not want to purchase the product because what if it is really an ai slop, what if I use it and someone calls me out.
There are thousands and thousands of items for sale. If a particular item is not aesthetically pleasing for whatever reason, best to leave it. If a vendor's style does not appeal, easier to buy from other vendors.
ah I gotcha, like many use renders of other 3d scenes in paintings on walls etc, Ultrascenery seems popular for that, except they used AI instead
it could be Dynamic Auto Painter which is also popular for giving a painterly look to renders, that uses brushes applied like a render, without an actual example one can only guess
Generative AI is also math so this statement doesn't make sense. It is a different set of algorithms than those used in generative/procedural generation but at the end of the day a computer can only do math, logic operators, and branching. https://theaisummer.com/diffusion-models/
With generative AI tools in phones and cameras which capture photos that can be used for textures, Substance Designer, and Photoshop it is going to become impossible over time to discern how much of an image or texture has been generated, modified, or tweaked with AI tools. Since PAs also use textures from merchant resources, public domain sources, etc. they may not even know the full provenance of all pixels in the image resources they use in a product.
Generative AI just takes a prompt of some kind, procedural textures require the deliberate construction of a sequence of functions (usually in the form of formual nodes of some kind) to produce the end result.
Could be! Or some stylize filter in PS or something. And would be nice if it was but dunno if those tools make such artefacts. Anyway it was just one possible example or such products from the OP's question.
This is not exactly accurate. Generative AI algorithms like Stable Diffusion do not operate on prompts as computers do not have the ability to understand language, they can only perform math, logical operations, and branching based on conditions. While it may look like Stable Diffusion is generating based on a prompt, what it is happening is there is a separate step before the Stable Diffusion algorithm, where a prompt is converted by a language model like CLIP into embeddings which are just vectors or just a series of numbers. Stable Diffusion algorithm operates on these embedding vectors, it never sees a prompt. Also, you don't even need a prompt for generative AI functions. You can easily use image2image, passing in just an image which is converted into pixels or again, just numbers representing the colors, without a prompt and get a new image. Just like you can use Substance Designer or Filter Forge to apply an algorithm to an input image, you can use generative AI just on just an input image without any prompt. The only difference between the two is in the specific algorithms they implement. At the end of the day, it's just math. Numbers input, numbers output. https://stable-diffusion-art.com/how-stable-diffusion-work/#Conditioning goes into more detail on how text is converted into the embeddings.