@1f2frfbf @m3moellering I seem to remember a similar thing being said about Led Zeppelin and delta blues musicians... and hip hop DJs and the soul music vaults they mined for the building blocks of one of the most transformative art movements of the past 100 years... and what about street artists... or, well... any major art movement of the last century... I mean really since cavemen started smearing finely-hued mud on walls over in the mountains Frogville...
Artists in every medium have been standing on the shoulders of those who came before them since the first art created touched another's soul.
What makes this AI stuff so much different..? Is it simply because today's silicon allows the process to be switched into hyperspace..?
Is it because the wrong people are profiting?
Is it because now "anyone can make art"...?
Sincerely, why do so many people appear to be so up in arms about these developments?
@LocalStain Fair enough. But I have far more respect for someone who bought a record, sat next to a speaker and learned (and maybe improved on) a riff, than someone who typed text in a box that commanded a program that was trained on images it had no permission to use programmed by coders who don't profit off the product. That kind of "🤷♂️Rights and permissions?" might have flown back in the 1950's, but we can do better by artists (of all types) these days...
Note bene: I am a working artist who has no copyright protection of his early work (because it was either Work-for-hire or 3d sculpture, so...) so I'm certainly no fan of copyright as it stands, but even less of a fan of those who don't at least acknowledge their sources. We have a word for that in academia: plagiarism, and it's a death sentence.
@1f2frfbf I mean it didn't fly back then either so much as it was just they way things were till someone said something that effected a change. Until then all the fat-cats at the top, and the folks who had the talent to manipulate what they learned into something new and marketable, were really the only ones who made any money... Or became famous...
I guess what I'm saying, above all, is the more things change, the more they stay the same. With both artists and critics, it would seem..
And when we really come down to it; do Wes Anderson and JRR Tolkien need any more money... Or can someone talented with the tools currently available mine the past to create something new to entertain the future..?
@LocalStain The last thing I thought I would be doing today was defend Wes Anderson, but here I am...
I agree there is a conversation to be had about this, but honestly, look at this guy's other work and convince me that he's worth the oxygen...
There are artists and then there are view collectors, and as a famous judge said, I know the difference when I see it. Let Mr. Anderson's lawyers come after him and the AI hacks that empower him with all guns blazing until they pay their share for the work they used without lifting a finger or brain cell.
@1f2frfbf "the work they used without lifting a finger or brain cell."
That's a fairly bold claim. All art, even the derivative crap seen here takes a bit of work. I can see you are a bit hot about this so;
No disrespect intended, I'm just looking to get some perspective. The bit about Tolkien and Anderson not needing money, while true, was meant as a joke.
To be clear; I'm not defending this artist. I'm defending the idea that for art to move forward, and this has been extrapolated on at length by people waaaay smarter and more articulate than me, it's going to be a product of that which came before it.
And one of my best friends has spent the last 40 years getting those blues and soul musicians whose backs hiphop was built on paid so I get it.
@LocalStain You're right. I need to take a step back. This trailer and the previous hit a nerve. I'm sorry if I came on too hard. Let's agree to discuss over beer with good music in the future. Cheers!
@LocalStain I understand your position. I was trained as an actor. I not only understand, I know that feeling. But, some of the images I have seen have borrowed so heavily from others work that I find it offensive. Drumpf supporter offensive? No. But I see no good way forward. To me, this seems more like Pandora and the box than social media.
@m3moellering If you'd have asked, orchestra musicians were never going to work again when word of Edison's Cylinders hit the pro circuit. And don't get me started on those darn "talking pictures" everyone is so enamored with these days... Proper theater will never survive.
Something, something faster horses...
I know it's not apples to apples, but I do get it.
Same for the Star Wars version.
Artists in every medium have been standing on the shoulders of those who came before them since the first art created touched another's soul.
What makes this AI stuff so much different..? Is it simply because today's silicon allows the process to be switched into hyperspace..?
Is it because the wrong people are profiting?
Is it because now "anyone can make art"...?
Sincerely, why do so many people appear to be so up in arms about these developments?
(aside from the fact that most of it is crap)
?
The internet in 2023: "Everybody panic!"
I guess what I'm saying, above all, is the more things change, the more they stay the same. With both artists and critics, it would seem..
And when we really come down to it; do Wes Anderson and JRR Tolkien need any more money... Or can someone talented with the tools currently available mine the past to create something new to entertain the future..?
I agree there is a conversation to be had about this, but honestly, look at this guy's other work and convince me that he's worth the oxygen...
There are artists and then there are view collectors, and as a famous judge said, I know the difference when I see it. Let Mr. Anderson's lawyers come after him and the AI hacks that empower him with all guns blazing until they pay their share for the work they used without lifting a finger or brain cell.
I'm done here.
That's a fairly bold claim. All art, even the derivative crap seen here takes a bit of work. I can see you are a bit hot about this so;
No disrespect intended, I'm just looking to get some perspective. The bit about Tolkien and Anderson not needing money, while true, was meant as a joke.
To be clear; I'm not defending this artist. I'm defending the idea that for art to move forward, and this has been extrapolated on at length by people waaaay smarter and more articulate than me, it's going to be a product of that which came before it.
And one of my best friends has spent the last 40 years getting those blues and soul musicians whose backs hiphop was built on paid so I get it.
Cheers.
It's a deal.
Something, something faster horses...
I know it's not apples to apples, but I do get it.
Cheers!