Something ive noticed about AI art is it enables people who see themselves as “idea guys” to pump out every thought they have, call it good enough, and display it proudly like they worked hard at it.
When you make art you take an idea and that idea is shaped by external factors. Your skill level, your medium, how you collaborate if you are, all of these things influence what you make and that influence in turn changes your ideas. You may have an idea of what you want to paint, and during the process of painting come to appreciate the beauty of texture, and the next painting seeks to explore not just your idea but what you can do with the medium. Artists usually seek to push themselves to learn and explore and have their art change them as much as they seek to create the art.
But an idea guy only has interest in the idea. He doesnt want to do the process, he has no desire to be changed by his work. He has an idea and he wants an end product, and AI allows him to bypass that pesky learning to draw/paint/create business. It removes limitations in medium and skill level and spits out something close enough to his idea that its serviceable.
And I think that, to me, really signifies how much the idea guy values ideas over everything else. It takes all the work out of creation, and the lack of craftsmanship in the ideas is very telling in the final product.
There is also art without any idea, where the artist simply went with the flow. And there is commission work where the idea isn’t the artist’s. Also I think “idea” might sell short what someone has: an idea can be super highlevel leaving a lot of freedom to how it is represented, or that person can have a very detailed result in their mind they would like to bring onto paper or into sound or whatever.
On top it’s not like AI gives you an exact result. Quite the contrary; throw the same prompt at it a few times and you get different results. Potentially vastly different. So if you want an AI built representation of your idea, you still have to iterate and steer a lot until you get something that somewhat resembles what you had in mind. Besides having an idea, you also have to curate. But anyway, the process also shapes the result here; the constraints are different ones than for “real art”.
Mostly agreed, but you’re putting the person who creates an AI image into a box.
I may make an AI image for personal reasons and because I can’t do anything more than rudimentary Photoshop, and even then I have to have a starting image.
My art lies elsewhere. We could spend two hours while I show you around my house, show you all the things I’ve created.
Something ive noticed about AI art is it enables people who see themselves as “idea guys” to pump out every thought they have, call it good enough, and display it proudly like they worked hard at it.
When you make art you take an idea and that idea is shaped by external factors. Your skill level, your medium, how you collaborate if you are, all of these things influence what you make and that influence in turn changes your ideas. You may have an idea of what you want to paint, and during the process of painting come to appreciate the beauty of texture, and the next painting seeks to explore not just your idea but what you can do with the medium. Artists usually seek to push themselves to learn and explore and have their art change them as much as they seek to create the art.
But an idea guy only has interest in the idea. He doesnt want to do the process, he has no desire to be changed by his work. He has an idea and he wants an end product, and AI allows him to bypass that pesky learning to draw/paint/create business. It removes limitations in medium and skill level and spits out something close enough to his idea that its serviceable.
And I think that, to me, really signifies how much the idea guy values ideas over everything else. It takes all the work out of creation, and the lack of craftsmanship in the ideas is very telling in the final product.
It’s autotune for business majors.
There is also art without any idea, where the artist simply went with the flow. And there is commission work where the idea isn’t the artist’s. Also I think “idea” might sell short what someone has: an idea can be super highlevel leaving a lot of freedom to how it is represented, or that person can have a very detailed result in their mind they would like to bring onto paper or into sound or whatever.
On top it’s not like AI gives you an exact result. Quite the contrary; throw the same prompt at it a few times and you get different results. Potentially vastly different. So if you want an AI built representation of your idea, you still have to iterate and steer a lot until you get something that somewhat resembles what you had in mind. Besides having an idea, you also have to curate. But anyway, the process also shapes the result here; the constraints are different ones than for “real art”.
This guy understands art.
Mostly agreed, but you’re putting the person who creates an AI image into a box.
I may make an AI image for personal reasons and because I can’t do anything more than rudimentary Photoshop, and even then I have to have a starting image.
My art lies elsewhere. We could spend two hours while I show you around my house, show you all the things I’ve created.
People who make one kind of art can undervalue another kind.
Yep, it’s been real disappointing seeing musicians and writers use AI album/book covers
I get your Point but even as someone whos like you in that Aspect (not good at Images) that just Sounds a bit lazy