1416
People like to create things
(media.piefed.world)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 04 Sep 2025
1416 points (100.0% liked)
People Twitter
10338 readers
1807 users here now
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
- Mark NSFW content.
- No doxxing people.
- Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
- No international politcs
- Be excellent to each other.
- Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major celebrity, figure or any politician. If you replace the "x" at their site with xcancel (so it beomes xcancel.com), and you're not on mobile, it will save video. https://web.archive.org/save is another great option. Archive.is is no longer recommended because they remove/alter content.
- If a tweet (or similar) makes a statement of fact, either mark it as "satire" in the body or provide the original source link backing up the statement
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
this is part of the reason why the blunt anti-AI movement pisses me off. It lets those of us who didn't get to dedicate a bunch of time to mastering visual arts to get an OK representation of an idea made. Not all of us have commission money.
The greater impact, how it's used etc are valid points of argument. But it's nice to see some interesting ideas rendered well, and it's nice to be able to put in stupid ideas and see them made. And not all of it is draining oceans and making people homeless.
Not anymore : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comedian_(artwork)
Also, photography in general. You're not making the landscape or person the portrait is of.
Neither are particle effects from pixar films, but it doesn't stop people saying they are/were masterpieces (before the disney acquisition). People also like rougelike games.
Photography is an extremely difficult art that involves multiple skills. If your analogy made any sense then painters would also need to create their pigments and paintbrushes to be considered artists.
When the one thing you do is provide a prompt in a matter of seconds, without even knowing what the output might be, you're not really creating. It's much more passive than anything else someone might call an art. If photographers just had to write down a sentence and then a photo would appear on paper, I doubt anyone would've ever considered photos special, at least once we got over the magic of it being possible. The same has already happened with AI "art". People instantly recognize it and despise it. Most of those people probably first said "wow, cool!"
I'm not saying "photography isn't art or expression" I'm saying "by your statement of 'Art is creation and process not result.' you are setting a restrictive definition that puts photography outside of art".
Have you ever read a book? Or listened to a piece of live music that had an improvised component? Or one with a non determined outcome (running the output of a radio into an effects system to add another layer to the piece being composed). Played a game with randomised elements?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Cage#Chance
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Eno#Generative_music
Are you saying the non deterministic pieces by Cage and Eno aren't art?
When you write prose, you are not in charge of how the reader imagines what you're putting out. Writing a prompt is creating a piece of technical prose, the setup of the particular AI image generation with loras and data sets is akin to setting up settings for a camera with lenses and exposure times and etc.
And the overarching point that is relevant here is that AI allows those without the skills in visual art to be able to participate in the arts because most people WANT TO be able to create some form of visual or auditory expression, but don't have the skills to be able to.
Yeah, it's cheating. 100%. But guess what :
And I am disputing this strongly. Photography being compared to writing a prompt for AI is insulting as fuck to photography. I think you would understand the point I'm making if you weren't intending not to understand it. I seriously doubt you actually think that there is no composition, lighting, thematic concerns, choice of subject, color choices, etc, etc etc in photography. Even one of these concerns would make photography 10 times closer to art than writing an AI prompt.
Maybe? I don't care enough to research those artists further as every time I listened to either I was bored, and also this question is normally not one I find interesting. I just find it fuckin' baffling that someone can think typing a half-assed sentence and waiting for an output could ever be considered "art". Hell, you can only sometimes fool people into even thinking it's not obviously AI.
Yes, that's my point. Both AI based art generation and photography rely on technical skills in order to process events that ocurr that are outside of the creators' control.
Yeah, the same way you could reductively say that someone taking a photo with a cellphone camera isn't art. But both statements are wrong.
My point is that there are ways that are analogous to steps taken by professional photographers and those that have worked on their craft as a phographer in the field of AI art, and you need to work on those skills to get similar results. Things from managing Loras ,training models, writing better prompts, creating images to serve as starting points, post processing of generated images to purely technical things like system setups, paramater management, hardware choice etc etc.
You need to understand that there are actions akin to setting up lights and selecting the correct lenses that impact both fields.
Yes, 99.99% of the time that would be entirely true and fair. Art would require a creative intent. Most mobile phone photos are just someone wanting to capture a moment, or now with social media, attention. Nothing creative about almost any of that.
Notice I mentioned nothing about technical setup about photography because none of those technical things are creative. Knowing how to setup lights to achieve emotional impact is different from "derp I know I need a lit subject, I setup light now".
None of the things you're saying about AI are necessary for generating images, and further I'll never ever accept any of those as resembling anything like even the ghost of a creative choice. You're wrong. AI image gen is not art, photography is art by anyone's definition who has the first idea about what art is or isn't.
ok, so this post indicates that you are basically grabbing any "common idea" about art wholesale, not interpreting any of it, and regurgitating it. There is no actual interaction to be had here, nor logic being processed.
Bye.
Nope. I actually used to argue with snobby people who would call something not art if they didn't personally get it. You're just wrong here. You understand the point I'm making but you won't acknowledge it. Had you said "the AI process could be creative if..." you might get some conditional agreement. But what you're instead doing is lazily saying "well photos are technical and so is this so BAM: art."
I'll bite :
Sure, writing the prompt could be art of a kind. But I would challenge the claim that it's fun and fulfilling. Maybe it is for some people, but almost certainly not for any traditional artist.
if you are a traditional artist, of course it's not. But if you are not, then it is more gratifying than making a crude stick figure that doesn't have the same emotional impact or resemblance to the idea you have in your head.
Except ai artists didn't do anything to help create said art. It's the equivalent of me messaging a friend and telling him about a story idea I've had. Then that friend goes to a library and starts taking bits and pieces from other people's stories and putting them together. Am I an artist now?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cut-up_technique
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sampling_(music)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comedian_(artwork) (this "artwork" , which has been in museums, involves giving instructions to a curator to tape a banana to a wall.)
So... yeah. Either we need to stop accepting existing human art forms as art, or we need to accept that when someone writes prose and puts it into a computer, they are expressing theirselves.
Yeah, those are all techniques which require actual work from the artist. Except the last one which is a one off tongue in cheek piece by a guy known for his hyperrealistic work. You go call a museum curator and ask him to smash a pumpkin to put on display. If you can get them to do that for you, then I'll concede my point and call you and every ai prompter artists.
I'll write a script that takes AskReddit prompts and sends them automatically to chatgpt and then I post them. Do I become an artist?
Can you differenciate (explain to me/us) the difference betwee prose, poetry and prompt writing? Also, how is the setup of a local AI different to buying paints?
Prose requires skill. Poetry requires skill. Prompt requires you to press one button ad infinitum until you get a result that you like. Do you really think typing "give me 1000 paintings with mountains" and then picking 2-3 which you think will sell makes you an artist? The whole point of art is to take something from yourself and show it to the world. Yeah, there's generative and randomly generated art, that's what people do, take things to extremes. But there's a reason only The first few people to do that are mentioned. Because the rest aren't creating. If I take a banana and duct tape it to a wall, that's not art. That's just me copying someone. That's what AI art is.
I strongly disagree with those people. Like, this is verging on spiritualism.
funnily enough, in turkish the words for medium specific arts like visual arts and music have seperate words to culturally significant or expressive works. "Sanat" is the word for the latter, we even have a genre called "Türk Sanat Müziği" or "Turkish artistic/culture music"
EDIT: For example, "Resim" refers to drawings and paintings, "görsel sanatlar" visual arts, including sculptures (heykeltraş). Sanatkar is artist, regardless of medium, müzisyen is musician, etc.
Yeah, it's probably best to focus on the positives. The AI box has been opened, and there's no closing it back up, even if we wanted to.
I asked AI if it was Pandora’s Box and it said no.
Side note that I find hilarious: predictive text on my phone keeps suggesting “Pandora’s Door” for whatever reason
Well I'm sure it wouldn't lie about that. What a relief!
I know how to close it, but it won't be pretty (or easy)
Edit: it involves fried potatoes, ranch dressing & bolt cutters
I think that everybody has access to a pencil and paper. And if you don't, then you have much bigger problems.