Comment by southernplaces7
4 days ago
What i'm seeing here are the arguments of an apparently typical AI bro completely missing the forest for the trees.
I do art, photography and painting both, and most of my friends and acquaintances are artists of some kind or another too and generally among all of them as far as I know, the idea of having a visual regurgitation algorithm make your visual and textual (and now video) creations for you is anathema to artistic creativity.
Sure, there are artists who use AI to create interesting projects that I would call art, because the main crux of the work requires their creative construction and integration of elements and narrative, regardless of the final form it takes.
On the other hand, some idiot spending a couple minutes on a prompt to create a dozen variations of a cat making a mouseburger is not art, it's someone playing with some digital visuals.
And yes, I declare myself completely able to say that shit like that isn't art, and that the kind of person who'd claim it to be so because they couldn't pull a bit of their own effortful creativity out of their ass has no idea what art is or represents.
If you have a camera, you still need to take it to places and set up compositions. It takes effort, and there's a distinct difference between someone who learns to do it well vs. someone who has no clue except for an occasional, incidental lucky shot. Becoming a photographic artist lies in the gradient we move along between these two extremes, in sometimes unusual ways that are saturated with human creative narrative and effort. The same goes for other forms of creative expression.
Photoshop is a bit more tricky, and especially now, that it includes Firefly AI tools for completely rebuilding photos into... something else. but if one is serious about respecting their own learning curve of photography, they try to not let it take away from the essential message they were trying to communicate with the human-made photos they took in the first place. So on and so forth.
Bottom line: art is many things, and we could debate that, as well as questions of quality and preference, but it emphatically isn't the wholesale regurgitated, instant productions of a completely unthinking algorithm.
> What i'm seeing here are the arguments of an apparently typical AI bro
Ad hominem and a clear display of bias. You know nothing about me, my history or capabilities.
> Sure, there are artists who use AI to create interesting projects that I would call art
> And yes, I declare myself completely able to say that shit like that isn't art
Gatekeeping, again.
The rest of your post regurgitates your previous post, and completely fails to address my previous rebuttal. Your argument is disingenuous, tired and still riddled with issues. Take the L and learn to not arrogantly force your world view onto other creatives.
If your being "creative" consists of nothing more than having an AI vomit things up for you with no input on your part except for some prompts, you're not a creative. If my argument above seems repetitive, it's because i'm trying to hammer home a point that should be obvious, and is obvious to any number of people who exercise real creativity, regardless of its medium.
Also, ad hominem is fine as long as it doesn't form the main thrust of an argument.
Ad hominem is what people do when they lack a more convincing direct argument. It's one thing to draw attention to relevant attributes of a speaker, it's another to say "What i'm seeing here are the arguments of an apparently typical AI bro", which is literally an attempt to discredit an argument by insulting and pigeonholing the speaker, instilling bias, instead of engaging with the argument itself. It is childish, and poor taste.
> no input on your part except for some prompts, you're not a creative
Hm, some people disagree with you:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generative_art
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algorithmic_art
You can shout at clouds and spread hate online all you want, but you still don't have the power to declare someone a creative or not. I did not grant you that power and neither has anyone else. Your criticism is yours alone of which to bear the weight, meanwhile I'm gonna go make art with cool revolutionary tools that redefine what it can mean to be an artist and allow many more people to participate in self-expression.