- Messages
- 4,605
- Name
- Graham
- Edit My Images
- No
I don't think this has been posted, but there is a bit of furore going on about the AI updating of Ansel Adams Moonrise: Hernandez photograph.
For those who don't like B/W: the AI solution for $10,000
- Thread starter myotis
- Start date
Nod
Tootles
- Messages
- 49,618
- Name
- Nod (UK)
- Edit My Images
- Yes
TBH, I reckon the man himself (AA) would have enjoyed that result, although perhaps he'd have enjoyed creating it himself rather more!
The © implications are a whole different issue...
Personally, I like both images but feel the AI adaptation a little overcooked for my taste. Certainly not $10,000's worth!
The © implications are a whole different issue...
Personally, I like both images but feel the AI adaptation a little overcooked for my taste. Certainly not $10,000's worth!
- Messages
- 12,124
- Edit My Images
- No
I suppose it comes down to whether the work is still in copyright and if so, it qualifies or fails to qualify under the rules for exception.
OP
- Messages
- 4,605
- Name
- Graham
- Edit My Images
- No
I think it probably goes beyond the legalities.
As for the legal side, I'm not sure if the copyright stays with the Trust, as long as it exists, or whether it still lapses after a set period.
- Messages
- 12,124
- Edit My Images
- No
American copyright law appears to be a minefield. So far as I understand it, up until 1976, protection of a registered item was 28 years and in 1976 this was revised to the life of the author plus 75 years.
Whether this last applies to items which were created before 1976 I really don't know but this article suggests that it may be up to 95 years in certain circumstances...
Copyright law of the United States - Wikipedia
- Messages
- 40
- Edit My Images
- Yes
It’s just lazy isn’t it. Im all for trying new things, they could have paid a working artist to make it colour and theyd at least be some tangible added value
Nod
Tootles
- Messages
- 49,618
- Name
- Nod (UK)
- Edit My Images
- Yes
And, who do you sue? If the "artist" was a computer, can it be sued?
Does the prompt "Make a realistic color version of Ansel Adams’ iconic “Moonrise Over Hernandez”. imply simply colorizing the original or is it vague enough to simply include that as an option?
OP
- Messages
- 4,605
- Name
- Graham
- Edit My Images
- No
I can't back into the link I posted, but in one the things I read it said that the colouring was done by a named well-known artist (not that I had heard of them) using AI, and was part of as series they had created on several well known photographs.
EDIT: I've tried to find the post where it named the artist, but so far I can only find posts that say it wasn't attributed to any particular artist :-(
OK, on further searching and proper reading, I see that the prompt you gave is the one that was actually used, I guess I've picked up the wrong end of the stick here :-(
Last edited:
OP
- Messages
- 4,605
- Name
- Graham
- Edit My Images
- No
I don't think it is exactly like that, artists are using AI as "part of their work" and, as I said in another post, the work was done by a named apparently well known artist as part of a series of similar work.
It's also being sold by a serious art dealer, so I assume there was more to it than a simple prompt.
EDIT: I've tried to find the post where it named the artist, but so far I can only find posts that say it wasn't attributed to any particular artist :-(
OK, on further searching and proper reading, I see that the prompt you gave is the one that was actually used, I guess I've picked up the wrong end of the stick here :-(
Last edited:
OP
- Messages
- 4,605
- Name
- Graham
- Edit My Images
- No
Yes, I looked it up as well.American copyright law appears to be a minefield. So far as I understand it, up until 1976, protection of a registered item was 28 years and in 1976 this was revised to the life of the author plus 75 years.
Whether this last applies to items which were created before 1976 I really don't know but this article suggests that it may be up to 95 years in certain circumstances...
Copyright law of the United States - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Nod
Tootles
- Messages
- 49,618
- Name
- Nod (UK)
- Edit My Images
- Yes
- Messages
- 40
- Edit My Images
- Yes
As I understand Disney was a big driver of this and protecting oldAmerican copyright law appears to be a minefield. So far as I understand it, up until 1976, protection of a registered item was 28 years and in 1976 this was revised to the life of the author plus 75 years.
Whether this last applies to items which were created before 1976 I really don't know but this article suggests that it may be up to 95 years in certain circumstances...
Copyright law of the United States - Wikipedia
Mickey Mouse
- Messages
- 12,124
- Edit My Images
- No
Indeed.
Apparently the revised law is referred to, by some, as the "Micky Mouse Act".
- Messages
- 7,348
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Anyone who wants this sacrilege will be able to replicate their own version for less than $10,000. The problem may be getting a large enough copy of the original, but then again, the AI could increase the resolution too, seeing as it is making stuff up. 
OP
- Messages
- 4,605
- Name
- Graham
- Edit My Images
- No
It's comforting to know that Ansel Adams, managed to give us a better finished picture than an AI prompt.
It hasn't received any comments, but my post about retouching and AI very much centres around AI being incapable of giving the quality of retouching required by "fussy" clients. Who are fussy, because their clients (their customers) have become very good at seeing through AI generated work. Which, I know has become a bit of a recurring theme from me.