No, Ai "Art" is not Art.

Yeah shit in can (artist's shit) is an art and the beautiful Théâtre D’opéra Spatial is not art, humanity is doomed, we're evolving backwards, i believe AI will keep improving and all overrated, under qualified "artist" will gone, only the best will keep on top and it's using tool named AI

How do YOU train your own non-AI dataset?
Any artist and especially ILLUSTRATORS train it on anything and everything. Just look at any modern education vid - go to Google, look for something like you are painting, learn from it and only fear of a Nick Simmons getting too close in 'tribute' and law/copyright stops you from openly copying everything.

Suggest UBI - Universal Basic Income - pay for it by cutting the existing corporate welfare then ensure it by taxing Automation and blocking or heavily taxing exporting/illegal immigrant jobs. You'll have a basic small level of income, food and comfort and art supplies / digital tools are relatively cheap. You can spend your lives doodling no care if it sells. That is ART at its purest level.

And no the AI will NOT send a Bavarian accent nude muscled creature to demand you give it your paint and pencils... Unless that's how you program YOUR AI/love bot and it just "Ve Vill start by teaching anatomy...!"

That was a great and inspiring video, thank you very much!

I would call ai pictures “an illustration of artwork” rather than artwork itself

It’s a photo that illustrates something. It’s art

I have finally watched this video, and I have to say that it is precisely the reason why I appreciate your content!!

It's not art

I don't know in how many languages this happens, but art is always synonym of beaux arts(beautiful arts). Illustration is someting you would find in a technical manual, comic with the purpose of comunicating an idea clearly.

With that in mind I would say is the other way around. AI can imitate make art but not illustration. At least so far.

A fascinating topic. In my long life as an artist there have been others who openly copied my work. This was intensely distressing until my husband said, "You have only one option. Outrun them." Thereafter I always made sure that my work clearly represented ME and it has proved to be wise in every way. I paint for me, what is on the canvas or in the clay represents what my mind sees. A happy way to work which oddly makes me no longer consider my work to be in the long continuum of art history. It is just me. I hope the same solution may be helpful with AI, at least for now.

ok so those amazing things the robot does doesn't count as art but the literal blank canvas abstract art bs is? wtf is wrong with humanity lmfao

AI is souless and AI is not art. A person can look at an AI generated "thing" not knowing it's AI and experience emotions. Once the viewer finds out it's AI, the emotions change. It's usually a deflation, a flattening, a disappointment, a soulessness because the human connection is lost. Regarding the urinal, the engineer who designed the urinal is the artist, not the guy who heisted the urinal and put it on display. The engineer could have made the urinal any shape and out of many different materials, but he chose a certain asthetic that invokes emotion in humans whether we like to admit it or not. So, let's give credit where credit is due. Regarding the tree being art, is God an artist? Is nature an artist? Is the Creator an artist? I say YES. The most best and grand artist above us all. So, are WE art? I say YES, each a unique creation that cannot or should not be replicated. So, it might depend on whether you believe in God or a Creator. One thing I know for sure is that no human can manifest a tree, a planet, a star, a sunset, a human being, or any of the abundant beauty of this world the way the Creator does. Regarding the capitalism of art, we all know that great art often does not come in the form of commercially marketable art. However, humanity is allowed to have its preferences. It's not capitalism driving what is most purchased; it's human preference driving what is most purchased. So, let's not blame capitalism. I know artists who are making a great living creating marketable art and they love what they do. Do we really want to living in a world where all art has to be a urinal or some abstract whatchamathingy where only the most abscure artists are in the club? The system works the way it is and it's every man, woman, and child for themselves. It ought to make one work harder and strive more and have a sense of fulfillment at the end of the day instead of living in a perpetual state of laziness and degenerating brain plasticity.

Thank you for saying it!

I don't know why people need to complicate things with philosophical questions here about this AI problem...While really it's more of a moral one and it's very simple.. Do you like when somebody stealing your stuff, and then reselling it and profiting from it.. No? I know i don't.. And yes, it needs to stop. All of those systems and image generated, chat gpt etc, has been done, basically without consent... They never asked people if they want to be "replaces"..Well, i guess the answer would be "NO"... The real problem really here is that most people are spineless cowards, and don't know how to fight back, when clearly they have to. Instead, lets just bore our self here with ridiculous, pintless mental masturbation when evil acts are done under our noses... That, will help.. Absolutely no one.

I'm not an artist in the traditional sense. My canvas isn't a blank sheet of paper or vinyl. I build and paint models. In doing so I express my view of the world.

An AI could never do that for me.

moronic video

Would it be possible for a human artist to create art via AI tools? Why can't AI be used to communicate those intentions and give the work soul

Just another medium to communicate with

Your judgmental attitude belies your ignorance and arrogance. You're clueless about using technology for art and entertainment if you think computer generated visual images aren't artistic. Where do you get off dismissing the nearly five decades I've spent making entertainment, commercial advertising, and other digital graphic art in the form of games, web content, wall art, textile prints, and other marketable art. You're just scared your palette and brush skills aren't good enough to compete with a 21st century artist. I don't judge your work. Don't judge mine. As Frank Zappa said, "A mind is like a parachute. It doesn't work unless it's open."

What makes AI soulless is that it was not created by a human. Art is a uniquely human task. It has nothing to to with capitalism. Your socialism is clouding your view.

AI art is not “indistinguishable” from human art. At least right now. If you cannot tell the difference, you should reconsider your status as an artist.

Everytime I surf across the net, I have to pause a bit and look at least twice to even say if It's human art or AI art... AI will eventually create things beyond perfection that human can no longer distinguise. While most artists considered it not an art, others might see it as innovation, creativity, whatever. It will surely replace some art jobs as what it has already done. Will 'we' still make art as a passion and ignore the daily earning basic? I guess I'll still do what I love - drawing, and define the own 'art' inside me.

yeah but i don't care what stupid wrong people think....

this video is the most all over the place in being correct and incorrect i've seen on this subject matter so far....

The demeaning of "illustration' is quite a recent thing. It occurred when America was trying to establish its individual aesthetic credentials with modernism. One way of promoting yourself is to demote everyone else. So art became about ideas, exploration, investigation etc or ideas. Unfortunately visual imagery is a poor medium for ideas. No painting or sculpture ever changed the world or very much deepened any understanding. Those that did, such as Leonardo's anatomical drawings are illustrations. Art might clarify or comment but not initiate, it comes after the event it refers to. Language is the medium for ideas, not paint. The famous urinal is only notable in an art gallery. In a skip or a lavatory it is unremarkable. It is the same urinal in both instances. The artist might declare something art but the action is meaningless. Art is a creation of human study and skill. It is not the spirit speaking but experience. The modern art myth is of advance and discovery, but these are merely clothes stolen from science. Every form of art from observational, abstract and symbolic were present in cave paintings 20,000 years ago. The interesting thing about art is that it has not changed or advanced but is still the same. I understand the Stone Age artists drawing of a horse, and he would understand mine.

Unfortunately you only have to watch the first 2 minutes to understand that the rest will be nonsense. The tremendous over simplification of what AI art works and can work disqualifies any further viewing. All you have to do is study modernism and the history of modern art. To understand this is video will go nowhere.

You do realize that you can use AI to convey a what you describe as “deeper meaning” you don’t just hit a button that says “create art” you need to guide the AI to achieve what you want.

I like to think that I do art because I love doing it and not just because there is a market for it. If one day illustration jobs end, I hope artist will keep doing art and even do it in a more liberating and honest way. But that may mean that most will have to get money thru other jobs and have a lot less time do dedicate to their art. To have artist doing art fulltime without having to be illustrator/designers etc it would have to exist some kind of government incentive and/or people buying it just to collect it (that’s a market too by the way). I don’t know, I may think differently in the future, but right now this is my honest thought.

I think the question you pose is wrong. It doesn't matter if we want to live in a world in which the job of artists is replaced by AI or not. The question is how much you value something purely for being hand crafted by a human. No one ever gave a shit if we wanted to live in a world in which conveyor belts and machines replaced the jobs of blacksmiths and joiners. No one wants that. But almost no one values the fact that an object was handcrafted enoughto pay the tenfold price over a factory made alternative. And artists are not more valuable humans then blacksmiths and joiner were (ad the few still around are), they are just more whiny and that is why this debate is so inflated. The reality is very simple here, in the end the economically more viable solution will always be the succesfull, no matter how many high concept debates about the morality of technological progress we have, if it is cheaper without comprmising qualitiy, it will succeed.

Your so called paradox under capitalism also simply is not true. Automatization of food production does never lead to famine, instead it drives food costs down which helps feeding more people rather then the opposite.

If you call something art and it can be art, literally why not an ai generated image?

The best thing about ai art is the opportunity to put pretentious twerps like this out if work. Im a professional artist btw.

Alternate title for this video: "Hip Hop is not real music because it uses sampling."

I still do " traditional art " not as much as i used to but became intrigued by "ai" an use it as a tool , in many cases it can give a different perspective on your idea , concept, etc. in short many folks have given me flak for even using "ai". then i had a conversation with a tattooist freind of mine about this , his exact words " those artists giving you flak are not confident in their skills because if they were they would not be afraid of it." that statement rings for me an i thought maybe it may do so for some of you as well. just something to think about .

This was a beautiful anecdote. Thank you. I am currently writing my bachelor thesis on this exact question and even though I obviously still have to do a whole scientific process, I am grateful for the thought aspects this video has given me.

That's funny -- when you showed George Lucas talking of Russian cinema I immediately thought of Stalker (definitely would not be made under a studio system), and ten seconds later you were showing that clip!

Just a version of the argument of painting artists to when photography came on the scene. It's here. Stop complaining and work on making your own art better. Isn't that better use of your energy? Something created by a human will always be superior.

I have yet to see an ai image that is indistinguishable from traditional illustration. The amount of pictures I see of a train which has roots growing out of misshapen wheels fusing to the rails which aren't even slightly parallel is just getting warmed up. Ask for a pic of some schoolkids on a platform waiting for a train and you're liable to get a locomotive on wrecked track with the station building dumped on top of it.

wise words

thank you.

art is anything you can get away with
Andy Warhol

What about Monet or van Gogh? Just pretty pictures but still art

We all know it's going to put people out of work, this is a given and it's why the tech has been made available for commercial use. The only potential silver lining is that it will enable people to fill the gap in their skill-sets so maybe we'll all become cottage industries in the future ? You know, rather than be employed, we'll do our thing which we can do and then get supported by an army of algorithms ? So, the writer doesn't need an artist, the artist doesn't need the writer, the musician doesn't need the producer, none of them need the accountants etc. Yes I appreciate I'm being optimistic ..

The older I get, the more I think communism and capitalism are mechanically similar. Different slip covers, but both oppressive in their own right, and very keen on exploiting people as resources

Please make video on samuel Palmer

And then he starts complaining about capitalism... lol... first of all, automation doesn't threaten capitalism. If we automated farming, food would become cheaper, and then people would have to work less to afford it. And there are still plenty of other jobs. Several western countries are even running low on work force. Also, it's not true that we can't imagine a world without capitalism. We've seen plenty of attempts at alternatives. They just... you know... never worked a single time. As for what George Lucas says, it pretty much only applies to large scale movies and video games because they take an enormous amount of money to produce. Anyone can create paintings, books, and music.

I present to you everything in the past, present and future as my masterpiece work of art: therefore feel free to call anything you'd like Art

Satan was jealous because Adams painting was beautiful

It's not that simple. Neural networks do not create themselves, but look for interrelationships between the data that will be "pumped" into them. Behind every neural network product, without exception , is the creativity of humans. It's like throwing thousands of creations into a blender and making a cocktail out of them. An orange, after such a process, still remains an orange but in different form. Is it still orange? Yes... but no. Neural networks have nothing to do with AI - for now AI is just a nonsense marketing term completely disconnected from reality.

AI art is art and we are in a new renAIssance!

As anyone who talks about ai art you are missing a simple point. AI art is not something that a dumb computer generate by itself: it is something that a human generate by using a set of easy to use but complex to master tools.

So what you are witnessing right now is just like the dawn of cinema: mostly a collection of experiments done by a new media. But as right now a lot of people are figuring out ways to express themselves with this tools.

If art is communication between the autor and the viewer then as right now there is art generated by an AI mastered by the autor.

In a society where freedom of expression is granted you can make all the art you want. You can sell it if there is someone who wants to buy it. If you want to make something for the masses you have to walk the thin line that Lucas walked.

In a socialist society you can only sell what the gatekeepers want you to sell. Sabin Balasa is indeed a great artist, but it will probably have just worked in a factory if not for the fact that he was a friend of Ceausescu.

Crafting a vector-style portrait over many hours using the pen vector tool, for instance, is true digital art. An AI prompt that generates something similar in under a minute is simply unworthy of the same level of respect and admiration.

We'll wait for the vanguard that reveals to the world, without saying any word, what art really is, what is it for.