[HN Gopher] Show HN: AI Generated SVG's
___________________________________________________________________
Show HN: AI Generated SVG's
Author : tm11zz
Score : 104 points
Date : 2023-11-24 17:43 UTC (5 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (vectorart.ai)
(TXT) w3m dump (vectorart.ai)
| nojs wrote:
| Look cool but would be good to try without signing up
| tm11zz wrote:
| That's the dream, unfortunately with the costs attached it
| isn't currently possible.
| cseleborg wrote:
| Cool service! This, though, may prove to be a weakness of
| your business model. Having to sign up creates friction (I
| won't), which may lose you potential paying customers. What
| else could you be doing to give people a real feel for how
| well this works? Maybe a gallery of prompts and the
| respective results?
| fernandopj wrote:
| When I click to see an imagem from the gallery, it looks like it
| loaded but then a blank screen appears instead, after what looks
| like a refresh. Tried on Chrome and Firefox.
| samsquire wrote:
| This happened to me, maybe it's a bug?
| tm11zz wrote:
| Fixed, thanks for reporting.
| petercooper wrote:
| Not free, of course, but when I loaded Adobe Illustrator for the
| first time in a while the other day I noticed it had gained a
| feature where it can generatively add elements to vector
| illustrations. It worked very well in my casual playing around
| and maintained the style of the existing image too.
| dsmmcken wrote:
| Demo of this feature from the most recent Adobe Max conference:
| https://www.youtube.com/live/1tbrJNP5Cjk?si=tZegLn1-kXE1axDq...
|
| The style transfer is really impressive (watch past the
| underwhelming first example of the airplane).
| petercooper wrote:
| Thanks, I was travelling at the time and completely missed
| all of this!
| tasty_freeze wrote:
| Are these generated by doing normal text to (pixel) image
| generation, then doing a raster to svg conversion? Or are LLM
| models actually capable of generating SVG directly?
|
| I can imagine that working for simple things: make a red circle
| with a blue line under it, because there are many simple examples
| on the web.
|
| But generating complex SVGs directly from text seems like it
| wouldn't work at all. The examples on their home page are well
| into the "too complex to generate by piecing together bits of svg
| examples seen during training."
| bigyikes wrote:
| Definitely raster to svg conversion. The giveaway (besides
| complex SVG generation being too difficult, as you say) is the
| splotchiness of the images, since the vectorization doesn't
| work super well with gradients.
| minimaxir wrote:
| You can prompt ChatGPT to generate SVGs. It unsurprisingly
| doesn't work well.
|
| I once asked it to create a SVG of Earth and it create a green
| ellipse on top of a blue circle.
| mewpmewp2 wrote:
| Maybe it knows earth is flat after all?
| Zetobal wrote:
| Yes, if you look at the paths it's rather obvious.
| krebby wrote:
| Yeah unfortunately differentiable SVG rendering is still
| something that is very difficult to accomplish with diffusion
| models. I looked into this last year and found VectorFusion
| [0][1], which appears to be using a similar technique to this
| app - generate the raster image and then apply a vectorization
| tracer. This leads to the blobbiness you see, given the way the
| diffusion model generates the image and the tracer applies to
| the output.
|
| There have been a few attempts (i.e. this recent one [2][3]) to
| attempt to fine-tune the parameters of the SVG with image
| segmentation, before comparing rendered outputs with a CLIP
| model. This is promising but the search space for vector images
| is just so huge that so far you really need to start with an
| existing image as a basis rather than starting from scratch.
| Interesting area of research!
|
| 0. https://ajayj.com/vectorfusion/ 1.
| https://arxiv.org/abs/2211.11319 2.
| https://intchous.github.io/SVGCustomization/ 3.
| https://arxiv.org/abs/2309.12302
| kevincox wrote:
| Strange that the free tier has no documented limits. I always
| like it when I can see what I am working with, especially when
| refining an image will eat into that number.
| jzebedee wrote:
| Seems to be hugged to death. Any sign-ups just give me "Email
| rate limit exceeded".
| tm11zz wrote:
| Should be fixed now!
| Zetobal wrote:
| The best pixel to vector is still vectormagic. They are on it
| since at least 2009 and have a native desktop app. I am not
| affiliated but just a bit flabbergasted that they are still so
| far ahead.
|
| https://vectormagic.com/
| jokethrowaway wrote:
| Have you tried? https://www.visioncortex.org/vtracer/
|
| Not affiliated, but I've used them for a project and I was
| impressed
| mkreis wrote:
| > By using the Services, you grant to VectorArt.ai, its
| successors, and assigns a perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive,
| sublicensable, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable copyright
| license to use, copy, reproduce, process, adapt, modify, publish,
| transmit, prepare Derivative Works of, publicly display, publicly
| perform, sublicense, and/or distribute text prompts and images
| you input into the Services, or Assets produced by the Service at
| your direction.
|
| -> even to images I upload? This is a no go. As a paid
| subscriber, I would expect to a) not automatically give a license
| for everything I UPLOAD B) not automatically give a license for
| content I created myself
| jahewson wrote:
| Yeah this is excessive in the extreme. Wave goodbye to your
| copyright if you upload images to this service.
|
| The other thing is that they want you to pay to use the
| generated images commercially - but (as far as we know) purely
| AI generated images are not subject to copyright, so such
| licensing restrictions can't exist.
| alexchamberlain wrote:
| > purely AI generated images are not subject to copyright, so
| such licensing restrictions can't exist.
|
| This doesn't feel right, similar to how it doesn't feel right
| that the companies are hoovering up copyrighted data. The
| company has invested in creating a cool product here, and
| it's reasonable for them to be able to license that work when
| used commercially.
| free_bip wrote:
| They created a product and they definitely have copyright
| over that product.
|
| However, what the product is creating, the output, is an AI
| generated Image... Which because it wasn't human authored,
| is automatically put into the public domain the moment it's
| created.
|
| The product is copyrighted, the output is not.
| tensor wrote:
| I really don't think this has been legally established,
| especially not in the case that AI is being used in
| conjunction with a copyright base image that it uses as a
| scaffold. It's incredibly hard to see the result as
| anything but a derived work of the original and being
| copyright by the author of the original in a similar way
| to applying a digital filter would.
|
| The courts will sort out the boundaries of copyright
| here, but I'll eat my shorts if it's as extreme as the
| "all things that come out of AI are public domain" crowd
| thinks.
| swatcoder wrote:
| The gist of guidance from the US Copyright Office is that
| it's relative to what was put in.
|
| If your input was a six word prompt of everyday langhage
| and the widely available magic box decompressed that into
| a cool picture, nobody produced anything copyrightable.
| And most of us wouldn't want that to be different. You'd
| just have squatters racing to claim copyright over every
| Midjourney prompt they can generate.
|
| But if someone put what's clearly a demonstrably
| significant amount of commercial direction or artisanal
| effort into producing a original work while using
| generative tools, that direction/effort is what earns
| your copyright. The same would likely apply when using
| the tech to further "work" some already-copyrighted
| material of your own.
|
| You're right that most of this stuff hasn't been tested
| by the courts when the tools are called "AI", but many of
| the underlying questions have decades and decades of
| precedent behind them (music sampling, collage and
| assemblage in visual art, monkeys taking snapshots, etc).
| Regulators do and lawyers will be making their cases
| about AI copyright in reference to those earlier,
| analogous, cases.
| jahewson wrote:
| Yes, the "copyright base image that it uses as a
| scaffold" case is special and I agree that we've not seen
| the conclusion there yet. Though, it must be said that
| I'd expect to the extent that such copyright exists it's
| going to belong to the original image author, not the
| model creator/user.
| jahewson wrote:
| I actually agree that it feels weird but you can't license
| something you don't own and copyright law supersedes
| contract law.
| 4death4 wrote:
| The images themselves may not be subject to copyright, but
| you can still enter into a contract that says you won't use
| generated images without paying for them.
| jahewson wrote:
| You can't because copyright law supersedes contract law and
| copyright law states that such rights are exclusive - thus
| contract law cannot be used to usurp or invent a copying
| restriction. Licensing is the exclusive right of the
| copyright owner and when no copyright exists there can be
| no license (or de facto equivalent).
| 4death4 wrote:
| It's not a copyright restriction. It's a restriction on
| using the service.
| tm11zz wrote:
| Thanks for surfacing this. I'll work to improve this to reflect
| reality - your prompts and images are private and owned by you.
| graypegg wrote:
| Reality is whatever is in your terms of use agreement. Who
| wrote it?
| waihtis wrote:
| AI, of course
| graypegg wrote:
| Haha, I wonder if we're ever going to see a litigation
| over a EULA, where the service provider is trying to
| nullify some duty based on the fact they used AI to write
| the agreement which swapped Provider and User in a
| sentence.
|
| Great era to be EULA hunting!
| yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
| I'm sure it will happen. However, I'm also fairly
| confident that whoever is the first to try it will be
| ripped to shreds by the judge:)
| amluto wrote:
| How would VectorArt.ai even believe that their user has the
| rights to do so? If (for example) I upload some stock photo off
| the Internet, I absolutely do not have the right to grant such
| a license.
| colejohnson66 wrote:
| They don't. It's a CYA in case they're sued. If/when that
| happens, they can point the finger at you the uploader.
| leptons wrote:
| Yet this is essentially the same kind of license Facebook has
| when you upload any image to Facebook. And billions of people
| still upload content to them every day.
| esafak wrote:
| I would buy credits if they let you, instead of a subscription.
| Just how many vector images do people need to create?
| james2doyle wrote:
| It seems like we still can't use Bard in Canada yet. Pretty
| annoying. I haven't been able to find an explanation of why it is
| not available
| politelemon wrote:
| Best I could find:
|
| When asked what regulations Google is considering when it comes
| to bringing Bard to Canada, Sebastian cited the Online News
| Act, which would force tech giants and other companies to pay
| Canadian news producers for links posted to their platforms
|
| "We'll bring (Bard) here to Canada very soon as we manage
| through all the regulatory issues," Sebastian said.
|
| https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/google-exec-says-regulatory-conc...
| TekMol wrote:
| It's a sign-up page for a commercial service, not a show HN.
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/showhn.html
| Kiro wrote:
| I think "sign-up pages" here needs some clarification from the
| mods (maybe referring to wait lists?). If everything that
| requires sign-up is banned then why this section further down:
|
| > Please make it easy for users to try your thing out, ideally
| without barriers such as signups or emails. You'll get more
| feedback that way.
| petee wrote:
| I think its pretty clear, Show HN is for readily showing a
| project, not getting email addresses. Any service should be
| able to create a demo account.
|
| The quote is them just asking nicely and clearly to make it
| accessible.
| supermatt wrote:
| Not actually AI generated SVGs, but it generates an AI raster
| image and then "converts" it.
| yieldcrv wrote:
| this could be great, I've tried getting chatgpt4 to output svg,
| it will but struggles on complexity
|
| it can perceive what is being requested but you need to break
| down each part in a g statement just like with coding
| okamiueru wrote:
| So, if anyone has a weekend to spare, setting up a competitor by
| running stable diffusion with a LORA for vectorized output with
| vtracer on the image output... should about do it. Seems at least
| one of these services pop up every day, and it's usually the same
| thing wrapped in different packaging.
| andybak wrote:
| Spam. Check their post history
| blacksmith_tb wrote:
| It's interesting to see the prompts on specific examples, like
| https://vectorart.ai/3e5ead1b-60be-40f8-ae6f-25e14ca4e9a0 I guess
| "vectorized" is doing some heavy lifting there for converting to
| SVG. It's always funny to me to see random text generated,
| especially when it's either close to right (like this example) or
| just mangled shapes that were derived from the Roman or Cyrillic
| alphabet, but which still have some flavor of the original font,
| just with zero meaning.
| layer8 wrote:
| So, this is just traditional image vectorization on top of
| existing AI-based bitmap image generation. It would be more
| interesting if this was actually AI-based vector image
| generation.
|
| They also don't say if they are self-hosting the image generation
| or rely on an external AI service, which may have an impact on
| data protection.
| zdwolfe wrote:
| Seems to not be working. I tried the same prompt twice. My trial
| credits were used but there was no image generated, nor do they
| appear in My Images.
| system2 wrote:
| This is an account just to promote the website. I don't think it
| fits HN.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-11-24 23:01 UTC)