You must log in or # to comment.
common furry L
Furries are like one of the main customers of artists
they are also one of the main driving forces of custom trained generative image models tho.
As they should be
Takes out popcorn from the microwave
The greatest DYKWIA I’ve ever seen
Don’t you know what I am
Did You Keelhaul Will I Am?
Wonderful.
This burn is far too much for the likes of Neosporin. This Atsuhiko needs a hospital.
WHOA! I used to post in a forum with Jessie over 20 years ago. I didn’t know she worked on Invincible! That’s awesome.
Destroyed in seconds.
Abominable Intelligence
deleted by creator
The characters in the meme are literally on the cover of the first pictured show in her credit roll.
The meme was pulled from a show that SHE animated
That’s literally her art.
But isn’t the reply is right?
What’s the relation between using other people art and the user credentials? Should the AI art okay as long as the one published it already has good credentials?
Public education has gone down hill. Reading comprehension is at an all time low
sorry, meme recognition wasn’t taught in here
Meme recognition? It’s just reading the fucking text that’s right there, dork.
There’s no mention of Invincible in left side picture, how am I supposed to know that?
Okay, so now I get it, you’re just trolling.
It is indeed possible to not know what show the meme on the left is from…
That’s 100% possible, yeah, but that’s not the point and that’s not why I accused then of trolling.
It goes back to reading comprehension. This user is either incapable of seeing the context supplied, or being dense on purpose. All they had to do was see they’re an animator who has a list of shows avaliable, and even if they don’t know what that one show is is, the implication of the two images being supplied together is it IS their art. That’s pretty straight forward context clues involved. This sub is “Don’t you know who I am”, which isn’t even subtext, that’s a direct message to the meaning of the material presented.
They however couldn’t possibly grasp this very simple idea and instead took to arguing when it was pointed out.
They said in their reply that there is no mention of invincible on the left. They clearly know the show and are trolling.
It’s possible. I didn’t know. Now I do, and now I get it. Hell, there might be stuff even you didn’t know. Knowing is that way.
This isn’t about “good credentials”, the person making the post was actually an animator for Invincible (where the image is from).
So it’s the artist posting a meme with their own art from a series, someone accusing them of stealing the art (saying they are as bad as AI) while the artist was actually part of the team that made the series. What is there not to get?
And aside, memes are memes, that specific image conveys a concept in a way that another, custom made, image wouldn’t.
I had no idea until you explained it. I’m not familiar with any of that content. So thank you.
But couldn’t it be easily inferred from the right-side of the image?
I explained that in another comment. I thought the humour was supposed to be that he could do art but choose to use someone else’s art.
I’m not good with riddles.
That the image is from anime called Invincible, sorry not knowing that
I didn’t know that either. It was more than obvious from the context.
Check it out if you have a chance, it’s pretty good, and I’m not usually into animated stuff.
Lmao Invincible isn’t an anime
By the japanese definition it is. It isnt by the bastardized western definition of it.
It’s not “bastardized”, it’s what “Anime” means in English (and arguably every non-Japanese language). It’s a way to differentiate them, like here in Italy we call US cartoons “cartoons” instead of the Italian word for it.
Because people decide to colloqiually change what it means in context, but the problem is, most people cant even agree on a definition of what is and isnt anime because there usually exist some counter example to show that that focused definition is incorrect.
For example, if someone defined it by being animated in japan, Batman the animated series, would be considered anime due to it being animated by Sunrise (which shares the same art style to The Big O, an Anime). Its a borrowed word whose definition was changed from the original definition because people are too lazy to say japanese animation. You them go through the rabbit hole of what would you call animation studios that are purely outsourced.
While other countries animated studios already have their own word for their animation (Aeni for Korea, Donghua for China), the choice for japans is breaking its original meaning.
I think most of the anime community agrees on more or less MAL’s definition: “An animated work created in Japan for the Japanese market”.
Sure, there’s animation studios that outsource a lot, but it’s usually just inbetweens, rarely Key Animation. Directors, screenwriters and other positions are almost always Japanese.
Invincible (where the image is from).
Are we all expected to just know that?
Not at all, but this is how this sub works. It usually goes:
-
Person A posts something
-
Person B tells them they stole it or have no clue about the topic
-
Someone brings up that Person A is actually the owner of the thing, or a leading expert in the field (see the right side of the the meme in this case)
-
(optional) Person B finds out they are dumb and apologize
And at no point does OP actually explain what the fuck is going on, just act smug when we don’t immediately know what they’re on about.
-
No… that’s why they added the part on the right.
Could have just told us outright.
They did - out right
But it still doesn’t help someone unless they start researching the movies shown.
I first took it as, he used someone else’s art, even though he could do his own art. shrug
I took it like that at first but used my deductive reasoning to see who posted the tweet, why they would include two pictures, what it all meant.
Inductive, but yeah
How does an electrician know if a circuit is live?
He uses conductive reasoning
thanks
Yeah I didn’t find it interesting enough to do that, but it is an obvious solution
You’re expected to infer that it’s from one of the shows listed on the right, both because the creator’s name is listed there and because the community’s name is “Don’t You Know Who I Am?”
Wouldn’t it have been easier to just say that?
The picture provides proof, so it makes more sense to do it that way.
Doesn’t stop OP from actually using a title that helps explain literally anything
If you need literally everything explained, that’s okay, but you have to understand that it’s not on everyone else to cater to your level of intelligence.
Context. Are we still doing that?
deleted by creator
Evidently not, when you could just explain nothing and act smug.
Fair enough, but it was also a reference to Archer, a joke if you will.
On the OP. I went from top left, than down, then to the right. Saw the meme template (I didn’t know what was it from), and read the replies. I saw the imdb page and thought “Oh, this meme must be from that show and he wrote it. Burn! Hah. That’s funny.”
And that was it. A fairly certain conclusion given the context.
I literally had never heard of Jessie Lam, or seen or heard of the invincibles before this post. I inferred that they were one of the artists for that show based on the words and context in the images in the 12 seconds it took me to read it.
You’re just dumb, sorry buddy.
When the “good credentials” are “drew the art”…
The original poster (Jessie Lam) worked on Invincible as an animator, so they did use their own art for that meme, which is a screenshot from Invincible.
On the other hand… animators usually sell their work to the studio… so “technically” it is no longer “theirs”, they have no right to use a copy without the studio’s permission… 🤷
They aren’t really talking about the copyright in this context. Also artists can usually still claim the work they did with a studio as their own and show it to others at their discretion, they in fact usually put their work in their portfolio to show to potential future employers, or other animators, or even just an online following. Spencer Wan for example likes to post the line tests/animation tests/keyframes/storyboards/etc for some of his animation sequences on twitter, and has done so for Castlevania, The Owl House, Spider-verse, etc. Animators just can’t sell the same work for profit or provide the completed project in its entirety, at least not without permission. There may be restrictions on how early they can show their work publicly depending on the contract, but that’s usually to prevent major spoilers or leaks, and varies between studios/projects. Also, they still get credited for their work in the project they worked on in the credits, so it’s not like they would be completely divorced from it even if they weren’t allowed to share it separately. It’s still classified as “their” work.
Yet the original characters Invincible and Omni-man were created by Robert Kirkman, who did not illustrate the original comicbooks (I think). Man, this thing goes deeeep.
It isn’t as deep as you think it is
That’s what she said.
He said, in a not uncommon self burn
The picture in the meme is a screenshot from the show. It’s not about who created the characters or drew the original comics, it’s about who drew that screenshot.
Only one person draws for most animation studios.
This specific person drew for this specific animation studio which created the screenshot in the meme.
It was a joke about ownership and the complications of working with other peoples IP. Something AI-enthusiasts could probably relate to.
The point being?
Did that person draw that specific frame all by themselves? If no then it’s still using others’ copyrighted work + own input.
It’s absolutely incredible that people are such bootlickers for billionaire projects that they’ll see this tremendous slam dunk and then go to the comments trying to defend the person who just got dunked. Like, seriously, you really think that’s going to convince people?!
Yeah the ball went in the hoop, but this is also essentially trashing the entirety of meme and edit culture.
They also were inspired by other creations. Like Superman’s strength and flight ability.
Everything is inspired by something.
It shouldn’t be. That’d stealing work from others and I doubt most are paying the original artist
So what you’re tell me all artists in history should be sending residuals to the first caveman to draw on a wall?
You know what, sure, let’s go with that. Maybe copyright enforcement is the way to discovering time travel in this reality.
I will issue you a challenge: create art inspired by absolutely nothing and 100% orginal.
Why would I agree to a challenge that I know is impossible?
I thought the implications of my sarcastic comment about the first cave painting was that there is no 100% original or inspiration-free work of art at this point in human history. However, there is a difference between plagiarism and transformative work.
Dante’s Inferno is based off the Bible. Does that mean Dante should have given all credit and proceeds of his sales to the Church? Jesus? God? That’s what my cave painting joke was trying to highlight.
Dude, I’m sorry.
I wasn’t drunk or hungover yet posted a reply to the wrong person. That was meant for the touching grass user.
I totally agree with you.
Don’t be silly, residuals only last until 70 years after the artist’s death… that caveman died thousands of years ago. /s
Absolutely. If you create a piece of art. Its precious and anyone who ever looked at that piece owes the artist something. This debt should be paid for life and beyond for all time. End of story
You’re delusional.
That’s sarcasm, right? It’s hard to tell some days
Rule of thumb: no “/s”, no sarcasm.
You sound like someone who cannot or does not make art.
I’m demanding eternal payments for shit nobody wanted while putting it out on every platform to market it like an ebusker
What’s the point of shared open spaces if I cant monetize them and take everyone else’s shit down with DMCA claims.
I’m 100% artist baby
You’re an idiot.
Don’t worry. I can understand sarcasm without markdown.
Bruh
The only true artist is Ooonga Baloonga, who invented art when he drew something roughly resembling an animal on a random cave wall 6 bajillion years ago. Everything since then is derivative bullshit, lifeless imitations of his unique vision.
I bet the first painting wasn’t of an animal, it was probably
porna fertility deity.That’s the argument they’re making against people who think LLMs are inherently theft.
Nope, I think you should try to listen again.
That’s the point. It’s supposed to be a facsimile of s man. The whole plot of the show is a critique of comic book tropes and the consequences of idolizing superheroes etc
Exactly. It’s like Elon pointing at a SpaceX rocket and saying that he made it.
