Jodorowsky's Star Wars | Hacker News Reader

Jodorowsky's Star Wars

artstation.com

22 pointsjajag16 comments

Not as interesting as the "Jodorowsky's Tron" posted here a month ago [0,1]. I do like the way Midjourney does technical stuff like the big red droids here[2] though. I like the one R2 droid with what looks like a stormtrooper helmet for a head.

[0]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33752684

[1]https://www.djfood.org/fantasy-jodorowsky-tron-visualisation...

You missed the [2] url :)

I'm curious what the droids look like!

oops.

https://cdna.artstation.com/p/assets/images/images/056/724/9... (bottom left)

https://cdna.artstation.com/p/assets/images/images/056/762/0... (bottom right)

We're just making up and sharing fake film history, without stating that it's fake, as a way to show off some concept art? WTF?

There are so many different and better ways to present such work without that kind of nonsense detracting from it.

It’s showing off the capabilities of generative models. As someone who loves both Jodorowsky’s Dune and ML, these are awesome.

More of the same. Is it even legal to train models on star wars artworks and if so, why doesn’t Disney shut it down?

I don’t know if a precident has been set yet, but training is legal and the work is not a copy, but a derived work, so should be fine.

Can’t use the trademarked terms and whatnot, but creating things in the style of seems legal.

It’s like reading Tolkien books for 1000 hours and then writing a book that’s inspired by Tolkien.

Or like making a painting in the style of Picasso, etc etc

Lord of the rings is a good point. From what i understood this is a very difficult terrain to manouver leagally. Why is Disney so passive? I cannot imagine this to go on much longer.

Apart from the words "Star Wars" in title this is clearly a derivative/inspiration, not a copy.

Oh sure- try and make a sci-fi movie with anything vaguely resembling a lightsaber…

I think that’s more due to cultural uniqueness than legal restrictions.

This is a common misconceptiom.

"Derived work" does NOT mean "copyright of original does not apply".

It means "copyright of original DOES apply, in addition to copyright on the modifications."

I think you're thinking of “transformative”; a derived work is by itself still subject to the copyright of the source material.

"Concept artist" lol

These lack the artistry of the originals. They look awkward.

Sorry for offtopicness: I've unbanned this and what I believe to be one of your other accounts, because they've been posting within the site guidelines lately. It's not great to use multiple accounts to comment regularly, but I'd rather see good comments unkilled. If you feel like merging the accounts, let us know at hn@ycombinator.com and we can do that for you.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com