That gets into the difference between inspiration and derivation. All art created by humans is inspired by their experiences, but it is not always "derived" from the experiences.
Is the AI using the training art to derive new art or is the AI only inspired by the training material? From my knowledge of specialized artificial intelligence, it is the former. It will never produce a work that deviates from the bounds of the source training material, which would be possible if it were truly inspiration.
...If an A.I.learns using collaborative art and third party arts, everything she creates will be on CC0 even if the source of her learning is not right? since it is a machine, a tool and not a human being. Right? She is a creative tool and not a creator, right?...
In my opinion, no that is not right.
The AI is not creator but a tool, that I agree with... But that doesn't exempt it from the licenses of the assets used to create a derivative. It would basically be the same as downloading a bunch of photos from Google Image (which have various licenses, not CC0), putting them into Photoshop, and creating a new composite image out of them.
The new image could not be licensed CC0 just because Photoshop allows you to license the output how you want. The licenses of all the photos used in the composite would affect the derivative. Just like any image created by the A.I. would be considered derivatives of all the images used to train the A.I.
The only way the output from the A.I. could be licensed CC0 is if all the images used to train the A.I. were also CC0.
I believe this is what neurofire59 is referring to:
The stone portion of 'background 3' in the download file is both smaller in scale and differently textured compared to the stone portion of background-3 in the preview image.
@LadyCris: Sim, pode ser usado em projetos comerciais. Certifique-se de atribuir crédito a Stephen "Redshrike" Challener e ao OpenSurge Team. Leia os termos da licenca CC-BY: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/deed.pt :)
There are many generous artists here that often do work for free, but usually it is because the project interests them. Sometimes an artist will be interested, sometimes not. It's the same reason you are working on your game for free; it's interesting to you. :) I ask about pay because willingness to pay often generates interest where none might be otherwise. The appropriate cost is dependent on a large number of factors, so being unsure about that is expected.
I recommended specifying as much details about what you need as possible:
* Sprite dimensions
* Frames of animation per action
* Number of actions per character
* Number of characters total
* How many different types of equipment (helm, greaves, torso, boots, shield, sword, bow, etc)
* Style of art
All of these will help artists know if they would be interested or not.
That gets into the difference between inspiration and derivation. All art created by humans is inspired by their experiences, but it is not always "derived" from the experiences.
Is the AI using the training art to derive new art or is the AI only inspired by the training material? From my knowledge of specialized artificial intelligence, it is the former. It will never produce a work that deviates from the bounds of the source training material, which would be possible if it were truly inspiration.
In my opinion, no that is not right.
The AI is not creator but a tool, that I agree with... But that doesn't exempt it from the licenses of the assets used to create a derivative. It would basically be the same as downloading a bunch of photos from Google Image (which have various licenses, not CC0), putting them into Photoshop, and creating a new composite image out of them.
The new image could not be licensed CC0 just because Photoshop allows you to license the output how you want. The licenses of all the photos used in the composite would affect the derivative. Just like any image created by the A.I. would be considered derivatives of all the images used to train the A.I.
The only way the output from the A.I. could be licensed CC0 is if all the images used to train the A.I. were also CC0.
I believe this is what neurofire59 is referring to:
The stone portion of 'background 3' in the download file is both smaller in scale and differently textured compared to the stone portion of background-3 in the preview image.
Oh, cool!
I'm late, but Congratulations FabinhoSC. Medal awarded!
I think I had a few things in mind for this one, but I was worried they weren't really much more than a pixel flip.
I attack the gazebo!
Love those cacti et al above, too!
@LadyCris: Sim, pode ser usado em projetos comerciais. Certifique-se de atribuir crédito a Stephen "Redshrike" Challener e ao OpenSurge Team. Leia os termos da licenca CC-BY: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/deed.pt :)
There are many generous artists here that often do work for free, but usually it is because the project interests them. Sometimes an artist will be interested, sometimes not. It's the same reason you are working on your game for free; it's interesting to you. :) I ask about pay because willingness to pay often generates interest where none might be otherwise. The appropriate cost is dependent on a large number of factors, so being unsure about that is expected.
I recommended specifying as much details about what you need as possible:
* Sprite dimensions
* Frames of animation per action
* Number of actions per character
* Number of characters total
* How many different types of equipment (helm, greaves, torso, boots, shield, sword, bow, etc)
* Style of art
All of these will help artists know if they would be interested or not.
The armor, clothes, and weapons of the LPC set are already separate, animated, and meant to be overlaid on the player bases.
That being said, I can understand you wanting something exclusive instead. Is this a paid request?
Sounds a lot like you're looking for the LPC set
https://opengameart.org/content/liberated-pixel-cup-0
https://opengameart.org/content/lpc-collection
Pages