You're viewing a single thread.
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.
This user is either incapable of seeing the context supplied, or being dense on purpose
Or the user speaks English as their second language. What may be obvious to you may not be for someone who's still learning and needs a little extra mental overhead to understand. I'm not sure why the only two options you give are stupidity or trolling
Yes, you rightfully pointed out that they lack deduction skills. That doesn't mean they're trolling, in fact they immediately admitted their fault after it being pointed out.
I consider myself not lacking in deduction skills and it took me a while to figure out. I was just browsing and didn't even notice what community it was in. Only after I went to the comments where all this discussion already happened did I get it.
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?
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.
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.
Has exceptions, where some anime like Cyberpunk Edgerunners is primarily designed for westerners, and published on a western companies streaming service(netflix). Is Edgerunners not anime?. Like i said, there are always exceptions to more strict definitions that arent the japanese one. Keep in mind, thr average japanese person hasnt even remotely played or heard of cyberpunk 2077. Japans pc business isa growing market by still severely smaller than other asian countries, and home console adoption in japan is low. (And abysmally low if you count xbox in japan) Cp2077 is also not on the switch.
Then you have examples that are not as favorable in japan and run because they are extremely popular outside of japan like Vinland Saga. Is Vinland not anime because the target audience is mostly people outside of japan at this point.
CP2077 even won GOTY in IGN Japan. And yes, Pc and Xbox aren’t that common, but PS4 is extremely widespread. It was definitely a success in Japan as well.
And both Edgerunners and Vinland Saga launched with a Japanese Dub on Japanese platforms. They might’ve bet more on the oversea market to get the budget back, but they were still made as products to be watched in Japan, unlike Batman, My Last Day or other “borderline” cases.
Ps4 adoption in japan is lower than the vita(around the time where marketing was relevant) vita is at 6m sales, ps4 is at 9m now, but at the time of marketing, was about the same.
Let alone, the experience of 2077 on the base ps4/xbox to be abysmal. The practical size of the userbase that would be even able to play the game is extremely low.
Theres a HUGE reason why the head of playstation decisions is from the American branch and not the japanese one.
Check it out if you have a chance, it's pretty good, and I'm not usually into animated stuff.
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.
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.
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
thanks
Yeah I didn't find it interesting enough to do that, but it is an obvious solution
Could have just told us outright.
They did - out right
Context. Are we still doing that?
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.
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?"
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.
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.
It was a joke about ownership and the complications of working with other peoples IP. Something AI-enthusiasts could probably relate to.
Only one person draws for most animation studios.
This specific person drew for this specific animation studio which created the screenshot in the meme.
The point being?
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.