Skip to main content


What is the hashtag that you would recommend artists to use to say that their art is not created with AI?

  • #HumanMade (54%, 523 votes)
  • #HumanArt (30%, 287 votes)
  • Something else (comment) (15%, 144 votes)
954 voters. Poll end: 1 year ago

honestly imo it's the ai art that should be othered out, not hand made art
it's the others that should mark their art.
I don't think there is a need. AI one is tagged, which is enough, IMO.
@tennoseremel @jonn @SRAZKVT You can't really expect AI artist to tag their art properly. On ArtStation, many are not even mentioning they use AI. I'm afraid it will become the norm.
@SRAZKVT oh wow. Well, the issue then is lack of "report" button on the website. But yeah, then probably #HumanArt is very good.
Dunno, I do expect it here on Fedi, personally.

@jonn @SRAZKVT
I could argue it makes no sense that AI art posters would be so lazy about putting a little hashtag mentioning that unknown work is being transformed by a machine. Honestly, this "human-made" category can just as well be a target for AI posting. I don't think such tag even should give anyone any points.
I'd say Hi, because
1. Human Imagination
2. Human Intelligence
3. it's always nice says Hi ! 😀
@Gynux i wish i had same emoji on my instance lol
In my opinion everything from the AI ​​should rather contain #AiArt. And the other way around, you shouldn't have to worry as much.
I recommend NOT tagging it in any machine-recognizable way. As the Internet gets flooded by AI-generated content, funding material that can be used to train models becomes more and more difficult. Tagging it in an easily recognizable way makes it easier to be found and fed into the next generation models.
I put a more detailed argument about this here
http://wok.oblomov.eu/tecnologia/not-by-ai/
although I think the machine is down ATM 8-/
I would insist on ditching out AI art into a specific category rather than making people put their hand-made/manual works in their own category. When something is done by machine learning, there is always a chance of copyright infringement, so posters of such things really need to make it clear that some work of unknown origin may be transformed by an AI. So, I suggest the opposite of manual hashtag: #AIArt should do it.
Nothing. You shouldn't mark your art to show that it was made by a human. AI generated pieces should be marked as well. When I say piece, I mean everything. Not just visual or audible art pieces but also videos, emails, essays, articles, etc. Anything and everything generated by AI should be labelled clearly.

@davidrevoy
I think that this might be counterproductive, as it might create an easy-to-mine hashtag for AIs to be trained upon.
None. The onus is on the ones that use AI to disclose it.
#HiArt Human Intelligence Art or #NiArt Natural Intelligence Art
#NoBot

No just for art but anything not using AI...?
all of the above and maybe #noai
#noai
"The creator of this work has been able to solve a captcha"

Content warning: A.I.

ZERO-AI or 0-AI simple and effective
🤔 I use ArtWithOpenSource to show I used a open source programm and often also add the software's name, I guess that would show it's human generated art?
@marionline :shibathinking: That's a pretty good solution. Thank you for sharing.
@marionline A1111 is open source as well though
@Optional @marionline Right, I forgot about that. Good point.
#LudditeArtist
AI is just the latest tool with which to create art. It takes a lot of time and effort to get good results.

And to create art for sale, it must be responsibly sourced, compensating any artists on whose work it is based.
I don't think it needs a special tag for it.
Why not just HandMade? It is not like AI has hands! (for now)
Real artists shouldn't have to hashtag anything. AI generated art should be tagged however.
Not sure if I need such distinction.
But if not using isn't an option, then the #HumanArt because it uses the same convention as #AIArt which is already in use.
It should evoke positive emotions. "HumanArt" sounds like something a robot or alien would say.

I would vote for #RealArt
most cameras today , especially phones, apply software enhancement, is that AI?
Humain art, car ça ressemble a la chanson de Lara fabian

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8wD3o8LQNr8
"Made by Natural Intelligence" 😀
I think something like #handmade, which is used for crafts and such, would fit best. I reckon #HandmadeArt would be a good tag. I just feel #HumanMade is a bit too... wide and undefined. Every building is Human-made. And #HumanArt kind of feels.. off for me. I can't define it, it just doesn't sound right!

#HandmadeArt *possibly* cuts into painter territory? But it's not like digital artists don't use their hands to make their art, so I think it's fine ^^
obviously, as a notorious horse and maker of things that aren't intentionally art, I'm going to have to go with #ConsciouslyMade or similar.

But about whether it's a good idea to provide a tag for unscrupulous ML trainers to feed on, I'm less sure. See thread!
I agree with all other comments about not labeling because it could be targeted by IA.

I like "handmade art" more than "human made" if I had to choose.
I was wondering, wouldn't using tags like #HumanArt or #NoAi just make it simpler for AI companies to scrape images by hashtag?

Even if you explicitly forbid them from doing so (with those hashtags), I don't think it would make a difference. They haven't really been considerate of these things in the past.

A problem with AI "art" is that using it to feed into datasets essentially deteriorates what an AI image gen is able to produce. Wouldn't those hashtags help AI companies?
This entry was edited (1 year ago)
@stjepanlukac Yes, thanks to the comment, I see more and more the risk of creating a honeypot to AI trainer with hashtag like that.

It's probably better to keep just this type of info in my profile, and post often process, wip, and timelapse.
@stjepanlukac Ai companies who disregard ethics will train on anything.

I read somewhere that the results from AI trained on AI art gives bad result like lossy jpg compressed over and over. Yes using a specific hashtag for human made art is like giving them easy filter. But they were going to train on it anyway, no point in thinking about that.

Having an hashtag would definitely help humans to know what is what. So it is plus for humans wanting to enjoy human art.
@raghukamath I disagree. I think the hashtag is counterproductive and makes artists do the "preemptive filtering" for AI imageGen companies.

If anything, just use Glaze and publish your art normally.

https://glaze.cs.uchicago.edu/index.html
@stjepanlukac
yeah hash tag acts like filter to these companies, but nothing stops AI using these images anyway.

Glaze looks really nice but, it is not free software and open source which is a requirement for me and I think for @davidrevoy too. And also it excludes users and artists who use linux as it only provides app for windows and mac. When it was introduced I have also read about it ripping of Free Software code - https://twitter.com/ravenben/status/1636444647034634256
@stjepanlukac The glaze team may have changed the code now, or not ( we can't say for sure as it is closed source) but they violated GPL (may be inadvertently or out of ignorance) , and even after knowing and accepting that they violated the license I do not know if they released the full sources code as required by the license, that tarnished their reputation as protector of any kind of rights in my eyes. You can protect rights of others by stealing from someone else.
This entry was edited (1 year ago)
@raghukamath @stjepanlukac Yes true. Also, if you read their Q&A on their website Glaze has a lot of blabla to explain how great their technique is. If you look at Glaze paper (src: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2302.04222.pdf ) everything is at 5.2 and to resume it this way: You just apply a style transfer (with an external picture) then overlay it at low opacity with the blending mode of your choice. This add a perturbation to the picture. You could achieve this with GMIC Stylise filter, IMO. 1/2
@raghukamath @stjepanlukac you have to trust the result of a single paper about how those perturbations works. I'm not sure it is very effective to be honest. Reading the (8) Limitation only 3 month after the technique was released and attacks make me think this is interesting but not future proof 2/2
the AI artist should be the one to add a hashtag. Though I realize this is a though demand.
@gigantos Yes, I totally agree. But I also don't expect AI artists to do that, because they have too many advantages in not using hashtags.
None. Art is in the eye of the recipient, not determined by the creator.
human made should be the default. If I don't see a hashtag or something indicating it is AI art I should be safe to assume it is human made.
How about #HumanMadeWithoutAI or just #MadeWithoutAI? I feel it needs to be more specific than #HumanMade since that is a fine line of did a human make it and use AI or not.
All art is "human art," even the art made by AI. "Human made," is more descriptive of what we are talking about, I think, when said in English. When I see the words, "human made" I feel it is describing the process of making the art, and not who made it. It is also a nice counterpoint to the tag "AI generated."
I agree with others that the onus is on AI generated content to self-label.

I can't resist the chance to give something a name though. Therefore:

#OrganicIntelligence
#BioIntelligence
@lisamelton I like what the guy who first got me into the creative industries said: he uses AE…Actual Experience.
@lisamelton Also, if you use “human” to differentiate, then it becomes the “other” and puts non-human as the default idea in our monkey brains.
I don't know exactly what it should be, but it needs to be more insulting towards AI 'art'.

#AuthenticArt perhaps?
the Intention is always from the artist
HumanArt in my case sounds more like the opposite of FurryArt. HumanMade reminds me of things like human made climate change or human made garbage patch. NoAI still seems the best for me, also safes on characters for posts.
@Takiro Good points, I never thought about that. Thank you.
How about "#original"? It conveys that generative AI are not creating anything new. The issue with HumanMade is that AI are human made too, and transitively, their creations are human made too.
@x_cli Right. HumanMade is definitely embracing a too-large meaning this way. Thanks for sharing.
We have a word “Art” : that which is made by a human, provides aesthetic value, and offers no practical utility. This word belongs to a highly-trained trade, and should not be retreated from, or allowed to be diluted.

Brushstrokes by an Elephant: not made by a human = not Art.
Aesthetically pleasing sculptural chair: has practical utility = not Art*.
AI-Generated output: see Elephant.

*We have a word for this, a technical, non-derisive term. That word is “Craft”.
#HumanArt sounds more like it would be art depicting humans. Like portraits and so on I guess...
En français on dit Intelligence Artificielle (AI, quoi) donc j'imagine que le hashtag devrait être du genre "IA ! IA ! Shub-Niggurath !"...
sweat, tears, and blood made.
Personally, I would go with #FuckAIArt but TBH either poll option works fine
@clacke Can we please just use another word than art for things created by non-creatures?
is't AI human made?, like one of the replay, i would say #FuckAIArt
if you want one tag, let’s do like roman artists #homoquidammefecit
I think #HumanMade seems more precise, but also, all AI is human-made, not just the software and hardware, but even the data for training and the alignment during that training, all that is human-made. So, #NotAI could be more rigorous, but less human-relevant.
Is it important provided that the audience can't tell the difference between both cases?
...
@another_katt Hey, I think I have the same result at heart and in mind, no worry. I'll see if I can post a little debrief article about how it changed my mind on the topic later this week.
the trouble is, people use AI to make art so they will list themselves as "a human artist" supposedly working in the medium of AI. It would take a long time to explain to these people, in terms they could understand, why AI isn't a medium. It's just big buckets of plagiarism.