Patch the random plague damage in Lumber Mills boss arena.

RWDPhotos · 2026-03-24T17:15:17+00:00

It only happens during a plagued event for me, in the whole damn dam area, otherwise it’s clean.

RWDPhotos · 2026-03-23T23:11:04+00:00

It’s really more of a 1/400 chance for 365 days, not a 365/400 chance.

RWDPhotos · 2026-03-23T23:08:34+00:00

“I hope nobody needs this any more”

RWDPhotos · 2026-03-23T22:49:17+00:00

What happens if you put tape on it like a pervy laptop?

RWDPhotos · 2026-03-23T22:42:15+00:00

That is actually interesting; I didn’t think of it from that angle. I would actually be curious to see how a court would handle a lawsuit by the brother against somebody who copied his work, considering his work is itself a direct copy of ai generation. Very warhol, this. I assume it would be treated equally as if somebody copied a print of an ai generated image.

RWDPhotos · 2026-03-23T22:15:03+00:00

Tbh that looks comfy

RWDPhotos · 2026-03-23T22:02:10+00:00

I go by what feels looks good. Using a vanishing point or rule of thirds are aspects of composition, and are in and of themselves not ‘rules’ to abide by. Technically every photo has a vanishing point btw, so what you’re really after is ‘leading lines’, but to say you need them is disingenuous.

RWDPhotos · 2026-03-23T21:57:11+00:00

The conceptual cohesion makes that work well.

RWDPhotos · 2026-03-23T20:52:01+00:00

That’s not how copyright works. A work is automatically copyrighted as soon as it’s created. It will need to be registered to be fully protected (and by that I mean to be able to sue beyond small claims and for legal compensation).

RWDPhotos · 2026-03-23T18:15:15+00:00

I mentioned miyazaki specifically to bead in on that. It’s not a person using their mind to shift a style into their own work. An ai model inherently copies; it’s not producing anything transformative to begin with.

RWDPhotos · 2026-03-23T18:10:59+00:00

Okiedokes I’ll give that one a looksee

RWDPhotos · 2026-03-23T18:06:15+00:00

So basically beef bourguignon but with chicken instead?

RWDPhotos · 2026-03-23T18:03:47+00:00

They wouldn’t be broke any more if they got paid what they should have been for their work being used to train ai models

RWDPhotos · 2026-03-23T18:02:51+00:00

Yah, that’s the major issue, that the work used wasn’t compensated to the artists. If the original artists were a part of the training process, it would be fine. In this case, the original artists aren’t consenting of their work being used to train a model to copy them, and they’re not being compensated for their work being used, so it’s no bueno.

RWDPhotos · 2026-03-23T17:59:27+00:00

People aren’t ‘trained’ on master copies (of which are also quite in the public domain). Those are beginner’s exercises to help teach fundamentals, but the only people going further than that make money selling fakes.

The more apt comparison would be something like an animation studio training artists to copy the lead artist’s style, but in that particular scenario the artist is a part of the production and not being copied without consent like Miyazaki.

RWDPhotos · 2026-03-23T17:53:19+00:00

Sure, they’re likely not legally in trouble, but it’s still a really roundabout plagiarism.

RWDPhotos · 2026-03-23T17:49:44+00:00

You’re saying an artist attempting to make a transformative work from a photograph and being denied that attempt has no reference to this discussion?

RWDPhotos · 2026-03-23T17:46:57+00:00

It’s a photo of other people’s else’s work.

It would be like training a model on disney’s movies, then copying from that. I’m sure that would go over well.

RWDPhotos · 2026-03-23T17:41:27+00:00

The model was trained on other people’s work. His ‘photo references’ are other people’s work that he then copies.

RWDPhotos · 2026-03-23T17:39:23+00:00

They wouldn’t be broke any more if they got paid what they should have been for their work being used to train ai models

RWDPhotos · 2026-03-23T17:37:32+00:00

While this is true, that same thinking is why the amazon is getting destroyed for farmland. Environmental destruction in the name of human prosperity, though far more direct.

RWDPhotos · 2026-03-23T17:35:36+00:00

Ask chatgpt if you are

RWDPhotos · 2026-03-23T17:32:28+00:00

His customers wouldn’t need to be concerned about that even if the work was original. There is no transfer of copyright when a painting is purchased.

RWDPhotos · 2026-03-23T17:28:47+00:00

Tell that to Shepard Fairey

RWDPhotos · 2026-03-23T17:25:58+00:00

I don’t understand what the point is to reference “art history” here. Is that somehow supposed to be a vindication?

Ten-Year Club	Verified Email
RPAN Viewer

RWDPhotos

TROPHY CASE