Comment on How much did photography "stole" painter jobs ?
C4d@lemmy.world 11 months agoLet’s explore this further. When we look at the work of a human we can often see their influences (and they can often acknowledge them or even cite specific works). In a way, they are able to credit those they were inspired by.
Would an “AI” be able to do the same? I’m guessing it probably can, but more as a statistical similarity to other works. I don’t know if it can cite its sources.
VivaceMoss@lemmy.world 11 months ago
A human can say that they were influenced by XYZ but they might not be crediting all of the instructors they had, or all the art books they read, all the stepping stones that got them to the point of being able to produce a work that has an identifiable influence. Then consider the people who influenced the person they’re citing as an influence, and so on and so on. I don’t know that the AI can tell you where every flourish comes from, but the person using it as a tool certainly could tell you what tags they used, which often include "in the style of "
Laticauda@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Instructors and art books literally give permission to use them as a “stepping stone” by definition.
Also the main difference is that a human has a human mind and is making creative decisions unique to that human. The problem is that a narrow AI algorithm cannot be anything BUT derivative. If you never give a human any input they can still make art, that’s why we have cave paintings. But a narrow AI algorithm needs specific input via specific pieces of art or else it can’t create anything. It cannot be anything but derivative. With that in mind permission and consent is much more important to the artists whose specific pieces are being fed into the algorithm.