Thread about tags for various "AI" image generators

Background Pony #5ACC
A more general thread following up from this one
It’s not yet formalized what overarching tag(s) should be used to group these kinds of images. There had previously been a discussion between me (Background Pony) and PUBLIQclopAccountant in the General Tag Discussion thread, beginning at the linked post and in this thread (and a little in the thisponydoesnotexist thread, mixed with philosophical debate) without really reaching any firm conclusion.
machine learning generated is the tag used to group these kinds of works.
All the “ai” software tags should imply one or more of these?
  • ai generated? (46)
  • machine learning? (22)
  • neural network? (58 if you exclude artist:thisponydoesnotexist) but I don’t know for which pieces of software it’s correct. This tag is also used on a few pictures related to neural networks, not generated by neural networks.
  • computer generated? (58) My issue with this is that it’s not specific enough - consider that 3D art is also known as “CGI”/“computer generated imagery”
  • artificial intelligence? (556) - IMO this should be only for sci-fi AI in context (Cortana, EDI, Sweetie Bot, etc.) and not for what this thread is about. This would be a big change to how the tag is currently used.
Please give some feedback!
The only tags implying anything at the moment:
artist:thisponydoesnotexist implies neural network only.
dall·e mini and nightcafe ai imply ai generated only.

Several more have been updated.

I think it might be good to invent a tag to identify when there’s ai generated imagery PLUS human-artist generated imagery in a post, for cases where someone’s redrawn something, like in >>2718269 - because it’s not sufficient to search or filter with a query like ai generated, artist:* because people may use artist tags on pure ai generated imagery because the process of writing a prompt and curating the results is arguably an artistic process.

Big list of software tags and some aliases to do:
Except for uberduck and so-vits-svc, these tags are used both for output of the software, and for a few images relating to/fanart for those projects. None of them have any implications set up.
Please reply with more if you know about them.
Princess Luna
Preenhub - We all know what you were up to this evening~
Thread Starter - Started a thread with over 100 pages
My Little Pony - 1992 Edition
Notoriously Divine Tagger - Consistently uploads images above and beyond the minimum tag requirements. And/or additionally, bringing over the original description from the source if the image has one. Does NOT apply to the uploader adding several to a dozen tags after originally uploading with minimum to bare tagging.
Cool Crow - "Caw!" An awesome tagger
Economist -
A Perfectly Normal Pony - <%Nebulon> Yeah, just fetch me a smaller anus, sweetie.
Magnificent Metadata Maniac - #1 Assistant
From the Night -

Senior Moderator
Site Developer
Tag Czar
I’ve done a bit of cleanup on various tags competing with “ai generated” so they’re restricted to in-universe things instead of referring to image creation, and aliased “ai generated” to “machine learning generated”.
Background Pony #AA1D
“This pony does not exist” uses an artist: type tag. I tried to follow this example and created artist:stable diffusion. Then someone removed the artist: prefix.
So what is the current consensus? Should AIs be tagged with the artist: prefix, without it, or even with an ai: prefix or similar?
EDIT: And perhaps we should have separate tags for ML-generated sound and ML-generated imagery?
Background Pony #5ACC
@Background Pony #AA1D
I’m not a consensus, take from my comments what you will:
There was a proposal to use an ai: prefix, which I disagreed with instead recommending no prefix for tags identifying software tools. I also separately suggested removing the artist: prefix to empower searching and filtering around it.
thisponydoesnotexist is a little different from other AI art tools in that, AFAIK, if it hasn’t changed since I looked at it, all the images it serves are pre-rendered and you’re just looking through the bulk collection, not actually changing or producing anything. In that sense, thisponydoesnotexist could be thought of as the artist: (or, the programmer of the generation software project instead) or instead it could be thought of as a fanwork/series, which also has been suggested and is what I think I agree with the most.
tl;dr I’d just call them all without the artist: prefix, or any other prefix, and categorize as appropriate. Not even sure where it came from to label “thisponydoesnotexist” as the artist.
Background Pony #AA1D
I see that machine learning assisted is a thing. Does it apply to cases where someone made a very small edit to the AI image or only when the human contribution is substantial?
An example of the former is this pic, where only the mouth was slightly edited:
A less extreme example is this pic, where someone cleaned up the AI pic:
Background Pony #5ACC
@Background Pony #AA1D
IMO, “substantial”. Whatever that means.
I’d make a first try to define that as there being concrete enough portions of the image that you could state, “X part of the image was neither generated by an AI nor handmade for the purpose of correcting AI artifacts/errors, and that part is not a trifling part like an earring.”
How to judge that line in terms of significant hands-on manipulation, cutting/compositing, creation of underlying images fed into “img2img” functions, etc. I’m still quite uncertain about.
Background Pony #AA1D
@Background Pony #5ACC
Then how should we tag slightly corrected AI images? It’s useful to tell them apart from raw AI images in order not to overestimate the abilities of a given AI.
Background Pony #AA1D
Since we require the image uploader to tag the artist and provide a source, should we require them to tag the machine learning system which generated the image and provide the prompt, respectively? This is of course about machine learning generated, not machine learning assisted images.
Magnificent Metadata Maniac - #1 Assistant
Solar Guardian - Refused to surrender in the face of the Lunar rebellion and showed utmost loyalty to the Solar Empire (April Fools 2023).
Non-Fungible Trixie -
Magical Inkwell - Wrote MLP fanfiction consisting of at least around 1.5k words, and has a verified link to the platform of their choice

IRL 🎠 stallion
@Background Pony #AA1D
I agree that the prompt should be required where available. However, I don’t want images banned because someone went scraping Discord or Twitter for AI images that did not have prompts attached.
Posted Report
ラ・ゼッタ - For supporting the site
Pixel Perfection - I still call her Lightning Bolt
Silly Pony - Celebrated the 13th anniversary of MLP:FIM, and 40 years of MLP!
Shimmering Smile - Celebrated the 10th anniversary of Equestria Girls!
Lunar Guardian - Earned a place among the ranks of the most loyal New Lunar Republic soldiers (April Fools 2023).
Crystal Roseluck - Had their OC in the 2023 Derpibooru Collab.
Flower Trio - Helped others get their OC into the 2023 Derpibooru Collab.
A Lovely Nightmare Night - Celebrated the 12th anniversary of MLP:FIM!
Princess of Love - Extra special version for those who participated in the Canterlot Wedding 10th anniversary event by contributing art.
Tree of Harmony - Drew someone's OC for the 2022 Community Collab

Senior Moderator
The artist tag will always be much more important than that information, but we don’t delete images because they don’t have artist tags. We just ask for them, or try to find them.
If someone is scraping Discord or Twitter for AI images and tagging them badly, they’re more likely to be deleted for Rule #3.
Posted Report
Interested in advertising on Derpibooru? Click here for information!
Champions of Equestria

Help fund the $15 daily operational cost of Derpibooru - support us financially!

Syntax quick reference: **bold** *italic* ||hide text|| `code` __underline__ ~~strike~~ ^sup^ %sub%

Detailed syntax guide