The philistine war on AI art
Genius can appear in the silliest of places
"AI art will supervene, is already supervening, upon several different categories of human endeavour.
It is simply not a meaningful question to ask whether any AI output may appropriately be categorised as art. Art is artifice plus, one hopes, a hint of genius, or something close to that."
By Justin E. H. Smith
Is photography art?
After all, it’s a camera that actually creates the image (yes, it’s art and so is my hours using digital tools to create art).
Even flinging paint onto a canvas is considered to be art (whether it is good or not… that’s a whole different question).
"Art tends to emerge at the sites of social value, of care. If we think AI art is a bad idea, then we might slow its ascendancy by grounding our care in other spheres of human life than those shaped by cutting-edge technologies. But this is almost certainly not going to happen."
Whenever a new and different tool is designed, people will create art with it.
That is just how human beings are.
When computers were created, people used, and I’m not joking, the printers to make music. They came up with ways to make art (and of course porn), even if it was rather crude.
People have used everything from shears to harvesters to make art.
Art and artistry isn’t the tool or the material, but the person behind it.
Agree.
I was there, Pre-press and cameraman, for 35 years.Learned how to use laser scanners, direct to plate, and other computer driven automation.
I was learning how to rotate a cube in 3D space on an Apple II (before they invented GPUs — sure, now it’s easy!).