samesies on the pattern problem. although i dont think its necessarily a problem as such.
listen to popular music throughout modern history, and it's ALL repeating patterns.
take this:
do-re-fa-la-re
do-re-fa-la-re
do-re-fa-la-re
do-do-re-la-do
first three lines are just repetition of a simplle minimelody, fourth line is a resolution of that melody ending with the same note that started the melody.
now take that same melody, mix it up a little, see if it sounds good (assuming first one sounded goood XD) and you have two patterns. repeat these two patterns to make a sort of meta-pattern X. now try to make a breakdown pattern -- a tempo change, or a another resolution pattern, call this Y.
X X Y X X
you just wrote a pop song! here is your golden record, thanks for all the fish!
1) what am i going for? A - do i want to make something in specific style or B - do i just wanna riff around and see what sounds good.
if A then proceed, if B then just do whatever i want.
2) pick a mode that fits that style.
3) come up with a hook or signature riff
4) make the rest of the song around that hook, usually i write in a verse chorus verse chorus style cuz i come from a punk band background.
as far as instruments and synths i will play around with different stuff. i use midi so i can plug in diff instruments to see how they sound.
for the variety question -- i fail at this. my music is usually pretty steady repition of what i hope is catchy hook. this comes from the punk band background i think.
it is because this art could be made by someone in a few minutes with minimal effort and could potentially be considered trivial. medicinestorm's trivial collection is not a statement that it is trivial, it is just putting it for review later. your art is still available
thats really cool. i wanted to have the melee weapon in my game hantolzuca be one of these, but i couldnt find one. now when i get back to that game some time in the next 20 years, i have a wepaon to work with!
under current terms i believe the content made using firefly is allowed for non-commercial uses, when i fiddled with it it applied a no commercial use watermark to my images (see the attatchment above)
i do think it is really cool that companies are paying attention to the debate and trying to do this in a way that doesn't violate anyone's rights.
i think in the future we will see more open datasets
The current Firefly generative AI model is trained on a dataset of Adobe Stock, along with openly licensed work and public domain content where copyright has expired.
As Firefly evolves, Adobe is exploring ways for creators to be able to train the machine learning model with their own assets so they can generate content that matches their unique style, branding, and design language without the influence of other creators’ content. Adobe will continue to listen to and work with the creative community to address future developments to the Firefly training models.
With the Content Authenticity Initiative (CAI), Adobe is setting the industry standard for responsible generative AI. With more than 900 members today, the CAI is leading the conversation around digital content attribution. The CAI offers free, publicly available open source tools and is working on a widely adopted technical standard in collaboration with leading technology organizations through the nonprofit Coalition for Content Provenance and Authenticity (C2PA).
Firefly will automatically attach a tag in the embedded Content Credentials to make AI-generated art and content easily distinguishable from work created without generative AI.
"
however i cant find any "demonstration" of there claims. i mean they obviously own the rights to adobe stock images, but i guess we are just supposed to trust them that the rest of the dataset is public domain.
but since my first generation with it churned out this thing, it cant be all bad:
they are probably just better than us :)
samesies on the pattern problem. although i dont think its necessarily a problem as such.
listen to popular music throughout modern history, and it's ALL repeating patterns.
take this:
do-re-fa-la-re
do-re-fa-la-re
do-re-fa-la-re
do-do-re-la-do
first three lines are just repetition of a simplle minimelody, fourth line is a resolution of that melody ending with the same note that started the melody.
now take that same melody, mix it up a little, see if it sounds good (assuming first one sounded goood XD) and you have two patterns. repeat these two patterns to make a sort of meta-pattern X. now try to make a breakdown pattern -- a tempo change, or a another resolution pattern, call this Y.
X X Y X X
you just wrote a pop song! here is your golden record, thanks for all the fish!
YES! just in time for the summer jam too!
i have been wanting to use your space merc redux and dead gunner redux assets, and now you have forced my hand. i know what i must do for summer jam.
great job.
good discussion prompt.
so i usually go through these steps:
1) what am i going for? A - do i want to make something in specific style or B - do i just wanna riff around and see what sounds good.
if A then proceed, if B then just do whatever i want.
2) pick a mode that fits that style.
3) come up with a hook or signature riff
4) make the rest of the song around that hook, usually i write in a verse chorus verse chorus style cuz i come from a punk band background.
as far as instruments and synths i will play around with different stuff. i use midi so i can plug in diff instruments to see how they sound.
for the variety question -- i fail at this. my music is usually pretty steady repition of what i hope is catchy hook. this comes from the punk band background i think.
it looks like stone soup to me
though now i look more, some the doors looks like its deriv from 32x32 orthogonal
it is because this art could be made by someone in a few minutes with minimal effort and could potentially be considered trivial. medicinestorm's trivial collection is not a statement that it is trivial, it is just putting it for review later. your art is still available
i love this
thats really cool. i wanted to have the melee weapon in my game hantolzuca be one of these, but i couldnt find one. now when i get back to that game some time in the next 20 years, i have a wepaon to work with!
under current terms i believe the content made using firefly is allowed for non-commercial uses, when i fiddled with it it applied a no commercial use watermark to my images (see the attatchment above)
i do think it is really cool that companies are paying attention to the debate and trying to do this in a way that doesn't violate anyone's rights.
i think in the future we will see more open datasets
i did some perusing, and there is no transparency of the dataset that i can see. "adobe says" is the only think i can see.
from the FAQ
"
The current Firefly generative AI model is trained on a dataset of Adobe Stock, along with openly licensed work and public domain content where copyright has expired.
As Firefly evolves, Adobe is exploring ways for creators to be able to train the machine learning model with their own assets so they can generate content that matches their unique style, branding, and design language without the influence of other creators’ content. Adobe will continue to listen to and work with the creative community to address future developments to the Firefly training models.
With the Content Authenticity Initiative (CAI), Adobe is setting the industry standard for responsible generative AI. With more than 900 members today, the CAI is leading the conversation around digital content attribution. The CAI offers free, publicly available open source tools and is working on a widely adopted technical standard in collaboration with leading technology organizations through the nonprofit Coalition for Content Provenance and Authenticity (C2PA).
Firefly will automatically attach a tag in the embedded Content Credentials to make AI-generated art and content easily distinguishable from work created without generative AI.
"
however i cant find any "demonstration" of there claims. i mean they obviously own the rights to adobe stock images, but i guess we are just supposed to trust them that the rest of the dataset is public domain.
but since my first generation with it churned out this thing, it cant be all bad:
Pages