Yes, a style can be copied. But the difference is a human artist, in order to imitate a style might take years of training (self-taught or not) and really have to apply their craft, whereas AI can produce a "work of art" in seconds. I know when I create an album, because I do it alone, it takes some…
Yes, a style can be copied. But the difference is a human artist, in order to imitate a style might take years of training (self-taught or not) and really have to apply their craft, whereas AI can produce a "work of art" in seconds. I know when I create an album, because I do it alone, it takes sometimes years of effort, and thousands of dollars to produce it, let alone distribute and market it.
And what if you did not have the creators permission to even "view" or "hear" their style? For example, if you are an up and coming human creator listening to the radio and hear a style, and fall in love with it and begin to imitate it, it stands to reason that the artist you are listening to has worked for years behind the scenes to get there, inked some sort of deal with a record company and are receiving compensation for their creation. And you might go and buy their album (download, CD, etc.) just to learn from them. They get compensated.
Most visual artists who put their images out there (say, on Deviant Art) have copyright statements in or around their work, and they're trying to "make it" but haven't gotten there yet. I used Randy Vargas for one of my last projects when he was relatively unknown. I found him on Deviant Art. Artists on there want a human to see it and potentially be interested in hiring them. If an AI company employs spider bots to crawl the internet a copy thousands of copyrighted images into their database so their AI can "Learn", they have essentially stolen the product. The artist should be able to consent or ask for compensation.
Personally, I believe the answer is probably somewhere in between. Artists have been given the shaft for so long by big tech and corporate interests, they would do well to safeguard their work and not just give it away to the first company who promises them exposure (rather than pay).
I also personally believe AI will never match the human spirit. AI will never have to go through the loss of a loved one, a painful betrayal, the excitement of falling in love, or the utter joy of a new birth. It can only imitate. And imitations can ring really hollow and cheesy. So while the world will fill up with mediocre AI generated art, it will only make the true human artists shine.
Agree and Disagree with you on this.
Yes, a style can be copied. But the difference is a human artist, in order to imitate a style might take years of training (self-taught or not) and really have to apply their craft, whereas AI can produce a "work of art" in seconds. I know when I create an album, because I do it alone, it takes sometimes years of effort, and thousands of dollars to produce it, let alone distribute and market it.
And what if you did not have the creators permission to even "view" or "hear" their style? For example, if you are an up and coming human creator listening to the radio and hear a style, and fall in love with it and begin to imitate it, it stands to reason that the artist you are listening to has worked for years behind the scenes to get there, inked some sort of deal with a record company and are receiving compensation for their creation. And you might go and buy their album (download, CD, etc.) just to learn from them. They get compensated.
Most visual artists who put their images out there (say, on Deviant Art) have copyright statements in or around their work, and they're trying to "make it" but haven't gotten there yet. I used Randy Vargas for one of my last projects when he was relatively unknown. I found him on Deviant Art. Artists on there want a human to see it and potentially be interested in hiring them. If an AI company employs spider bots to crawl the internet a copy thousands of copyrighted images into their database so their AI can "Learn", they have essentially stolen the product. The artist should be able to consent or ask for compensation.
Personally, I believe the answer is probably somewhere in between. Artists have been given the shaft for so long by big tech and corporate interests, they would do well to safeguard their work and not just give it away to the first company who promises them exposure (rather than pay).
I also personally believe AI will never match the human spirit. AI will never have to go through the loss of a loved one, a painful betrayal, the excitement of falling in love, or the utter joy of a new birth. It can only imitate. And imitations can ring really hollow and cheesy. So while the world will fill up with mediocre AI generated art, it will only make the true human artists shine.