As more companies add AI tools to their programs, from Adobe's Lightroom sneaking it into just about everything, to Photoshop and its generative fill, and Blender's AI rendering, it's no secret that we've entered yet another era in this strange new world. A few art programs are still resisting adding these features, but many don't even mention that they've updated an existing tool with some form of AI generation.
I've had a lot of people ask about this since they are nervous about sending their art in after using programs like photoshop. Lets brainstorm that one! I'll tackle this issue below, but I'd love feedback if anyone has any.
Let's start with Adobe since they seem to have fully embraced the concept. Their AI offerings are currently extensive to say the least. Most people know them for Generative Fill, but almost all of their products include some form of AI, even for traditional tools artists have used for decades. In this case, I don't think there is a whole lot we can do about it other than judge each piece individually on how much AI was probably used. If most of the work is still human made, I'm not going to nitpick little background things. All we can do is hope that artists go in and at least do some work to make the generative bits actually look good.
Other art programs are doing it with a bit more subtlety. Clip Studio for example has basics that will upscale existing work or fill lineart with color better. Honestly these aren't much different from what people were already doing here. I know I've slapped my low res sketches into waifux2 just to have cleaner lines to work over, and paint bucket with a little edge fill is just part of the process at this point for me. Having AI make that more accurate is only making the tedious parts faster, which is all good in my book.
Blender is less of a problem here on EQD since we don't get a ton of 3D work, even if it can do a bunch of things for 2D as well. It's probably the most powerful of the programs out there right now when it comes to AI, with a freaky amount of things it can do with the right plugins. I don't know if this will be a problem in the future or not. There just aren't enough 3D pony artists in the fandom, and as someone who plays with 3D stuff for Second Life occasionally, the skill bar is still sky high for even using these things. Will we see people send 100% blender created stuff in the future? We might. For now though, it's not much of an issue.
There's also the idea of using AI detection sites. I started playing with these earlier in the month a bit more after they were recommended in Blogpony chat, but after a few false positives (not many, but enough to turn me away from them) along with complete failing on specific Lora's, I don't think EQD will use these yet. Maybe in the future if they become more accurate, but I have a feeling this arms race will never be completely even.
If anyone knows of one that has been reliable, please let us know in the submit box! So far everything on first few pages of google hasn't been reliable:
 | |
| This is also AI |
 |
| This is AI, and honestly surprised me. It's one of the most "ai style" I've seen in the submit box. |
 |
| This was drawn by PonykillerX almost a decade ago |
We'd also need some way of detecting how much of the image used AI in some form, since again, that's what this post is about! If programs have it baked in now for basic tools, it's hard to really fault people.
Anyway, don't be afraid to send art if you used a tool to upscale your work or tried a more accurate paint bucket. If you straight up generated a pony then did minor editing though, we won't accept those. Hope that clears everything up! Of course this is always subject to change. AI will be completely different in a year as we've seen the last few years unless it hits the wall a lot of people are predicting.
