This is fascinating. I have over 6 years of formal training as an artist. Where AI really struggles is with human anatomy. Light logic, colors, lore—all these issues could be honest mistakes by an artist working to meet a deadline or not entirely familiar with the story.
However, the image of Cersei sitting with her legs crossed, and she only has one leg, or the image of her standing over the dead knight, and her upper arm does not connect to her lower arm—these are unmistakable signs of AI.
I looked at Jeffrey McDonald's web site. He is taking credit for this art. It does match his style, but of course AI could be trained to do the same. The first question is: did he use AI and pass it off as human, deceiving the publisher? Or, was the publisher aware and okay with it?
Either way, it will be really interesting to see where this story goes. Artists have always used tools. Vermeer used a camera obscura. Dürer used a camera lucida. As soon as photography was invented in the 19th Century, artists began using it for reference. You can actually go on 'zon and buy a book of the photos Norman Rockwell used to stage his famous paintings. Personally I have no doubt whatsoever that artists—especially illustrators—are already using AI as a tool, the same way they rapidly adopted Photoshop when it first came out. Virtually all illustrative art these days is digital, and it all goes through Photoshop before you see it.
Will illustrators own up to using AI as a tool? Will the broader public care? In a day and age when an artsy-fartsy "modern" artist can tape a banana to a wall and call it art, does it even matter?
People are still paying for Martin's books? The man gave up on this story over 15 years ago and methinks anything tied to his name is not worth a hill of beans.
That's the real question. People shelling out for the illustrated editions are essentially just paypigs, at this point, and they can't be surprised when they get treated as such.
AI or not, schlock efforts are noticeable. As to refund/redo, the right way involves cost & customer service - money spent to repair damaged good will.
2) If this is all that one gets for an "illustrated edition", they might as well have AI do it for them for free, and
3) You've clearly never created anything artistically worthwhile in your life, because if you had you would know how destructive and anti-human this sort of thing is. Is it the highest of crimes? No, but normalizing laziness like this helps the woke, gay redditor cringe people who *are* the lazy ones. It doesn't help us.
1: That’s subjective. Plenty of folks may think it’s fine.
2: It’s a book that has been out for well over a decade. If you’re still getting it and paying premium money for a book that has been available in paperback since the first Trump term, then you’re just getting it because you’re an ultra fan who wants to throw money at GRRM.
3: I’ve created plenty of art, and thanks to AI, I can create plenty more. All without ever (over)paying some snobby art fag or Redditor.
That’s progress!
The whole reason these preachy twats HATE AI is because:
A: Art is no longer gate kept by preachy fags. And:
B: They seem to think that the world OWES them to be able to make a living off their hobby. And it just doesn’t.
This is fascinating. I have over 6 years of formal training as an artist. Where AI really struggles is with human anatomy. Light logic, colors, lore—all these issues could be honest mistakes by an artist working to meet a deadline or not entirely familiar with the story.
However, the image of Cersei sitting with her legs crossed, and she only has one leg, or the image of her standing over the dead knight, and her upper arm does not connect to her lower arm—these are unmistakable signs of AI.
I looked at Jeffrey McDonald's web site. He is taking credit for this art. It does match his style, but of course AI could be trained to do the same. The first question is: did he use AI and pass it off as human, deceiving the publisher? Or, was the publisher aware and okay with it?
Either way, it will be really interesting to see where this story goes. Artists have always used tools. Vermeer used a camera obscura. Dürer used a camera lucida. As soon as photography was invented in the 19th Century, artists began using it for reference. You can actually go on 'zon and buy a book of the photos Norman Rockwell used to stage his famous paintings. Personally I have no doubt whatsoever that artists—especially illustrators—are already using AI as a tool, the same way they rapidly adopted Photoshop when it first came out. Virtually all illustrative art these days is digital, and it all goes through Photoshop before you see it.
Will illustrators own up to using AI as a tool? Will the broader public care? In a day and age when an artsy-fartsy "modern" artist can tape a banana to a wall and call it art, does it even matter?
Isn't GRRM suing AI companies as we speak? What a greedy, lazy asshole.
"Rules for thee, not for me."
People are still paying for Martin's books? The man gave up on this story over 15 years ago and methinks anything tied to his name is not worth a hill of beans.
That's the real question. People shelling out for the illustrated editions are essentially just paypigs, at this point, and they can't be surprised when they get treated as such.
George R.R.R.R.R. (how many? 11?) R. Martin should just have Ai write his last story and claim victory.
It would be a better story than anything he's ever written. I tried reading his first GoT book and... what a mess.
They should refund and redo it but they won't. Until there are federal laws that say you can't do this, others will try to follow suit.
AI or not, schlock efforts are noticeable. As to refund/redo, the right way involves cost & customer service - money spent to repair damaged good will.
Wonderful news for artists, horrible news for Sam Altman
Yeah, I don’t give a fuck.
There are plenty of issues you can raise with GRRM.
Getting your panties in wad over AI art is gay and peak Redditor cringe.
1) It's shitty art,
2) If this is all that one gets for an "illustrated edition", they might as well have AI do it for them for free, and
3) You've clearly never created anything artistically worthwhile in your life, because if you had you would know how destructive and anti-human this sort of thing is. Is it the highest of crimes? No, but normalizing laziness like this helps the woke, gay redditor cringe people who *are* the lazy ones. It doesn't help us.
1: That’s subjective. Plenty of folks may think it’s fine.
2: It’s a book that has been out for well over a decade. If you’re still getting it and paying premium money for a book that has been available in paperback since the first Trump term, then you’re just getting it because you’re an ultra fan who wants to throw money at GRRM.
3: I’ve created plenty of art, and thanks to AI, I can create plenty more. All without ever (over)paying some snobby art fag or Redditor.
That’s progress!
The whole reason these preachy twats HATE AI is because:
A: Art is no longer gate kept by preachy fags. And:
B: They seem to think that the world OWES them to be able to make a living off their hobby. And it just doesn’t.