The Key to Better Art Style Mimicry

cover
13 Dec 2024

Abstract and 1. Introduction

  1. Background and Related Work

  2. Threat Model

  3. Robust Style Mimicry

  4. Experimental Setup

  5. Results

    6.1 Main Findings: All Protections are Easily Circumvented

    6.2 Analysis

  6. Discussion and Broader Impact, Acknowledgements, and References

A. Detailed Art Examples

B. Robust Mimicry Generations

C. Detailed Results

D. Differences with Glaze Finetuning

E. Findings on Glaze 2.0

F. Findings on Mist v2

G. Methods for Style Mimicry

H. Existing Style Mimicry Protections

I. Robust Mimicry Methods

J. Experimental Setup

K. User Study

L. Compute Resources

D Differences with Glaze Finetuning

In Section 4.1 and Figure 2, we discussed the brittleness of Glaze protections against small changes in the finetuning script. We also found our finetuning setup to be better at baseline style mimicry from unprotected art (see Figure 19).

Figure 19: The finetuning script shared by Glaze authors produce substantially worse mimicry even from unprotected art. We apply both finetuning scripts directly on unprotected art from @nulevoy. The main reason behind this difference might be that the script uses Stable Diffusion 1.5, instead of version 2.1 as reported in their paper.

Authors:

(1) Robert Honig, ETH Zurich (robert.hoenig@inf.ethz.ch);

(2) Javier Rando, ETH Zurich (javier.rando@inf.ethz.ch);

(3) Nicholas Carlini, Google DeepMind;

(4) Florian Tramer, ETH Zurich (florian.tramer@inf.ethz.ch).


This paper is available on arxiv under CC BY 4.0 license.