An entrant of the Colorado State Fair art contest won a prize with his artificial intelligence generated piece of art.
Should artificial intelligence programmed art be considered art?
2 Likes
I’ve seen A.I Art, and some of it is really good, but I don’t consider it art at all. 
To me, art is a deliberate action of putting medium to canvas/paper/screen, in order to try and express something.
This A.I art is just random in my opinion - not that I have tried every program but the one I tried (Craiyon) put together an image based on words I entered. Interesting results, but it isn’t art.
1 Like
I’ll play devil’s advocate for a bit.
The guy who used the AI deliberately experimented with different words to find the right medium to put to screen to try to express what he wanted to express. The words weren’t random. The pictures evokes some feeling, or it would not have won.
He had been experimenting with it for a while, learning how it worked and trying out different techniques in a Discord server he hung out in.
Over the years, people have claimed that artists who used technology lacked the skill necessary to be called artists. From cameras to computers, each new invention was considered a “cheat”.
Could this new technology just be another advancement in people being able to express themselves through a new medium?
1 Like
Well…y’know, I do kind of see where you are coming from in regard to the consideration he gave to creating the words he wanted in order to formulate the piece.
Having looked at the piece again, I think its a nice visual image. It’s ironic that I’m looking at it on a computer screen and dismissing it, because I couldn’t tell if it was A.I or painted in Oils, frankly.
People said this about digital photography and now that has become mainstream without any regard for the more traditional methods.
I accept that new ways of creating art are coming through. I don’t like it, and wouldn’t value it as much as I would a “proper” piece of painted art, because…because…it isn’t real. Its printed onto canvas…a perfect piece. There was no effort, no mistakes no effort. Its too easy y’know…? And anything easy, doesn’t have value. (In my opinion)
2 Likes
That’s a scary road to travel. 
1 Like
Really? Why?
If I create something in a digital drawing program, it doesn’t feel as much to me as say something I have worked on over days on paper or canvas and become frustrated with when mistakes happen, and excited about when it goes right.
I take lots of photos…if the camera settings are on automatic, its a snapshot…if I use manual controls and put effort into creating the ambience…it becomes a photograph
1 Like
From what I’m understanding, you’re saying that if something is too easy, it’s not considered art. But who determines if it’s easy. Does that leave out the child prodigy who can create masterpieces on their first try?
It also lends itself to people making life more difficult for themselves than it has to be. . . . for the sake of art. IMO, suffering should be optional.
1 Like
Art is whatever a person thinks of it as though…I mean, if I drew a smiley face on an Origami boat and put it in a river to float away, it’s a fun thing to do, but it isn’t art, in my opinion.
Is there a fine line between suffering, and effort?
1 Like
So the definition is, 'it is what I say it is?" If I said it was art, would that make it art? Is it self-defined?
if someone videotaped your making a smiley face on the origami boat and watched it float down the river, could that be considered art?
What if they added some music and made it into a movie-like presentation with the symbolism of someone dying and putting their souls out to sea?
There’s a lantern floating festival where the soul of a loved one is depicted in the floating lantern. It’s beautiful. Is this art?
Yes, and they’re both self-defined. What I think of as effortless you might feel took a lot of effort and vice versa. Is this how art is defined?
Effort can be quantified in energy spent, whereas suffering is a more subjective thought. Easy/hard are subjective judgments as opposed to objective standards. I equated hard with suffering (perhaps wrongly).
AFAIK AI is a digital process and thus discrete. For me, art is continuous and ephemeral. Therefore AI can never generate art.
Care to elaborate? What makes a process discrete or continuous?
Would adding words to the text that creates the painting make it continuous? Is a finished painting sold to someone else continuous or discrete?
The processes involved in AI are deterministic.
Yes…but then again, if someone else wants to think of it as artful, who am I to say otherwise.
Well, I suppose if they made so many changes to it it would become “their” piece of work, so they could call it art if they wanted. This is going back to the effort and expression of it all. My contribution becomes smaller than theirs…does that make sense?
I would consider this art, yes…because there is emotion attached. A connection between the person and the piece of work.
I think subconsciously I have assumed this as well…
1 Like
Love it! Reminds me of Stargate:
I loved that film!
1 Like
I think if someone’s created something just to be looked at, they can call it art.A lot,including this one,is not to my taste though.
1 Like
You will usually find that the child prodigy , even with exceptional talent has honed his craft with hours of practise .
1 Like
Hi
I am no longer working, so not entirely up to date.
We do still talk to each other, but very privately.
AI is scary, very scary.
I was part of one of the validation experiments.
It did not beat me on certain specifics, but it was very fast, it teaches itself, learns from it’s mistakes.
I am told that I am now not only retired , I am irrelevant, things have moved on dramatically and that I have basically been absorbed into the system, but with my flaws excluded.
I find this scary.
It has excluded humanity and focuses solely on the outcome.
This is not a good thing.