We have received your report and it is currently under investigation by a forum moderator.
Multi postings on the Gallery.
Welcome to the forum.
Here you can discuss all things art with like-minded artists, join regular painting challenges, ask questions, buy and sell art materials and much more.
Make sure you sign in or register to join the discussions.
Join our Studio membership and save your favourite Painters Online content, from gallery artwork to step-by-step guides, to your own online mood boards. Create your go-to place for inspiration and learning. Plus, members can also enjoy a range of exciting features including monthly art videos and a digital magazine library.
If you are already a Studio member, simply login to your account.
Not a Studio member? Why not try our free 30-day trial - no commitment, no credit card required
He’s lied from the first day he joined, starting off by telling us that he’d painted them… he’s carried on telling lie after lie to all of us on here, and to Dawn - that’s unforgivable.
This has been a regrettable episode that generated a lot of discussion as well as indignation. Whether he left of his own will or was removed (as I read Alan's comment), I know not. The terms and conditions of used of the site (15.4.7), however, are quite clear. 'Contributions must not: Be likely to deceive any person.' Regardless of whether such postings, if original, are acceptable is up to the site owners, but his early claim that he had painted them was clearly intended to deceive.
Wasn't even AI, was it?
Let us give him credit for having got the message: it wasn't the digital nature of his work that upset people so much as the deception. If anyone knows who might have left the site having had more than enough of this, do encourage them to come back - I know of a few, but in most cases have no means of contacting them.
Robert, some of his work was AI generated - we found evidence of it on a ‘free to create AI images’ website - and when asked recently if he was using AI generated work, he declined to comment.
Should have been more specific - I meant that he hadn't used AI, he used somebody else's AI creations and occasionally mucked about with them. But addressing your point: you looked at one of the sites from which he took - well, I can't call it work; let's say "images"; and I had quite a long look this afternoon, to see if I could find anything I'd even find worth copying, were I inclined to.... I found one picture: out of hundreds, even thousands of images. Just one that I thought tolerable - not good, but not actually complete rubbish.
The others, including some animé/Manga images from various semi-pornographic videos so far as I could see, were all alike in their way - crude colour, stilted drawing, horribly romanticized and sentimental, as stagey as a Victorian melodrama featuring the late Todd Slaughter... so many faux-mediaeval themes, of damsels in distress, the odd representation of Godzilla. Now, as I discussed here with Eric Marioneaux a week or so back, I've seen real digital art, and fantasy art before computers came in and (in my opinion) stole its soul: some of it is excellent - but the stuff on these websites isn't; it encourages what I would call a tacky look at the world.
Compare and contrast modern versions of Hannah Barbera and Friz Freleng cartoons - Bugs Bunny, Wile E. Coyote and the Roadrunner, Foghorn Leghorn - all my favourite stuff; keeps me quiet for hours, except for the giggles, and that's got to be good - and you'll find the original hand-drawn and painted cartoons were a league and a half better than any computer animation. Once you take the humanity out of any artform, or minimize it in favour of apps and 'programs', you suck all the skill and fun out of it.
I MAY have digressed slightly....
I don't know, I go out for a day and look what happens!! I've just read through it all and it seems that things may have finally turned out for the best.
