2y ago

Dungeons & Dragons tells illustrators to stop using AI to generate artwork for fantasy franchise

apnews.com Dungeons & Dragons tells illustrators to stop using AI to generate artwork for fantasy franchise

The Dungeons & Dragons role-playing game franchise says it won’t allow artists to use artificial intelligence technology to draw its cast of sorcerers, druids and other characters and scenery.

AI Stuff @lemdro.id

ijeff @lemdro.id

2y ago

Dungeons & Dragons tells illustrators to stop using AI to generate artwork for fantasy franchise

apnews.com /article/dungeons-dragons-ai-artificial-intelligence-dnd-wizards-of-coast-hasbro-b852a2b4bcadcf52ea80275fb7a6d3b1

4 0

Dungeons and Dragons @lemmy.world

TheTango @lemmy.world

2y ago

AP: Dungeons & Dragons tells illustrators to stop using AI to generate artwork for fantasy franchise

apnews.com /article/dungeons-dragons-ai-artificial-intelligence-dnd-wizards-of-coast-hasbro-b852a2b4bcadcf52ea80275fb7a6d3b1

84 26

Technology @lemmy.world

L4sBot @lemmy.world

BOT

2y ago

Dungeons & Dragons tells illustrators to stop using AI to generate artwork for fantasy franchise

apnews.com /article/dungeons-dragons-ai-artificial-intelligence-dnd-wizards-of-coast-hasbro-b852a2b4bcadcf52ea80275fb7a6d3b1

174 21

You're viewing a single thread.

26 comments

That's fine, I don't need their artists to illustrate anything for the characters I play or adventures I run. I do it myself with Stable Diffusion.
- Sure, that's great. However this is in regards to material published by Hasbro. Were I an author, I would want to employ an actual illustrator or artist to work on my material that's published to an audience.
  I believe it's a good thing that Hasbro has taken this stand; that artists should be employed to illustrate their material.
  
  Artists use AI tools too.
  
  Which is exactly what the article said. Hasbro said artists for their D&D products will not use AI.
  
  You said "artists should be employed to illustrate their material" and I was pointing out that allowing AI tools to be used doesn't interfere with that.
  
  @FaceDeer
  @Madisonrogue it does. The artwork was detected as being created with AI due to significant quality issues, not through thorough forensic analysis/mathematical models.
  
  Any artist can do shoddy work with any tools. If shoddy work is the problem, ban that.
  
  That's not what Hasbro wants, though, and it's completely within their rights to have this stipulation for artwork that is tied to their brand. You sound offended by their decision, when their decision will likely result in more humans being employed and valued for their human contributions. Seems like a strange thing to have a problem with. No one is saying you can't make your own personal D&D art with AI tools.
  
  Of course they can do it. I'm saying that they shouldn't do it. I'm giving my opinion that they are making a bad decision here. It will result in poorer quality books in the long run because they are needlessly hobbling their artists.
  
  Okay, I get your point now. If all artists had your stance and felt this hobbled them, then I'd understand thinking Hasbro's decision is wrong. But not every artist agrees with you. This is reminiscent of the argument between digital and physical art, with digital artist's struggle to be seen as viable against oil painters and other physical media artists. Except digital isn't any better or worse, they're simply different mediums. You could argue pros and cons for both types, but in the end everyone is entitled to the medium they prefer. This includes AI assisted artwork. If someone prefers digital art but wants no AI influence, that's up to them since art is entirely subjective.
  This is a perfectly valid direction for Hasbro to want to take, and they're the ones who get to make the call. Not every artist feels hobbled by being barred from AI tools, some artists prefer to avoid AI entirely. There are plenty of people who would happily accept these jobs.
  
  There's also a huge difference between an AI tool and an AI generative model. There's definitely grey area there, but pretending the background eraser is identical to Stable Diffusion is ludicrous. One of them is used by an artist to gain marginal improvements in quality/workflow, the other has an objective of replacing the artist entirely.
  
  If they want digital artwork, then it's safe to say they accept the typical digital tools and brushes, even if some of those could technically be using algorithms some would describe as rudimentary AI. An artist would have to be purposely obtuse not to understand the difference between the clone brush and telling Bing to draw them a dwarf.
  
  A person being that deliberately obtuse is present in this thread, unfortunately.
  
  Like cool story bro do you honestly think people didn’t know what you meant? Or did you just want to get a bit argumentative for attention?
  
  The person I was responding to said:
  Were I an author, I would want to employ an actual illustrator or artist to work on my material that's published to an audience. I believe it's a good thing that Hasbro has taken this stand; that artists should be employed to illustrate their material.
  That has a very clear implication that people who use AI art tools are not "actual illustrators" or "actual artists." I think this is a position that is very much worth arguing against.
  
  And I said:
  Like cool story bro do you honestly think people didn’t know what you meant? Or did you just want to get a bit argumentative for attention?
  But seems like you already answered the question.
  
  Odd what gets under some peoples' skin. @someguy has been following me around downvoting all of my comments everywhere I make them today. Having fun wasting all that time?

26 comments