I don't have the opportunity to use Generative fill because I don't have the soft- or hardware to use it. Understand me right, I think its awesome to have the opportunity to use the equipment. Its the future. When using externals in the image you post, the rools says you should post the externals as a link to explain what you have done to the image you posted. (I do it mostly on my images, but not always).

Should the creator of the image mention it under the image, when using Generative fill or other AI related software?

This is what the rools says here at psc.com:

Should I mention my external sources?

You should not use an external source that would deceive voters into thinking that you did significant manipulations to the source that you did not do. Entries believed to be in violation of this rule will be removed. Enforcement of this rule is subject to moderator discretion. As a general rule of thumb, if you submit an entry that relies heavily on an external sources in this way, you should post a link to those sources along with your entry.

Start discussion.

The "Photoshop Gen. Fill Tool" aside, this topic point has been debated at length on every site I've ever been a member of. At times I've posted my sources religiously, and basically found not many peeps ever pay attention below the image. That said here is the most significant point made in the declaration of these rules "Enforcement of this rule is subject to moderator discretion." Gen Fill or not it's a judgement/enforcement issue. And plenty of images come across the table that should fall under this scrutiny presently and many years past. Not to mention copyright issues but if I did, it would mean the use of GF is adhering to the rules closer than ever. As I'm sure these images don't violate the copyright rule. How many here can claim to using rights free images only?

I try to be forth coming with everyone, I have the GF tool and I'm gonna use it. Basically it searches images for you, same as you would surfing the net. Choose one to use and GF will install given your directions, estimating lighting, contrast, and ect. You will need to make adjustments in a many cases. I could isolate the GF images, then post to external links. "same as posting acquired sources from the net". In this case usage the "installation" is the AI.

That said GF does have the ability to generate image/texture/characters. Exampled in my next contest entry and below. But I clearly note the case for anyone's review with links below the image. *not every single time though*

In summary I'll just say, I've came to the realization that the art form we fondly refer to as "chopping" can not be preserved as we've known it and must evolve.

All is good Geir! Let's enjoy and

Im not talking about copyright on images. Forget about that.

I want to know what sources people use to make the images. (Yes, maybe people use copyright images, maybe other selfmade images). I just want to see the sources used. Often Im curious about how people have made their image.

I wish there was a moderator that answered and took some kind of responsibility to maybe change the rools. Made the rools more clear.

If you ask me I want to see a line under the image that describes what source(s) is used in the image. Are we talking GF, AI-generated image, googled images, selfmade images etc......

Let me get this straight... We obey some rules and others we just forget about. Why is that? The use of "Copyright" is relevant to the entire issue of not enforcing rules. Which is the point your making here. I didn't disagree with you on that. Most haven't listed their sources for ions now, I don't believe they are going to start anytime soon.

Question Geir? Where in the rules does it state I must post a link to my legally acquired Adobe images? I also feel that the above mentioned rule is referring to representing others work as your own. Which has been done for years upon years. The question is "Where do you draw the line between your own creation and plagiarism?" thus the vagueness and disclaimer of sorts interjected in the rules you cite above ........ linked here: http://photoshopcontest.com/faq/help.html#topic_8
IMHO "Enforcement of this rule is subject to moderator discretion" is still the hinged factor in the teeth of this rule.

I only put info about other images used in a chop, if they are asked for (or required) by the creator of those images. I don't use anything off google, because you never really know if their images are copyrighted (unless you do good research and go to the site that the image originated on). I don't know where those AI programs find their images, so... I would bet that the only legit one IS the Adobe Photoshop program (since that one probably uses Adobe sources).

Like you Bob, I began to boycott Google when their heavy censorship began. Hell... my most innocent search terms would not result correctly. I do however have a Gmail account that's in use. I'd say the AI sites like Midjourney are legit. ALL's you need is $100, $200, or $600 a year to invest and find out. https://www.midjourney.com/showcase/recent/

Please don't take this personally guys but this idea crossed my mind and I felt compelled to create it. And now I just want to share this creation with my friends

That would be me. If one really wants to see what I used all they have to do is a reverse googley search. And I don't have AI, and never will. I only have PS6 and it does all I need for free. Of course I also won't be able to compete with those that do use it but I just chop for fun and having a site that provides the source (like here) inspires my creativity.
but that's me, I don't begrudge those that use it.


And don't read anything into me not submitting for a while, As Rush would say,,
"I'm in a blue funk."
When the mood strikes I'll spend a day or two and fill up the month.

So here's my two or three cents, I do use GenFill and at times Midjourney, some times I post my externals and some times I don't, I have a bad habit of searching Google and if I find an image I copy and paste it into my psd file, and never save it, and once I manipulate it, I no longer have the original to post. It all depends on my time available, and my disposition at that time.

As far as worrying about copyright, are you serious that's never been a problem here, sometimes people leave the watermark on their entries, if it works for you, use it. Damn the rules. (Harumph!)

On another site ( Pixeleyes) now defunct, it was required for you to post externals, but not only that, you had to show people how you did your entry, you were required to post a SBS, (step by step).
Boy was that a chore, took all the fun out of it, it helped some noobies but it got to be too much, as I said that site is dead.

So I say do whatever it takes to come up with a great entry, but no cheating, come up with a great idea and carry it out to the best of your ability. Let the rest judge.

Ps. A.I. is here to stay weather you like it or not, so if it can work for you, embrace it, learn it, and make it your friend.

I agree but let me clarify a bit,
The Copyright issue was brought up to call out the cherry-picking going on. Meaning one can post source images all day long but if your referencing copyrighted images it doesn't make you any more righteous than the guy who never post a source at all.

You should not use an external source that would deceive voters into thinking that you did significant manipulations to the source that you did not do.

this here; in a recent contest there was a beautiful image, i suspected ai but as there had been a poll and other discussions in the forum, against AI; i decided to give it benefit of the doubt. but it turns out it was an AI generated image with the source integrated into it. But we were led to believe there was a substantial amount of work done to the image when there was only about a 2 minute integration job. If you are going to use AI it should at the very least be stated. In my day that image could have been a real chop; by thqt i mean 100 percent chopped from the source image. I know psc has changed a lot, but i believed it was still a photo manipulation site and not an AI contest site, i believe there are other sites for that; im not against ai; just against it being used in a dishonest way. My 2 cents

Agree with Janfet. If an artist wants to use AI that's fine no rules against it just don't hide the fact from voters but own it and let voters know that AI was used. Just as External sources are expected so not to deceive voters as per the PSC Rules, if "AI Generated" is used it should also be posted as well so as not to deceive voters. My 2¢

My opinion ... as far as AI and GF goes, I haven't used them, so I am not familiar with how they work, but it seems there is really no skill involved in using them. I feel like it should be a consideration when voting, especially for the weekly prize chop. Someone who did a skillful old-school chop should hold more weight than someone who used AI or GF. I agree with several of you that said it should at least be made known it was used in a submission.

I haven't been listing my external sources. At the moment, I don't use a site for storing them and I tend to use on or two elements from several different sources, so it would be a inconvenient for me. I do agree that it's nice to see how someone created their submission. I admit that I use images from Google searches and don't make sure they are free for use. Typically, I only use a piece or two from one single image, so hopefully I'm altering it enough as to avoid copyright infringement.

The way I see it, AI is just another tool.
As long as you use it as such in the process of chopping it's ok.

If you just submit something that is 100% AI it's not really chopping....


In regards to posting externals, I really like it when people do it, it gives more clear understanding of the work done.
The only reason I don't do it all the time is because it's a hassle to host the image somewhere. Would be nice if we had the option to upload it to PSC directly. (I know that's probably never going to happen tho haha).

How do you guys upload your externals these days?