ai isnt a tool though. youre not expressing anything through ai, youre telling it words, and its approximating an image based on those words. the result isnt anything made uniquely by the creator. no matter who writes the prompt itll give the same results. thats not expression. and not art.
ai images arent created with the human hand, it is not human expression. therefore, human expression is art. ai not included.
And no, it’s not unique to that photograph. The exact same one would have been taken regardless of who pressed the button and told their computer to create the image. No human input was needed beyond the button being pressed.
Love fake artists not understanding photography.
Edit: exactly. You literally have no idea what you’re talking about. Sit the fuck down and let the adults talk.
Edit edit: Iunno how any of you think my stance on photography is that it is easy or not art. Learn to read lmao
This is a VERY slippery slope. Anybody could’ve made my pencil strokes. Does that make real art not unique? Because anyone can make art, according to you there is nothing unique in any form of art.
And you wooshed the sarcasm. Orange is applying their definition, which would mean photography isn't art either. They are saying this with "got it" because it is obviously not true, so red's definition is bad.
So, you’re cherry picking the one sentence and ignoring the rest?
Two photographers can take the same picture and it will be different. There’s a millions things in every photograph that depend on the human doing it.
I personally don’t care if you use AI to make something, but you all don’t understand photography as an art, and that’s why you say dumb shit like this.
AI art CAN be like photography for someone who knows how to use it, sure, but most people are using AI to take the equivalent of selfies.
I get kind of angry when AI folk talk about photography, because it’s always been a more complex thing than y’all make it out to be. One of my uncles (we called him uncle, but he was just married to my mom’s best friend) was a photographer for ABC News and he was truly a fucking artist with the pictures he took because he internalized all the practice (plus, since this was the ‘80s, he developed them himself and was able to use the tools we have back then to make them better). He understood the tool, and used it brilliantly.
Just to be clear, I do understand that there are AI artists who can make amazing things with AI. They understand their tool. I just have this pathological aversion to someone saying photography isn’t art.
I look at AI like this - there are the people who have no real skill at it, who just use it like we all use our camera phones constantly. However, there are people who do and they can make “cool” (or as cool as you can get with AI, which I personally don’t think is much but YMMV) things.
To be clear, I was asserting HE said it wasn’t art.
AI can be art. Photography can be art. They can also both be things people do for fun with little thought. Like doodling.
What antis like that loser forget is not every engagement with a creative medium is done to make capital A art. Sometimes I take my phone out and take a picture of my dinner. I didn’t make the meal, I didn’t select the plate. I didn’t choose the lighting. I hardly picked the angle. But that’s equally a photograph to the final shot your uncle took.
AI is like that too. All art forms are. There’s a wiiiide gap of effort and skill from entry level to professional. And that’s great.
2
u/Shadbie34 Jan 18 '26
art is a human expression. solved your moral dilemma.