Damage to the source material by an adaptation

Haerangil said:
Allright. I see a difference between a human copying a human using his own handcraft and a human copying another human by using a computerprogram based on stochastics instead. The first one may call himself a craftsman, the second one a button-clicker.
Click to expand...
Actually the 1st way would cost me 5-10 hours of my life while the 2nd estimated 30-40 hours - by what my own trials have taught me... So I cannot completely follow you here.
 
I have talked to a commercial painter whose works were trained into that data vault SD uses...

He needs days to finish one of his works and SD plagiarized his paintings to enable other people to imitate just his own painting style in seconds. Of course the man is afraid of his revenue!

Personally i enjoy the technology quite a lot, it's great fun and if one doesn't charge any money for works made by sd i don't mind using them.
 
Haerangil said:
Personally i enjoy the technology quite a lot, it's great fun and if one doesn't charge any money for works made by sd i don't mind using them.
Click to expand...

Do not think his style this popular to be copied worldwide. Those who know art enough to recognise his style would want to have the original with siganture on their walls. What makes a work of art costly is the signature and provenance of a piece, not what it actually looks like.
 
That is how high art works on the market, not illustration. Books are quite expensive in print, to order original artwork is quite costly... or was.
 
Haerangil said:
That is how high art works on the market, not illustration. Books are quite expensive in print, to order original artwork is quite costly... or was.
Click to expand...

And imho still will be. Cheap children's books used stock-pictures anyways, and those that wanted a named illustrator for an own style will still hire one. There are probably far less skilled AI specialist out there than there are illustrators, so I would think hiring an AI artist would cost more yet, not less.
 
Last edited:
No. Just think about old pulp magazine covers and the newest illustrations for Harry Potter and you notice the difference in quality. I am pretty sure hand made illustration already is a rare art and will become even more rare and expensive and AI will soon be the new standard. So i CAN understand why artists would want to secure their works and not allow them to be trained without compensation.
 
Haerangil said:
No. Just think about old pulp magazine covers and the newest illustrations for Harry Potter and you notice the difference in quality. I am pretty sure hand made illustration already is a rare art and will become even more rare and expensive and AI will soon be the new standard. So i CAN understand why artists would want to secure their works and not allow them to be trained without compensation.
Click to expand...

You do not need AI for that effect. Look at the selfmade book cover pictures that use ready-made stock stencil-like elements - no AI needed. Photoshop or its derivates is easier to master the AI if you need consistant results. And so is Canva or similar.
 
Last edited:
Rob Harding said:
No, on that front it is an issue. Corridor Crew have both produced a legitimate piece of art with ai functionality while also making a video to explore legal implications of the tech. It’s a tricky space.


but anyway, back to LotR, I would love to hear suggestions of works that play in the tropes and and aesthetic if Tolkien but have their own interesting voice and perspective.
Click to expand...
For context, here’s some traditional 2D animators (who worked on classic Disney Renaissance films) discussing the above AI enhanced film made by the Corridor crew (15.28 onwards):

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top