Stable Diffusion AI Image Generator

Christmas has come early, there's a free, working plugin... yes, working -- I had to fiddle with my environment paths in Windows to get it working, but it's working -- Stable Diffusion plugin that allows you to use Automatic 1111 directly in Photoshop.

github.com

GitHub - AbdullahAlfaraj/Auto-Photoshop-StableDiffusion-Plugin: A user-friendly plug-in that makes it easy to generate stable diffusion images inside Photoshop using either Automatic or ComfyUI as a backend.

A user-friendly plug-in that makes it easy to generate stable diffusion images inside Photoshop using either Automatic or ComfyUI as a backend. - AbdullahAlfaraj/Auto-Photoshop-StableDiffusion-Plugin
github.com github.com
 
So Pistol Whip is a VR game which is already pretty trippy with its flashing lights and disco styled visuals, but sending it through Stable Diffusion amps it up even more ;)o_O;)

 
What happens when you utilise the art and content in other forms of media. like portraits in a video game or film. To scenes, textures etc... Or even entire character references?

How exactly does the copyright work here since I heard there's some problems with copyrighting this stuff?
 
Moosedrool said:
What happens when you utilise the art and content in other forms of media. like portraits in a video game or film. To scenes, textures etc... Or even entire character references?

How exactly does the copyright work here since I heard there's some problems with copyrighting this stuff?
Click to expand...

It depends on whether it has been copyright checked, amongst other things. AI creations are already used in marketing, and some PC games have already incorporated AI creations.

Let's be honest here, people don't give a schit about other people's property.
 
Moosedrool said:
What happens when you utilise the art and content in other forms of media. like portraits in a video game or film. To scenes, textures etc... Or even entire character references?
Click to expand...
That's not why it's was banned.

Automatic's web ui is a front end for the models. The models are what's under scrutiny when it comes to the whole copyright BS.

How exactly does the copyright work here since I heard there's some problems with copyrighting this stuff?
Click to expand...
Models don't infringe copyright at all, hence all the moaning from luddite artists without a single copyright-related case being filed.

The artists WANT models to be nailed under copyright. Hence why a bunch have gotten together with Disney and some other big companies to lobby government in the US.

All results from AI meet the "transformative" requirement under US copyright...so far.
Hasn't actually been tested in front of a judge as of yet.
 
There's some drama concerning AI image generators lately and to be honest I think most people have the cat by the tail.

The only cases that really have merit as far as I'm concerned are the ones where the average person can now more easily re-produce relatively high quality art and merchandise of copyrighted characters, and potentially make money off that (selling t-shirts, posters, coffee mugs, etc), but those should be handled on a case by case basis by the relevant legal teams instead of wanting to burn the technology at the stake.

They whole "style stealing" argument that artists are on about doesn't really hold much water, people have been copying each others' styles since the dawn of time, again if there's blatant copying and profiteering from a particular person's creations then that should be looked into on a case by case basis.

I'm pretty sure each generation of photographers got more and more concerned as camera technology improved to the point where practically anyone can pick up a camera and take a fairly good photo if they are so inclined, using stock automatic settings.
 
Well, apparently AUTOMATIC1111 is unbanned and the repository is back on Github again.
 
Well I've finally found a workflow that works well for me for generating character art that I'm 100% happy with. It does require a fair bit of work in Photoshop and back and forth between PS and SD, so for time being artists can sleep easy knowing that this type of image doesn't just get spat out by Stable Diffusion prompting in 5 minutes.
SittingByTheWindow.jpg
 
This is another SD plugin for Photoshop that works off a local Automatic1111 API. This one is less cumbersome to install and use than the previous one that was released in December. It lacks outpainting though that is apparently an upcoming feature in a future update.

 
SD is pretty good at horror too. Did some upscaling and minor colour and contrast tweaks in Photoshop but this Dead Space Necromorph is straight out of Stable Diffusion.

Necromorph.jpg
 
we need to link the output from the AI art with the input given to the engine and maybe store it somewhere? Dare I say a blockchain?

In my mind, if I asked an AI engine to design "a photo of a well built man wearing a swimsuit diving into a pool" - whatever it spits out should be copyright to me, i asked for it.

But if I asked an AI engine to design "a photo of Ryan Reynolds wearing a swimsuit diving into a pool" - the copyright is now Ryans' - its his face, you can't freely own an image with someone elses face. To prove that one can use the verification of input/output like from a blockchain or similar - "what was the bot asked to do?" the moment a person's name or something that ties to them is mentioned the copyright cannot apply and you cannot use the image without their permission.

Another example:
I draw AI art and claim its mine and sell it, or use it or whatever. And someone says "Hey, that's a coca cola bottle in there you can't use it commercially." - again, we go back to what the Bot was given as input. If it said "a bottle of soda" - you can't do much. But if it was given "coca-cola" as a keyword, it now means a registered trademark has been used and you cannot own the brand rights to the photo?

Where it gets complicated possibly is when there's a well-known person and 2 brands in a photo. But i suppose one can fallback to legal entities then owning the copyright and rights on behalf of..

I might be blabbering nonsense as i need coffee its early.
 
neoprema said:
we need to link the output from the AI art with the input given to the engine and maybe store it somewhere? Dare I say a blockchain?

In my mind, if I asked an AI engine to design "a photo of a well built man wearing a swimsuit diving into a pool" - whatever it spits out should be copyright to me, i asked for it.

But if I asked an AI engine to design "a photo of Ryan Reynolds wearing a swimsuit diving into a pool" - the copyright is now Ryans' - its his face, you can't freely own an image with someone elses face. To prove that one can use the verification of input/output like from a blockchain or similar - "what was the bot asked to do?" the moment a person's name or something that ties to them is mentioned the copyright cannot apply and you cannot use the image without their permission.

Another example:
I draw AI art and claim its mine and sell it, or use it or whatever. And someone says "Hey, that's a coca cola bottle in there you can't use it commercially." - again, we go back to what the Bot was given as input. If it said "a bottle of soda" - you can't do much. But if it was given "coca-cola" as a keyword, it now means a registered trademark has been used and you cannot own the brand rights to the photo?

Where it gets complicated possibly is when there's a well-known person and 2 brands in a photo. But i suppose one can fallback to legal entities then owning the copyright and rights on behalf of..

I might be blabbering nonsense as i need coffee its early.
Click to expand...
The copyright and ethics of it does get pretty complicated... just this week on Reddit, I saw some dude had created a custom SD model of his wife and then proceeded to share that model with the internet. I can only imagine the things people would have done with it. It's funny, sad and disturbing at the same time.


3 I embedded my wife into Stable Diffusion. StableDiffusion.png

These comments are epic :ROFL::ROFL::ROFL:
 
Last edited:
OnlyOneKenobi said:
The copyright and ethics of it does get pretty complicated... just this week on Reddit, I saw some dude had created a custom SD model of his wife and then proceeded to share that model with the internet. I can only imagine the things people would have done with it. It's funny, sad and disturbing at the same time.


View attachment 1464859

These comments are epic :ROFL::ROFL::ROFL:
Click to expand...
lol. she's gonna stab him, and that won't be rendered.
 
I played around with the "Deliberate" model, it produces some pretty decent results - this is a composite of Tobey Maguire \ Andrew Garfield and Tom Holland as Spidey. I did some upscaling and detailing using my secret Photoshop techniques ;)

Spidey.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X