Alpaca – Stable Diffusion Plugin for Photoshop

https://www.getalpaca.io/

by t0bia_s • 4 years ago

87 62 4 years ago

t0bia_s6• 4 years ago

Combining Human skill and AI generative power

9dev• 4 years ago

While the video someone linked here looks incredible, the website has information density around 0. It’s a little annoying to having to research something instead of just reading about it on the project website.

I understand you’re in a private beta, but a demo video, some example images, and a little bit of descriptive text would do wonders in improving the website.

bovermyer• 4 years ago

Looking at this, I'm not sure what it does. Something with AI. The image makes me think it's maybe layering results from a DALL-E like AI?

ChildOfChaos• 4 years ago

Yes, Stable diffusion is an open source AI image generator that runs on your own hardware.

mpaepper• 4 years ago

Check here for details about stable diffusion: https://www.paepper.com/blog/posts/how-and-why-stable-diffus...

PankajGhosh• 4 years ago

Possible name collission. “alpaca” is a ycombinator backed startup: https://www.ycombinator.com/companies/alpaca

quantumduck• 4 years ago

It's also a popular meta-learning algorithm: ALPaCA: https://arxiv.org/abs/1807.08912

Well no one cares unless one of the parties has enough money and interest to hire a lawyer.

bee_rider3• 4 years ago

I wonder if that actually is close enough to have a case.

eis3• 4 years ago

Possible name collision: "alpaca" is an animal: https://www.getalpaca.io/_next/static/media/logo.30fd61b8.pn... :)

simonw• 4 years ago

There's a video demo of this Photoshop plugin here: https://old.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/wyduk1/sho...

ofrzeta• 4 years ago

In that dialog box there's a text field with "modifiers" one if which is called "studio ghibli". I guess that makes for some interesting copyright considerations.

navjack272• 4 years ago

I mean does studio Ghibli own the concept of the style of their art?

optimalsolver• 4 years ago

It's funny because art was the activity humans were supposed to be engaged in after AI took over the work we didn't want to do, but it looks like it will be one of the first things to fall to the machines.

t0bia_s6• 4 years ago

You confusing art with images. Art is more deep than just digital generated image.

Do you thing that AI generated images will be bough by collectors or published in art galleries?

m00dy2• 4 years ago

why not ?

dougabug11• 4 years ago

It depends on who made it, and why.

spaceman_2020• 4 years ago

One of the biggest categories of digital art at the moment is algorithmically generated art.

Of course, the “artist” wrote the algorithm, but I can easily imagine an AI putting together something similar.

wds• 4 years ago

Not to give credence to this space, but NFT art shows presenting Pixel Chill Monkey #9491 made with a coked-out doll dress-up game is a seemingly much lower bar

masswerk• 4 years ago

Get ready for all artwork being of one of a few standard styles.

superzamp• 4 years ago

Well if you can't tell, does it matter?

green_on_black• 4 years ago

I disagree. I believe that art is eternal, but we still fail to grasp what it means. I don't think art is limited to pretty pictures and poetic prose. For example, if a human laboriously produces a work that they could have simply asked an AI to produce, isn't that starkly superfluous? To me, a performance art.

dougabug11• 4 years ago

But graphics, design, and special effects were some of the first areas heavily influenced by digital technology, so it’s not super surprising that AI is showing early signs of future impact in the visual arts.

It’s becoming pretty clear that some people are much better at harnessing these emerging tools than others. Some people are already billing themselves as “AI artists,” and I predict that many will find success in this new art form.

t0bia_s6• 4 years ago

"AI artist" probably wouldn't be hired for specific tasks.

quadcore4• 4 years ago

Parent is principal AI scientist (Id say a $1M+ per year position), his net worth (in billions) is very likely function of the success of these tech.

It’s becoming pretty clear that some people are much better at harnessing these emerging tools than others. Some people are already billing themselves as “AI artists,”

This is evil bullshit. Whatever creativity or value rather an artist creates with these "tools" will be sucked out by the AI directly from the photoshop canvas and recycled the next day except the artist wont be necessary this time.

and I predict that many will find success in this new art form.

Until the pupil has surpassed its many masters obviously.

At which point Parent will be on Mars.

bee_rider3• 4 years ago

Painters had to change their business model when photography was invented, but they didn't vanish completely.

awfulneutral5• 4 years ago

But at least photography created new roles for photographers. AI art promises to replace many creative roles for humans entirely, without creating any new roles.

Melatonic• 4 years ago

Not at all - this is just another tool that artists will use.

t0bia_s6• 4 years ago

Agree. For me, as not very skilled artist (but still able to make living by creating art) it opening new layer to creative process. I can spend more time by thinking about content than just drawing or spending hours for researching specific images.

awfulneutral5• 4 years ago

You might be right (at least until the AI improves a bit), but even so it promises to make artists more productive to the point that we will need far fewer of them. Unless we are able to scale up the amount of art we need by a huge amount.

dvfjsdhgfv• 4 years ago

It's not that simple. The current generation wave of so called "AI tools" such as GPT-, DALL-E and the rest generate fantastic results because* someone did the enormous work of scraping a huge amount of someone else's work (texts, images). Of course you'd argue humans do the same: they absorb a huge number of inputs and generate content based on that. However, there is something else in automated solutions like this one that places tools like Copilot on the verge of more or less sophisticated plagiarism. And when you look closer at the images, you discover oddities just like in the faces of AI-generated people.

Real art, on the other hand, is all about innovation and exploration. That's one of the reasons there are fewer and fewer traditional paintings in modern art museums. The current generation of AI is still very much a copycat, not a creator. I believe this might change, but we'd need a complete paradigm shift for that - ML is almost useless as the core of such solution, as much as generative art algorithms.

navjack272• 4 years ago

Seems like humans are still actively engaged in it. Just place a color blob here and a different color blob here assign those color blobs with different tasks and tell the AI to fill in those blobs with different descriptions.

tomalaci• 4 years ago

I knew that eventually Photoshop would get some plugins utilizing AI image generation but I never expected it to happen this quick. From a brief glance at the demo (see reddit link from simonw) it seems to be of decent quality as well.

According to the reddit comment by alpacaAI the plugin uses cloud/hosted solution, however [1]. Locally-powered generation to be added as a feature later it seems.

[1] https://old.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/wyduk1/sho...

Still, pretty amazing (or terrifying for some) at how quickly we are advancing with this diffusion-based tech. I wonder what is going to be the next big AI method for creative-work generation?

RunSet• 4 years ago

Gee, I always wanted to register for a product launch.

marosgrego• 4 years ago

GIMP plugin when?

lucidrains• 4 years ago

already done https://twitter.com/nousr_/status/1563912133120647168

Escapado• 4 years ago

This is a smart move and goes to show people move so quick on this. I wonder how long before these models overtake stock image websites, get used in games or video production, generate T-shirt prints and whatever other usecase people can come up with.

On that note: Iirc back when I learned about GANs, when they were still rather new there was a clear path towards improvements of them by making the model bigger and feed it _much_ more high quality training data. When I look at the outputs of stable diffusion or Dall-E there are still often visible artifacts and most prominently faces are often weird. Is there a clear path towards improvement here aswell or are we hitting a wall with the "just more" paradigm somewhen?

dougabug11• 4 years ago

GANs have a key (learned) loss called a discriminator which tells it whether or not the generated output looks real or not. GANs took many years of research to get to the point where they could get to the point where they could generate realistic, full sized images. Progress in diffusion models has been much faster.

But you can add additional guidance to diffusion models, for instance, (possibly pre-trained) discriminative models which detect if certain objects classes such as faces look abnormal or malformed. We’re still quite early in the evolution of this family of models.

bee_rider3• 4 years ago

When my friends and I play D&D, usually the host will quickly sketch maps on the fly (just, like, a floorplan or something). This tool seems like 1-2 iterations off from being perfect for that sort of thing.

in3d• 4 years ago

Some Stable Diffusion repos are already using an additional specialized model that fixes faces.

Krasnol• 4 years ago

I wonder how long it will take to get those algorithms to generate hearable music.

Alpaca – Stable Diffusion Plugin for Photoshop

Related Stories