( I probably said this already, but…)
and if an elephant paints a picture, is it art?
1 Like
Nah… elephants have no skill. 
Monkeys?
I don’t know… @Michelist What do you think?
5 Likes
Hilariously, this is a topic that has come up…
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/animalia/wp/2016/09/07/zoos-make-money-selling-paintings-made-by-animals-are-they-art/
If one was so inclined, they are apparently still selling
1 Like
I like this. Art is a nice media to let audience empathize with artists.
you have to remember that people is not just a single person. . the one who do art and the who build the machine are 2 different group with 2 different goal
it probably could. . . after all. What we have got today used to be something impossible to achieve too
1 Like
If 80% of the works is done by the AI, then it was you who are helping the machine i say.
Yeah, I suppose that’s all it is. These are probably made by people who have no desire to express something with art but only want to see a pretty picture or be rewarded for posting one and so perceive no difference between the two things. That would explain why they did not give much consideration to integrating it into an artistic process as a tool, but rather designed it to replace it with the internal workings being a mysterious black box that is never entirely predictable. Still, it’s sad to even imagine a person being that way.
3 Likes
With this whole discussion, we could say whatever we want about the Ai/people who make Ai art.
Yet the ones who needs to listen to us will not listen at this point in time.
At this moment, they are trying to justified their actions “Art is tedious” so let help them unburden their workload.
They wanted to fix a problem, but instead they are making more problems.
1 Like
You have taken this small excerpt out and in this way removed it from the overall context. The answer to your question can only be possibly both works are not art, but the work of the computer cannot be, by definition. The question or even the fact that something is more beautiful to look at than a comparison piece does not define art.
The answer to whether something can be art or not, however, follows from the whole text and can be described in short form like this: Whether something can be art, results from the fact that the creators of the respective piece with it, either something to say or express would like, or that they would like to stimulate to the thought or to a discussion, or also completely simply only something would like to create, over which others are to be pleased or annoyed, and only the ability with these intentions something to create, be it tangible like a statue or immaterial like a song or action art, can make something to art.
A machine doesn’t want to say anything, express anything, doesn’t want to make people think, doesn’t want to lead a discussion about its “work” 
, and it also doesn’t want to create any emotions, no matter what kind.
These AI machines, as fascinating as they may be from a technical standpoint (I’m dying to play with them myself), are nothing more than a tool. This can only change on the day when machines develop their own self-awareness and grow up to be a technical species, i.e. become self-aware. And I hope, this day will never come, because from then on the human being is nothing more than an endangered animal species, which, due to the then existing self-preservation instinct of the machine beings, should be doomed to extinction. But that is another topic, about which I would not like to discuss, because it touches also topics like religion.
Did I say short answer? Sorry! 
Michelist
Add:
These AI machines can help people who are too lazy to practice, or those who are afraid to paint for fear of possibly having no talent (or whatever reasons are given for not picking up a brush themselves), to produce pictures that follow the instructions given at the prompt and largely correspond. The results seem to please the viewers for the most part, and there’s nothing wrong with that, it’s just that it’s not art.
Further, these generators can probably be used well in the entertainment industry, i.e. games, film, TV, etc., to generate images previously created by concept artists and will support them when things go well for the concept artists, and when things go badly for them, they will be replaced by the generators. Don’t ask which of the possibilities I would prefer.
But this is like frozen pizza, you can consume it and not die from it, one looks like the other, and they all taste identical, if I change the program another series of pizza comes out of the machine.
Compared with the pizza handmade by a talented pizza maker, with fresh ingredients, preferably baked in a wood-fired stone oven, the difference becomes clear.
3 Likes
I think they want to show off how AI progress nowadays, which can “understand” input text or image, and output what it “learned the concept” of each element from those arts / photos.
Hi hi, a kind of pantograph deluxe, computerized with multicolor pens and worn out joints for larger variations.
Michelist
I don’t think so, the computer don’t have the need for the artwork, i do, so even if it did most of the work, it helped me because I’m the one who need its help.
Anything technology related it’s here to help us not the other way around, for example, when you enter a site, your just typed the URL, and the computer did all the heavy lifting doing all the mathematics behind going to the server and bringing the site to your screen, it made all the work but it helped you to access a site.
Same as a car for example, you don’t say that you helped a car going to a destination by driving it, it helped you get to a destination.
Well, that comparison did work if what’s matter is only the result. And it was fine on its own.
I don’t want to be rude, but In this case.
You are already relegated to just a client while the machine is being the actual artist. Hence, i say you are just helping while the machine do the actual works.
After all, this is literally how a commission works.
-
You give someone (or something) an idea
-
You give it your requirements in the form of sample, base, detailed request, or prompts etc.
-
And then you wait for the result.
-
Last, if the result doesn’t go perfectly. You just tweak or edit it yourself. (this is the helping part).
Only in this case, you are not commissioning the work to a human but a machine. It’s still pretty much a commissioned works. AI Commissioned works.
2 Likes
With how well they can emulate the style of an artist. It was infinitely tweakable. So this. . .
one looks like the other, and they all taste identical,
Statement can be invalidated by any user who know their way around.
1 Like
This kind of tool is going to be well received by 3d artist. . . after all, most of their works are indeed just a tedious slogs. The arts only come after they have done the boring mundane part.
More so if what they needed to create is something that doesn’t even need any artistic input. My friends who works in 3d says that he is fine not asking to machine to draw things like walls, rock, grass, or any hundreds of mundane things.
I think one thing I noticed is that this tech can be used to assist us, however, if you are not careful you may rely on it too much. It is still important though for artist to learn the basics. My concern for this is that some artist will neglect to learn the fundamentals and thinks that they can use this as a shortcut for anything. And what happens if you do not have access to the tools somehow later?
It requires at least understanding in certain techniques order to design a concept effectively, there are risks that aspiring artist sees professionals promoting any tools or techs and thinks that they can generate good art if only they have access to the tools. I used to experience that hurdle and neglect the reason artists love making art in the first place, is for the enjoyment of the process and to for their own personal growth.
And eventually, those people who are in it for the hype will just get bored and move on, leaving only artists who utilise will that tool to the fullest.
In a similar fashion, 3D art makes it easier to store assets and save time for animation but then you can differentiate what’s a truly good animation vs cash grabs. Only those truly passionate for the art can utilise the tool in their arsenal really well. It is also why stop motion almost always produces really beautiful and thought provoking work of arts, because that medium that most people do not bother and only those who are truly passionate in the craft take their time to use it to express themselves. That’s just my two cents and I hope that this new tool will not discourage aspiring artists and instead gives them more ways for self expressions.
I have seen that kind of thing a lot on pixiv. Many still have some self awareness and give a proper tag to inform it was an AI Commissioned work. AKA. They tell people they are not an actual artist.
But some would just wouldn’t bother and fine being misunderstood as an actual artist.