If an AI created an image and it was very beautiful, would you call it art?
No, if art requires intention/effort?
Yes, if it evokes a strong emotion in you?
Yes, if it evokes a strong emotion in you?
26-30, M
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
CrazyMusicLover · 31-35
Hmmm, interesting question. Probably not just the way I don't call beautiful natural scenery or patterns of snowflakes art. They are created by some algorithm exactly the same way. It's just that people were able to put it in numbers and visualize on screens. But otherwise it's the same old story. It's all nature, we are nature, we repeat patterns we observed around us in nature for centuries. We copy, we synthesize. Honestly, we give ourselves too much credit. People judge art by emotions it gives them but you can have a psychopathic singer giving a heartbreaking performance making you think it comes straight from her heart and experience and you feel emotional connection when in fact it all was just carefully observed on another people, copied and meticulously trained. (A real story I heard). So... 🤷🏻♀
Everyone acts as if human artists didn't synthesize and copy. Sorry but if you can't tell if the art piece was created by a human or AI and it attracted your attention, spoke to you, brought up great emotions in you then you need to ask yourself if you're truly interested in art itself or just the story around it. If you want to admire the art or the author behind it. If AI was capable of creating music that would sound exactly like Elvis Presley as if he just released brand new songs, a large portion of fans would reject it because it is not Elvis Presley. Therefore it has never been about the music but just about the cult of personality or idk, admiration of the brain and the anatomy of the vocal chords that were capable of creating such voice.
Art has always been something we ascribe to humans, something man-made. So I think that as long as people use AI as a tool to make the scenes in their mind visible and presentable to other people in original and creative way, it's still art. But if AI reached the point when it would create stuff perceivable by our senses on its own, I'd take it more as a part of nature, therefore something that is beyond us as humans. Man-made and original are crucial when we talk about art, I think.
Everyone acts as if human artists didn't synthesize and copy. Sorry but if you can't tell if the art piece was created by a human or AI and it attracted your attention, spoke to you, brought up great emotions in you then you need to ask yourself if you're truly interested in art itself or just the story around it. If you want to admire the art or the author behind it. If AI was capable of creating music that would sound exactly like Elvis Presley as if he just released brand new songs, a large portion of fans would reject it because it is not Elvis Presley. Therefore it has never been about the music but just about the cult of personality or idk, admiration of the brain and the anatomy of the vocal chords that were capable of creating such voice.
Art has always been something we ascribe to humans, something man-made. So I think that as long as people use AI as a tool to make the scenes in their mind visible and presentable to other people in original and creative way, it's still art. But if AI reached the point when it would create stuff perceivable by our senses on its own, I'd take it more as a part of nature, therefore something that is beyond us as humans. Man-made and original are crucial when we talk about art, I think.
caPnAhab · 26-30, M
@CrazyMusicLover I like your answer. I don't know if I fully agree, but it made me think a bit more
I think Ai maybe can inspire art, similarly to the way nature does.
But I like the idea in an art piece that every detail is meticulously placed by its maker. And it having some thought put behind it
I think Ai maybe can inspire art, similarly to the way nature does.
But I like the idea in an art piece that every detail is meticulously placed by its maker. And it having some thought put behind it
CrazyMusicLover · 31-35
caPnAhab · 26-30, M
@CrazyMusicLover I'm interested in how the artist reacts to what he's putting on the paper. And the methods he uses to do it
Say for example, a slip of the hand creates a mistake and the vision for the whole picture needs to be improvised.
Or maybe a little accident ends up making it look better, but it's left in because the artist decided it
Say for example, a slip of the hand creates a mistake and the vision for the whole picture needs to be improvised.
Or maybe a little accident ends up making it look better, but it's left in because the artist decided it
CrazyMusicLover · 31-35
@caPnAhab Yep, same. That's what I admire and appreciate too. It takes talent to know what to do. And not just to satisfy one's artistic ideas but also make it the way that other people find it valuable too.
Ohplease47 · F
@CrazyMusicLover the human spirit is precious and can be imitated but never duplicated.