I’ve heard arguments for both sides and i think it’s more complicated then simply yes or no. what do you guys think?

  • Jamie@jamie.moe
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    Some AI generated images can require a lot of tweaking to get a final result. For example, someone might have a workflow that involves generating several images, then picking one as a base. They then take that base, and use img2img to rework certain parts to suit a vision before applying a set of post-processing effects in a traditional editor.

    Or, they generate an image and use it as a base for some sort of more traditional art, or use AI generated elements in a work that is otherwise drawn traditionally.

    There’s a lot of grey where I think just dismissing any creative vision is doing disrespect to the person that wanted to make something out of that vision, and put in a good amount of work outside just proompting and taking the first image that looked okay.

    • arquebus_x@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      What it comes down to there is whether the act of selection is an act of art. If there is no skill other than picking, I’m not sure I’d consider it an artistic act. (For similar reasons I’m very much on the fence about a lot of modern art.)

      • Jamie@jamie.moe
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        When it comes to selection, we already have a valid form of copyright which is explicitly that- compositions. If I take a bunch of royalty-free songs, and make a book of sheet music where I hand selected songs to be in that book, I can own a copyright on the composition without owning any of the featured material.

        So, if someone selects a bunch of individual elements in an image using img2img, is that now a composition?