this is part of the reason why the blunt anti-AI movement pisses me off. It lets those of us who didn’t get to dedicate a bunch of time to mastering visual arts to get an OK representation of an idea made. Not all of us have commission money.
The greater impact, how it’s used etc are valid points of argument. But it’s nice to see some interesting ideas rendered well, and it’s nice to be able to put in stupid ideas and see them made. And not all of it is draining oceans and making people homeless.
Art is creation and process not result. AI generated images are results that aren’t created. Using time or money as justification for using this abhorrent “tool” is just you trying to put an emotional twist on the judgments from actual artists.
AI generated images are results that aren’t created.
Neither are particle effects from pixar films, but it doesn’t stop people saying they are/were masterpieces (before the disney acquisition). People also like rougelike games.
Photography is an extremely difficult art that involves multiple skills. If your analogy made any sense then painters would also need to create their pigments and paintbrushes to be considered artists.
When the one thing you do is provide a prompt in a matter of seconds, without even knowing what the output might be, you’re not really creating. It’s much more passive than anything else someone might call an art. If photographers just had to write down a sentence and then a photo would appear on paper, I doubt anyone would’ve ever considered photos special, at least once we got over the magic of it being possible. The same has already happened with AI “art”. People instantly recognize it and despise it. Most of those people probably first said “wow, cool!”
Photography is an extremely difficult art that involves multiple skills
I’m not saying “photography isn’t art or expression” I’m saying “by your statement of ‘Art is creation and process not result.’ you are setting a restrictive definition that puts photography outside of art”.
When the one thing you do is provide a prompt in a matter of seconds, without even knowing what the output might be, you’re not really creating.
Have you ever read a book? Or listened to a piece of live music that had an improvised component? Or one with a non determined outcome (running the output of a radio into an effects system to add another layer to the piece being composed). Played a game with randomised elements?
Are you saying the non deterministic pieces by Cage and Eno aren’t art?
When you write prose, you are not in charge of how the reader imagines what you’re putting out. Writing a prompt is creating a piece of technical prose, the setup of the particular AI image generation with loras and data sets is akin to setting up settings for a camera with lenses and exposure times and etc.
And the overarching point that is relevant here is that AI allows those without the skills in visual art to be able to participate in the arts because most people WANT TO be able to create some form of visual or auditory expression, but don’t have the skills to be able to.
Yeah, it’s cheating. 100%. But guess what :
“I thought using loops was cheating, so I programmed my own using samples. I then thought using samples was cheating, so I programmed drums. I then thought that programming it was cheating, so I learned to play drums for real. I then thought using bought drums was cheating, so I learned to make my own. I then thought using premade skins was cheating, so I killed a goat and skinned it. I then thought that that was cheating too, so I grew my own goat from a baby goat. I also think that is cheating, but I’m not sure where to go from here. I haven’t made any music lately, what with the goat farming and all.”
Except ai artists didn’t do anything to help create said art. It’s the equivalent of me messaging a friend and telling him about a story idea I’ve had. Then that friend goes to a library and starts taking bits and pieces from other people’s stories and putting them together. Am I an artist now?
So… yeah. Either we need to stop accepting existing human art forms as art, or we need to accept that when someone writes prose and puts it into a computer, they are expressing theirselves.
Yeah, those are all techniques which require actual work from the artist. Except the last one which is a one off tongue in cheek piece by a guy known for his hyperrealistic work. You go call a museum curator and ask him to smash a pumpkin to put on display. If you can get them to do that for you, then I’ll concede my point and call you and every ai prompter artists.
I’ll write a script that takes AskReddit prompts and sends them automatically to chatgpt and then I post them. Do I become an artist?
Yeah, those are all techniques which require actual work from the artist.
Can you differenciate (explain to me/us) the difference betwee prose, poetry and prompt writing? Also, how is the setup of a local AI different to buying paints?
I’m saying “by your statement of ‘Art is creation and process not result.’ you are setting a restrictive definition that puts photography outside of art”.
And I am disputing this strongly. Photography being compared to writing a prompt for AI is insulting as fuck to photography. I think you would understand the point I’m making if you weren’t intending not to understand it. I seriously doubt you actually think that there is no composition, lighting, thematic concerns, choice of subject, color choices, etc, etc etc in photography. Even one of these concerns would make photography 10 times closer to art than writing an AI prompt.
Are you saying the non deterministic pieces by Cage and Eno aren’t art?
Maybe? I don’t care enough to research those artists further as every time I listened to either I was bored, and also this question is normally not one I find interesting. I just find it fuckin’ baffling that someone can think typing a half-assed sentence and waiting for an output could ever be considered “art”. Hell, you can only sometimes fool people into even thinking it’s not obviously AI.
I seriously doubt you actually think that there is no composition, lighting, thematic concerns, choice of subject, color choices, etc, etc etc in photography
Yes, that’s my point. Both AI based art generation and photography rely on technical skills in order to process events that ocurr that are outside of the creators’ control.
I just find it fuckin’ baffling that someone can think typing a half-assed sentence and waiting for an output could ever be considered “art”.
Yeah, the same way you could reductively say that someone taking a photo with a cellphone camera isn’t art. But both statements are wrong.
My point is that there are ways that are analogous to steps taken by professional photographers and those that have worked on their craft as a phographer in the field of AI art, and you need to work on those skills to get similar results. Things from managing Loras ,training models, writing better prompts, creating images to serve as starting points, post processing of generated images to purely technical things like system setups, paramater management, hardware choice etc etc.
You need to understand that there are actions akin to setting up lights and selecting the correct lenses that impact both fields.
someone taking a photo with a cellphone camera isn’t art
Yes, 99.99% of the time that would be entirely true and fair. Art would require a creative intent. Most mobile phone photos are just someone wanting to capture a moment, or now with social media, attention. Nothing creative about almost any of that.
Notice I mentioned nothing about technical setup about photography because none of those technical things are creative. Knowing how to setup lights to achieve emotional impact is different from “derp I know I need a lit subject, I setup light now”.
None of the things you’re saying about AI are necessary for generating images, and further I’ll never ever accept any of those as resembling anything like even the ghost of a creative choice. You’re wrong. AI image gen is not art, photography is art by anyone’s definition who has the first idea about what art is or isn’t.
ok, so this post indicates that you are basically grabbing any “common idea” about art wholesale, not interpreting any of it, and regurgitating it. There is no actual interaction to be had here, nor logic being processed.
As a professional artist, time and money are always a concern of my employer. The process is fundamentally unimportant to them; it’s the result that matters. We need a different word for the personal meaning of artistic process in service of the muse rather than money. As a chaote, I’d just call it magic, but that word has a lot of baggage.
We need a different word for the personal meaning of artistic process in service of the muse rather than money.
funnily enough, in turkish the words for medium specific arts like visual arts and music have seperate words to culturally significant or expressive works. “Sanat” is the word for the latter, we even have a genre called “Türk Sanat Müziği” or “Turkish artistic/culture music”
EDIT: For example, “Resim” refers to drawings and paintings, “görsel sanatlar” visual arts, including sculptures (heykeltraş). Sanatkar is artist, regardless of medium, müzisyen is musician, etc.
Strongly disagree. What makes art art is the ability to make the viewer experience emotion. Sometimes understanding the process is key to that experience and sometimes it isn’t. Heck some people consider the natural world an art piece all on its own.
Indeed, AI art empowers non-artists to explore areas they otherwise wouldn’t. Not everyone has the money or social connections to hire an artist every time they want to try something out.
this is part of the reason why the blunt anti-AI movement pisses me off. It lets those of us who didn’t get to dedicate a bunch of time to mastering visual arts to get an OK representation of an idea made. Not all of us have commission money.
The greater impact, how it’s used etc are valid points of argument. But it’s nice to see some interesting ideas rendered well, and it’s nice to be able to put in stupid ideas and see them made. And not all of it is draining oceans and making people homeless.
Art is creation and process not result. AI generated images are results that aren’t created. Using time or money as justification for using this abhorrent “tool” is just you trying to put an emotional twist on the judgments from actual artists.
Not anymore : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comedian_(artwork)
Also, photography in general. You’re not making the landscape or person the portrait is of.
Neither are particle effects from pixar films, but it doesn’t stop people saying they are/were masterpieces (before the disney acquisition). People also like rougelike games.
Photography is an extremely difficult art that involves multiple skills. If your analogy made any sense then painters would also need to create their pigments and paintbrushes to be considered artists.
When the one thing you do is provide a prompt in a matter of seconds, without even knowing what the output might be, you’re not really creating. It’s much more passive than anything else someone might call an art. If photographers just had to write down a sentence and then a photo would appear on paper, I doubt anyone would’ve ever considered photos special, at least once we got over the magic of it being possible. The same has already happened with AI “art”. People instantly recognize it and despise it. Most of those people probably first said “wow, cool!”
I’m not saying “photography isn’t art or expression” I’m saying “by your statement of ‘Art is creation and process not result.’ you are setting a restrictive definition that puts photography outside of art”.
Have you ever read a book? Or listened to a piece of live music that had an improvised component? Or one with a non determined outcome (running the output of a radio into an effects system to add another layer to the piece being composed). Played a game with randomised elements?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Cage#Chance
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Eno#Generative_music
Are you saying the non deterministic pieces by Cage and Eno aren’t art?
When you write prose, you are not in charge of how the reader imagines what you’re putting out. Writing a prompt is creating a piece of technical prose, the setup of the particular AI image generation with loras and data sets is akin to setting up settings for a camera with lenses and exposure times and etc.
And the overarching point that is relevant here is that AI allows those without the skills in visual art to be able to participate in the arts because most people WANT TO be able to create some form of visual or auditory expression, but don’t have the skills to be able to.
Yeah, it’s cheating. 100%. But guess what :
Except ai artists didn’t do anything to help create said art. It’s the equivalent of me messaging a friend and telling him about a story idea I’ve had. Then that friend goes to a library and starts taking bits and pieces from other people’s stories and putting them together. Am I an artist now?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cut-up_technique
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sampling_(music)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comedian_(artwork) (this “artwork” , which has been in museums, involves giving instructions to a curator to tape a banana to a wall.)
So… yeah. Either we need to stop accepting existing human art forms as art, or we need to accept that when someone writes prose and puts it into a computer, they are expressing theirselves.
Yeah, those are all techniques which require actual work from the artist. Except the last one which is a one off tongue in cheek piece by a guy known for his hyperrealistic work. You go call a museum curator and ask him to smash a pumpkin to put on display. If you can get them to do that for you, then I’ll concede my point and call you and every ai prompter artists.
I’ll write a script that takes AskReddit prompts and sends them automatically to chatgpt and then I post them. Do I become an artist?
Can you differenciate (explain to me/us) the difference betwee prose, poetry and prompt writing? Also, how is the setup of a local AI different to buying paints?
And I am disputing this strongly. Photography being compared to writing a prompt for AI is insulting as fuck to photography. I think you would understand the point I’m making if you weren’t intending not to understand it. I seriously doubt you actually think that there is no composition, lighting, thematic concerns, choice of subject, color choices, etc, etc etc in photography. Even one of these concerns would make photography 10 times closer to art than writing an AI prompt.
Maybe? I don’t care enough to research those artists further as every time I listened to either I was bored, and also this question is normally not one I find interesting. I just find it fuckin’ baffling that someone can think typing a half-assed sentence and waiting for an output could ever be considered “art”. Hell, you can only sometimes fool people into even thinking it’s not obviously AI.
Yes, that’s my point. Both AI based art generation and photography rely on technical skills in order to process events that ocurr that are outside of the creators’ control.
Yeah, the same way you could reductively say that someone taking a photo with a cellphone camera isn’t art. But both statements are wrong.
My point is that there are ways that are analogous to steps taken by professional photographers and those that have worked on their craft as a phographer in the field of AI art, and you need to work on those skills to get similar results. Things from managing Loras ,training models, writing better prompts, creating images to serve as starting points, post processing of generated images to purely technical things like system setups, paramater management, hardware choice etc etc.
You need to understand that there are actions akin to setting up lights and selecting the correct lenses that impact both fields.
Yes, 99.99% of the time that would be entirely true and fair. Art would require a creative intent. Most mobile phone photos are just someone wanting to capture a moment, or now with social media, attention. Nothing creative about almost any of that.
Notice I mentioned nothing about technical setup about photography because none of those technical things are creative. Knowing how to setup lights to achieve emotional impact is different from “derp I know I need a lit subject, I setup light now”.
None of the things you’re saying about AI are necessary for generating images, and further I’ll never ever accept any of those as resembling anything like even the ghost of a creative choice. You’re wrong. AI image gen is not art, photography is art by anyone’s definition who has the first idea about what art is or isn’t.
ok, so this post indicates that you are basically grabbing any “common idea” about art wholesale, not interpreting any of it, and regurgitating it. There is no actual interaction to be had here, nor logic being processed.
Bye.
As a professional artist, time and money are always a concern of my employer. The process is fundamentally unimportant to them; it’s the result that matters. We need a different word for the personal meaning of artistic process in service of the muse rather than money. As a chaote, I’d just call it magic, but that word has a lot of baggage.
funnily enough, in turkish the words for medium specific arts like visual arts and music have seperate words to culturally significant or expressive works. “Sanat” is the word for the latter, we even have a genre called “Türk Sanat Müziği” or “Turkish artistic/culture music”
EDIT: For example, “Resim” refers to drawings and paintings, “görsel sanatlar” visual arts, including sculptures (heykeltraş). Sanatkar is artist, regardless of medium, müzisyen is musician, etc.
Strongly disagree. What makes art art is the ability to make the viewer experience emotion. Sometimes understanding the process is key to that experience and sometimes it isn’t. Heck some people consider the natural world an art piece all on its own.
I strongly disagree with those people. Like, this is verging on spiritualism.
Indeed, AI art empowers non-artists to explore areas they otherwise wouldn’t. Not everyone has the money or social connections to hire an artist every time they want to try something out.
I think that everybody has access to a pencil and paper. And if you don’t, then you have much bigger problems.
Yeah, it’s probably best to focus on the positives. The AI box has been opened, and there’s no closing it back up, even if we wanted to.
I asked AI if it was Pandora’s Box and it said no.
Side note that I find hilarious: predictive text on my phone keeps suggesting “Pandora’s Door” for whatever reason
Well I’m sure it wouldn’t lie about that. What a relief!
I know how to close it, but it won’t be pretty (or easy)
Edit: it involves fried potatoes, ranch dressing & bolt cutters