[ad_1]
On 12/10/22 BIG Wall Décor polled its Instagram followers to ask, is AI art “real art?” The overwhelming majority, 82% of responders said “No” AI art is not “real art.” Only 18% of responders answered that “yes” AI art is real art.
Photorealistic and surreal artist Captvart said:
If you look up the definition of art it says “the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination.” With that being said, AI is a good tool to help you visualize your thoughts and then build from there on the work of art you want to make.
AI art may become an integral part of the artistic process, but as a standalone piece most agree that AI art is not real art.
The Case for AI Art is Real Art.
Jason Allen is the first person to enter AI art, Théâtre D’opéra Spatial, into an art competition and win. Since AI art beat human art in a competition, it’s fair to argue that if AI art is “better than” human art, shouldn’t it also be considered “real art?”
Many artists argue that what makes art “real” is the ability to evoke emotion. The competition judges that awarded Allen’s AI art 1st prize said, “Even if we had known [the piece was AI art] we still would’ve awarded it first place based on the story and spirit it invokes.”
Many artists argue it isn’t possible for a “soulless robot” to put soul and emotion into art.
This competition revealed that AI can create art that evokes emotion and tells stories, much like human art.
Additionally, there is a logical argument for AI art qualifying as “real” art. While artist Thomas Fotomas isn’t a proponent of AI art, he admits that he thinks of AI art as “real.”
He explains his logical argument with the example that, “Robots make cars. Cars are real. If robots make art, then art is real.” He doesn’t agree with the thought process that to be “real” the product must be created by a human.
But, Fotomas feels that because robots can make art doesn’t mean they should.
The Case for AI Art Isn’t Real Art.
The overwhelming response is that “no” AI art is not real art. Abstract artist Daniel Ignacio explained how most artists feel about the controversy:
We, artists, don’t just draw or paint on a canvas. We bleed. We transpose our emotions and turn them into art. Revealing a work of art we just made is us saying, “Hey, look at this part of my soul.” AI is terrifyingly good at creating pretty pictures. Some art will amaze you (AI), but some art will compel you to follow, will capture you, ruin you, and pull you into the psyche of its living, breathing author (the artist).
The main argument for AI art is “not real” is emotional. Artists argue that even if AI art makes you feel something or tells a story, it isn’t genuine or authentic. That is because AI is scanning existing human created art and using that to generate an output.
In a sense, AI art is copying or replicating art made by humans. It’s a complicated process that is being mislabeled as “art.” Many artists go a step farther arguing that not only is AI art “fake,” it is a form of theft.
Roll Up and Paint explains that she doesn’t think AI art is real because, “the computer isn’t really coming up with original ideas, it’s mashing up all the stolen art to create something it’s been prompted to make.” AI scans art online, without the expressed permission of the artists. Then it creates work that the machine claims is their own creation.
Herein lies the ethical dilemma. By not requesting permission before scanning, AI might be stealing the artists’ creative rights.
[ad_2]
Source link