Comment on A cartoonist's review of AI art, by Matthew Inman

• ech@lemmy.ca ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  That you can’t see or appreciate the intent of the artist behind those doesn’t mean it’s not there or not important. Why they were made or how they are used in the end is not important. All that matters is how they were made.

  source

  • ExcessShiv@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    I would honestly argue that the way an artist makes art is also completely irrelevant. The art is only meaningful in the way it’s perceived, how the artist physically makes it is of very little importance. The tools and materials are just a means to an end, it’s the finished product that inspires feelings and thoughts, not the process of how it came to be.

    source

    • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Right, but people who type prompts into AI art generators aren’t actually “making” anything though, are they?

      source

      • ExcessShiv@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        No, they’re not, never claimed they did. I said that what comes from it still holds value and is still subject to human approval in the end.

        source
    • ech@lemmy.ca ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      You’ve stated as much already. If we’re just repeating ourselves here, I’ll just copy-paste.

      That you can’t see or appreciate the intent of the artist behind those doesn’t mean it’s not there or not important.

      source