these type of posts really do have "professional painter says photocamera has no use for him" vibe

casual painting also "makes you remember how to see" and stuff - that doesn't mean that taking photos stop you. It's just different

When the camera was invented, no one was claiming a photo was a painting.

The camera replaced painters for the "I want to capture a static image" market but not the "I want art as expressed by a painter" market. While tragic for a lot of painters at the time, it does seem like the cost of progress.

In writing, there is no "objective capture" like with cameras; there's no tech that can take a picture of your conscious thoughts and translate that to words on a page in a way that's reproducible. So there is only a single arena of "written expression" that LLMs and traditional writers are competing in. And while there is a strong desired market for "art as expressed by the [human] writer," the product itself is much more difficult to distinguish from the new tech (LLM writing) than a photo from a painting. And the low effort of entry into this desired market with LLM writing is driving its dilution.

The analogy would work if instead they invented a magical camera that could turn any scene into a painting in any art style reliably, and hide the painting's origins.

Bad analogy. More like, "Professional painter says he doesn't employ low wage contractors to paint for him"

If your rebuttal is "Michelangelo would've only painted the broad strokes and the faces" you're still missing the point that he still /did some painting/.