Ilmarinen-Shadowstar

A lot of people question my work and no one seems to know where to draw the line between what we can call artwork when it comes to AI work and what we can’t The utilization of a 3-D model of a character, originally created by an individual, as a guide for an artificial intelligence (AI) system to draw that character does not constitute stealing. This is primarily due to the fact that the AI system solely relies on the 3-D model as a reference for aspects such as the character's appearance, coloration, and pose, while the actual act of drawing is executed by the AI itself. The fundamental distinction lies in the fact that the AI merely replicates what has already been constructed within a 3-D platform, rather than appropriating the creative work itself. To delve deeper into this explanation, it is crucial to recognize that the 3-D model serves as a blueprint or a visual representation of the character. It encapsulates the intricate details of its design, including attributes like physical features, proportions, and even the specific arrangement of colors. Essentially, the 3-D model embodies the artistic vision and expression of the original creator, who designed and sculpted it with their unique perspective and creativity. When an AI system employs the 3-D model as a reference to draw the character, it is essentially using it as a template or guide to understand how the character should appear and be depicted in a 2-dimensional medium. The AI, armed with a multitude of algorithms and computational techniques, analyzes the spatial information and other visual cues present within the 3-D model. By processing this data, the AI can then generate a 2-dimensional representation of the character, replicating its appearance and pose. The key distinction in this process is that the AI does not possess the ability to independently conceive or create the character from scratch. Instead, it operates within the boundaries of the predefined visual information provided by the 3-D model. The AI system, being an algorithmic entity, lacks the inherent creative faculties and the subjective decision-making capacity that an individual artist possesses. Its output is purely a result of computational operations based on pre-existing data, rather than an original creation. Therefore, the act of utilizing a 3-D model as a guide for an AI system to draw a character should be viewed as a collaborative and transformative process, rather than an act of stealing. The AI system augments and expands upon the original 3-D model by translating it into a different medium and representation. It is important to acknowledge the contributions of both the original creator of the 3-D model and the AI system, as they each play distinct roles in the generation of the final artwork. In conclusion, the use of a 3-D model to guide an AI system in drawing a character is a creative process that builds upon pre-existing work, rather than an act of theft. The AI system interprets the visual information present in the 3-D model, utilizing it as a reference to generate a 2-dimensional representation. This collaborative process acknowledges the contributions of the original creator and the AI system, ultimately producing a distinct artwork that combines elements from both parties' involvement. The question of where to draw the line in terms of AI artwork and whether it can be considered stealing requires careful consideration. While it may be challenging to establish clear boundaries, it is essential to evaluate the nature of AI-generated art and its relationship with human creativity. One perspective suggests that AI artwork should not be regarded as stealing because it operates within predefined parameters set by human creators. The AI system relies on existing data, such as the 3-D model in my previous example, to generate new artwork. It lacks true creative agency and subjective intentionality. Hence, arguing that AI artwork is equivalent to stealing could be seen as misconstruing the nature of the process. However, others may argue that AI-generated art raises ethical and legal concerns, particularly in cases where it closely resembles or appropriates existing artistic works without appropriate attribution or permission. In such instances, questions of plagiarism and intellectual property rights come into play. Determining the extent to which AI systems should be held accountable for potentially infringing on human artistic expression remains a complex and evolving challenge. It is worth noting that the acceptance and recognition of digital art provides an intriguing parallel. Initially, digital art faced skepticism and was frowned upon by traditional art communities. However, over time, as digital art gained prominence and demonstrated its own unique merits, it gradually earned acceptance as a legitimate art form. This historical perspective suggests that art forms, including those facilitated by AI, can evolve and find their place within the artistic landscape. To discriminate against all forms of AI-generated art, including those that are widely accepted and utilized by artists as tools or aids in their creative processes, would be overly restrictive. These tools can serve as valuable resources, enhancing human creativity rather than replacing it. It becomes crucial to distinguish between AI-generated art that incorporates elements of human collaboration and those that blatantly appropriate existing works without acknowledgment. In summary, determining the boundaries and ethical implications of AI-generated art is a multifaceted task. While some argue that AI artwork should not be considered stealing due to its reliance on pre-existing data, others highlight concerns of plagiarism and intellectual property rights. Reflecting on the evolution of digital art can provide insights into the acceptance of new art forms. Rather than outright discrimination, careful evaluation and consideration should be employed to differentiate between AI-generated art that aids human creativity and those that infringe upon existing artistic works. So considering my artwork is created using a 3-D model which dictates what the character looks like what colors it has hell even what clothes she is wearing, can we consider it not art, where do we draw the line people?