What do you think about AI art?
cross-posted from: https://piefed.world/c/justpost/p/1399601/what-do-you-think-about-ai-art
Image related.
I find it interesting, that is why I want to know people opinions about that.
Syndicated from the fediverse. Read and engage on the original instance.
View original on piefed.worldView original on piefed.world
14 replies
I think it's interesting that this question is being asked by this particular user - known for cropping the credits off of webcomic posts until doing so was made against the rules in that community.
It was an action I found to be rather anti-artist. And now they ask about another anti-artist activity.
Wonderful day!
Apologies, but I am not sure why do you ask the question.
If you open your heart to the art, if you look at the sounds, feel with the soul... if you would actually listen to the world... I believe you would never ever ask such a question, since the answer is utterly obvious, and is/will always be.
"AI art" has no sense, in any music/soundscape, video-game, picture, literature... And never will. It's nonsense, it's pointless, It's awful. It's dirty. It's empty. it's noise.
And considering the current "AI", it's also a bloody sorrowful noise of screams and cries of now defaced/anonymized actual artists whose works are now meatground in the LLM datasets without any kind f permission given...
There's absolutely no space for any kind of "AI" in art unless it's used as a message or instrument in a specifically human manual work with effort and person's own unique expression, idea, their viewpoint and life experience only they could create expressing their own message how they, the unique alive ineffably magnificent individual, a miracle... can express only - this is art, a timeless communication between people, to respect, to appreciate, to care about, to love... to learn from, keep in the history, and pass to the infinitely marvelous future...
"AI" is absolutely not art. It's blatant disrespect to any artist, every human, all the art and effort in the history possible, and a reckless attitude on the dear future, too...
That is. Art is a timeless communication between human, alive, loving, for those who feel pain, who fear, who live, who discover, who evolve, who improve, who develop... who love...
Art is also you, a unique ineffably magnificent person who lives, who appeared in this infinite world, who is a... miracle...
Related:
- https://lemmy.world/comment/22523235 (I tried multiple services in addition to the common as Shazam, but nothing was found…)
- https://lemmy.world/comment/23607523 (The main reason I am interested in art is communication…)
- https://lemmy.world/comment/24988288 (Please do consider capturing a moment for your works…)
the death of humanity
That is a very vague comment, what do you mean?
Can you elaborate on your comment?
That I think AI art is the death of humanity.
The generational decline of creativity is already observable. The same thing is happening in all domains of the human faculties, the smarter the devices got, dumber their holders. For the first time the new generation doesn't surpass the previous intellectually, and now we are not just outsourcing our intelligence, but also our imagination.
AI art is an ode to our end.
I think that you are on the right track but also there's something amazing about an artist that rejects and does their own thing.
I would argue that people putting prompts into an AI engine are just about the furthest thing possible from artists. They aren't creating anything. The AI is.
Trick question. Slop ain't art.
Then what is art?
Art is the human need to make things for its own sake, and the way in which the things we make reflect us.
Art is when you doodle into the margins of your notebook, art is when you tap a beat on your steering wheel, art is when you sing in the shower, art is when you fold your napkin or straw wrapper into a little origami shape, art is when you're holding something malleable and you make little sculptures or forms out it just because you want to. Art is the voice in the back of your head that tells you to embellish the furniture youre making. That makes you wanna build sandcastles. That made cavemen paint on cave walls, and that tells young scouts to whittle little faces into sticks. Art is what tells furries to draw characters. What tells you to start that webcomic. Write that story. Art is what makes you daydream about what you might create, and the things you make because you dayreamed of them.
Art is both the product of that facet of the human experience, and the experience of needing to make things. Some people make art to commicate. Some people make art to soothe themselves. Some to process their thoughts. Some to connect with those around them. Some to express their emotions and experience and get them out of their head and into the world in some way. But everyone who makes art does so because some part of their experience as a human calls to them to be creative. To make stuff.
Gen ai does not produce art, it produces visuals and sounds and words that are statistically probable outputs given a particular prompt and its data set. It has no vantage point, no personal taste dictating what it enjoys or doesnt. Dictating what it connects with or is repulsed by. It lacks fundamentally the experience necessary for it to be art. Artificial general intelligence may be capable of art, but genai just makes images. It doesn't make art.
(And those images are made from a dataset of art plundered from actual human beings whose attribution was washed away by the machine that uses their work. The function of ai is to wash the human origins off of creative works, in much the same way that money laundering washes money of its criminal origins. Which is why artist despise genai, and resent that people call what it produces "art". Artists see that as an insult to a facet of the human experience they hold very dear.)
Trash, without exception. It's a waste of resources, it's essentially theft, and it's never as good as using actual skills in the process. There are no redeemable qualities of AI art or the people that push it as a creative space.
Slop. Move on. It's not art.
What is art?
Art is a uniquely and specifically sentient endeavour. Seeking to communicate in an intentionally more abstract way to allow for wider interpretation and attempting to touch upon something more true to the viewer by allowing their personal intepretations to convert into the viewer's internal dialogue.
Churning out "independent" genAI "artwork" is pointless because it has no intentions. And its insufficiency as a tool only means the naive user compromises on their intention to conform to the tools' limited palette and capabilities.
Whereas an actual artist, when confronted with the limitations of their tools can attempt to sublimate or evolve their ideas, the genAI user must merely settle and delude themself that "yes, this is what I wanted." Or else their "artistic intention" was so pedestrian that it could have been a declarative sentence. Indeed, it fits that their prompt to a genAI agent is equal to artistic ambition.