Setting aside the usual arguments on the anti- and pro-AI art debate and the nature of creativity itself, perhaps the negative reaction that the Redditor encountered is part of a sea change in opinion among many people that think corporate AI platforms are exploitive and extractive in nature because their datasets rely on copyrighted material without the original artists’ permission. And that’s without getting into AI’s negative drag on the environment.

  • Mastengwe@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    57
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    If a computer auto generating music isn’t called a musician, or a robot tossing a football isn’t called an athlete, then a person making a picture with a computer isn’t an artist. No matter how badly that person wants to be called one.

    • BreadstickNinja@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Depends on the workflow, in my opinion. There are people who just type “1girl lol” into a text box and there are some people who set up workflows with hundreds of steps including significant manual work done in Photoshop or GIMP.

      Similarly nearly all music these days is made with a DAW, which enables you to selectively edit and combine performances that otherwise you wouldn’t be able to achieve. Drummer off beat? Quantize it. Want a string section but don’t know how to play violin? Use a synth. And certainly there are people who are overly reliant on those tools because their core music abilities aren’t very strong.

      If you think any amount of computer assistance means that something isn’t art, then basically all music made since the 90s would also not be art. It’s not a binary. Any tool can be used tastefully or be used to mask an underlying lack of talent.

      • yogurt@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        You don’t usually call the audio engineer a musician though. The fact that you “want a string section” is the important part. Art is communication, if you fuck with the AI until it communicates what you want, that can be art, as long as you’re not trying to pass off that the fake brushstrokes contain any meaning. If you learn all the right prompt words to make it “good” and then Photoshop it to fix all the telltale AI glitches but the only idea being communicated comes from 6 random people on Deviantart smashed together, that’s not art.

      • Mastengwe@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        7 months ago

        Computer assisted ≠ computer generated. This is a fundamentally understood distinction.

        • BreadstickNinja@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          7 months ago

          I’d welcome you to offer a rigorous definition of this supposedly well-known distinction. Computers don’t generate anything spontaneously. They always require some level of direction.

          Are the outputs of VSTs not “computer generated”? You can fumble around on a keyboard just moving up and down until you find the pitch you want, and the software will output an orchestral swell of dozens of instruments that take years and years to master, with none of that effort expended by the one mashing the keyboard.

          Is that sound computer-assisted or computer-generated in your estimation? Much the same with AI images. It’s not fundamentally different from any other computerized tool.

          • NoMoreCocaine@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            That’s pretty reductive and bad comparison. Your example boils down to saying that you could argue guitarist is a machine assisted.

          • Mastengwe@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            Again, ASSISTED ≠ CREATED. I don’t know how this is difficult for you.

            Assisted requires foreknowledge of skill/talent. Like a guitarist using an effect pedal to enhance his sound.

            Created leans entirely on the hardware/software combo to do the heavy lifting.

            It take ZERO skill to type a sentence into a computer to generate an image. Period. And of argument. I’m sorry this others you; but this is how I see it.

            • BreadstickNinja@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              9
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              7 months ago

              I said in my original post that just typing a prompt isn’t an example of skill. I stated that there are people who use both AI and non-AI tools in complex workflows that include a ton of manual work, and in those cases it’s disingenuous to write off the process as not being creative.

              I’m not sure exactly what you’re arguing against, but it isn’t the position I took. Seems like a reading comprehension issue.

              • Mastengwe@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                arrow-down
                9
                ·
                7 months ago

                My point is that AI generated pictures aren’t art. Period.

                I’m not arguing nuance. My opinion is across the board- no nuance. No argument… it’s not art.

                • TheEighthDoctor@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  8
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  Would you call a person that creates paintings by cutting images from magazines an artist?

                  What if the person cuts the images from AI generated content?

                  • Mastengwe@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    7 months ago

                    I would. Because they came up with the idea in their brain and did the skilled work it took to create it. They didn’t have a computer do it for them.

                    You’re not going to make a point here. Because ag the end of the day, no matter what example you use, it’ll always be that SOMEONE is actually doing the creative heavy lifting instead of a computer doing it for someone that takes the credit.

                    AI images aren’t art. And if it absolutely HAS to be called such, than at the bare minimum, the PC used to create it takes ALL the credit for it- not the hack that typed in a descriptive sentence.

                  • Mastengwe@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    3
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    7 months ago

                    Not all things are nuanced. Sometimes some things just are what they are, or aren’t what we want them to be.

                    AI imagery isn’t art and those that make it aren’t artists.

    • Dud@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      I just call the people in my Discord who generate AI images AI Handlers because to me it’s like getting a half trained unruly animal to do what you want. That being said when they take requests for character art for tabletop games they put out some good stuff. It’s just a tool to be used and it often takes an experienced handler to get what you want out of it.

      • Kedly@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        I’d be perfectly fine being called an AI Handler over an artist, its an apt descriptor and I’m not doing this to trick anybody. One of the top posts on all today is about true luxuries, and one of them is the Luxury of being able to fully express ones self, to which this new tool has provided to me faaar more than any tool previous. If I’m sharing my creations its because I’m excited to have a visual representation and I want to share it with those interested, I’m not trying to downplay the skillset of other artists, nor do I care about cred. I’m just excited to finally have an outlet for my creativity that doesnt require me to devote years of my life to learning specific skills before I’m able to start doing what I actually want to do, which is to be creative

        • NoMoreCocaine@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          7 months ago

          I don’t really think you’re expressing much of yourself with an AI, especially creativity. I mean all the power to you if you think so, but you can’t really claim to be anything more than a slightly less cumbersome Google image search bot.

          Basically you give “search terms” and then use your judgement to pick and choose. There’s very little expression and a whole lot curating of someone else’s work. I guess if you think making music playlist is an expression of creativity, sure it’ll qualify. But that’s some shallow expression of a personality when it comes to art. Might want to phrase that differently.

          • Kedly@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            Lmao, I could’t give less of a shit what you think about my own feelings of creative expression. Have a nice day!

    • glassware@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      7 months ago

      How does this argument not also apply to photography? A modern camera is a computer, you fiddle with the settings, press a button and it automatically makes a picture for you. People produce billions of shitty photographs a day which aren’t art, but that doesn’t mean someone working in photography as a medium can’t be an artist.

      In my experience it’s only non-artists who make this argument, because in their heads they’re comparing AI to painting. But for visual artists there are tons of mediums and disciplines where you don’t physically make the marks yourself and it’s the concept and composition that’s important.

      There was an exhibition of AI generated art at the big local gallery here last year and I expected artist friends to be against it, but they were just like “oh, that’s interesting”. They just see AI generation as another way of creating an image and whether a particular image is or isn’t art depends on the intention not the process.

      • Mastengwe@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        In the hands of someone that doesn’t know what they’re doing, a camera is useless. Any one can make a computer create an image. All it takes is being able to complete a descriptive sentence.

        It’s an unskilled task. It’s not art.

      • Ashe@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        7 months ago

        Taking medium into account changes everything. A sculpture artist or painter doesn’t have the same interest or concern about AI art yet, and may never. They also tend to not have the same comprehensive view of AI generation as well as training data.

        That being said, digital photography doesn’t remotely compare. If I were to set my DSLR up with a lens, set an F stop and shutter speed, the results would be similar to that of a film camera. A sensor takes in light in the same way film does. A 30 second exposure at a 500 ISO will compare to a 30 second camera on a certain film type, which is comparable to ISO settings.

        Artificially bumping up light sensitivity on a DSLR degrades image quality. Analog and digital are largely comparable. So how would it apply to photography? It’s not just automatically making a picture, and if it were doing that on auto, it’s still not all that different from a film photo with generic catch all sensors and light metering.

        Photography is all about catching the moment, personally I captured night landscapes via manual long exposure on a DSLR, but none of that is automatic.

    • Dkarma@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      17
      ·
      7 months ago

      Ok so edm and electronic music isn’t music…ok buddy. Nice definition.