I’ve seen this debate a lot and i wanted to ask yall
Honestly one of the main drives behind art is a sort of purpose or meaning to it
a lot of Dall-E generated art, unless you really bullshit it, lacks a lot of meaning, especially with how distorted a lot of the works tend to become. Making the prompt and the art itself, which would have contained the purpose, completely meaningless due to how jumbled it looks.
In short:
Art personally ain’t art unless it has a purpose.
AI Art currently lacks that purpose and personally I want art to stay as it is.
Something to express ourselves, not for a machine to express those thoughts for us.
…poorly, I might add
1 Like
Not really
I’m not really sure why i don’t, but I just know that I don’t
its art but when you generate ai art you didnt make that art and its not yours, its like commissioning someone and saying you made that art
4 Likes
The AI in itself is a work of art, the art it generates wouldn’t be considered such I would say. It lacks the thoughts and human familiarity in contrast to the actual AI which would have been something that has been meticulously worked upon.
Cool podcast (w/ CGP Grey) about AI art:
1 Like
Ai Rights
I wouldn’t call it art persay but that AI can make some amazing stuff.
I’d call it eye candy but I’m not going to call it art.
Depends on what you consider art.
I’m a hardcore materialist, so personally I think not referring to it as art is senseless nitpicking. It doesn’t matter if it takes other art pieces as input: real artists do that, too. That is literally how the human learning process works (at least on a basic level).
Of course, humans also pour emotion and other experiences that are unrelated to the current art piece into their work, like say a cartoon they watched at their uncle’s class when they were five, or that really cute asian girl that always wore turtlenecks who sat 3 seats away from them in Science class, but to me it doesn’t make sense to include that as a criteria, because that would imply that art you create while watching a video or reading a tutorial wouldn’t count since you’re usually trying to make a 1:1 copy of it while using very specific knowledge you obtained earlier in your life.
There’s also the fact that making art in the case of humans requires mastery of some other physical/mental ability in most cases like hand-eye coordination or being aware of the way light interacts with objects of different shape, size and texture, or perspective, but one could say the A.I also has to learn this, and does so by repeated practice. Any physical aspects are limitations of the human form and would no longer apply if the person was robbed of the things causing the limitation, like if human beings could use psychic abilities to draw on paper.
Yeah basically. It technically belongs to the A.I. Since A.I. don’t have rights and are legally the property of the owner of the A.I., it can then be said to legally belong to the A.I’s master (whether this be the customer or the team that made the A.I.), but to philosophically belong to either the A.I. itself or nobody. After all, if a hurricane blew through a parking lot and arranged the cars into a smiley face, the new piece of art (??) can’t be said to belong to anyone.
possibly
Kinda depends on how you interpret it. In my opinion all the art that the AI makes classifies as an application of human creative skill since it was in fact humans who made and coded the AI in the first place and made it apply to our tastes and media, and the rest of the definition matches. I’d say it’s art.
coding is strange for ai
it doesnt code to exactly what the bot does to edit the art, instead has a script for machine learning for the robot to code itself to edit the art
so its similar to a child copying actual art that someone made, then changing some stuff in it.
the child was helped by the original art, but it came up with original ideas to change the art.
however, the definition says thats its ‘human’ creative skill and imagination, so maybe ai art is a another category (im gonna call it artificial art now)
1 Like
I’d say that the AI is a human product and even if it’s art isn’t really our own, would still link back to us. Honestly im not sure though, not exactly an expert in this kind of field
Art for me is about the Journey, not the end result, so I don’t count AI Art as Art
I’m not entirely against it though, it has a purpose for people who has no access to artists and alike, and wants media for their writing or something similar
2 Likes