Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

H3adshotfox77 t1_iw5mkbb wrote

Reply to comment by AstroAlmost in Secret Menu (oc) by tastycrust

Original: 1. present or existing from the beginning; first or earliest.

It is original content, just not their program. Unless they redid an image already done then the content would be original.

Just because they used an AI program developed by someone else does not imho mean they were not the creator of the art.

That would be like stating the person who created colored pencils should be the original creator of all work created using colored pencils.

The AI is the tool, now it may be a tool removing the majority of the skill but it is still just a tool. It's the difference between a hammer and a nail gun. Makes the job easier but it's still doing a job.

Now there is a ton of semantics, you could argue if they used AI to redraw an image they saw online then it's a copy so not OC. But if you wouldn't make that same critique of someone who used a photograph to draw a picture than you shouldn't make it here either. But thats a different argument entirely.

3

AstroAlmost t1_iw5otkv wrote

i never implied the artist would be the person who developed the AI to begin with. the AI itself is the artist, as it is the amalgamation of whatever resources it is trained on, and is essentially commissioned by a person to create works of art for them.

the individual using the AI is no more an artist than a person requesting a more upbeat song from a busker, or a company commissioning an ad agency to develop content for their brand.

when “the tool” is the entire artistic process, and the individual using the tool does virtually nothing artistic at all to prompt the generation of the art, then the tool is the artist. artists inherently need to meet certain criteria by definition in order to be artists in the technical and classical sense, and in most instance in such AI is employed for art, virtually none of those criteria are met by the person using their token to generate a piece.

a hammer and a nail gun still require a skilled hand to be effective. a more fair comparison is the difference between using a hammer or a nail gun, and hiring a skilled laborer to use a hammer or a nail gun.

as per your last paragraph: what if, as is done in countless instances, one were to train the AI on a specific piece or series of pieces by a specific artist, then ask it to recreate scenes in a facsimile of their style. in instances where people do this and claim credit for the art, or worse yet, profit off of the skills the actual artist developed and the AI emulated, that is orders of magnitude less artistically ethical than using actual artistic skill to draw or paint from a reference image, something almost all artists already do and have done since the advent of the art form.

2