Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Art Waring" data-source="post: 9579474" data-attributes="member: 7037141">This is actually one of the reasons that I quit doing freelance commissions, as I don't like being asked to do 1:1 copies of other pieces of art (and thankfully, I have never had the displeasure of personally being asked to redo an ai-generated image). The primary purpose of hiring any particular artist, is that you like their work and their particular style. If I hand over a visual reference to a freelancer, I would never expect a 1:1 replica, I would expect that they use their own insight and talents to create a piece of art based on their interpretation of the reference, and any written details I provide.Pretty sure I answered this above, I would not want to try to create a duplicate of anything, the point is to allow an artist to express themselves through their work, duplicating things &quot;exactly&quot; does not allow this to process happen. And that is of course ignoring the typical artist process of drafting and revising a piece over multiple iterations to get the desired result.As for &quot;does this count as human generated?&quot; question. Well, due to the fact that a lot of these details are still being fought over in court, we will have to wait and see what happens. As it currently stands, only a human can register their work with the US copyright office, machines, no matter how many prompts and revisions you got through, will not be eligible for copyright (an ai-bro has tried numerous times to copyright an ai-generated image with the explanation that he went through thousands of prompts, the US copyright office does not care how much time you spent typing words into gen-ai to get results, as it still has to be made by a person to get a copyright certificate).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Art Waring, post: 9579474, member: 7037141"] This is actually one of the reasons that I quit doing freelance commissions, as I don't like being asked to do 1:1 copies of other pieces of art (and thankfully, I have never had the displeasure of personally being asked to redo an ai-generated image). The primary purpose of hiring any particular artist, is that you like their work and their particular style. If I hand over a visual reference to a freelancer, I would never expect a 1:1 replica, I would expect that they use their own insight and talents to create a piece of art based on their interpretation of the reference, and any written details I provide. Pretty sure I answered this above, I would not [I]want[/I] to try to create a duplicate of anything, the point is to allow an artist to express themselves through their work, duplicating things "exactly" does not allow this to process happen. And that is of course ignoring the typical artist process of drafting and revising a piece over multiple iterations to get the desired result. As for "does this count as human generated?" question. Well, due to the fact that a lot of these details are still being fought over in court, we will have to wait and see what happens. As it currently stands, only a human can register their work with the US copyright office, machines, no matter how many prompts and revisions you got through, will not be eligible for copyright (an ai-bro has tried numerous times to copyright an ai-generated image with the explanation that he went through thousands of prompts, the US copyright office does not care how much time you spent typing words into gen-ai to get results, as it still has to be made by a person to get a copyright certificate). [/QUOTE]

Verification