What is this H@*D-ON everyone has against AI art?!? (Page 10 of 10)
|
Originally Posted By Cincinnatus: It’s not Art. It’s illustration and it isn’t created by Man. I'm not going to debate whether what I create is "Art." That's a taste argument. You can't win it and you can't lose it. I'll gladly debate the creation part, because I'm on hour 20 of a 2 minute video. Illustration is still made by someone. So is a cut. The model didn’t invent the character, write the lines, pick the takes, or sit in the editor. I did. The machine filled frames. That’s a tool. If your rule is “if a computer touched a pixel, no human made it,” then every digital photo, every DAW track, and every CGI shot in the last 30 years is also not made by man. You don’t believe that. You just don’t like this tool. A lot of the heat isn’t about quality. It’s gatekeeping. The same people who needed a gate to stay special are mad that regular people can put a finished thing on a screen. |
The long term future is a mash up of Idiocracy and 1984. "Ow, my balls" meets "He loved Big Brother". The boot on your face will likely be a big red clown shoe, but it'll be there regardless. - pmacb
|
Originally Posted By RarestRX: Correct — 100k views doesn’t mean it’s high art. It does mean the “it shouldn’t exist” argument already lost. People used their time on it. That’s the only vote that isn’t a forum hypothetical. If your test is “I personally don’t count AI,” say that. Don’t pretend popularity is irrelevant when the original complaint was that this stuff has no audience and no author. Originally Posted By RarestRX: Originally Posted By Cincinnatus: How many people enjoy something is completely irrelevant. Correct — 100k views doesn’t mean it’s high art. It does mean the “it shouldn’t exist” argument already lost. People used their time on it. That’s the only vote that isn’t a forum hypothetical. If your test is “I personally don’t count AI,” say that. Don’t pretend popularity is irrelevant when the original complaint was that this stuff has no audience and no author. Who has said it shouldn’t exist? I’ve only seen you say that. |
Let's Go Red Wings!
Beautifying the world one logo at a time since 1993.
Soli Deo Gloria
Beautifying the world one logo at a time since 1993.
Soli Deo Gloria
|
Originally Posted By RarestRX: I'm not going to debate whether what I create is "Art." That's a taste argument. You can't win it and you can't lose it. I'll gladly debate the creation part, because I'm on hour 20 of a 2 minute video. Illustration is still made by someone. So is a cut. The model didn’t invent the character, write the lines, pick the takes, or sit in the editor. I did. The machine filled frames. That’s a tool. If your rule is “if a computer touched a pixel, no human made it,” then every digital photo, every DAW track, and every CGI shot in the last 30 years is also not made by man. You don’t believe that. You just don’t like this tool. A lot of the heat isn’t about quality. It’s gatekeeping. The same people who needed a gate to stay special are mad that regular people can put a finished thing on a screen. Originally Posted By RarestRX: Originally Posted By Cincinnatus: It’s not Art. It’s illustration and it isn’t created by Man. I'm not going to debate whether what I create is "Art." That's a taste argument. You can't win it and you can't lose it. I'll gladly debate the creation part, because I'm on hour 20 of a 2 minute video. Illustration is still made by someone. So is a cut. The model didn’t invent the character, write the lines, pick the takes, or sit in the editor. I did. The machine filled frames. That’s a tool. If your rule is “if a computer touched a pixel, no human made it,” then every digital photo, every DAW track, and every CGI shot in the last 30 years is also not made by man. You don’t believe that. You just don’t like this tool. A lot of the heat isn’t about quality. It’s gatekeeping. The same people who needed a gate to stay special are mad that regular people can put a finished thing on a screen. Crucial question: What are you creating this for? |
Let's Go Red Wings!
Beautifying the world one logo at a time since 1993.
Soli Deo Gloria
Beautifying the world one logo at a time since 1993.
Soli Deo Gloria
|
Originally Posted By RarestRX: I'm not going to debate whether what I create is "Art." Originally Posted By RarestRX: Originally Posted By Cincinnatus: It’s not Art. It’s illustration and it isn’t created by Man. I'm not going to debate whether what I create is "Art." That's a taste argument. You can't win it and you can't lose it. I'll gladly debate the creation part, because I'm on hour 20 of a 2 minute video. Illustration is still made by someone. So is a cut. The model didn’t invent the character, write the lines, pick the takes, or sit in the editor. I did. The machine filled frames. That’s a tool. If your rule is “if a computer touched a pixel, no human made it,” then every digital photo, every DAW track, and every CGI shot in the last 30 years is also not made by man. You don’t believe that. You just don’t like this tool. A lot of the heat isn’t about quality. It’s gatekeeping. The same people who needed a gate to stay special are mad that regular people can put a finished thing on a screen. You’re wrong. I like the tool. It’s just not Art. It’s illustration. It’s not a question of taste. It has absolutely nothing to do with taste or quality. It’s a question of creation and Philosophy. |
"…unrivaled fervor for killing..."
|
Originally Posted By macman37: Crucial question: What are you creating this for? For fun? For personal satisfaction? It certainly isn't monetary.  |
The long term future is a mash up of Idiocracy and 1984. "Ow, my balls" meets "He loved Big Brother". The boot on your face will likely be a big red clown shoe, but it'll be there regardless. - pmacb
|
Originally Posted By Cincinnatus: Is it? You’re wrong. I like the tool. It’s just not Art. It’s illustration. It’s not a question of taste. It has absolutely nothing to do with taste or quality. It’s a question of creation and Philosophy. Then we’re using different dictionaries. You mean Art as a sacred category that only counts if a human laid down every mark. I mean a person made a thing that didn’t exist, using a tool. That’s creation. Calling it illustration doesn’t change who sat in the editor. |
The long term future is a mash up of Idiocracy and 1984. "Ow, my balls" meets "He loved Big Brother". The boot on your face will likely be a big red clown shoe, but it'll be there regardless. - pmacb
|
Originally Posted By RarestRX: Then we’re using different dictionaries. You mean Art as a sacred category that only counts if a human laid down every mark. I mean a person made a thing that didn’t exist, using a tool. That’s creation. Calling it illustration doesn’t change who sat in the editor. Originally Posted By RarestRX: Originally Posted By Cincinnatus: Is it? You’re wrong. I like the tool. It’s just not Art. It’s illustration. It’s not a question of taste. It has absolutely nothing to do with taste or quality. It’s a question of creation and Philosophy. Then we’re using different dictionaries. You mean Art as a sacred category that only counts if a human laid down every mark. I mean a person made a thing that didn’t exist, using a tool. That’s creation. Calling it illustration doesn’t change who sat in the editor. I think I mentioned before that this may make you a storyteller vs. an artist. I have delusions of eventually making movies using AI myself; it doesn’t make me a filmmaker, it makes me a storyteller using a different medium to share my stories with the world. |
Let's Go Red Wings!
Beautifying the world one logo at a time since 1993.
Soli Deo Gloria
Beautifying the world one logo at a time since 1993.
Soli Deo Gloria
|
Originally Posted By macman37: I think I mentioned before that this may make you a storyteller vs. an artist. I have delusions of eventually making movies using AI myself; it doesn’t make me a filmmaker, it makes me a storyteller using a different medium to share my stories with the world. Fine. Call it storytelling. I’m not going to tell you your stories aren’t yours because of the toolset. That’s the part I won’t do to you, and it’s the part I won’t accept from anyone else. |
The long term future is a mash up of Idiocracy and 1984. "Ow, my balls" meets "He loved Big Brother". The boot on your face will likely be a big red clown shoe, but it'll be there regardless. - pmacb
|
Originally Posted By RarestRX: Then we’re using different dictionaries. You mean Art as a sacred category that only counts if a human laid down every mark. Originally Posted By RarestRX: Originally Posted By Cincinnatus: Is it? You’re wrong. I like the tool. It’s just not Art. It’s illustration. It’s not a question of taste. It has absolutely nothing to do with taste or quality. It’s a question of creation and Philosophy. Then we’re using different dictionaries. You mean Art as a sacred category that only counts if a human laid down every mark. I mean a person made a thing that didn’t exist, using a tool. That’s creation. Calling it illustration doesn’t change who sat in the editor. It’s not Art. As said earlier, you can’t even legally copyright prompt-generated content, because you didn’t actually create it. |
"…unrivaled fervor for killing..."
Joined:
Nov 2022
Posts:
5340
EE: 100% (4)
SC, USA
|
Originally Posted By Cincinnatus: Is it? You’re wrong. I like the tool. It’s just not Art. It’s illustration. It’s not a question of taste. It has absolutely nothing to do with taste or quality. It’s a question of creation and Philosophy. Thank you. I've been wantin to post a similar response, same idea, but you worded it better, and I lost the thread. That's the one thing I don't like about not being a member. Every other website on the planet gives you that for free. |
|
Originally Posted By Cincinnatus: I never said that. It’s not Art. As said earlier, you can’t even legally copyright prompt-generated content, because you didn’t actually create it. Listen, we're in the weeds. Here's my point: Somebody looks at a house I built with AI bricks and says I didn’t build it. Yes I did. I designed it, I placed the bricks, I mortared them. It exists. It wasn’t there before. You can hate the color. You can hate the architecture. You don’t get to say the house isn’t standing. That's my angle on this whole debate. |
The long term future is a mash up of Idiocracy and 1984. "Ow, my balls" meets "He loved Big Brother". The boot on your face will likely be a big red clown shoe, but it'll be there regardless. - pmacb
|
Originally Posted By RarestRX: Listen, we're in the weeds. Here's my point: Somebody looks at a house I built with AI bricks and says I didn’t build it. Originally Posted By RarestRX: Listen, we're in the weeds. Here's my point: Somebody looks at a house I built with AI bricks and says I didn’t build it. Yes I did. I designed it, I placed the bricks, I mortared them. It exists. It wasn’t there before. You can hate the color. You can hate the architecture. You don’t get to say the house isn’t standing. That's my angle on this whole debate. You are debating an imaginary foe. Make all the “AI brick” houses you want. Still not Art.  Heck, a pasted together collage of “AI bricks” actually does sound like a decent piece of Art. What’s the piece about? |
"…unrivaled fervor for killing..."
|
Originally Posted By Cincinnatus: Who is this imaginary “somebody”? Originally Posted By Cincinnatus: Who is this imaginary “somebody”? All the Anti-AI luddites on X? The Boomers on here that say, "HuRR dUrr YoU preSseD a buTtoN." Trust me, there's tons of them. Originally Posted By Cincinnatus: You are debating an imaginary foe. Make all the “AI brick” houses you want. Still not Art. Never said it was, since Art is subjective and it's dumb to argue it. |
The long term future is a mash up of Idiocracy and 1984. "Ow, my balls" meets "He loved Big Brother". The boot on your face will likely be a big red clown shoe, but it'll be there regardless. - pmacb
|
Originally Posted By Cincinnatus: Who is this imaginary "somebody"? You are debating an imaginary foe. Make all the "AI brick" houses you want. Still not Art. Heck, a pasted together collage of "AI bricks" actually does sound like a decent piece of Art. What's the piece about? Originally Posted By Cincinnatus: Originally Posted By RarestRX: Listen, we're in the weeds. Here's my point: Somebody looks at a house I built with AI bricks and says I didn't build it. Yes I did. I designed it, I placed the bricks, I mortared them. It exists. It wasn't there before. You can hate the color. You can hate the architecture. You don't get to say the house isn't standing. That's my angle on this whole debate. You are debating an imaginary foe. Make all the "AI brick" houses you want. Still not Art. Heck, a pasted together collage of "AI bricks" actually does sound like a decent piece of Art. What's the piece about? Could an "AI brick" house, whatever that means, have any architectural merit? |
"This is a free country, and I have the permits, background checks, licenses, and tax receipts to prove it." --Zippster (4/10/13)
|
Originally Posted By RarestRX: All the Anti-AI luddites on X? The Boomers on here that say, "HuRR dUrr YoU preSseD a buTtoN." Trust me, there's tons of them. Originally Posted By RarestRX: Originally Posted By Cincinnatus: Who is this imaginary “somebody”? All the Anti-AI luddites on X? The Boomers on here that say, "HuRR dUrr YoU preSseD a buTtoN." Trust me, there's tons of them. Originally Posted By Cincinnatus: You are debating an imaginary foe. Make all the “AI brick” houses you want. Still not Art. Never said it was, since Art is subjective and it's dumb to argue it. It’s never dumb to discuss the philosophy of what is and what is not Art. This has been debated by the smartest people in history. If you can’t make a stand, ask yourself why. |
"…unrivaled fervor for killing..."
|
Originally Posted By Torf: Could an "AI brick" house, whatever that means, have any architectural merit? Originally Posted By Torf: Originally Posted By Cincinnatus: Originally Posted By RarestRX: Listen, we're in the weeds. Here's my point: Somebody looks at a house I built with AI bricks and says I didn't build it. Yes I did. I designed it, I placed the bricks, I mortared them. It exists. It wasn't there before. You can hate the color. You can hate the architecture. You don't get to say the house isn't standing. That's my angle on this whole debate. You are debating an imaginary foe. Make all the "AI brick" houses you want. Still not Art. Heck, a pasted together collage of "AI bricks" actually does sound like a decent piece of Art. What's the piece about? Could an "AI brick" house, whatever that means, have any architectural merit? Maybe the point of the conceptual art “AI Brick House” is that it collapses like a poorly constructed argument… |
"…unrivaled fervor for killing..."
|
Originally Posted By Cincinnatus: Straw men are lazy efforts. It’s never dumb to discuss the philosophy of what is and what is not Art. This has been debated by the smartest people in history. If you can’t make a stand, ask yourself why. Because I need to finish this video by Friday? I'm not here to debate "What is Art" or "Is there a God." You have fun with your heady subjects. I'm here to tell people who post and cry about "AI Slop" to go eat a dick. 
|
The long term future is a mash up of Idiocracy and 1984. "Ow, my balls" meets "He loved Big Brother". The boot on your face will likely be a big red clown shoe, but it'll be there regardless. - pmacb
 The Creation- Painter Man |
A Fostered Love of Guns and Country
NRA Benefactor
NRA Benefactor
|
Originally Posted By RarestRX: Fine. Call it storytelling. I’m not going to tell you your stories aren’t yours because of the toolset. That’s the part I won’t do to you, and it’s the part I won’t accept from anyone else. Originally Posted By RarestRX: Originally Posted By macman37: I think I mentioned before that this may make you a storyteller vs. an artist. I have delusions of eventually making movies using AI myself; it doesn’t make me a filmmaker, it makes me a storyteller using a different medium to share my stories with the world. Fine. Call it storytelling. I’m not going to tell you your stories aren’t yours because of the toolset. That’s the part I won’t do to you, and it’s the part I won’t accept from anyone else. I didn’t say they weren’t yours, why are you saying that? You’re a visual storyteller. That’s awesome, I mean that. I encourage creativity wherever I can. |
Let's Go Red Wings!
Beautifying the world one logo at a time since 1993.
Soli Deo Gloria
Beautifying the world one logo at a time since 1993.
Soli Deo Gloria
|
Originally Posted By macman37: I didn’t say they weren’t yours, why are you saying that? You’re a visual storyteller. That’s awesome, I mean that. I encourage creativity wherever I can.  I'm just lashing out, not necessarily at you. The Anti-AI peeps are just tiresome (mostly on X, not so much here). |
The long term future is a mash up of Idiocracy and 1984. "Ow, my balls" meets "He loved Big Brother". The boot on your face will likely be a big red clown shoe, but it'll be there regardless. - pmacb
|
Originally Posted By RarestRX: Then we're using different dictionaries. You mean Art as a sacred category that only counts if a human laid down every mark. I mean a person made a thing that didn't exist, using a tool. That's exactly how a lot of people feel, but it fall apart applied to basically any other medium traditionally considered art. When you start pulling at the threads of dissent, the results get pretty absurd The only 'pure art' if such a thing exists is the dance, song, and fingerpainting of toddlers. Everything else is tainted by varying degrees of theft, motivation, and tools. There is no ruleset that can describe why a person prompting AI is not creating art, that does not also reduce most music, photography/film, and even basic mediums like painting to basically the mastery of tools to create derivative work.People just don't like AI yet because it cheapens their expertise. They'll get over it. Similar rejections happened across the Renaissance, early cameras, electronic music, and what we consider contemporary art. |