Brainsploosh@lemmy.world 3 days ago
-
Yes it’s your art, you used AI as a tool to create your concept, from your original ideas. If the tool is trained to reproduce others’ work (such as generative and LLM), it’s another story.
-
A painting doesn’t belong to the brush factory nor pigment maker, but neither is the brush or the paint the artistry of it. The greys of AI tool usage is when the tool takes away the art, statement, concept and/or craftsmanship. A photographer can create art with a camera, but they can also be used for stuff that is clearly not art.
-
To my mind, the art comes not from the school or medium, but from the artist challenging, provoking and/or expressing something human. With skill you can delve deeper within the human condition, conceptualise deeper truths, and with mastery of tools and/or craft become the better at conveying it.
An AI, not having an understanding of human-ness can never create art, only mimic it. Studying AI art can thus surely be used as an inspiration for technique and/or reflection, but trying to replicate generated images will probably be a difficult path towards creating art.
Then again, I would contrast art and creatives. Many ad creatives, fonts, decorations, and even wall paint swatches have very little artistic value to them, even though they require creativity and craftsmanship to realise.
Brainsploosh@lemmy.world 1 day ago
On a related topic.
If we ever develop AI sentience, I fully expect them to develop their own humor and art, which will by necessity be incomprehensible and alien to us.
If they keep/rediscover the same concept of art as we do, it will need to challenge AI-ness, which need not even be detectable by us.
Maybe there are jokes than conflate binary 0 with syn/ack delays, or are built around the non-linearity of RAM? More probably they won’t have the wiring for it like we do, where it works as emotional regulation, chemical proxy, and/or social markers.