> No matter how many times a prompt is revised and resubmitted, the final output reflects the user’s acceptance of the AI system’s interpretation, rather than authorship of the expression it contains.
If the photography was invented today would it be judged to be creative and containing authorship?
The art of photography is mostly the art of selection of outputs.
How's Henri Cartier-Bresson different from prompt engineer when he took hundreds of photos of the same street to ultimately pick his great photos:
he is still choosing what to take a picture of, rather than being presented 10 pictures and going "that one". In more practical terms, he had to expend the effort to actually be there in person and do the work. I know AI people pretend that coming up with good prompts is somehow a ton of work, but does anyone actually believe that?
Prompt engineer still chooses to type in prompt describing something specific and presses enter.
And after photographer generates 10 photos he obviously goes "that one".
Photographer makes no effort contributing to determining the color of each of millions of pixels. He just turns few knobs, points the thing and presses a button. Many, many times. Then he picks. The bulk of the art is in picking afterwards. That's when you see the product, evaluate its artistic value and claim it as your art. Another part of art is having interesting idea up front.
I don't really know about AI art but I know how photography is done. The kind that is displayed later in galleries.
And all the objections hurled against AI art would hit photography in the face if it stood in the way.
Readit News
If the photography was invented today would it be judged to be creative and containing authorship?
The art of photography is mostly the art of selection of outputs.
How's Henri Cartier-Bresson different from prompt engineer when he took hundreds of photos of the same street to ultimately pick his great photos:
https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2F...
Does the prompt engineer gets the copyright ? Or does the company (i.e. the photo camera) ?
Deleted Comment
And after photographer generates 10 photos he obviously goes "that one".
Photographer makes no effort contributing to determining the color of each of millions of pixels. He just turns few knobs, points the thing and presses a button. Many, many times. Then he picks. The bulk of the art is in picking afterwards. That's when you see the product, evaluate its artistic value and claim it as your art. Another part of art is having interesting idea up front.
I don't really know about AI art but I know how photography is done. The kind that is displayed later in galleries.
And all the objections hurled against AI art would hit photography in the face if it stood in the way.
Deleted Comment
Art produced by an model that was trained using Google Street View might be an example.
Lol
"Oh Dear, Did Someone Steal Something From OpenAI?" https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/other/oh-dear-did-someone-st...