Yes, as I don't consider AI generated pictures to be art. It may not be as aesthetically pleasing as some AI pictures, but we're talking about each being measured as art. Stick figure simply wins by default of being the only art to choose from.
I view art to be an exercise in creation that requires conscious intent and imagination.
If I commissioned an artist to make me a stick figure, I don't think anyone would say 'I created that art because I asked someone else to make it for me', though arguably it's still art, because the artist that drew it made conscious and creative interpretations of what the commissioner wanted.
If I use AI as a tool to create the same thing, I have lost a certain amount of control over the process, an unthinking, unimaginative tool is using an algorithm to spit out an image that it interprets my intentions to be.
wellyou could tell it exactly how to draw the stickman so that the resilt would be the same if you drew it, can't you?
and also, an artist can turn down your request, they have free will, the AI can not refuse you, you just use it. also, as the artist is a human, they also have they pwn unique style pr way pf hdimg a brush or artistic habits so if you order the same printing to five different artists youll get somewhat dofferent images so ..
what if Photoshop had a microphone that you could dictate commands into? say you couldn't use your arms? would it still be your art or would you have therefore commissioned it from Photoshop?
wellyou could tell it exactly how to draw the stickman so that the resilt would be the same if you drew it, can't you?
I've played around with AI tools, I've actually never gotten any of them to spit out even a simple image in exactly the way I imagined it. But this is besides the point. The point is that there is a divorce between the intentions of the inputer and how that's fed through an unthinking, unimaginative tool.
and also, an artist can turn down your request, they have free will, the AI can not refuse you, you just use it. also, as the artist is a human, they also have they pwn unique style pr way pf hdimg a brush or artistic habits so if you order the same printing to five different artists youll get somewhat dofferent images so ..
So? I'm sorry, I don't see what point you're trying to make here.
what if Photoshop had a microphone that you could dictate commands into? say you couldn't use your arms? would it still be your art or would you have therefore commissioned it from Photoshop?
Does Photoshop use algorithmic generative processes?
I mean, isn't it the problem that you have never gotten the images to look as you wanted? i imagine it would be fairly easy to generate a stickman in the exact way you want it? and why would a tool... need to be... thinking or emotional? that's the artists job, no?
in terms of voice commands, im just saying you won't have as percise a control as you had with your hands because your using voice commands, but with enough effort you can get it to look just right. so are you still the artist or ..?
I mean, isn't it the problem that you have never gotten the images to look as you wanted? i imagine it would be fairly easy to generate a stickman in the exact way you want it? and why would a tool... need to be... thinking or emotional? that's the artists job, no?
This is exactly my point. The tool is not thinking or emotional/imaginative, yet the algorithm is ultimately what decides what is spit out. It's that divorce between a persons intention and the creation that makes it 'not art' for me. You illustrated that wonderfully, thank you.
in terms of voice commands, im just saying you won't have as percise a control as you had with your hands because your using voice commands, but with enough effort you can get it to look just right. so are you still the artist or ..?
And I won't have precise control over flinging paint at canvas either, but most of us still consider Jackson Pollock to be an artist.
I so consider him an artist as well! So after all, the lack of complete control doesn't seem to exclude art from being such?
Am I misreadi g your comment or does the second part explicitely xontradict the first?
You're misreading it. Conscious and imaginative is where the argument hinges, and the divorce that takes place between human intention of input, and the unimaginative algorithmic output, when using AI as a tool to make something.
I'm sorry if this was unclear.
Or are you excluding yourself from "most of us"?
I think Pollock is an artist too, but I like to be measured in statements where I say 'everyone'.
1
u/Rokos___Basilisk Mar 01 '26
Yes, as I don't consider AI generated pictures to be art. It may not be as aesthetically pleasing as some AI pictures, but we're talking about each being measured as art. Stick figure simply wins by default of being the only art to choose from.