this post was submitted on 01 Sep 2023
177 points (93.2% liked)

Technology

60082 readers
4864 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
L3s@fry.gs
L4s@fry.gs
L4s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
177
Visual artists fight back against AI companies for repurposing their work (apnews.com)
submitted 1 year ago by L4s@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
74 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Visual artists fight back against AI companies for repurposing their work::Three visual artists are suing artificial intelligence image-generators to protect their copyrights and careers.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FooBarrington@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I absolutely approve of AI tools as a way for artists to empower themselves. Because there is human input.

Why does that "fix it" for you? Earlier you stated that AI cannot create anything new by its very nature. Why does the status of the output change if an artist uses it? Why is it art when an artist does it, but not if a non-artist does it?

[–] MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm not talking about "artists" who fiddle with prompts until they got something pretty and then treat the result as a finished piece.

I'm talking about people generate a nose, a hand, a set of abs, a piece of clothing, a texture for a set of clothing, and then combine these with their "traditional" digital art skills.

They are using the AI like a brush, not a printer.

[–] FooBarrington@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And why is only that "art"? Why is it not art when I use in-painting to generate individual parts of the image? Where is the magical border where it turns from not-art to art?

[–] MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The magical border is whether it originated in a human mind. What tools were used to get it out and into world don't matter.

A lot of AI content out there right now, isn't the result of that process. The AI generated something the artist liked, rather than the artist bending the AI into realising what they could already see in their mind.

[–] FooBarrington@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So if I enter a prompt and click "generate" it clearly originated in my mind, and it's art.

[–] MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No.

[–] FooBarrington@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Interesting that you don't explain why, as it satisfies your earlier statement.