Interesting. Not my style, mostly, but interesting.
As for
TheBanjo wrote: ↑July 18th, 2021, 10:47 pm
Today I was keen to create an image that I could use on Twitter and Facebook to announce to my teeny weeny social media following that my solo reading of Joseph Conrad's novel "Nostromo" is now available on Librivox.
you could wait until the cover is posted. Shouldn't take longer than a week or two.
Cheers, Ava.
Resident witch of LibriVox, channelling
Granny Weatherwax: "I ain't Nice."
-- AvailleAudio.com
Availle wrote: ↑July 19th, 2021, 1:32 am
Interesting. Not my style, mostly, but interesting.
you could wait until the cover is posted. Shouldn't take longer than a week or two.
As for 'style', the application is surprisingly versatile. Want a 'van Gogh look'? Just add 'in the style of van Gogh' to the prompt. Seriously! I'm not here to advocate the use of the program, however, merely to draw it to the attention of this forum as a (possibly not useful?) option.
As for your second point, you're quite right, and I must admit I didn't even think of this. Just wildly impatient! Should be more cautious in future.
This raises all kinds of thorny questions around who owns the rights to these artworks, both legally and morally.
"It's a bit of a nightmare," Mr Browning said.
"Giotto may be upset his religious paintings were turned into a Melbourne cafe."
From the article above..
It's a good point, and definitely worth considering. On the other hand, would you say that my own examples posed these kinds of thorny questions, any more than if they had, say, been painted by me manually (a feat of which I readily concede I am quite incapable)?
I think the results are Art and perfekt - but i doubt they are Public Domain
I looked Up a face Generator once and they copyrighted the results under a CC license (Not 0) what i remember
schrm wrote: ↑July 19th, 2021, 2:14 am
I think the results are Art and perfekt - but i doubt they are Public Domain
I looked Up a face Generator once and they copyrighted the results under a CC license (Not 0) what i remember
You may well be right, and that could be a killer. Well outside my area of expertise, I must say.
That is what is worrying me too - is the concept AND the image "database" they use copyright free. It's a fun idea but I remember there was at one stage online a way of putting in a number of words and getting them back in different colours and sizes and vertical and horizontal and it suddenly ceased to be public domain.
This raises all kinds of thorny questions around who owns the rights to these artworks, both legally and morally.
"It's a bit of a nightmare," Mr Browning said.
"Giotto may be upset his religious paintings were turned into a Melbourne cafe."
From the article above..
These AI generated images seem logically to be a sort of COLLAGE. The problem arises when a collage containing some non-PD images are used to create a "new" image attributable to no natural person. Fankenstein images!
-- Bill Jones
When you think that you have exhausted all possibilities, remember this: you haven't.
--- Thomas Edison
williamjones wrote: ↑July 19th, 2021, 7:03 am
These AI generated images seem logically to be a sort of COLLAGE. The problem arises when a collage containing some non-PD images are used to create a "new" image attributable to no natural person. Fankenstein images!
Collage, yes. Good name for it. Some quite interesting, others just a jumble. I presume the images are layered so one can move them around or discard/hide them.
Surely, the AI program checks to see that all images used are PD! Right?
Last edited by msfry on July 19th, 2021, 8:20 am, edited 1 time in total.
it is not just the pictures, it is the software used,die results of the software and so on.
remember the lawsuit about the ape who shot a selfie?
in the last arguments, most times i ended up in philosophy of who is the creator.
the software developer for sure is one of the real life, true and living people involved.
annise wrote: ↑July 11th, 2021, 9:18 pm
IMPORTANT NOTICE re the claims system
In response to the rare occurrence of a claim being made twice in a limited time period by 2 different makers. 2 of my fellow admins login tried to replicate this and were able to sometimes
Their report
" There is some bug in the system where if the timing is a certain way or if the page isn't reloaded (not just refreshed), the claim won't show and someone else can claim it. I don't know who claimed it first this time. Let's make a pledge to reload the cover page before making a claim, when it's been open on our computer for anything more than a minute or two. That way we can be more certain it hasn't been claimed in that time period."
Anne
Just for protocol: I claimed Nostromo this morning, but is now claimed by annise. Don't know if this has to do with it. I am pretty sure I reloaded before I did my claim.
"it's worse than you know!" - "it usually is." | Find a growing collection of my covers in higher resolution at flickr
It's all yours - I haven't started anything - it was late at night when I claimed it because no one seemed to want it and I did think I reloaded the list.