Tantabus
Filters (Default) SettingsRegisterLogin
Rules Update - For a short summary on changes, check Here
Welcome! Please check this thread

"prompter:" should change to "artist:"

Tagging Discussion » "prompter:" should change to "artist:" Search Posts
Started by IWTCIPP
Posted
46 replies
Subscribe
Zerowinger

3-3/4" Army Man Fan
I disagree. Besides the fact that it would be odd and confusing (especially when Derpi will be keeping the prompter tag), I don’t consider myself an artist. I’m just a guy playing around with a program for fun.
Posted Report
Edited
CappyAdams

I exist
@IWTCIPP
Not trying to start drama or anything, but prompters aren’t the same as actual artists.
a prompter calling themselves an artist when all they really do is type prompts is quite disrespectful to human artists.
but that’s just my opinion
Posted Report
Background Pony #36E1
Hard “no”. This would just pollute the tag for images that are on both boorus. Artists are for the people who make it by hand. I’ve burned away hours prompting and it’s just an iteration factory, not like an artist.
Posted Report
Lord Waite

I’d tend more towards “creator” myself, as well, if we were going to change it from “prompter”. I’d prefer to keep the two distinct, because, for example, if I drew a picture of a pony, then generated the background behind them by ai, I would both be the artist and the creator. And if it was a collaboration, where someone else drew the character, I could tag them as the artist and myself as the creator.
I’d also suggest, since this is an ai site, that at least one of the ai tags be required when uploading, the same way that you are required to rate the picture as safe, questionable, or explicit.
Posted Report
Siber

Nah. Artistry =\= prompting. Both creating art traditionally and by prompting are creative processes, but they’re different processes.
Posted Report
LemonDrop

I agree, creating art makes you an artist, and the act of guiding an AI to refine an image into something that matches your vision is the same creative process to any other artform.
Just because it’s “easy” to prompt things by comparison to the tedium of drawn digital art does not mean you’re not an artist, and saying otherwise is just a narrative the anti-AI crowd has spun to diminish people’s work and disrespect the AI artists. It’d be like saying digital artists aren’t artists because it’s a far easier process than that of traditional artwork on canvas with oil paints (no undo, no layering, no fancy effects or infinite brush shapes). This is especially true for more involved AI artwork where inpainting and other touchups are done in post via Photoshop or whatever, it’s hardly solely just “prompting” in that instance.
Course I can somewhat understand concerns over tagging confusion and etc, and to be fair also other areas of art have their own terms, e.g. photographer, cinematographer, game developer, but they all are under the “artist” umbrella if you want a general term. No (non-disparaging) specific term really exists for those who leverage AI heavily yet given it’s such a new medium other than like “AI artist” which specifies the medium a bit more specifically similar to “traditional artist” or “digital artist”, but these are just simplified just to “artist” in terms of tagging on Derpi at least.
“Creator” may be a fair compromise but I still feel like it’s a bit silly to downplay the artistry involved. As the OP said, this is an AI-specific site, so while a blind import of tags may be a bit confusing, in practice one would understand that the “artist” term on this site is contextually referring to AI artists specifically and transform the tags if needed to whatever convention exists on other sites (e.g. if importing from here to Derpi one would replace artist: with prompter: and add ai content or whatever as in theory that tag wouldn’t be needed here).
All that considered I think I still lean more towards “artist” than “creator”, but either is better than “prompter” which might as well be an insult in a place like this.
Delly

Administrator
Certified Blueberry
Comparing traditional artistry with prompting is offending everyone, who has spend countless years mastering the art of drawing.
The two are nowhere near on the same level, or at least the kind of prompting that this site is intended for isn’t (As actual art with only some smaller parts being done by AI is still welcome on Derpibooru)
Therefore, the prefix will not be changing. Learn to actually draw if you want to be an artist.
Posted Report
Annalee

Moderator
Adjutant
@Delly
also, on this site, the term artist has a specific meaning under rule #1: it’s for people who make original works that are copyright-protected. calling prompters “artists” could make things confusing and mess with how that rule applies.
Posted Report
Teaspoon

@LemonDrop
All that considered I think I still lean more towards “artist” than “creator”, but either is better than “prompter” which might as well be an insult in a place like this.
I don’t know if you have, but I’d suggest perusing civitAI; there are accounts with 12k images made in just a few months, practically 90% of their images are definitely horrible. I’d certainly not think anyone slapping in 12 words (optimistically) into the prompt box, not changing default settings, and hitting “Generate Forever” to churn out 250 images in an hour and do no editing or curation at all on them deserves to be called an artist.
Purely outside of the pedantry of what is and isn’t “art”, it’d be an organizational nightmare to separate out the people that do put some work and effort into their creations.
Lord Waite

@Teaspoon
Probably worth noting that civitai is running daily contests right now that give you 400 of their on-site currency, buzz, if you submit 20 images using the lora provided. It’s very much encouraging people to spam out 20 low quality images a day.
Posted Report
Zerowinger

3-3/4" Army Man Fan
@Lord Waite
So the contest is based on the output quantity, not the quality or popularity? (Daily theme contests on NightCafe are based on popular vote, with only one submission per person)
Posted Report
LemonDrop

@Delly
Weird, last time I checked you can be an artist the moment your pencil touches the paper without “years of mastery”. Guess you don’t think very highly of most artists. Imagine telling all the people on Derpi who have only been drawing for a few months “yeah you don’t have countless years of mastery so uhhh you don’t get an artist tag”, just insane lol.
Also I find it amusing that people’s standards are essentially requiring 10+ years of AI art experience on their resume to apply to the “artist” job when this sort of generative AI has only been a thing for 2-3 years now.
@Heat Sink
Appeal to popularity is not a valid argument.
@Annalee
Correct, that rule is outdated and carried over from Derpi and should be removed which kills two birds with one stone. The only reason that rule existed was a “peaceful coexistence” compromise with having both types of artists on the same site. This is a site for AI art specifically now though so caring about what existing digital artists think is no longer a concern as they will not be uploading here anyways.
@Teaspoon
Well I do think they deserve that title because that’s technically what art is. I never claimed it was good art, it’s dogshit art. A lot of art on Derpi is dogshit too though if you haven’t noticed, but that’s ok because learning is a slow process.
Derpi always has been more of an art collective and not a “curated art” site with a quality bar like something such as e621 is, so literally anyone who scribbles on a piece of paper is considered an artist with just as much effort as it takes to generate a low quality image via AI.
Anyways to me that seems like something solvable by just providing upload limitations to discourage quantity over quality at least to have some bare minimum standards in what is being produced. Not really the end of the world and not really an argument against why people using AI aren’t artists.
Zealousmagician

So how about for AI composition images? There’s a large degree of intentionality in the changes involved in those images that clearly result in a fully realised vision that was being worked towards from the initial generation (or perhaps even before that). Is such a process not deserving of being called a form of art itself? Would you say that with everything I- for example- have made, I’m only an editor and could not be considered an artist in any fashion?
The AI composition tag on Derpibooru asks that the editor tag be used instead of the artist tag, and I don’t think it should, at the very least not here.
Posted Report
Admin

Administrator
@LemonDrop
medium
I typed in “pony” and pressed shift-enter. Default model settings, touched nothing else, you can check the chunk. Does that deserve an “artist” tag for me?
I’d say “no”. And frankly neither do Jackson Pollock or whoever taped a banana to a wall deserve to be called “artist”. If we go by some “anything can be art” or whatever definition then the term “artist” has absolutely no meaning at all and thus there’s no reason to want to have it in the first place. Outside of some revanchist sentiment, I guess.
So no, I’d very much like to keep terms like artist or editor or whatever else reserved for people that put more effort into what they create than the average tagger/uploader puts in when typing into an image’s tag box.
  1. “But derpi calls anyone that puts any two lines together an artist!”
  • Yes and I hate that, but it was inherited from ponibooru and socially enforced thanks to hacks like Christopher Wool or Damien Hirst. If I could have changed it without starting WW3 I would have.
  1. “Why not call people that do ai composition artists, then?”
  • Ideally we will, both here and on derpi. Right now, what we’re seeing is what we expected: a lot of people going through their old raw gens and retagging them from ai generated to ai composition, either to “save” them, or out of spite for the new policy / the site. We’ll revisit the topic once those shenanigans are over.
  1. “You just hate AI and this place is set up just to honeypot AI users to pariah them and then shut the place down!”
  • No. I want this place to succeed, and I want people to use AI to create beautiful and amazing things. But what’s been going on in derpi, and elsewhere on the internet, really isn’t leading towards that. For every 1 person that starts putting some work and talent in, that curate or edit what they share, and produces a good looking image… another 9 pop up that type in something like “sally acorn huge boobs large ass hot sexy”, batch of 20, and upload them all regardless of all the horrific flaws and artifacts.
  • Allowing, or even promoting the latter is one of the big reasons AI is looked down on by so many, and it’s what’s keeping the space from flourishing. Sites are flooded with low quality images and it drowns out those that put in the effort, or make it seem like they just got a lucky RNG. A lot of people could have been spending the last two years learning new skills and working on how to improve their art but instead sat waiting for some next model release or technological advancement to fix the issues for them.
  • So yeah, I actually do want to get to the point where people aren’t looked down on for having made something with AI, and I don’t believe the “laissez-faire” policy many appear to want will ever get us there.
AIPonyAnon

@Admin
Prompter seems like the more pragmatic and descriptive choice when talking about the person who prompted for the image, which seems to me the better choice for a tagging system. Within the context of the tagging system, worrying about the definition of art and artist seems like a good way to waste a lot of time.
However, using prompter would imply the use of separate tags for the same person doing a basic sketch, generation, and inpainting, which seems like a good way to add excessive noise to the tags. As others have suggested, creator might be a decent compromise, as it’s a lot less philosophically charged than artist.
Individual tags for prompting, inpainting/editing, and arting (in the derpi sense) could be used in situations in which multiple people are collaborating. The correct tag for arting might bring the whole discussion up again, so perhaps bikeshedding about it is inevitable.
Posted Report
Annalee

Moderator
Adjutant
I’m honestly all for sticking with ‘creator’ when we’re assigning a title in a tag—like we already do in User Links. And keeping ‘artist’ just for how it’s used in Takedowns and Rules. Maybe it’s selfish, but it lowkey makes things way easier when handling image reports. That way, when someone says ‘artist,’ I know it’s about Rule #1 and not something I actually want to do, like helping someone set up their tag here.
I honestly don’t care what people call themselves, as long as when someone says ‘artist,’ it’s clear they’re talking about what that means in Rule #1.
My one caveat would be if the site ever decides to extend copyright protections to some AI art—like how Derpi uses ai assisted or their new ai composition tag. Still waiting to see how that all shakes out with ‘artist’ tags. Maybe things will be clearer by January.
It feels like a distraction right now. I’d rather not deal with it and just hope we don’t end up with a tag that’s baked into the rules that gives it a meaning, or accidentally makes people think they have rights they don’t actually have, that we will have to deal with later.
@Admin
I trust you to find the right balance, and make it make sense.
I’m gonna ghost this thread now since this isn’t my bikeshed, and I’ve talked about it enough. As long as the rules and tags are in sync, it’s all good.
Edit Preview
Syntax quick reference: **bold** *italic* ||hide text|| `code` __underline__ ~~strike~~ ^sup^ ~sub~

Detailed syntax guide