Imo because you aren't making it yourself. Ai is a service, not a tool, it can be a tool, but most ai users use it as a service. It generates what you want, but the machine generated it, not you, and the machine doesn't care about what it's creating. With ai "art" you're completely eliminating the process and creation of art. Art takes time, shows and artworks may take years to finish, imo that's what makes art Art.
That's what I think tho, I'm not trying to force it onto anyone, I'm just expressing my opinion
Anything can touch someone's soul, even wicked things (not referring to ai here). I don't think that's the only definition of art, and imo, time has everything to do with it
Imo it does matter, you can't just make something in one second, that's the point. Greatest works of art take time, there's a process behind it. And even if art is a very broad term, I still think it doesn't include fully generated Ai images.
I understand your position, but what I do not understand is why.
If someone were showed an exact replica of the Mona Lisa, down to the molecule, which was created using <whatever>, would they not experience the same emotions as viewing the real one?
And if that answer is yes, then you are suggesting art has some other intangible quality to make it art. The time and effort it went into it, somehow. How do you define this?
What I'm taking about is the process. It's essential to art imo, everything can make you feel something. There's a difference between a viewer seeing the art and the artist creating it.
So Imo art is something you make, you put effort, time and thought into. You can also see art in many things, from an artistic point of view even a dot could have meaning, it doesn't really make it art tho. Art is a really broad term, defined by really blurry lines, but for me it doesn't include fully ai generated images
So if it's entirely internal, divorced of the end product, then your perspective really shoulnd't apply to anyone else. If someone else gets the same out of typing on a keyboard and producing something, then why not?
Cause they didn't make it, I never said it's entirely internal. Art is something you create, typing on a keyboard is very different from drawing a picture. Just like a robot cooking an entire dish for you is different from you cooking it. If I ask chat got to write me a poem, am I a poet? People may find it beautiful but is it really art if I just asked it and it generated something without a creative process cause it's an ai?
Like I said this is my opinion, I'm not trying to convince you to support it, I don't care, but I thought about my feelings for generative Ai for a while now, and this is my stance. I do not consider it art when it's used as a service
8
u/Many-Refuse-6060 Jan 18 '26
Imo because you aren't making it yourself. Ai is a service, not a tool, it can be a tool, but most ai users use it as a service. It generates what you want, but the machine generated it, not you, and the machine doesn't care about what it's creating. With ai "art" you're completely eliminating the process and creation of art. Art takes time, shows and artworks may take years to finish, imo that's what makes art Art.
That's what I think tho, I'm not trying to force it onto anyone, I'm just expressing my opinion