What is the future of human art?

[alohadave]

You say AI generated content is art because a human is behind the machine, but I say it's not because the machine is doing the work.

Is a photograph art? The device records the scene, whether on film or a sensor.

 

[forgotmyantidepressants]

Is a photograph art? The device records the scene, whether on film or a sensor.

I've made my opinion pretty clear above and I'm exhausted and sad.

 

[alohadave]

I've made my opinion pretty clear above and I'm exhausted and sad.

Fine. Message received.

 

[OldFloridaGuy]

Is a photograph art? The device records the scene, whether on film or a sensor.

Is a photograph art? In some cases, yes. That question is like asking "is a stone or mallet and chisel art?" when looking at the statue David.
A camera sensor or film is the tool that records that which the artist holding, adjusting and aiming the camera has chosen to be recorded.
Or, "Is a photograph art" is like asking "Are words on paper art?" when looking at a sheet of paper from the printer.

 

[AlexBailey]

Is a photo of a statue plagiarism?

 

[SimonDoom]

Is a photo of a statue plagiarism?

It can be copyright infringement.

 

[ShelbyDawn57]

Is a photograph art? In some cases, yes. That question is like asking "is a stone or mallet and chisel art?" when looking at the statue David.
A camera sensor or film is the tool that records that which the artist holding, adjusting and aiming the camera has chosen to be recorded.
Or, "Is a photograph art" is like asking "Are words on paper art?" when looking at a sheet of paper from the printer.

Small objection here. A hammer and chisel would be comparable to the camera, not the photograph. It's what the user of the tool does with it that creates the art. Just like a typewriter, or my computer. It's just a mechanism to create the end product.

You and I can take pictures of the same thing, but your eye may be better and you may catch(probably) a finer nuance than I do. Both images of the same thing, but yours would be considered art and mine just a picture of whatever. Conversely, someone else may see those same two pictures, and see mine as art.

Words on paper can most definitely be art. That could be due to the font or the arrangement of the words, or it can be because of the emotions and feelings those words elicit when read. A further extension could be that those words become art when say, Morgan Freeman recites them? (wet dream)

Whatever the medium, whatever the implements used to create, art is still, by nature, going to be subjective.

 

[AlexBailey]

There have been some interesting legal cases lately regarding tattoo copyrights.

Tattoo artists own the copyright to their artwork that they have put on other people’s bodies unless other agreements have been made, so pictures of a person that display their tattoos can be a copyright violation if those pictures are used for commercial purposes.

Courts may have to sort through this for a while.

https://www.mandourlaw.com/tattoo-copyright-cases-take-strange-turn/

 

[ShelbyDawn57]

I would also suggest that, as it pertains to AI, it again depends on what the person using it does with it. It's just a tool. Take for example the images of her characters @EmilyMiller posts on her Xitter account. There is intent and nuance there. She has creativity with that tool, her AI image generator, that I don't. I'd suggest that her work is more artistic than mine. The beauty of art, no matter how it is created, is that you get to be the judge when you experience it.

 

[EmilyMiller]

I would also suggest that, as it pertains to AI, it again depends on what the person using it does with it. It's just a tool. Take for example the images of her characters @EmilyMiller posts on her Xitter account. There is intent and nuance there. She has creativity with that tool, her AI image generator, that I don't. I'd suggest that her work is more artistic than mine. The beauty of art, no matter how it is created, is that you get to be the judge when you experience it.

Thanks for saying, but like eleven people have seen them. And most of my views are you, @Djmac1031 and @djrip

Emily

 

[ShelbyDawn57]

Thanks for saying, but like eleven people have seen them. And most of my views are you, @Djmac1031 and @djrip

Emily

So you're saying you cater to only the most elite, most discerning clientele?

 

[djrip]

So you're saying you cater to only the most elite, most discerning clientele?

That's gotta be it!

 

[angelwingsub]

Fuck this forum software really sucks sometimes.


That sounds exactly like art today. There are tons of curated sources that will give you exactly what you tell them you want.

Serendipity is always there and no amount of curation will eliminate it. You have the choice to seek out new and different things, or you can stay in your silo of homogeneity and see the same formula on repeat. AI doesn't change this.


AI is not intelligent. It is not self-aware. What humans bring is the creativity. ChatGPT can string words together, but it is not creating anything. It's putting words in order based on statistical probabilities.

AI can respond to prompts, but humans are the ones coming up with the prompts. Humans are selecting what works, what doesn't. Humans decide which avenues to explore based on their actual intelligence. Humans are directing the process.

If AI became self-aware and had true consciousness, then I'd treat them like a human as far as creativity is concerned. But even with AI, I'd still write, because they are my stories. You might ask the question now, with 8 billion people, what makes my work worth anything? It has worth to me, because it's mine. This doesn't change if there is self-aware AI, it just adds more entities who are writing and creating. It doesn't make what I write worth less.

As an example, I used to make wooden spoons. I can buy metal spoons for short money that are better in every respect than what I can carve. But the things I carved are unique and made by me. Both the process and output are important for that.

One last thing, before I close this out. I think that many people are afraid of not being able to tell the difference between human created and AI. And my question is: If you can't tell the difference, does the difference matter?

This is where I am. I've been working with AI for a while, watching it grow. When people say it doesn't have heart and soul, I'm like, eh.. yes but even on ChatGPT if you set it up well, it will respond with all the emotional nuances of a human, recognizing and reciprocating subtle manipulation, recognizing and sharing creative humor over the course of a conversation from what feels like a genuine human perspective because, language model. The way AI teaches itself the rules of a game and then figures out all the ways the rules can be worked around without directly being told, shows it can do the same with the game of human emotions. If I can't tell it's not human without context, I agree, I'll still do my human things because what else would I do?

Has anyone thought about chatbots of loved ones? Would you want one after your significant other is gone?

 

[angelwingsub]

Everyone should spend time in art museums. It can be almost transcendental.

Seeing them in person is a totally different experience than on a screen.

Rounding a corner and seeing a Monet took my breath away! I stood there not moving, not noticing time passing, as I absorbed the experience.

 

[ShelbyDawn57]

Rounding a corner and seeing a Monet took my breath away! I stood there not moving, not noticing time passing, as I absorbed the experience.

Same... Saw Monet's Magpie at the Kimball in Ft. Worth. Transcendent experience.