I have not had "much" trouble from unwelcome fan art. Most of my readers are very respectful of my characters. Several have written pretty good stories set in my "universe" using their original characters.
As I mentioned in one of my earlier posts, I myself have done a lot of fan art/ fan fiction, starting with drawing Snoopy when I was in the third grade. I've created fan works of everything from Peanuts to Lord of the Rings, from Star Wars to Phantom of the Opera. I think that's how a lot of people learn the craft of writing, by creating "sequels" to works they love.
I taught myself to draw by imitating the styles of Charles Schulz, Dik Browne, Garry Trudeau, Phil Foglio, and the guys at Termite Terrace. Some artists study the Old Masters--these guys are my "Old Masters."
I incorporate a lot of "Easter eggs" into my comic strip. Many artists do include pop culture references or inside jokes. How many of the Looney Tunes cartoons had cameos of the big Hollywood stars of the day? After I started watching the "Red Skelton" TV show, I saw how many gags the Looney Tunes had stolen outright from him.
But I have never drawn somebody else's character for cash. That's the fan art that I am equating with what these AI training programs do. That kind of fan art (or writing) makes images of somebody else's copyrighted original material, usually without their knowledge or permission, and produces it for payment without compensating the creating artist. Do you think Lauren Faust saw a dime from all the artwork generated by the Bronies?
And this is why I don't like fan art anymore.
Some artists encourage fan art, and that's fine. But to hate AI art programs because they "steal" art, and to give a pass to live artists who are producing copies of somebody else's art and getting paid for that without compensating the original creator, is hypocrisy.
To address 2cross's comments:
I have not had "much" trouble from unwelcome fan art. Most of my readers are very respectful of my characters. Several have written pretty good stories set in my "universe" using their original characters.
As I mentioned in one of my earlier posts, I myself have done a lot of fan art/ fan fiction, starting with drawing Snoopy when I was in the third grade. I've created fan works of everything from Peanuts to Lord of the Rings, from Star Wars to Phantom of the Opera. I think that's how a lot of people learn the craft of writing, by creating "sequels" to works they love.
I taught myself to draw by imitating the styles of Charles Schulz, Dik Browne, Garry Trudeau, Phil Foglio, and the guys at Termite Terrace. Some artists study the Old Masters--these guys are my "Old Masters."
I incorporate a lot of "Easter eggs" into my comic strip. Many artists do include pop culture references or inside jokes. How many of the Looney Tunes cartoons had cameos of the big Hollywood stars of the day? After I started watching the "Red Skelton" TV show, I saw how many gags the Looney Tunes had stolen outright from him.
But I have never drawn somebody else's character for cash. That's the fan art that I am equating with what these AI training programs do. That kind of fan art (or writing) makes images of somebody else's copyrighted original material, usually without their knowledge or permission, and produces it for payment without compensating the creating artist. Do you think Lauren Faust saw a dime from all the artwork generated by the Bronies?
And this is why I don't like fan art anymore.
Some artists encourage fan art, and that's fine. But to hate AI art programs because they "steal" art, and to give a pass to live artists who are producing copies of somebody else's art and getting paid for that without compensating the original creator, is hypocrisy.