…Propaganda? Cnet?
Comment on Christie's First-Ever AI Art Auction Earns $728,000, Plus Controversy
jarfil@beehaw.org 5 weeks ago
This anti-AI propaganda talking point is getting old.
Value each artist’s input at what it is: if there is no input, then it’s slop; if there is input, value for what it is.
Some works of art, long predating AI, for your consideration:
Kirk@startrek.website 5 weeks ago
The_Sasswagon@beehaw.org 5 weeks ago
These are great examples of that part of art AI can not capture.
The first was painted by a donkeys tail in the presence of a legal witness, sent to exhibition under a false name, and when it began to be recognized at the time by critics and media, the artist said “aha! You literally like art that a donkey can make, your taste is terrible and so is popular art”.
The second is a physical can of the artists feces (I don’t know if anyone has opened the can to be sure), this time with no explicit agenda. What did the artist mean by this, was it another criticism of art critics, was it a criticism of the commodification of art, or something else entirely?
The last was made as the artist tried to find a religious experience derived from art. He said with this piece he did. I don’t find it particularly compelling, but 100 years ago this rethinking of what art can be was revolutionary enough for Stalin to send him to the camps.
If you only value art for consumption, yes these are exactly the same as me sitting at the computer pressing generate for a few hours. If any of the context is included in your enjoyment of the art, there is no comparison.
jarfil@beehaw.org 5 weeks ago
They are examples of a simple prompt you can put into an AI, to get similar results.
One is little more than random noise. You can put this comment into an AI prompt, in the presence of a legal witness, and when people start liking the output, say “aha!”.
The second is an automated process of canning food, that the artist used to can his own feces. Yes, they were real, about half the cans have exploded after being exposed in places when the sun would heat them up, which was part of the artist’s plan. Another piece by the same artist is Fiato d’Artista, a balloon blown up and sealed by the artist, that over time has deflated. The “art vs. automation” of both, fall heavily on the automation part.
The last can be generated with a single sentence prompt to any image generating AI.
The interpretation you make up to justify a piece, is independent from the means used to generate it… so you have to choose: