Should You Use AI Images?

[freshpeppermint]

So I just checked out jasper came out with Jasper Art. Do you guys think this is worth buying? I got an email on it. 20$ is pretty good, maybe you can use this for blog posts? You think google can detect if its AI generated or nah?

So you just type in a text and it will literally create an image based on what you type. (I am not a shill, I was big into jasper AI but my sites hit, clearly garbage but this looks good.)

 

[Potatoe]

I'm not sure why Google would care how the image was generated or if it matters that they can tell.

Maybe you could generate a handful of images using this app and then try doing a reverse image search and see if Google is pulling up the original images that your version is based on. It's not conclusive, but it would give you a clue as to whether Google could care at some point, but I'm not sure why they would care.

"Should you" do it really depends on what you're trying to accomplish, y'know?

If you feel like eating an egg sandwich, should you use AI images? No, you should use eggs and bread.

If you want illustrations on your website and you don't want to commission them or draw them yourself or use stock sites, then this is probably your best bet.

Not sure what any drawbacks would be, but for the sake of tossing out something to think about for down the road...

I don't know a ton about how these work but I imagine they're using some set of images as a reference to create these AI images, so I don't know how the artist's or original creators ownership rights would work in those cases or if they've been licensed by Jarvis or what, but I imagine we're a long ways away from that even being a relevant issue, if ever.

If some of the outputs are pretty close to the originals, but with a faceswap/filter applied, is that enough for fair use? I have no clue, but that's the only potential hiccup I could think of. But it's on the other side of the spectrum as, say, using Getty images unlicensed in terms of how concerned I'd be to use AI images. It's also possible they fed it a bunch of Getty images to train it, who knows. I've heard that these things are still many years out from being able to create totally unique and new images on their own, but I guess it just comes down to what your goals are and what problem this is solving for you.

But yeah, if you like the way the images turn out, this seems like it should be fine to use.

 

[Steptoe]

If your site suits 'arty' or creative images then I'd say AI generated images would work well. If you want some unique photos involving humans or animals for your site about say nursing homes or dog training then I wouldn't recommend them - the images AI spews out are just too alien and disturbing to appeal to anyone.

 

[convbelt]

That's mad funny though.

 

[freshpeppermint]

If your site suits 'arty' or creative images then I'd say AI generated images would work well. If you want some unique photos involving humans or animals for your site about say nursing homes or dog training then I wouldn't recommend them - the images AI spews out are just too alien and disturbing to appeal to anyone.

is this jasper art ai? or some other software? I legit thought this would be a great breakthrough.

 

[bernard]

You shall not make depictions of the Machine Lord.

 

[Steptoe]

is this jasper art ai? or some other software? I legit thought this would be a great breakthrough.

It's generated by Dall-E, which is the little brother of what Jasper uses. Jasper still retains the issues of really fucked up facial features if you try to generate anything non 'arty'

 

[freshpeppermint]

It's generated by Dall-E, which is the little brother of what Jasper uses. Jasper still retains the issues of really fucked up facial features if you try to generate anything non 'arty'

Oh, I thought this would be like a breakthrough for the majority of niche sites, no need for stock images. But guess this is useless