4 ms·

Say you generate a picture with an AI like midjourney, who's the artist? It's fair to say it's midjourney right? Except midjourney isnt an artist, it's a machin

Say you generate a picture with an AI like midjourney, who's the artist? It's fair to say it's midjourney right? Except midjourney isnt an artist, it's a machine. But a machine can only copy. Or you're saying a machine can be an artist.

Waterluvian 4y ago
It’s also not Photoshop. It’s the person making the non-trivial decisions about what to get the machine to do.
- quadcore 4y ago
  Say you use photoshop to make a picture, who's the artist? It's fair to say you're the artist. Or you are saying photoshop is the artist.
  - Waterluvian 4y ago
    The person using the paintbrush, or the instrument, or photoshop, or AI, is the artist.
    - quadcore 4y ago
      You're saying the AI has the copyright. So how did you get the permission from the AI to copy that picture? You asked - nicely? Something in the order of "hey AI, can I copy the picture you have the copyright of?"
      - Waterluvian 4y ago
        I’m not sure how else I can write this. Maybe I’m mis-using commas? The AI does NOT hold a copyright. That’s ridiculous. The person using the AI does. It’s just a tool like a piano or a paintbrush. A piano doesn’t own the copyright to any music. It can’t. It has no rights. It’s a piano.
Udo 4y ago
> who's the artist? It's fair to say it's midjourney right? By convention, we're using the term artist only for people. Midjourney is not a person, it's a tool. Just like a Gravatar image is not made by the artist Gravatar, it's made by a generator, using rules and some input. Midjourney's rules come from all the stuff it saw when it was trained, and its input comes from humans entering text prompts. You could argue the same applies to human artists, but that doesn't make them equivalent just because they have some things in common. So, Midjourney is not an artist. But is a person entering a prompt an artist or not? I would argue that there are people skilled and creative at engineering prompts, or further refining the generated outputs. It's not NOT art. Then again, that has always been a matter of interpretation. > But a machine can only copy. Or you're saying a machine can be an artist. That's a very Hollywood interpretation. Obviously a machine can be an artist, because humans are also machines (unless you're arguing for the supernatural). As I said above, the common convention is that an artist should be a person. We have long ago decided that a person can use tools, including generative algorithms, to make what is considered art. However, nobody is obligated to appreciate any given artwork, so I don't see what's being lost if we just let this development play out. > So - with as few words as possible, who is the artist of that picture? (HN won't let me reply to your question below directly, so I'll add it here). In your opinion, does every picture HAVE to be made by an artist? If your answer is "yes", then the artist is the human entering the prompt, although the artistic work may have been quite minimal. If your answer is "no", or "it depends on the result", there may be no artist. Let's say a camera takes a picture of a public place every few minutes and puts it online. Who's the artist?
- quadcore 4y ago
  Say you generate a picture with midjourney, someone has to be the artist of that picture right? So - with as few words as possible, who is the artist of that picture?
  - dragonwriter 4y ago
    > Say you generate a picture with midjourney, someone has to be the artist of that picture right? No, they don't. Nor, if there is at least one artist, does it need to be exactly one. An image can be created without artistry/authorship or with multiple people’s artistry combined, either by collaboration or otherwise.
EMIRELADERO 4y ago
The machine is not an artist, but it is a generator of artistic expression.
nottorp 4y ago
Say, midjourney is out of the news. Has it gone beyond changing colours off album covers?

Waterluvian 4y ago

It’s also not Photoshop. It’s the person making the non-trivial decisions about what to get the machine to do.

quadcore 4y ago
Say you use photoshop to make a picture, who's the artist? It's fair to say you're the artist. Or you are saying photoshop is the artist.
- Waterluvian 4y ago
  The person using the paintbrush, or the instrument, or photoshop, or AI, is the artist.
  - quadcore 4y ago
    You're saying the AI has the copyright. So how did you get the permission from the AI to copy that picture? You asked - nicely? Something in the order of "hey AI, can I copy the picture you have the copyright of?"
    - Waterluvian 4y ago
      I’m not sure how else I can write this. Maybe I’m mis-using commas? The AI does NOT hold a copyright. That’s ridiculous. The person using the AI does. It’s just a tool like a piano or a paintbrush. A piano doesn’t own the copyright to any music. It can’t. It has no rights. It’s a piano.

Udo 4y ago

> who's the artist? It's fair to say it's midjourney right? By convention, we're using the term artist only for people. Midjourney is not a person, it's a tool. Just like a Gravatar image is not made by the artist Gravatar, it's made by a generator, using rules and some input. Midjourney's rules come from all the stuff it saw when it was trained, and its input comes from humans entering text prompts. You could argue the same applies to human artists, but that doesn't make them equivalent just because they have some things in common. So, Midjourney is not an artist. But is a person entering a prompt an artist or not? I would argue that there are people skilled and creative at engineering prompts, or further refining the generated outputs. It's not NOT art. Then again, that has always been a matter of interpretation. > But a machine can only copy. Or you're saying a machine can be an artist. That's a very Hollywood interpretation. Obviously a machine can be an artist, because humans are also machines (unless you're arguing for the supernatural). As I said above, the common convention is that an artist should be a person. We have long ago decided that a person can use tools, including generative algorithms, to make what is considered art. However, nobody is obligated to appreciate any given artwork, so I don't see what's being lost if we just let this development play out. > So - with as few words as possible, who is the artist of that picture? (HN won't let me reply to your question below directly, so I'll add it here). In your opinion, does every picture HAVE to be made by an artist? If your answer is "yes", then the artist is the human entering the prompt, although the artistic work may have been quite minimal. If your answer is "no", or "it depends on the result", there may be no artist. Let's say a camera takes a picture of a public place every few minutes and puts it online. Who's the artist?

quadcore 4y ago
Say you generate a picture with midjourney, someone has to be the artist of that picture right? So - with as few words as possible, who is the artist of that picture?
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  > Say you generate a picture with midjourney, someone has to be the artist of that picture right? No, they don't. Nor, if there is at least one artist, does it need to be exactly one. An image can be created without artistry/authorship or with multiple people’s artistry combined, either by collaboration or otherwise.

EMIRELADERO 4y ago

The machine is not an artist, but it is a generator of artistic expression.

nottorp 4y ago

Say, midjourney is out of the news. Has it gone beyond changing colours off album covers?