Is digital art itself bad, because its not the human doing all of it?
It is bad primarily because it plagiarizes historical art in order to undermine the professional trade for future artists.
It forecloses art as a career, thereby depriving future generations of evolution in style and professional craft.
Gate keeping art is silly regardless
The gate being constructed fences off professional artists from the revenue their work produced. And in doing so, it defunds the schools and studios where professionals pass their craft from master to apprentice.
It forecloses art as a career, thereby depriving future generations of evolution in style and professional craft.
I hate AI art too, but I don’t think it’s so bad as that. It’s terrible because it uses obscene energy and steals art. But that doesn’t mean anyone actually likes AI art (except people who make it and wish other people would like it).
If you tell me your “art” is AI, then I instantly lose interest (with very rare exceptions that generally use older types of AI, like MGMT’s “When You Die” music video"). Momentarily disregarding economic considerations, AI “art” is to real art as over-processed food is to whole-food, made-with-love meals. Will some people eat it, for whatever reason? Sure. But are Twinkies competing with fine dining? No. I’m interested in art for the relatable human element. If that’s emulated, then you can only hold my interest until that fact is revealed. AI artists can only be disinteresting or deceitful, there’s no third option.
It is bad primarily because it plagiarizes historical art in order to undermine the professional trade for future artists.
It forecloses art as a career, thereby depriving future generations of evolution in style and professional craft.
The gate being constructed fences off professional artists from the revenue their work produced. And in doing so, it defunds the schools and studios where professionals pass their craft from master to apprentice.
I hate AI art too, but I don’t think it’s so bad as that. It’s terrible because it uses obscene energy and steals art. But that doesn’t mean anyone actually likes AI art (except people who make it and wish other people would like it).
If you tell me your “art” is AI, then I instantly lose interest (with very rare exceptions that generally use older types of AI, like MGMT’s “When You Die” music video"). Momentarily disregarding economic considerations, AI “art” is to real art as over-processed food is to whole-food, made-with-love meals. Will some people eat it, for whatever reason? Sure. But are Twinkies competing with fine dining? No. I’m interested in art for the relatable human element. If that’s emulated, then you can only hold my interest until that fact is revealed. AI artists can only be disinteresting or deceitful, there’s no third option.
Anyone in the business of churning out media slop at high rates and low quality loves it.
Low budget advertisers, propagandists, and click bait influencers are its primary user base.