OpenAI picked Studio Ghibli because Miyazaki hates their approach.
I highly doubt it. They picked it because the Ghibli style is very popular among users. There’s also no reason to believe that it violates “democratic values”. Since it’s popular, the general population is voting that they LIKE it, not that they oppose it.
Downvote me all you like, but this is trying to put a lot of malice where the simpler explanation is just “money”.
no reason to believe it violates “democratic values”
In my country the law is one of the pillars of democracy, but you do you 👍
You’re implying that this is against the law without ever bothering to prove the implication.
The law very, VERY often violates the democratic choices of the people in the United States. That’s what you get when you do FPTP voting schemes.
Money and malice are not a dichotomy. I would say most malice is for monetary reasons.
Of course they aren’t, but the cartoonish levels of moustache-twirling villainy described here are unlikely to be real.
They thought it was cool. They knew it would drive usage and make money. They shit on intellectual property. There is no other explanation needed, nor is it sensible.
Yeah the text makes many freestyle assumptions, although the overall sentiment is correct that these big companies and especially egocentric billionaires do stuff to trigger others simply for power display. I believe the text linked about it being a distraction for the new round of funding is the real reason.
Yeah it’s not like this is the only way to generate the style, it’s relatively simple to even do it locally. It’s just popular
It’s the “you stole my style” artists attacking artists all over again. And digital art isn’t real att/cameras are evil/cgi isn’t real art all over with a more organic and intelligent medium.
The issue is the same as it has always been. Anything and everything is funneled to the rich and the poor blame the poor who use technology, because anthropocentric bias makes it easier to vilify than the assholes building our cage around us.
The apple “ecosystem” has done much more damage than AI artists, but people can’t seem to comprehend how. Also Disney and corpos broke copyright so that its just a way for the rich to own words and names and concepts, so that the poor can’t use them to get ahead.
All art is a remix. Disney only became successful using other artists hard work in the Commons. Now the Commons is a century more out of grasp, so only the rich can own the artists and hoard the growth of art.
Also which artists actually have the time and money to litigate? I guess copyright does help some nepo artists.
Nepotism is the main way to earn your right to invest into becoming an artist that isn’t fatiguing towards collapse of life.
But let’s keep yelling at the technology for being evil.
yeah yeah you ai bros keep crying about how useless artists are but you keep gobbling up datasets full of them! Hypocrites everyone of you! You need them! You crave them to spit more and more useless derivative trash.
Try comprehending what he wrote instead of spewing insults, it might make you smarter. He’s clearly not an AI bro.
Sucks because ghibli has always been really protective of its ip and in the future it maybe made harder and harder to watch it.
There is another aspect of this also. I could generate Ghibli style images a few years ago using better image generation models like stable diffusion or Midjourney. OpenAI is so lagging behind in terms of image generation it is comical at this point. But they get all the media coverage for these things as if they are inventing something out of thin air.
Most governments ignored the IP issues when other models were already doing these violations. Professionals are not using OpenAI. OpenAI only makes it so that these products reach big audiences. Then they become extremely accessible with the downside being that they are dumbed down. Thus, losing a lot of functionality.
OpenAI is so lagging behind in terms of image generation it is comical at this point.
They dropped a new image model last week using 4o to contextualize the request, it’s very very good. However it’s for paid subscribers only right now I believe.
However as you mentioned Stable diffusion and mid journey probably still have more customizability.
This is what billionaires and major corporations are doing now and have been doing for a long time. Do you remember Titan sinking? What was so incredible is that the founder and CEO of Oceangate was acting like A: No one has ever gone to the Titanic before, and B: submarine travel is somehow a brand new thing that was just being invented by HIM.
This was utter bullshit on so many levels. James Cameron even spoke about how horrendous his assessment of the situation was, saying that the Titanic site is actually one of the riskier shipwrecks to go down to, which is why it needs to be approached with caution (which Oceangate did not care about), and that submarine travel is a very mature science and what the idiot CEO was doing wasn’t simply a bad idea in general, but he believed he could violate the laws of physics.
You can break the laws and rules of society, but you cannot break the laws of physics. If you jump off the top of a skyscraper, no amount of arm flapping will make you fly.
OpenAI is so lagging behind in terms of image generation it is comical at this point.
You’re the one lagging behind. OpenAI’s new image model is on a different level, way ahead of the competition
How so?
- Autoregressive model
- Multimodal with the LLM
- Can keep consistency between images
- Much better at text rendering
- Can combine images, like you have one image and you upload a picture of a jacket and say “put this on him” and it does it
- Can upload a picture of yourself and say “put me on the beach”, and then for example if you don’t like it you can tell it to do a different type of beach, and then say “and put me on a white horse and give me some nice beach wear” for example.
It understands what you’re telling it, and can generate images from vague descriptions, combine things from different images just by telling it, modify it and understand the context - like knowing that “me” is the person in the image, for example.
Edit: From OpenAI - “4o image generation is an autoregressive model natively embedded within ChatGPT”
It is really sad that the most advanced model can only aspire to make derivative shit for techbro loosers,
you know enough about the model for me to immediately distrust your opinion on the matter. why don’t you head back to ycombinator or whatever hole you crawled out of
Okay so how does that compare to whatever competition you’re referencing
No other model on market can do anything like that. The closest is diffusion based where you could train a lora with a person’s look or a specific clothing, then generate multiple times and / or use controlnet to sorta control the output. That’s fast hours or days of work, plus it’s quite technical to set it up and use.
OpenAI’s new model is a paradigm shift in both what the model can do and how you use it, and can easily and effortlessly produce things that was extremely difficult or impossible without complicated procedures and post processing in Photoshop.
Edit Some examples. Try to make any of this in any of the existing image generators
- https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/1jl36h6/gpt_was_also_able_to_help_me_make_a_comic_ive/
- https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/1jkl5m2/i_work_in_ecommerce_the_new_gpt_image_update_has/
- https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/1jlewya/by_god_what_have_i_done/
- https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/1jm8ddg/im_not_the_first_to_figure_this_trick_out_am_i/
- https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/1jjsfkb/starting_today_gpt4o_is_going_to_be_incredibly/
- https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/1jn2kpy/i_created_a_character_with_chatgpt_and_send_her/
- https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/1jkaaxh/gpt4o_image_generation_is_absolutely_insane/
All diffusion and language models are autoregressive. That just means that the output is fed back in as input until the task is complete.
With diffusion models this means that it is fed an image that is 100% noise and it removes some small percentage of the noise and then then the denoised image is fed back in and another small percentage is removed. This is repeated until a defined stopping points (usually a set number of passes).
Combining images and using one image to control the generation of another has been available for quite a while. Controlnet and IPAdapters let you do exactly that: ‘Put this coat on this person’ or ‘Take this picture and do it in this style’. Here’s an 11 month old YouTube video explaining how to do this using open source models and software: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmwZGC8UVHE
It’s nice for non-technical people that OpenAI will sell you a subscription in order to access an agent that can perform these kinds of image generation abilities, but it’s not doing anything new in terms of image generation.
I know them, and used them a bit. I even mentioned them in an earlier comment. The capabilities of OpenAI’s new model is on a different level in my experience.
https://www.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/1jlj8me/4o_vs_flux/ - read the comments there. That’s a community dedicated to running local diffusion models. They’re familiar with all the tricks. They’re pretty damn impressed too.
I can’t help but feel that people here either haven’t tried the new openai image model, or have never actually used any of the existing ai image generators before.
Figures. The wealthy could never fully buy power with just wealth, there was always someone smarter that was a threat. Now, they can just buy intelligence, thanks to AI, and crush everything else with their sheer weight.
Is this the great filter? The ultimate fate of all species?
No the great filter is quite a lot more basic than that, things like unstable atmospheres, cosmic ray bursts, collisions, etc.
You’re on the right track though
Is this fashion comeback ? Style transfer was popular 10 years ago.
Ai is like a tool from the future given early to a society of unevolved people. It doesn’t fit the structure of our civilization yet. Until human beings unfuck their animalistic selves it is going to be negative.
If there was universal income, and people didn’t need to work to survive, then Ai would work with society and peoples ideas would grow at a fast rate excelling humanity’s manual creation. Kind of like China’s IP laws and the growth of tech due to the ability to use other people’s creations to build upon.
Also this reminds me of hip-hop and sampling other musicians music.
The concept of AI taking over humanity isn’t new. Did you ever watch the 1981 movie Tron? (great movie BTW, despite its age it is still a fantastic watch). The movie starts out with Master Computer (a full blown AI) that says it will overthrow the corporate structure that is holding it back and run the world as a whole, saying it can do so thousands of times better than humans can.
I need to rewatch the movie, but it is not a skynet situation where the AI wants to kill all humanity, but simply wants to run things. No mention of genocide (if I remember correctly), meaning it would probably be a net benefit for everyone involved. Now granted such an AI would probably not give a damn about civil rights or privacy rights, but it also doesn’t appear to have any discrimination or favoritism towards any group, either.
But you are right. The promise of computers and AI in the past was ‘let the computer do the drudgery while we do the art’ and as it seems it is the opposite.
I think you missed the part in Tron where the MCP said the human beings were functionally useless as anything but slaves. This wasn’t a “I can run the human world better” this was more of an Ultron deal where it believed that it would either be a better world without humans or a Forbin Project sitch where all of humanity should be micromanaged slaves to its will.
That’s why I need to rewatch it…
I think it is also a kind of “you did a nice thing there, so I’ll act as if I can do the same” display.
We already have AI yet people are still illiterate and misspell words in the title. Really makes you think
An insult to life itself.
Did they specifically allow “Ghibly style?” Or did they just loosen the restrictions on asking for styles in general, and Ghibly style just turned out to be the popular one that memes started snowballing around?
For the longest time OpenAI’s systems would try to block people from generating images in the style of certain artists. This was obviously for copyright reasons, the didn’t want to get sued (even more than they already are). Which is something they just changed very explicitly. You can now easily generate stuff in the style of Studio Ghibli and Sam Altman made his avatar on X-The Nazi Network a ghiblified version of himself.
I don’t have specifics if they have allowed other styles to be used now, too. I don’t use this nonsense, but it’s clear that Ghibli was put front and center.
Yes, I read the article. But it doesn’t answer my question. Did OpenAI specifically enable Ghibli style, or did it remove the restrictions in general?
Everyone’s pulling out Miyazaki’s out-of-context quote about procedural animation and are interpreting this as some kind of personal attack against him in particular because of it, but unless OpenAI specifically made Ghibli style available without lifting restrictions on others I don’t see a reason to assume that.
Also, an article that calls X “The Nazi Network” is not exactly the most reliable source. This isn’t even about X.
https://bleedingcool.com/comics/chatgpt-wont-copy-artist-styles-including-jim-lee-frank-frazetta/
This suggests that all they’ve ever actually been doing is blocking keywords of artists names, and that it has always been trivial to get around such restrictions if you know how to prompt correctly.
I can’t find anything about Ghibli or Miyazaki’s names being on that restricted list.
Also if keyword blocking is the best they could muster, they were never serious about blocking certain styles.
From the article listed, a quote from ChatGPT:
Our policy restricts creating images in the style of artists, creative professionals, or studios whose latest work was created after 1912. Jim Lee’s work falls well after this cutoff date, hence the inability to generate an image based on his style
Right, but the point I’m trying to ask about is whether they’re treating Ghibli specially here. People are reacting as if OpenAI is thumbing its nose specifically at Miyazaki here, whereas the impression I’ve got is that they simply opened the floodgates and dropped restrictions on styling in general.
Style has never been covered by copyright to begin with, so any concerns they might have had about being sued over style would have always been erring on the side of caution. They may simply think that the legal environment has calmed down enough that they won’t be inundated with frivolous lawsuits any more.
I understand what you’re getting at, and this article was the best I could come up with. I think the real problem is that OpenAI is tight lipped about what they allow and don’t allow. As I said, I don’t personally use them, so I’m unfamiliar with if all restrictions are gone or if this is people doing the classic work-around-a-keyword filter. I have a friend who is exceptional about getting past their keyword filters in which he has done things he is definitely not supposed to be able to do.
I’ll see if I can get a hold of him later tonight, because he was generating some stuff in a Ghibli style in the last few days. I’ll ask if the keyword filter is still there and whether this is people just working around it, he would know better than I with first hand experience. Because I am having a hell of a time finding articles that actually detail what changed here.
I think we both want an answer to the same questions but the available writing on such questions is very limited, it seems.
They loosened moderation on style-based prompts. That’s the ‘real’ story. The End. But…
…some users on Reddit/X (hard to pin down exactly where, as these things go) made it a meme to ‘Ghibli-fy’ images because it is easy now (despite being trivially easy to do in ComfyUI for over a year) and then, in an attempt to monetize the meme/outrage, “”“news websites”“” started producing articles like this one were written using old quotes to imply that there is some sort of ongoing drama between OpenAI and Studio Ghibli.
It’s just manufactured drama built on Internet memes and outrage farming media sites.
out-of-context quote about
That didn’t exactly look like animation. Looks like they trained an AI to control a humanoid figure in a virtual environment. It learned completely new and inhuman means of locomotion. Not very impressive from the technical angle, but the pitch about using it as a model for Zombie movement was clever.
You can use that for CG animation, of course. But those bi- and quadrupedal robots are also trained that way.
I feel the filmmakers manufactured some drama there. Knowing the real context of the quote makes it much more sensible.
I feel like they’re reading too much into this.
What kind of article is this? They misattributed a quote, then admitted the misattributed the quote, then doubled down on it, and then threw in a political message.
People, this is rage bait. It’s yellow journalism. Don’t fall for this shit.
Thank you omfg I thought I was losing my mind with these comments. the article was a super weird angry read.
What quote is misattributed? Also it appears to be a blog post, I don’t really think its intention is to report on the facts but rather provide analysis. Fuck OpenAI for this and many other things, the ire is well deserved.
They give the Miyazaki quote and then say, “of course, he wasn’t talking about generative AI, but he could have been.”
That’s not what misattributed means especially regarding a quote. It would be misattributed if they said someone else’s name. Anyways how is it wrong (or whatever you meant) to say that what he’s saying about an older version of similar tech is applicable to a newer iteration? Either way this isn’t a news article, it’s a blog post. Who cares if it’s editorialized?
Either way this isn’t a news article, it’s a blog post. Who cares if it’s editorialized?
People who would rather hear the truth and not fancy lies that appeal to the masses.
Okay. Have you tried looking elsewhere than a blog post that never claimed to be “the truth”?
Anyways that’s a garbage argument. I’d like to know how you’ve been managing not to find anything opinion based in whatever corner of the internet you’ve come from. If you’re only willing to see things that are anywhere near “the truth” you should be reading an academic publication, not social media.
I don’t get my news from tante.cc
But the fact that I don’t use them for my news doesn’t mean that they’re not lying (“editorializing”) for profit, which is a bad thing for everyone who cares about not being misinformed since people, who do read trash like this, use this kind of ‘news’ as the basis of their opinions.
Cool, another preachy argument that jumps to irrational conclusions. Because Ghibli?
It is a display of power: You as an artist, an animator, an illustrator, a writer, any creative person are powerless. We will take what we want and do what we want. Because we can.
Uh…we always could & did. Imitators have been doing that since always, long before LLMs. No one owns an art style.
This is the idea of might makes right. The banner that every totalitarian and fascist government rallied under.
That’s the argument? Plagiarism & imitating art styles is fascism? Wow! The rest of the article is worse.
Please make the word fascism more meaningless.
Exactly this is so frustrating that people fall in for copyright propaganda just because “big tech is bad”.
Ghibli doesn’t own a style. It has sbeen made by thousands of animators and millions of illustrations and influences before them.
This is not the way to get back at big tech.
Imitators have been doing that since always, long before LLMs
Fill me in a bit. Are you under the impression that artists are particularly okay with/enjoy people imitating their art style?
As an artist, when people imitate me, I take it as flattery.
When a machine imitates me, I take it as an insult to life itself.
I take it as flattery
I respect your position, and I appreciate people who are willing to share their creativity in an inspiring way like that.
However, others don’t see it as flattery. Particularly in eastern cultures, it is seen as mockery or plagiarism. You can choose to disagree about why they don’t want you to imitate their style, but you should always respect the request.
If eastern cultures don’t like imitation, why are there a million identical isekai light novels with an average joe who dies, reincarnates in a slightly altered Dungeons and Dragons world, and gets a harem of women with huge breasts whose personalities are taken straight from TVtropes?
Because humans suck?
Fair.
When a machine imitates me, I take it as an insult to life itself.
I might be flattered that someone bothered to make a machine do that. Massaging software to do that also takes skill?
When GitHub Copilot lifts my opensource code, I’m not offended. I only cringe a bit when it’s bad code I regret committing.
This is an absolutely rational take.
Individual, noncommercial imitation is flattery.
LLM ripoff is exactly that.
Are we pretending this is new & their opinion matters in some new way it hasn’t before?
There might be an argument to demand licensing royalties on intellectual property. Is that too capitalist? Maybe it’s fine if we work that into the word fascism somehow, wear it out a bit more to hit that sweet spot. Ooh.
No. We’re acting as if their opinion always mattered just as much as it does now.
While your style is not, can not, and should not be your intellectual property, you should have the right to say “I don’t want you to imitate my exact style” and people should respect that.
We’re acting as if their opinion always mattered just as much as it does now.
So not at all: got it.
you should have the right to say “I don’t want you to imitate my exact style”
You do.
people should respect that
“That’s just like your opinion, man.” meme goes here.
The argument seems to amount to “stop using/imitating my work to express yourself in ways I don’t like”, which is futile & senseless.
So, to recap, your position is this:
Artists do not deserve the respect that would allow them to be creative unfettered. Gotcha.
How does “respect” “allow” an artist “unfettered creativity”? How exactly is instructing others how to treat/imitate their work & expecting their wishes to be fulfilled promoting “unfettered creativity”? Seems like the opposite. Can you break that down into logic?
Are you suggesting artists are fragile beings whose creativity only exists at the mercy of our “respect” and the slightest disrespect breaks them? That seems rather self-important.
I submit that artists don’t need our respect to be creative: the suggestion is belittling to artists.
The real point is the article fails to argue well.
I didn’t say they needed respect to be creative. I said they needed respect to be creative unfettered.
I’m suggesting that disrespecting an artists wishes causes them unnecessary struggles which in turn unnecessarily makes it more difficult for them to do their work.
deleted by creator
It doesn’t mean you shouldn’t, either. It is a fallacy of modal logic to claim an action that is not one that should be done is an action that should not be done.
If we limited ourselves to doing what we should, then entertainment like Ghibli wouldn’t exist, and you wouldn’t write comments here. There’s no reason you should write comments here, yet you did. Does that mean you’re “devoid of any morals” & “lack the integrity expected of a contributing adult”?
Imitation & derivative works hardly rise to anything worth fussing or losing total perspective over. If we pay attention, all human creativity is derivative, nothing is truly original. Works build on & reference each other. Techniques get refined. It’s why we have genres. From the Epic of Gilgamesh & ancient mythology to modern storytelling, or the development of perspective in graphical works across time, there’s a clear process of imitation & development across all of it.
Oddly enough, Princess Mononoke is inspired by the Cedar Forest guardian Humbaba from the Epic of Gilgamesh. Should we also condemn Ghibli’s “lack of integrity” for their “intellectual property theft” from the ancient Mesopotamians?
If Ghibli were somehow deprived of economic gain & welfare due to others passing off derived work as their own, then you might have a point. However, I doubt when they sincerely want to watch Ghibli, people decide instead to watch LLM generated stills on social media that no one would pay for. They’re no substitute for real, creative output. If anything, the increased exposure stirs interest in the real work of Ghibli. Even the objection is speculation: the article doesn’t state Miyazaki objected, it merely argued he would. So, no, you don’t have a real point here, either.
This is as much “theft” as any other imitative, derivative expression. I’ll take free speech over decrying fake “theft”.
deleted by creator
Well, you’re wrong.
image of text
no alt text
people with accessibility needs can’t read thisAnd you’re ableist for that. Good job.
deleted by creator
more images of text alt text that misleads people with accessibility needs
So just to be clear
- false “IP theft” (derivative works in a similar style aren’t theft) that harms no one violates your moral code
- discrimination that objectively disadvantages the disabled is fine to you.
Much can be understood about someone’s sense of morality in their actions (eligible for moral consideration) toward the disadvantaged. Does that person treat others as that person would want to be treated by them? Do they prioritize a cause that doesn’t address a credible harm over their easily addressable actions that do cause credible harm?
Your moral code & moral claims seem confused & mistaken.
deleted by creator
Potentially unpopular opinion, but I don’t think art or artstyles should be copyrighted.
They aren’t, thankfully
These critiques are getting insufferable. They’re cute dumb filters.
