HOME | DD
RobotCatArt β Is it CHEATING to let an AI color your art?
Published: 2017-01-28 04:50:44 +0000 UTC; Views: 28433; Favourites: 264; Downloads: 0
Redirect to original
Description
/* Journal Clean-Up */ body div#devskin12898934 * { background:none; padding:0; margin:0; border:none; font-family:'Open Sans', sans-serif; } body div#devskin12898934 .gr { padding:0!important; margin-bottom:-3px; } body div#devskin12898934 .gr-top img, body div#devskin12898934 .gr1, body div#devskin12898934 .gr2, body div#devskin12898934 .gr3 { display:none; } body div#devskin12898934 a.external:after { display:none; } body div#devskin12898934 .user-symbol { font-size:0.7em; margin-left:2px; } /* Normal Thumb Styling */ body div#devskin12898934 .shadow-holder { vertical-align:middle; margin:3px; } body div#devskin12898934 .shadow-holder img { padding:10px; background:#fff; margin:1px; } body div#devskin12898934 img.lit { display:none; } body div#devskin12898934 .shadow-holder:hover { padding:0!important; } body div#devskin12898934 .embedded-deviation img, body div#devskin12898934 .embedded-freeform-deviation { padding:10px; background:#fff; width:97%; } body div#devskin12898934 .embedded-deviation img:hover { } /* Normal Lit Thumb Styling */ body div#devskin12898934 .lit { margin:1px; width:180px; height:160px; box-shadow:none; -moz-box-shadow:none; -webkit-box-shadow:none; background:#fff; } body div#devskin12898934 q { margin-left:-15px; font-weight:normal!important; } body div#devskin12898934 q strong { margin:10px 0; } body div#devskin12898934 q img { border:none!important; outline:none!important; } /* Big Gallery Code */ body div#devskin12898934 .big .shadow-holder { display:inline-block; width:80px; height:80px; overflow:hidden; } body div#devskin12898934 .big .shadow-holder img { max-width:none; margin:-1px 0 0 -1px; padding:0px; } body div#devskin12898934 .big .lit { width:200px; height:200px; } body div#devskin12898934 .big .shadow-holder:hover img, body div#devskin12898934 .big .shadow-holder:hover .lit { background:#fff!important; } /* Mini Gallery Code */ body div#devskin12898934 .mini .shadow-holder { display:inline-block; background:#fff; width:80px; height:150px; overflow:hidden; } body div#devskin12898934 .mini.wide .shadow-holder { display:inline-block; background:#fff; width:150px; height:80px; overflow:hidden; } body div#devskin12898934 .mini .shadow-holder img { padding:0px; max-width:none; margin:-1px 0 0 -1px; } body div#devskin12898934 .mini .lit { width:170px; height:150px; } /* Journal Top */ body div#devskin12898934 .gr-box { background:url('https://fc07.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2013/244/4/7/whitecustom_by_simplysilent-d6kp6dh.png'); } body div#devskin12898934 .gr-top { background:#5f4848; padding:70px 0 40px 0; text-align:center; } body div#devskin12898934 .gr-top h2 { background:#ff5075; } body div#devskin12898934 .gr-top h2, body div#devskin12898934 .gr-top h2 a, body div#devskin12898934 .commentslink { text-transform:uppercase; text-align:center; letter-spacing:2px; padding:5px 20px; font-size:15px; display:inline-block; margin:0 auto; color:#fff; } body div#devskin12898934 .gr-top h2:hover { padding:5px 40px; background:#ffa53a; } body div#devskin12898934 .timestamp { display:block; color:#fff; padding:5px; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:2px; } /* Journal Text */ body div#devskin12898934 .text { padding:50px 6%; } body div#devskin12898934 .text, body div#devskin12898934 .content { font-family:'Open Sans'; font-size:14px; } body div#devskin12898934 .left, body div#devskin12898934 .right { width:48%; } body div#devskin12898934 .right { float:right; } body div#devskin12898934 .left { float:left; } body div#devskin12898934 b { color:#3f4848; } body div#devskin12898934 .text a { color:#ff5075; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:none; } body div#devskin12898934 .text a:hover { color:#ffa53a; } /* Box and Square Headings */ body div#devskin12898934 h1, body div#devskin12898934 h2 { text-transform:uppercase; font-weight:normal; font-size:14px; font-weight:bold; font-family:'open sans'; } body div#devskin12898934 h1 { letter-spacing:2px; color:#fff; padding:10px; text-align:center; background:#ffa53a; } body div#devskin12898934 .text h2 { padding-left:10px; letter-spacing:1px; margin:5px 0 -5px 0; border-left:20px solid #ffa53a; } body div#devskin12898934 h1:hover, body div#devskin12898934 h2:hover { font-weight:bold; } body div#devskin12898934 .p1 { background:#ff5075; } body div#devskin12898934 .b1 { background:#5f4848; } body div#devskin12898934 .g1 { background:#9fce54; } body div#devskin12898934 .p2 { border-left:20px solid #ff5075!important; } body div#devskin12898934 .b2 { border-left:20px solid #5f4848!important; } body div#devskin12898934 .g2 { border-left:20px solid #9fce54!important; } body div#devskin12898934 blockquote { padding:10px 3%; background:rgb(95, 72, 72); background:rgba(95,72,72, 0.1); } body div#devskin12898934 .clear { clear:both; } body div#devskin12898934 ul, body div#devskin12898934 ol { margin-left:30px; } body div#devskin12898934 ul li { list-style:square url('https://fc09.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2013/271/e/3/bulletbrown_by_simplysilent-d6oci8y.png'); } /* Journal Bottom */ body div#devskin12898934 li .f, body div#devskin12898934 li.f.a { background:transparent; } body div#devskin12898934 .list li { font-size:10px; } body div#devskin12898934 .list img { display:none; } body div#devskin12898934 .f.list { position:absolute; bottom:20px; color:#fff; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:2px; } body div#devskin12898934 .bottom { background:#5f4848 url('https://fc09.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2013/271/1/5/squares_by_simplysilent-d6oci96.png') no-repeat 97% 45px; padding:50px 0; } body div#devskin12898934 .commentslink { background:#9fce54; bottom:40px; font-weight:bold; padding:8px 20px; } body div#devskin12898934 .commentslink:hover { text-decoration:none; background:#ff5075; padding:8px 40px; } /* Credits */ body div#devskin12898934 .credit { position:absolute; bottom:20px; font-size:10px; right:3%; color:#fff; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:2px; } body div#devskin12898934 .credit a, body div#devskin12898934 .credit { color:#fff; text-decoration:none; } body div#devskin12898934 .credit a:hover { text-decoration:underline; color:#ff5075; }
Instagram |Twitter |Facebook |Tumblr
So in case you haven't been in the loop, in the past 24 hours or so, Someone released a tool that uses a neural network to color anime lineart. You can find it here:
paintschainer.preferred.tech
It just takes a jpg image and starts the coloring process for you, depending on the quality of your input image and contents, the results could range from meh to pretty amazing. Of course, you can specify colors and tweak it even further, and a lot of people have posted some really great looking results:
I have no doubt many people will use this to some effect or another. In fact, I think if this tool was released two years I might not have even bothered trying to seriously learn to color, since it'd be so convenient in comparison and my focus was more on making manga. There's a lot of people who stick with pencils and pens, but find digital hard to get into, or traditional colors too messy. This tool would allow them to finally get to see their own works in color. Others might put it in their digital workflow, or let it take over their digital coloring completely.
The question is, would this be considered cheating?
To answer that question, we'd have to examine what are some cases that can be considered cheating right now. The one that most people immediately think of is probably tracing. Generally most people can agree tracing is cheating, especially if you present it as your own work. The next one that comes up a lot is copying. However, already we're starting to get into a grey area. All fanart is basically copying the design and ideas of a popular franchise, so a lot of copying is already accepted. The times where drama seems to flare up is when the copy is too close to a well known work of another artist or official merchandise, such as copying the entire composition in addition to the characters. Some popular artists have ran into a bit of trouble when passing these 'studies' off as their own work, but it seems as long as you reference your source and don't try to profit off of it, its acceptable.
However, this tool doesn't really fall into the former 2 categories, but instead its more comparable to a photoshop tool or shortcut. For example, many artists use custom brushes to make their workflow much faster. Why draw every strand or rock crack when your brush takes care of the grunt work for you? Or the use of applying existing photo textures, a very common and accepted technique. Photobashing is straight up taking photos and cutting them up and putting them into your composition, and using layers, filters, and color adjusters, in combination with some digital painting touchup to make a completely new work, and is considered standard practice in the concept art industry.
So back to our original question. Is using this filter cheating, or is some level of use okay? I mean, if someone straight up says they colored it, but used the tool 100%, then I'd consider that cheating, but if they disclose they used the tool to color it, then it would it be okay? What if they used it, but then altered it by hand in addition to the AI coloring, like in photobashing, or altered it significantly so it becomes more or a reference? Would it be okay for them to say they painted it? Or they'd have to disclose they used it in some way during the coloring process?
I can already see a few uses I might have for it. For example, it seems to be able to calculate a very aesthetically pleasing color palette, while introducing a bunch of additional hues that fit your overall color scheme. It'd be extremely useful for setting up scenes or color profiles to get really interesting colors as a base reference:
Also, someone already made a short animation with the tool:
I really do want to try my hand at animating portions of VRO, and having it be colored automatically would save so much time. Of course I'd disclose my use of it.
Right now it seems the neural network was most trained on pastel type coloring, but in the future other coloring styles would become readily available. I can easily see this tool becoming a standard filter in the next version of Photoshop or Clip Studio Paint. When it does, it'd become widespread pretty quickly, and I'm sure there will be some huge schism on the digital artist scene regarding its use.
What do you guys think? Is it cheating? Or just another tool in a digital artist's arsenal?
UPDATE
I read through everyone's comments, that sure took longer than I expected. It seems people are pretty split regarding whether using the tool is cheating or not. However, most people agree that credit should be given if you do use the tool. A few comments brought up 'collaboration', which is a viewpoint I hadn't considered. There's also the issue of commissions, which make thing a lot more complicated.
Either way, it seems like as AI become more prevalent, thinks will be shaken up in ways we might not be able to control.
Instagram |Twitter |Facebook |Tumblr
Skin by SimplySilent
Related content
Comments: 219
I feel like it could be very useful for some things, therefore, I would consider it as another tool. BUT, I feel like it takes away all the dedication and skill we artists had to learn. It makes me feel kind of a bit... sad and useless, I guess?Β I don't have a really good feeling about this.
I don't really think it would be cheating, IMO it's a bit moreΒ like laziness
π: 0 β©: 0
It's just another tool.
Unless you consider Photoshop/SAI/Krita 'cheating', this doesn't even enter the equation.
It's a matter of people thinking that their effort is lessened or cheapened and it's not.
π: 0 β©: 0
yes, if you say that you colored it. if you say you drew the picture, but also say that an ai colored it, then it's fine
π: 0 β©: 0
While I think it seems kinda cheap because there's more heart/dedication to colouring the picture yourself, this could benefit other artists who don't feel confident in the way they colour or aren't the best at colour theory. In addition, they could possibly learn from this AI and improve for future artwork.
π: 0 β©: 0
it does look good but it looks like the AI (lets call it Haley Joel Osment) only has the ability to do a cloudy form of colouring, looks great but i feel like you can do more diversity in your colouring yourself
not saying it's bad just saying it can't hurt to do both auto and manual colouring
π: 0 β©: 0
It's awesome that's what it is.
π: 0 β©: 0
Neural networks need to be trained by large amounts of input data to work (in this case images of colored lineart).
Convolutional networks like this will sort of replicate the "style" of the images they were trained with. So if people use those tools, they should keep in mind that the colored images will have a certain look - which is just one of many ways you could potentially color the image.
The coloring might also not always be correct. I'm not sure how this particular tool is built, but if the network is structured very simple, it might not take stuff light lighting or 3D shape into account and produce incorrect shading.
π: 0 β©: 0
It's just using a tool in my opinion. Artists just need to know that THIS doesn't make them any better at colouring.
They also should know that they have to BE HONEST about it. Gosh! So many liars that believe in their own lies eventually.
π: 0 β©: 0
I wouldn't consider it cheating, as long as the person declares the use of the software. Even more if the person proves to be able to achieve the same result without using it, so it's just a speed up.
Β It's ok to use for animation or comic pages coloring, but for illustration it would lessen the artistic value of it.
It will also cause a major job loss for colorists, which is a pity considering how hard it is to find a job in the art field.
π: 0 β©: 0
I think that this will take the jobs of millions of artists hahahaha lol A lot of artists, if this improves, will go jobless...
π: 0 β©: 0
Honestly I think it's a pretty good tool for people who might be good at lineart, but bad at colouring their stuff. As silly as that may sound.
π: 0 β©: 0
I don't think of it as cheating. Really I thought of it as more of a collab, where you do the line art and the AI does the coloringΒ
π: 0 β©: 0
I think it would be cheating if people didn't reference it properly and used it all the time, claiming it as their own? Using it once or twice won't hurt thoughΒ Β
It'd be kinda sad to see an artist that can't actually colour though
π: 0 β©: 0
Clearly it wont be able replace manual coloring since it kinda go insane on hard compositions or detailed backgrounds, at least for now. But I think it might be increadibly useful for consept art since you can get many examples of differently colored sketch/line in just few minutes and work to a more complete refernce out there
π: 0 β©: 0
Look like program prefer simple body and closing structure xD At least after I tried to feed it comic page lineart it went insane xD
Well, it wont actually replace real artist couse it wont be able to work, for example, with elaborate fabrics which would require some patterns. Drawing them on lineart not always the best way. But it would be insanely useful for consept art in big or medium teams. It can give cool ideas for basic character pallet and its possible to try many coloring variants in few minutes and show it to brainstorm meeting xD
π: 0 β©: 0
Interesting 
π: 0 β©: 0
Cheating? Cheating how?
For commissions? No, if the price is fixed. Yes if it's a pay by hour and you still charge full price.
Artistically? Kinda, if it is not disclosed. In that sort of picture it should say: lineart and artistic vision by artist. Colors by machine.
If it is transparent, consider it as much cheating as a collaboration. Someone else did a part of the art for you.
π: 0 β©: 0
i don't think it's outright cheating but it really takes the fun out of drawing artwork. When you colour by yourself and it looks amazing, then you congratulate yourself on it but if it's coloured with a machine,,, you can't really claim it.
It would be good for colouring sketches that you've done and never gotten to colour
π: 0 β©: 0
I learned several AI stuff in the university (I'm computer engineer). As an Artificial Neural Network (ANN) it has to pass through a training phase which gives it general info that uses to classify data even in never seen cases. It's true that can achieve really nice results, but it's not intelligent enough to make a sense about coherent lights, shadows, forms, etc. If it works as I think, it detects first borders through Artificial Vision methods, separate zones delimited by the lines in the sketch and start to paint, as it find inner lines in that portions increases the color darkness near them, and does it for every portion.
Of course, as an AI, it works better in more desirable cases, like clean sketches with well defined lineart that clearly shows well the zones to work.
The outputs are impressive but I don't see it as a real substitute for a good coloring work nor cheating, maybe just a basis or a complement. Personally I would use it to make some backgrounds for my character drawings, as I'm really bad at drawing them.
So don't worry, nowadays AIs are not intelligent enough to substitute artists' work.
(Sorry for my bad english, that's not my native language)
π: 0 β©: 0
Heh, of course it's cheating
For me, it doesn't replace learning how to do 'real' coloring. A program can only take you so far. And right now the results pretty different from the style I prefer for my work (I am a huge nitpicker when it comes to picking colors). But I will definitely use it for coloring all those sketches I otherwise probably never would have gotten to
π: 0 β©: 0
It's ok to use it, also if you're talk a while to make art
π: 0 β©: 0
Well it's like in the old days...famous painters would often let their assistants colour their paintings for them ,under their guidance,and then they may add their little touches to it...
I mean it's not cheating ...but...it kinda defeat what makes your art special...the fact that yourself do it...
π: 0 β©: 0
It's just kind of concerning because even I kind of feel like "Why bother learning to color if this AI can do it better and faster?" I just don't think avoiding learning to color by using this tool is the right way to go. It seems like what a lot of (especially young) people will do though. Then you also end up getting a bunch of "stale" art because so many people rely on the same AI to color for them which produces similar results.Β
I don't think this technology will become so common that a large percentage of artists will use it. If they do they will use it sort of like you mentioned, as a filter or maybe a start off point that you can then further edit. I definitely approve this for comics or animation though, or even low-budget games like visual novels. I guess the main difference here is for those things it's being used just to speed the process instead of relying on it to color for you. Also, these aren't just random illustrations, they have other things to keep your interest like story. Personally, for an anime for example I would rather the coloring look like every other anime (which many of them already do anyways) if it means you can get more episodes in a season, or maybe multiple episodes a week, or maybe even that it airs throughout the entire year when it normally wouldn't.
π: 0 β©: 0
Hmm... I don't think it is cheating. Because the tool still needs a reference. Without it, it's pretty much useless. Basically, it all starts with the user. If the image isn't exactly the one he wants it to draw, chances are, he'll have to edit it before even using this AI to color it for him. The colors are to be set by the user, basically, the user needs to tweak the settings. It's a useful tool in the sense that if you're working on multiple projects and they have really tight schedules, you'll need help and this could help you speed up the process. Just, like everyone says it, tell them that you had help from this tool instead of taking all the credit saying how you did it from scratch to finish.
π: 0 β©: 0
Well, if you have that quality drawing, and it's just that you don't usually like to paint your stuff and you use that tool, I don't think it's that bad. I mean, the quality of the drawing is already yours, the design, the effort, the time spent cleaning those lines.
I can compare the use of that tool with some artists that use photos as backgrounds and just apply thousand photoshop effects to make them look like a "cartoonish" background. The character design is theirs, but the background 0 effort xDDDDD Still, the final piece looks awesome if you know how to do it properly.
That's why I don't think it's that bad to use tools that digital art offers you 
Have a wonderful day :3 <3
(And sorry for my bad English haehoahoee
π: 0 β©: 0
It's better than what I can do by myself T.T I wouldn't consider it cheating if it is noted that it was done by the tool. it's still depressing D: Saves time though, so it might be cool, for a webtoon artist to produce their comic faster, I guess.
π: 0 β©: 0
I think were already becoming obsolete, in a while, were going to get to a point where computers can do most things better than an actual human. Its pretty depressing imo.
π: 0 β©: 0
It's only cheating if you are claiming to be a colorist.
It's just a tool.
Once again, I'm reminded of the comic of two cavemen watching a third paint on a cave wall with a paintbrush while one comments, "Sure, it's faster and easier, but is it art?"
π: 0 β©: 0
It is another tool in the repetoire.
π: 0 β©: 0
I would definitely say it's not cheating! Might be able to make a case for it if they don't disclose usage of the tool, but even then if it becomes commonplace enough that it's a given that people are using it then that'd fade, even.
I can definitely understand concern surrounding it, and I feel like it does sorta cheapen things a bit, but I wouldn't call it cheating strictly.
It does sorta raise some questions though, It'll be interesting to see it unfold, I think.
π: 0 β©: 0
i don't know why it's not working for me 
π: 0 β©: 1
nevermind XD it's cool, though i prefer the coloring be done by myself :3 i'm trying it on edge because chrome seems not to be working :/
π: 0 β©: 0
I remember a short story by Asimov about a writer who gets a new computer program with a self-learning algorithm. Β In the first week he's pleased that it does the spelling/grammar check stuff (keeping in mind he was writing it back in the era when computers were still usually the size of rooms and bugs in the system were sometimes literally insects, long before autocorrect existed).
The second week the author finds it starts to offer suggestions for paragraph completion, which he admits are often better than the ones he had in mind. Β At the start of week four he turns on the computer and it begins writing a story from scratch, having learned the writer's style and voice perfectly. Β The writer sits back and pours himself a drink, unsure what to do now that the writing's all being done for him.
That's my reaction to this sort of thing - it's handy, absolutely; but over the long-term, will it ultimately cause more problems for people in the real world? Β Economically, human colorists will struggle to match the output of algorithms. Β Not that they'll all go broke - but more than a few will, and the ones who don't will be pressed pretty hard to compete.
π: 0 β©: 0
Well what do you mean by AI color? Like as in shading, coloring, and hilights at the click of a button? Like how dies it work? And is there a link? So we can test it?
π: 0 β©: 2
π: 0 β©: 0
I don't think it's cheating , ; It's just a tool after all ( as long as most of the work was done by yourself and it's just used as a secondary thing ) !
π: 0 β©: 0
It will be helpful at some point.Β
It would be definitely very sad if an artist sells their art using this program.
π: 0 β©: 0
Now on one hand, it's kind ofΒ annoying know that you can put all your energy into one thing, and an AI can do it better, and not only that, but make it look potentially amazing. It actually can even be considered borderline insulting If you decide to sell your art while using this AI. So yeah, if its just an image, Id say you are most likely cheating.
But then there is animation. To be honest, idk how to animate, but I know one thing: it's time consuming. Really, Really time consuming. So taking an AI and using it then, I can understand, because then you can work on something else sooner instead of having to spend 8 hours animating,. then another 8 hours coloring your animation in.
Basically, I see it like this: If it's something you can do easily, something you can put your heart and soul into, then using a bot is cheating. If you already put your heart and soul into making it move, then you don't need to worry about it.
π: 0 β©: 0
If we're talking artists using this, then no it's not cheating, but it's a lazy feat that lacks the rewards of self-accomplishment. Tracing and other gray areas are the same. When people utilize these tools to make profit or get popular, and without due credit, that's when it's cheating. In the end, it all comes down to how true you are to your job.
This is my honest opinion, being a somewhat gray artist myself.
I can see a lot of possibilities in this, as well as the downsides. Would say this is more of a tool for the non-artists though.
π: 0 β©: 0
I know there's nothing wrong with this, but it makes me kinda mad to know people put a lot of effort into their art and then others can just do this...
π: 0 β©: 0
Definitely should credit the tool and tool maker but as long as whatever you are working on turns into something that others can enjoy why bother worrying about whether its cheating or not? Personally I feel as if its a huge bonus if great things can be churned out faster because if they can that means artists have more time to concentrate on newer and better things and if someone isn't a fan of the tool that just adds to the competition which will help push artists to make even better works.Β
π: 0 β©: 0
Interesting. It is a tool, and a good learning tool, at that too. It could make workflow way faster, specially, I assume, if you are making some complicated BGs... As a tool for industrial process and making of art, it is amazing, and I would heavily say YES, GO FOR IT, use it. But, as way of making art, per se, well, I'd only use it as a tool to learn, or see a "second opinion" of how "someone else" would colour your art.
Call me an idealist, but part of creating art, not as an industrial process, but as a way of expression --not saying that industrially made art can't be expressive, but I can see how deadlines can hamper expression in lieu of fastness-- is that each stroke and choice of colour is the artist putting in the canvas --digital or not-- their discipline, knowledge, as well as personal preference, built from their experiences and learning.
Of course, I'm not an artist, so I'm talking outta my ass.
π: 0 β©: 0
unbelievable!
i wasn't even aware of this.
yeah to some degree you may consider this cheating
but if you let others know you used the program then perhaps it's not cheating.
i just tried use it and it's not working.
(correction now it is working)
π: 0 β©: 0
I don't think your analogy is proper in this case.
When botting the bot does all the work.
In this case the artist still has to create a good, shaded, lineart for the tool to be useful.
A better analogy might be is "Is it cheating for a musician to use AutoTune?"
π: 0 β©: 0
if you credit the tool and don't say you coloured it when you didn't, then it should be fine.
π: 0 β©: 0
it's a tool. cheating means you took credit for work you didn't do. if the program did the work for you, you aren't cheating using it if you disclose use. It's more of a hack instead of a cheat, but with the medium this program is no different than the guys who invented different paints for traditional use. As the media's evolve, so do the tools.
π: 0 β©: 0
<= Prev | | Next =>