• uranibaba@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    5 days ago

    Even if the image was regenerated with tweaked prompts until the generated image expressed what the prompter wanted to convey?

    • Valmond@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      I don’t think we’re at the level AI prompting can be used to reflect the subtlety needed to make art. It’s like chainsaw art, cool and mebbe art but it’s not art like the old masters art.

      Also everyone thinking that shitting out a Rembrandt liking image is fantastic does not understand what art really is.

    • Squorlple@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      The person inputting prompt modifications may have controlled the larger assets as a whole, but they did not curate the Gestalt of the image. If the input is text that a computer is to output as a literal estimation, then it is data, not art; if the input is data curated by a person who means for a computer to output it as plotted data, such as with a complex lineplot or 3D model or even text as ASCII images, then that can be art.

    • Yes even then. Writing a prompt is no more an artistic skill than describing your idea to an artist you’re commissioning. You didn’t create a damn thing. You will not be called an artist for commissioning a work.

      • Uranium 🟩@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        5 days ago

        But would that then imply that all commissioned works aren’t art?

        Or does the difference of who (or more specifically what) you commission to produce something decide whether it’s art?