Azath Vitr (D, on 20 March 2023 - 03:29 PM, said:
Diffusion models do not produce exact copies. As I explained at length (with references) in the other thread, in the vast majority of cases they don't produce anything resembling a rough copy, with the exceptions almost always being cases where an image occurs a very large number of times in the training set and the set of words associated with it otherwise occurs relatively rarely. Those cases are already covered by copyright law.
What they do 'copy' is artistic style. But complaining about AI 'stealing' her artistic style when her style (and, in this painting and others I've seen, the poses and ideas she uses) seems completely derivative is ridiculous.
The ability to copy something for a human being with a set of paints, a pencil and some thumbnails is not the same as copying something digitally. To copy a style and employ cliche or trope elements from the works of masters is one of the best ways to get better as an artist. Many of the great artists we see from classical times were born into the tradition of copy painting. They became masters when they surpassed their teachers ability to paint ultra realist copies and started to generate their own novel takes.
Today an artist learns to draw from surrounding media, I myself started with comic books, anime and game characters for example. Only after getting 'ok' at producing fair copies of what I liked was I able to see what I lacked and develop from there. I also looked up the responsible artist for the work I admired and adopted their practice methods. All the great artists develop styles that pull from their formative years, learning from better artists and its a big part of what makes human art interesting. Humans can offer credit to their influences and inspirations. Its this process that defines an 'artistic tradition'.
AI doesn't acknowledge the hands behind the styles it copies in the slightest sense of the word. I don't think that's reasonable and I also don't think it's comparable.
Azath Vitr (D, on 20 March 2023 - 03:29 PM, said:
Quote
@pencilforge
Why does her original art already look ai generated
Artyom Tucović
@vor_bokor
That's why she's so scared!
[...] it's Karla who "muddies the waters" by [...] hiring Washington lobbyists with crowdfunding instead of campaigning against Marvel or any other of her corpo bedfellows secretly forming entire AI departments right now
https://twitter.com/...502147632807947
Part of the appeal of this painting certainly comes from her being of Indigenous ancestry---or at least so she claims, since she looks very white: 'I'm Puerto Rican, I am a blend of Spanish, African and Native American blood'---hopefully she has evidence for that beyond simply having been born in Puerto Rico and having a Spanish name....
I don't fully understand why ethnicity is a factor? I mean I do enjoy more diversity in fantasy art but I don't think it needs to come from an artist of that ethnic group to hold value for me at the very least.
Marvels plans on developing an AI division is still at grassroots level last I looked this up? The lawsuit against AI generators was aimed at active models that pull from affected artists work. I would not understand why one would sue Marvel for plans to explore AI as opposed to Wonder or stable diffusion with active models trained on data sets that very likely include Karlas work and the many others included in the class action lawsuit.
...
More from Kortiz, just to keep on topic: