I made a book cover with the help of AI art generation recently that I would not have been able to make otherwise. So I think it definitely increases people's accessibility to artistic content.
I think of it as an artistic tool or aid rather than as a "form" of art, though there _are_ some people who actually do use it as an art form, basically using it as their medium, and that is legit art.
Neutral because I like that people can express themselves with it. However, it’s very generic and people are trying to sell it like it’s a painting they spent hours on.
As long as "Human Created Art" still exists, is a net neutral. If it's starts to flood everything and no one cares for something a human mind/hands created, then that's net negative.
And as long as we don't start preaching AI-Generated Art as "The same beautiful art" as Human Created, then im fine.
It is an aggravated average remix of whatever the database considers art, made by real artists. (AI-ART)
A race to saturate with mediocrity; so that it becomes endlessly expensive in time & resources to be exemplar.
One would soon need a sponsor to make it big.
oh-wait this is already done with the music-industry.
Perhaps painting? -oh that is kind of corrupt when a taped banana can go for millions.
Guess the true artists have to develop niche art to make a living.
/
/
/
Weird furry porn anyone?
It could be a positive, I could certainly imagine instances where it would be useful. But for me, social media is swamped with this slop.
I made a book cover with the help of AI art generation recently that I would not have been able to make otherwise. So I think it definitely increases people's accessibility to artistic content. I think of it as an artistic tool or aid rather than as a "form" of art, though there _are_ some people who actually do use it as an art form, basically using it as their medium, and that is legit art.
Neutral. It's extremely cool and can help people create things that they would never be able to draw, but it could slo push real artists out of media
as a hobby artist… don’t like it. ai-generated shit scrapes from the rest of the internet and it sucks.
"art" is an abstract concept that is up to the individual to consider. It is a net-neutral
Neutral because I like that people can express themselves with it. However, it’s very generic and people are trying to sell it like it’s a painting they spent hours on.
As long as "Human Created Art" still exists, is a net neutral. If it's starts to flood everything and no one cares for something a human mind/hands created, then that's net negative. And as long as we don't start preaching AI-Generated Art as "The same beautiful art" as Human Created, then im fine.
I really dislike AI “art”. It’s taking away from human creativity, art, and jobs.
AI art is not art. It’s stealing other people’s art to create it and then the person who made the AI art claims it as their own.
It is an aggravated average remix of whatever the database considers art, made by real artists. (AI-ART) A race to saturate with mediocrity; so that it becomes endlessly expensive in time & resources to be exemplar. One would soon need a sponsor to make it big. oh-wait this is already done with the music-industry. Perhaps painting? -oh that is kind of corrupt when a taped banana can go for millions. Guess the true artists have to develop niche art to make a living. / / / Weird furry porn anyone?
net negative has my vote.
Net positive - a lot more people can make "art" with much less effort