You must log in or # to comment.
Oh cool, that looks easy enough. Let me try:
Wow! How do you come up with your ideas?
Sometimes I get inspired xx
oh wow that’s like, dark
It completely changes the meaning of the comic. Nice job! I dub thee “original content”
Holy cow! It’s like a new comic, who inspired you?
@skisnow@lemmy.ca @The_Picard_Maneuver@piefed.world
@comicstrips@lemmy.worldDoes the following count as original?
Looks brand new to me.
Bit too avant-garde for my tastes.
Oh my God! This is your best work … In all my years teaching I’ve never seen something so… needless … to say this is art… I can’t teach you anything
We definitely need a himym community around here
New Artist: “You’ve inspired me to learn your artistic style and mimic your techniques. Now I’m going to tell my friends and they’re going to start doing it too. And before long, there will be an entire artistic tradition based on your original works.”
Original Artist: “You absolute piece of shit.”
Funny story, I was once on the periphery of a bit of fandom drama (I won’t say which TV fandom cause I don’t want to trigger/dox any crazies) where a particular fandom artist/fanfic writer wrote a popular fanfic with accompanying art. This was successful enough that some other artists within the fandom drew their own sincere art of that fanfic, with appropriate links to the original work.
The author flew off the handle, blocked them all, sent takedown notices, and posted an epic rant about how they were using their intellectual property without permission. When someone (cough) pointed out the hypocrisy of them trying to assert ownership of a setting featuring characters that they themselves didn’t own or have permission for to begin with, they claimed that it was different because everyone already knows the TV show and it belongs to the public, whereas their fanfic of it that they published online was personal to them.
I don’t know if there’s any moral to the story beyond artists are weird and sometimes psycho
I won’t say which TV fandom cause I don’t want to trigger/dox any crazies
LOL, it wasn’t MLP on that occasion, but it could just as easily have been.
It was my first thought as well, but this situation didn’t sound too familiar to me
Delicious. That’s right up there with that time an indie romance author tried to trademark “cocky” and found herself at the pointy end of millions of romance readers. Premium popcorn material.
Is this about the straight werewolves author?
I don’t know what that is, but it doesn’t surprise me that it’s happened more than once.
My money is on Harry Potter fandom.
This is how it came across to me too but maybe there’s context I’m missing.
A younger or less-experienced person comes up, says “I drew this like you draw!” and you’re mad? That’s a you problem.
Think it’s that they’re saying it’s their own original art when it’s clearly at least replicating the first artist’s style.
Is copying a style bad
No, but lieing about it is
That’s the thing with (human made) art - even something that’s arguably “the same” is still a product of another person’s effort and viewpoint, and will embody their personal approach to the same task as much as the original does of its artist. It’s a personal story of effort and care, unique to any that attempt it.
For example, music covers. I keep an eye on the youtube channel of Triple J, a radio station that regularly has visiting musical guests perform covers of songs of their choice, and the different approaches to taking on another artist’s music is so interesting. Some do more direct imitations that mirror the original, while others take radically different approaches that bring entirely new meaning. It’s all great stuff.
If anyone here love short novels, random recommendation on the topic: Borges’ Pierre Menard, Author of Don Quixote
Where is the line between copying and inspiring? What is new art?
All artists copy.
“Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery”
It’s also how you learn to do anything.
That’s why I think it’s funny that people hate on AI generated art for using copyrighted artwork for training.
It’s the exact same thing a human would do to learn how to do art.
If a human copies someone else’s art, that is copyright infringement. You say that AI works exactly the same way. Somehow you think that people should not be angry when AI is used to copy their work. If I ask you what is 2+2, will you tell me 5?
Not exactly the same the human would have to pay to view the art first
Not necessarily but also irrelevant whether they did
What are you talking about? Art is available on the Internet without paying to view it. The same art that the AI models train on.
When I was in film school I used to mess with a friend coming back with a exact idea for a script he told me about a week later but with the characters professions changed from writers to clowns. He later learned that I was never going through with my “script” ideas so he stopped getting mad about it.
Still better than AI literally copying the color of pixels and their orientation.
I think he mean his own “original prompt”.
Mr. Lovenstein would like a word with this guy.
OC Do Not Steal
Now replace the orange guy with AI
