Anyone need anyone shrunk?

[Queen Skadi]

Basically just looking for good images for photoshop practice.

Obviously you either need to have permission of the person in the photo or be the person in the photo, nothing underage and try to keep it fairly tasteful, obviously the better quality and clearer the image the better.

Not just doing shrunken ladies, also do giant/giantess and shrunken guys as well as any other suggestions you might have, can't make any promises so please don't be offended if I can't do anything with your picture but I am willing to give things a shot depending on the request.

Gallery of my current works can be found here.

https://www.deviantart.com/queen-skadi/gallery

[Sumguy14]

boop

[Sumguy14]

boop

[Queen Skadi]

Would rather not use random google images, I would feel much more comfortable if I knew you had the consent to use those pics

[Underscore]

We can always use more SW images of Cosplayers if its something that interests you? Hane Ame, Hana Bunny, Hidori Rose, Mikomi Hokina, Gumiho Hannya, Bishojo Mom, Erin Eevee, Caticorn Play, Usatame, Valery Himera, Yaya Han, Stella Chuu, Meg Turney.

We also need more E-girl content so Belle Delphine, Rusty Fawkes, Runabyte,
Emma Langevin
Eve Frsr
Hannah OwO
Light Collins
Maya Zaya
Nava Rose
Neekolul
Pokimane
Rary Kari
Xpher Wolf

I'm sure LeopoldKai09 would have some others to add I've missed. She many good Cosplayers out there ripe for some SW content/handhelds

[Queen Skadi]

Depends on whether or not those cosplayers and e-girls allow their photos to be edited re-uploaded, prefer not to use images unless the author has explicitly stated that they are ok with their photos being used as stock in collages.

[Prof Sai]

Then you'll probably never be doing any photoshop practice. Getting that kind of permission would be more work than doing the collage.

[DocRick]

Then you'll probably never be doing any photoshop practice. Getting that kind of permission would be more work than doing the collage.

As long as you are not profiting and acknowledge you don't own the photos or give the source of the photos, I don't believe you are violating any copyrights. Look how many fake nude celebrity photos are out there. If it was illegal, I think they would be banned.

[Prof Sai]

There are some lines, like nudity of non-actors, but if someone gets paid for their looks, I think it is okay.

[Queen Skadi]

Then you'll probably never be doing any photoshop practice. Getting that kind of permission would be more work than doing the collage.

As long as you are not profiting and acknowledge you don't own the photos or give the source of the photos, I don't believe you are violating any copyrights. Look how many fake nude celebrity photos are out there. If it was illegal, I think they would be banned.

I think it is probably more that it is almost impossible to crack down on, lots of accounts that fall through the cracks and the images are posted on sites located in countries outside of legal jurisdiction

[Queen Skadi]

Then you'll probably never be doing any photoshop practice. Getting that kind of permission would be more work than doing the collage.

There are deviantart accounts that allow you to use their images as stock provided you give them credit, they usually post a stock rules section on their account or under the picture they upload.

I know many people do use cosplayers and celebs in their photo edits and they usually get away with it as honestly it is pretty hard to crack down on but I just don't feel comfortable using people's pictures unless they say they are ok with them being used as stock.

[Little Sally]

Then you'll probably never be doing any photoshop practice. Getting that kind of permission would be more work than doing the collage.

There are deviantart accounts that allow you to use their images as stock provided you give them credit, they usually post a stock rules section on their account or under the picture they upload.

I know many people do use cosplayers and celebs in their photo edits and they usually get away with it as honestly it is pretty hard to crack down on but I just don't feel comfortable using people's pictures unless they say they are ok with them being used as stock.

As you say, you're absolutely fine using stock providers off DA providing you give credit and show them the results. When more often than not they'll "fave" what you've done with them and leave a comment. Saying that, I have used a cosplayer or two in the past who I haven't asked permission of (or have had the stock and forgotten where I got it), and have never had any comebacks from it. I think if you're respectful of the person's image and don't place them in porny scenarios (as some do), then I think you'll be ok.

I'd say you've got to be a bit more careful with "celebs" though. And while the chances of them seeing what you've done might be remote, I think it's even more important not to place them in dodgy scenarios (yeah, that porny thing again). Being respectful is the best guideline I reckon.

Such as, not doing topless versions of Valerie and Betty from LOTG (using AI), which someone posted on here recently. Which I personally thought was a bit disrespectful, especially as Deanna is no longer with us.

[Prof Sai]

I just don't feel comfortable using people's pictures unless they say they are ok with them being used as stock.

You know, this is a good reason to start with AI pics, as I do now. Set them to be slightly cartoonish, and there are no worries about anyone thinking that they are being manipulated or used.

[Bobascher]

Then you'll probably never be doing any photoshop practice. Getting that kind of permission would be more work than doing the collage.

As long as you are not profiting and acknowledge you don't own the photos or give the source of the photos, I don't believe you are violating any copyrights. Look how many fake nude celebrity photos are out there. If it was illegal, I think they would be banned.

They are banned. It’s is called involuntary pornography…

https://legalvoice.org/nonconsensual-pornography/

[Bobascher]

I just don't feel comfortable using people's pictures unless they say they are ok with them being used as stock.

You know, this is a good reason to start with AI pics, as I do now. Set them to be slightly cartoonish, and there are no worries about anyone thinking that they are being manipulated or used.

Perhaps remote but there is a non-zero chance someone can sue over copyright infringement due to similarities to their prior art if the bot trained on it. That is uncharted legal waters.

What isn’t uncharted is that ai art is not copyrightable as it is created by a non-humanoid object. https://www.creedon.com/blog/2022/3/22/ ... 0Copyright

You may be able to claim copyright over your specific prompt, but these are normally not nuanced or transformative so perhaps not even then.

[DocRick]

[
They are banned. It’s is called involuntary pornography…

https://legalvoice.org/nonconsensual-pornography/

Google any celebrity and "nude" or "naked" and you'll find fake nudes. Even in the 1970's someone took Farah Fawcett's iconic red swimsuit poster and airbrushed her nude and it showed up in magazines. (The Net wasn't around then) It's everywhere and if someone wanted to go after those doing it, they would need an army of computer geeks and lawyers to track them down. Besides, I doubt any celebrity even knows this forum exists !!!

[Prof Sai]

Perhaps remote but there is a non-zero chance someone can sue over copyright infringement due to similarities to their prior art if the bot trained on it. That is uncharted legal waters.

Not a chance. If the AI was recognizably reproducing existing works, the internet would be packed with examples of it by now.

What isn’t uncharted is that ai art is not copyrightable as it is created by a non-humanoid object.

Common sense usually prevails in time. Cameras and paint brushes are non-human objects. They can create art. (If you stubbornly refuse to acknowledge the human effort involved.) If a baby had taken the same kind of photo that that monkey did, that would qualify as copyrightable art, despite zero intentional effort. So what exactly earns copyright?

They are banned. It’s is called involuntary pornography…

I'm fine with that. I think the intention of that law is for someone making fake revenge porn, and showing it to the victims acquaintances in order to humiliate her.

[Bobascher]

[
They are banned. It’s is called involuntary pornography…

https://legalvoice.org/nonconsensual-pornography/

Google any celebrity and "nude" or "naked" and you'll find fake nudes. Even in the 1970's someone took Farah Fawcett's iconic red swimsuit poster and airbrushed her nude and it showed up in magazines. (The Net wasn't around then) It's everywhere and if someone wanted to go after those doing it, they would need an army of computer geeks and lawyers to track them down. Besides, I doubt any celebrity even knows this forum exists !!!

They don’t because the legal process is expensive. So if you keep below the radar you are probably going to not be pursued. That said, I can guarantee these are 100% people. Just because they are attractive doesn’t make their desires for privacy and body autonomy any less valuable. What if you found your own picture converted into nudes and posted online for others edification?

[Bobascher]

Not a chance. If the AI was recognizably reproducing existing works, the internet would be packed with examples of it by now.

Clearly if the tech was just a copier it wouldn’t be very good. Hank Green did a video a little while back and just asked for an Afghani woman in a green dress and it gave him a mirror image of the iconic blue eyed Aghani girl photo. Though yes, the common argument used by the proponents is that the work is “inspired” and copyrights don’t apply to genres and at some point all work is inspired by someone else’s. Time will tell if the courts accept that argument.

Common sense usually prevails in time. Cameras and paint brushes are non-human objects. They can create art. (If you stubbornly refuse to acknowledge the human effort involved.) If a baby had taken the same kind of photo that that monkey did, that would qualify as copyrightable art, despite zero intentional effort. So what exactly earns copyright?

Clearly copyright is a case by case determination. I think we’ll eventually find a sliding scale of human interaction will be applied to this determination. Using an AI editor to overlay effects and art styles onto a piece that one creates, like an autotune, will probably be acceptable but I doubt that text to image generators will ever be found robust enough from a protections perspective. The text to image generators are akin to making a request at a 5 star restaurant- that food will be art, but the customer is not the artist.

I'm fine with that. I think the intention of that law is for someone making fake revenge porn, and showing it to the victims acquaintances in order to humiliate her.

True, defamation is the genesis. As I mention above, justice is expensive and won’t be pursued by celebrities typically due the quantity of harassment they get. Does an unprosecured crime make it ok?

[Prof Sai]

Though yes, the common argument used by the proponents is that the work is “inspired” and copyrights don’t apply to genres and at some point all work is inspired by someone else’s. Time will tell if the courts accept that argument.

That argument is far older than AI.

I doubt that text to image generators will ever be found robust enough from a protections perspective. The text to image generators are akin to making a request at a 5 star restaurant- that food will be art, but the customer is not the artist.

I suspect you've never used one then. A five star restaurant will often get your order right first try. AI can take a hundred tries, and a thesaurus to get what you want. It took me months between first downloading DiffusionBee and getting my first useful images. (I'd given up for a while, and then found new info.)

Does an unprosecured crime make it ok?

Another reason that such art is overlooked is that it would make powerful corporations look bad to be prosecuting kids in basements.

[Prof Sai]

"Afghani woman in a green dress"


First try.
In the video, did they show how many times they attempted it and what the other prompts and settings were? Did they show the whole prompt, or the negative prompts?

[Bobascher]

Yes I do use text to image generators


But the level of effort is no where near the effort required to make even the simplist of photo edits. As these algorithms continue to evolve, the level of effort will continue to go down.

I have actually used a text to image generator once to create stock for a later photo edit I made.

I’m not knocking the technology, nor I am trying to gatekeep what an artist is, but Picard asking a replicator for Earl Grey tea does not make him a master chef.

[Little Sally]

Yes I do use text to image generators

(image)

But the level of effort is no where near the effort required to make even the simplist of photo edits. As these algorithms continue to evolve, the level of effort will continue to go down.

Exactly. Till we reach the stage where we're all doing it and it becomes tedious. Given time, it'll be as easy as turning on the TV (though possibly more like kiddie TV until the nerds find a way around the censorship issues).

I’m not knocking the technology, nor I am trying to gatekeep what an artist is, but Picard asking a replicator for Earl Grey tea does not make him a master chef.

I suppose it depends on how we decide to define what an artist is. To me it's like asking a computer program to do an art commision, because you haven't got the ability to do it yourself. And when the darn program doesn't get it right first time, you have to keep poking it until does (of course a "real" artist would just tell you to p*ss off and do it yourself, but AI wouldn't be rude like that lol!).

Maybe the art challenge will be.. who can do the best text prompt for a really cool pic? (without being told you're a naughty person!).
I notice advice is already being sought about that on some threads!

Btw, Yorkshire Tea is where it's at Bob!

[Prof Sai]

Yes I do use text to image generators

But the level of effort is no where near the effort required to make even the simplist of photo edits.

Maybe I'm doing it wrong then.

[Bobascher]

Btw, Yorkshire Tea is where it's at Bob!

Hell yes it is! Some gold and milk is like bread pudding Red with lemon juice is perfection

I saw an interview and Patrick Stewart said Yorkshire is his favorite in real life:)