PaintedLiger [2018-02-07 18:19:50 +0000 UTC]

I don't know. Personally, I think if someone wants to use an AI to color their artwork, that's fine. They can do that. But not for commissions. If someone's paying you for a full-colored artwork, and you do the lines and then pop it in the auto-coloration app, that's cheating someone out of their money, and that isn't ethical. If they're paying you for a sketch, or just the lineart, and you put it through that AI, then whatever. Just as long as you're not charging people more for something you're not even doing half of.  

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

5agado [2017-11-04 11:23:24 +0000 UTC]

The problem is that "cheating" is more of a ethical and moral concept. When considering instead a more utilitarian view, you can see that once AI will get better that humans in coloring (and other art-related steps for that matter) it would not matter much, or better: it will matter a lot  for many, but what society will do at that point will be highly unrelated to such opinions, and instead focused on the most effective and efficient path (notice that effectiveness here includes also intrinsic quality of the resulting art, is not just "fast and cheap").

Dummy example: if I want to offer my services as human calculator (doing additions, multiplications, divisions, etc.) I better be doing something really extraordinary as a plus for you to choose me instead of a much cheaper and faster basic calculator. If I cannot accomplish this, than there is no point in using me for the task. Are you cheating by using the calculator? In a normal context, not at all, you just chose the optimal option.

On my side I am experimenting and developing more and more techniques that use a mix of automation and machine learning for art purposes, and I believe we will soon [what is soon?] be able to automate the process making it pretty much impossible to distinguish between human and machine artists.

And here some automatic colorization for my works:

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

FiddleMyJiggles [2017-10-29 21:28:49 +0000 UTC]

I'd say it's more lazy than cheating. Plus an AI doesn't know what you want the end result to look like, all it knows is what spaces to fill with colors. When I was on cubebrush.com, there was a brush someone made a brush what was a bunch of anime base bodies & heads: cubebrush.co/marketplace?resou… It's not gonna help people draw anatomy better & this applies to this AI. Why bother drawing if a machine's gonna do it for you?

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Genisay [2017-10-29 18:39:53 +0000 UTC]

I'd call it experimental.  Artist are always playing with new techniques, and this one happens to produce a very distinct sort of look.  After a while, you start being able to tell when it was used.  These are some pretty decent ones too. I've played with this program myself, and some of the images I've tried to do didn't get results nearly this nice.
I could see people even combining this 'style' with hand painted portions as well to develop new looks, or to more quickly get a base to start from to save time, then further stylize into something more uniquely their own. If this becomes more common, I don't see it ruining or as cheating art any more than using Photoshop and Coral Painter to achieve digital paintings or special effects. Instead, I see it as just another tool artists can possibly add to their bag of applications and techniques, and something that can expand into new ways of doing art. No different than the invention of anything else that changed the way people approached art.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

MallonIllustration [2017-10-29 18:20:24 +0000 UTC]

It's not cheating, but it's going to put a lot of people out of work eventually.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

ChazzVC [2017-09-29 03:50:24 +0000 UTC]

It's hardly any different than using bucket fill, I don't see what all the fuss is about. 

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Ravvie-Kun [2017-07-10 17:08:00 +0000 UTC]

I personally hate coloring. It's not that fun. On the rare occasion I make lines steady enough for it, I use it.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

xXSilverCellistXx [2017-06-11 22:45:14 +0000 UTC]

It honestly depends, though something like this for animations would be VERY useful. I tried to do animation and I can confirm that it is a pain to color every single frame. It honestly depends on how it's used in my opinion. 

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

EGGv2 [2017-06-11 22:09:17 +0000 UTC]

This actually looks incredibly useful for animators tbh LOL 

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

NebulaDreams [2017-06-11 15:31:51 +0000 UTC]

I think it's a fun tool to use, and the effects can be nice, but I wouldn't use it as a crutch. It can't replace actual color theory.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Reenaki [2017-06-11 14:29:12 +0000 UTC]

i honestly think its cheating. And i will never stop coloring by myself.
The big threat that I fear is that if this continues,artists wont have any role in the future. If AI can color like this,almost anyone can have a perfectly good piece of art with much effort. NOW BEFORE YOU SAY IT,yes,im aware that the person WOULD have to draw the lineart. But still, im pretty sure AI will someday be able to draw that aswell. I hope that day never comes.
Artists already have a hard time as it is,but if AI take over the art field,we are all DOOMED. It would be impossible to tell the difference between someone who worked hard on something themselves,and someone who just ran some stuff through AI. Unless mentioned. Which will,in my opinion,greatly dishonor legit artists
i dont pride myself on it,but i refuse to believe someone who has used AI to make something as an artist. I will show them respect for drawing the lineart. But if someone asks me to critique a work colored with AI,I can assure you I WILL ignore the color an only review the lineart.
also the fact,that it pretty much sucks the fun out of being an artist,it sucks the fun out of trying new styles of coloring,of learning,of improving,and most of all,I feel like it sucks the fun out of finishing a piece of art,and just sitting back and being proud of what you did.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

gendemo [2017-04-02 11:18:52 +0000 UTC]

I have a related question, but I can't find a a discussion on this. Hence if you can direct me there, I'd appreciate it.

What is people's opinion on colouring in other artist's line art? Its just for fun, not to sell or nothing. Should I message the artist and ask permission?

thnx, GD

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

howjustrightxxo [2017-03-25 17:38:46 +0000 UTC]

hey nice article

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Krinmu [2017-02-22 01:22:14 +0000 UTC]

A little bit late to the party, but I don't think you would really define it as cheating as long as you credit the ai.

The only thing I'm really worried about is that weather or not we can distinguish the difference between hand drawn and AI as technology keeps on advancing. If the difference between AI and hand drawn truly disappears, that's when I think that things are getting to out of hand because there are people who honestly want to get recognized by their way of coloring and art. Of course this is just my opinion, but it would definitely make me feel better if someone can look at a painting and tell it was painted by an AI or by hand. I feel like the AI should be kept to around nothing to detailed, because if it starts interfering with very stylized coloring styles of certain artists, that's where I draw the line.

But I do think that it's a really neat tool to help express something quickly, but I don't think it's something you should use all the time if you truly want to keep that traditional or maybe even professional feel.

I feel like a similar debate started when digital art was becoming more widespread too, but even though traditional paintings may be a thing of the past, you still give them recognition (Like have you seen those Star Wars concept arts that where traditionally painted. F***** amazing)

Happy arting!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Weissboard [2017-02-21 23:58:27 +0000 UTC]

When I buy something, I go by the final result. I do not know if you hand painted it or used a computer. all I go by is whether I like it or not. I'm not an artist, so doesn't make sense to advise, just appreciate.

Looks like a fun tool, but I may be missing something here. Is there  a way to download the result to your PC or do you have to post it to Twitter?

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

JaliosWilinghart [2017-02-19 16:16:32 +0000 UTC]

I dont think its cheating at all. Not even close. This great advancement can bring much more good than harm. Just like the elevator, the bike, and Photoshop. All can be argued to only be "tools of the lazy", but in reality they can all be great tools for people to not only improve their lives, but also give them abilities they would not else have at all.

I, as well as anyone else, should have respect for skill. But just imagine how many more people can show their artistic visions and works with this tech? Art is not about limiting it to only a few being able to properly express themselves according to their vision. Living, breathing, art, is about not just one doing so. But many. This can free up many artists to be able to express themselves, as they have yearned for. Life is too beautiful to be limited for only the few to express it to be so.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

CRUMVIII [2017-02-18 15:40:24 +0000 UTC]

This is the most amazing thing I've seen in the last few months. <3

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Night-hearted [2017-02-12 22:25:29 +0000 UTC]

Interesting. Neural networks are starting to get better and better every year, and it's possible that one day they might even be able to create their own artwork of a professional quality and replace human artists entirely. O_o For now, though, I could see how this would be immensely useful in applications such as animation. Maybe someone will start working on a neural net that is able to do in-betweens given a few key frames.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Sakuchu [2017-02-12 09:30:29 +0000 UTC]

I don't know if I'd consider this cheating, but I know I wouldn't want to use it since it's just no fun? lol
At least I enjoy coloring most about the whole artwork process lol

But I can see how this can be very convenient for producing fast results, especially for animation. (which is a rather tedious task if you decide to color everything on your own.)

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Shadowwright [2017-02-11 21:11:41 +0000 UTC]

The A.I. should be given the credit for coloring your art for you.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Shiwakura [2017-02-11 12:14:57 +0000 UTC]

Cheating what? It's just a tool, which is something that aids in accomplishing/completing a task, the only way I could consider this cheating it would be if someone uses it in a colouring competition or something like that.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Tinseii [2017-02-11 06:10:44 +0000 UTC]

I know this journal was posted a few days ago but I do consider this cheating since many of us struggle (and are still struggling) for years to get our colouring to where we want it 

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

r2om [2017-02-09 07:05:10 +0000 UTC]

For a product stand point....Party on!!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

KurouKoutarou [2017-02-06 22:13:11 +0000 UTC]

I wouldn't take this as cheating, it's pretty convenient especially if you don't have the luxury to buy expensive markers just to make your art look half-decent (from a digital artists perspective it might be a different story)

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

onyxrose777 [2017-02-04 05:44:16 +0000 UTC]

ok...I FINALLY got a chance to play with this program and I am going to say ... no.  This is not cheating.  The reason why I say no is because in a more complex drawing it is going to take a lot of editing and user input to get the lighting, mood and effects just right.  I'm still a pretty novice digital artist, but when I used a more complex sketch (keep in mind, it is a very rudimentary sketch) the results are utter crap!  This could be due to my lack of digital skill or my inexperienced color choices, but if I were to "finish" this sketch on my own...it would come out a lot better than what I made with that program.  This is not to say that the results weren't pretty impressive, it is still nothing more than a tool.  The sketch I used was this one:     

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Kayozera [2017-02-04 05:26:51 +0000 UTC]

Omgosh. This is crazy!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Starlight-Destiny [2017-02-03 20:35:22 +0000 UTC]

I think it's cheating, because art is a culmination or all of your skill and hard work.

This AI objectively knows where to put everything, which means that you are not using any critical thinking, at all, in the process.

How will you learn to manipulate light and shadow, colour and hue, if you already have a tool doing all of it for you.

Art is a constant learning process, and if you're not learning, then you're not getting better.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Sylverstone14 [2017-02-03 13:33:37 +0000 UTC]

It has its uses, but over-reliance on the tool will probably lead to complacency if the artist doesn't really know much about coloring.


If anything, it looks like a nice launchpad.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Hebigami-Okami-77 [2017-02-02 06:40:28 +0000 UTC]

It's a great tool, but it's not so much cheating that I'm concerned with because that's quite a grey area, but rather the following:

1. Laziness.  People who do colour their own work most certainly do not learn overnight nor do they take shortcuts.  They have to learn and practice, practice, practice.  My own colouring is not perfect - definitely not compared to this - but comparing my digital colouring when I first started on DA to now, I'm still very proud of where I've grown and developed and fully intend to learn more.  The tool is amazing, but at the same time, it can make people lazy.  Thus, when the time comes and the tool is not available, they can no longer draw, colour or even showcase their skills.

2. Lack of knowledge for the actual art.  Can also fit with laziness - actually learning the concepts and purposes of shading, lighting and colour theory takes time and dedication.  Artists don't just pop out overnight - not even the artists during Impressionist, Renaissance or Surrealist periods just immediately become sensations.  There's a reason why majority of the masters of art are presented as older gentlemen (i.e. Leonardo da Vinci, Vincent van Gogh, Pablo Picasso, Claude Monet, Salvidor Dali, etc.) - they take years to craft and perfect their trade.  Somehow, I feel like the tool is undermining all their hard work.

3. Loss of jobs.  Because if this tool is here, what's then the point of digital artists who actually do what they like for a living? Upload, click and there - you get a pretty picture.  As a result, that can lead to the loss of jobs for those who want to make a living out of their passion.

4. Lack of individuality and variety.  From my observation, the colouring style is very similar - a softer and lighter palette that leans towards pastel colours even.  What makes art so amazing is the range and variety it has.  Anyone can do art since it can come in many different forms.  So to present the same sort of thing over and over again will eventually get boring and thus raise the question - what's the point of digital art if it all looks the same? Wouldn't you want some variety? 

👍: 0 ⏩: 2

May-I-Tutchem [2017-02-01 17:40:47 +0000 UTC]

I think its useful for when you're pressed for time and you need to get something completed fairly quickly, or helping with creating a good color scheme. Otherwise, it is kind of cheating.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

t-4-v-0 [2017-02-01 03:46:00 +0000 UTC]

in fact im gonna start using that xD
LOL im too lazy to color my stuff

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Gingerbreadbirdy [2017-02-01 03:12:54 +0000 UTC]

Seems like just a means to an end if you ask me.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

firesparkes [2017-02-01 01:02:05 +0000 UTC]

I don't forsee this tool actually teaching anyone anything about color theory. In that regard, I think it's a bad thing. It's important to understand fundamentals, regardless of what tools you actually choose to use in your artwork or not. It's like learning to run before you can walk, or building a house on a shoddy foundation.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

DTJB [2017-01-31 16:16:38 +0000 UTC]

Rather than cheating, this leans more towards the category of lazy.

I can see the benefits of using this program, especially if someone is stumped on what colors to use to make everything aesthetically pleasing, along with the fact that personal tweaks can be made as you mentioned, but if an artist abuses this tool to do the work for them without any thought, I think that lacks genuine creativity.  If all an artist does is push a button to make the decisions for them, then the artist isn't utilizing their own personal vision and they're not challenging themselves to develop their potential.

Used in moderation, sure.  Otherwise it's not really creative.

By the way, that first pic is Fuuka from Persona, am I right?

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

FelinusRex [2017-01-31 07:30:43 +0000 UTC]

Wow. This is kind of amazing (and expected in a weird way).

The fact that facial recognition software has been advanced enough for a while now to fill in partial faces would seem to point to AI being eventually capable of the task of coloring in outlines. That doesn't surprise me much. The fact that "artists" would consider adopting it as a tool is the surprising and disappointing part for me. It's not that the artist isn't personally responsible for the work: interns and apprentices have been doing that for centuries now. It's that a lot of the "joy" of making art is in the doing, and that disappears when the "doing" is a push of a button. It's a bit like foreplay with the happy O left to someone else, very capitalistic and detached. 

I'm sure this type of thing will become immensely popular, especially with Americans. 

Sigh.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

eo84 [2017-01-31 03:42:14 +0000 UTC]

I find it interesting as it will sort of give some guidance to those who are weak in colour.

However I dont find it cheating as the quality is far inferior than any trained artist quality. But eventually this tech will be adapted into app or art software as a feature.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Mister-Jackson [2017-01-31 00:50:41 +0000 UTC]

Nahh, It's a tool just like anything else. Like all tools though you definitely don't want to be hindered by the thing, so learning to color is still your best bet. Honestly though if you look deep enough into fine art and art history there has always been this sort of thing. The flemish used a form of lense to project things onto canvas and painted what they saw to great effect, and today people copy paste and rearrange things in photoshop.

If anything not using the tool is dumb, on the other hand learning to not have to use it or build upon it is just a good. Fundamentally I think the idea is to get to the point where you don't have to rely on the tool in order to make good work.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

themagicalpinata [2017-01-31 00:49:22 +0000 UTC]

I like to draw concept images for the stories I write, but cannot colour worth shit... this tool is a blessing (which is odd because I paint Warhammer plastic models quite nicely). 

Funny thing is I use machine learning (artificial intelligence) in my career, where I use it to identify patterns in resistance to chemotherapy in breast cancer. I am all for the machine, but know there are many who are a stick in the mud when it comes to this kind of change (and can respect their view/opinion).

Thanks for sharing!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

ChibiTacoLord [2017-01-31 00:12:56 +0000 UTC]

how does it work?

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Norski [2017-01-30 20:48:42 +0000 UTC]

Is this cheating? My opinion is - yes, and no. It depends on what can reasonably be expected in a given situation.

Examples:

If someone asked me to do an oil painting, make a digital scan of the piece, and send the digital copy - - - in principle, I could use software to create a three dimensional scene, render that from a suitable perspective, then use other software to make the render look as if it had been painted in oils. That, I think, would be cheating: and a really bad idea.

One time followed a process something like the first example, with the finished product looking more than a little like an inked graphite-pencil drawing. I was doing that for myself, never claimed that it was a traditional artwork, but didn't specify the steps I took to make it. I do not think that was cheating, since the piece was intended as an illustration for a bit of fiction: and I doubt that a reasonable person would expect that artwork of that sort had to be produced in a particular way.

For your purposes: I don't know the anime/manga/animation culture very well. If there is a deep-seated assumption that *all* work done must be created using a particular method: I suppose deviating from those expectations would be considered cheating. I also think that, if that is the case, the assumptions are long overdue for re-appraisal.

My own take, for art which is intended primarily to be enjoyed by folks who are not fanatic devotees of some particular process, is that what matters is how the art looks when it's done. How the artist gets there should be up to the artist - - - provided that minimal ethical standards are followed. The latter shouldn't be an issue in this case, since I gather than using an AI to color your art does not involve human sacrifice or slave labor.

If AI ever get civil rights: that's another topic.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1