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.
Nope. I actually used to argue with snobby people who would call something not art if they didn’t personally get it. You’re just wrong here. You understand the point I’m making but you won’t acknowledge it. Had you said “the AI process could be creative if…” you might get some conditional agreement. But what you’re instead doing is lazily saying “well photos are technical and so is this so BAM: art.”
had you said “the AI process could be creative if…” you might get some conditional agreement. But what you’re instead doing is lazily saying “well photos are technical and so is this so BAM: art.”
I’ll bite :
AI art is art when you have an actual vision and feeling you are trying to express, and you lack the craftmanship to be able to do it through traditional mediums and use prose, which itself is art, to get a tool to assist you in rendering out that vision and feeling you have. It’s a bit less direct than traditional creativity, but it’s fun and fulfilling, and that’s the entire point of art in the first place.
Sure, writing the prompt could be art of a kind. But I would challenge the claim that it’s fun and fulfilling. Maybe it is for some people, but almost certainly not for any traditional artist.
Maybe it is for some people, but almost certainly not for any traditional artist.
if you are a traditional artist, of course it’s not. But if you are not, then it is more gratifying than making a crude stick figure that doesn’t have the same emotional impact or resemblance to the idea you have in your head.
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.
Nope. I actually used to argue with snobby people who would call something not art if they didn’t personally get it. You’re just wrong here. You understand the point I’m making but you won’t acknowledge it. Had you said “the AI process could be creative if…” you might get some conditional agreement. But what you’re instead doing is lazily saying “well photos are technical and so is this so BAM: art.”
I’ll bite :
Sure, writing the prompt could be art of a kind. But I would challenge the claim that it’s fun and fulfilling. Maybe it is for some people, but almost certainly not for any traditional artist.
if you are a traditional artist, of course it’s not. But if you are not, then it is more gratifying than making a crude stick figure that doesn’t have the same emotional impact or resemblance to the idea you have in your head.