| ▲ | sunrunner 3 hours ago |
| > it's about what you created But you didn't create anything in this case. Not the images at least. Which then casts doubt on the rest of the writing in said blog post. |
|
| ▲ | onlyrealcuzzo 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| But you didn't create anything if you used Photoshop... You didn't create anything if you used synth and autotune... You didn't do any scientific research if you used a calculator. You didn't do anything if you just piped together two programs. I've heard it all before. Gate keepers wanna keep the gate as long as they can. |
| |
| ▲ | Hoasi 38 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | I’ve heard this gatekeeping argument before, but it’s not convincing. Nobody prevents anyone from doing anything with any tool of their choosing; nobody prevents anyone from writing (or doing art or any other business, really). There is no gatekeeping or democratization of art needed either. If you just prompt an image, it has zero value, and if your blog is just a copy-paste from any LLM, what’s even the point? Prompting an entire article is a waste of time for everyone. Just outsource all thinking already. Oftentimes a generated illustration signals that. Laziness, lack of discernment. Low consciousness, cheating. (Not always of course, sometimes you just want an illustration for your blog, no big deal! Use AI!)
That said, writing doesn’t need to be streamlined like a production line. People immediately feel when you haven’t put the work. This point against “gatekeepers” is a very lazy argument. And the same can be said about taste. Taste comes from learning and learning is practice. No wonder people are put off by generated “content”. | |
| ▲ | qarl2 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Don't forget photography. Photography is going to destroy art, don't you know. | |
| ▲ | sunrunner 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | You probably put a fair amount more effort and intention in than from just writing a text prompt, I'd wager. All of those examples would require you to at least have some kind of idea about your intended output. | | |
| ▲ | dahart 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | > at least have some kind of idea about your intended output. Isn’t that what a prompt literally is? |
| |
| ▲ | atomicfiredoll 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | These statements are factually untrue or overly broad to the extent of being nonsensical. Hopefully, you can see how that would come off as incredibly disingenuous. [E.g. what did they autotune? What did they Photoshop? Probably some creative work that they or somebody else made.] [Edit: Further, these don't really line up with what the comment you're responding to is saying. If all you did was write a prompt for an image, it gives the impression that you may have done the same for the text. At that point, if I care about what the AI has to say, I can just write a prompt to an AI myself.] |
|
|
| ▲ | derektank 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| There is an artistry in assembling other art into a single cohesive piece. The film director doesn’t design the sets or give the performances or do the makeup, but they place an authorial stamp on the production by selecting what will and will not end up in the frame. |
| |
| ▲ | byronturncoat 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | There is artistry in assembling other art into a single cohesive piece. A film is a collection of the work of artists and performers. Combining AI imagery and AI text together does not make art, because none of the constituent parts are art. A few prompts do not make art. | | |
| ▲ | orangedog 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Writing a blog post is a creative effort, selecting a few pieces (generated or not) is creative, too, whether it is up to your standards are not. The gatekeeping on this is crazy. I really wonder how artists discussed photography and other advances. | | |
| ▲ | byronturncoat an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | If you write a blog post, yes that is creative. If an AI does it, it's no longer creative, it's derivative (by definition). Selecting AI images for one's blog is technically creativity (akin to decorating), but in the most hollow way possible. If you compare this scenario to photography and art, it's pretty clear you've not actually participated in that community | | |
| ▲ | orangedog an hour ago | parent [-] | | Somebody still has to prompt it, there is a creative task. Somebody still has to curate it, that too is a creative task. I was comparing this to when photography first came onto the scene not today, but I'm tired of the gatekeeping (which you retreated back into) which says this isn't art when as with every creative process, it is derivative and creative. People already splice together videos of generated clips. Is that not creative? It's just gatekeeping. People in a few years (or already) or in a generation won't be this pedantic about it. | | |
| ▲ | byronturncoat an hour ago | parent [-] | | If you use the definition of "creative" in that someone creates, sure, you can make your argument. Most people, however, include a level of imagination and effort in their qualifications of whether something is creative. An AI prompt does not meet the bar of "creativity" for most people. Curating AI slop similarly does not meet this bar. Your personal bar may well be on the floor, but that is not representative of most people, in my experience. You're using your definition of "creative" and "art" interchangeably, which lacks nuance and respect for art. The reference to the arrival of photography similarly lacks nuance and respect for artists and art. Art and creativity have a human element, they evoke emotions. As soon as you delegate the process to an LLM, you've disrespected that human element if you try to pass it off as creative or art. You can call it "gatekeeping" if you want to, but I see it as basic respect for other humans and human imagination and effort. | | |
| ▲ | orangedog an hour ago | parent [-] | | Yeah I just don't think there is anything special about "art" and I don't think there is some specific definition for what art is. People create that's art. You can put different amounts of time and effort into it but I think it's just as lacking in imagination or respect for human creativity to distill this down to he worst case. If somebody spends hours prompting various resources and curating it, is that then "slop"? I don't think it is, it's just as sustained a creative effort, regardless of the tool used. You are saying that the 10-20 minute clips that people have put together of generated vid of various series (like Star Wars) isn't art? There are entire stories told using this method. It's not art? | | |
| ▲ | byronturncoat 34 minutes ago | parent [-] | | To summarize, this is a "you" problem. Just because YOU do not think there's anything special about art, it does not mean there isn't. Your lack of respect for art does not undermine the thing itself. You cannot have your GenAI products included with "art" simply because you want to. You aren't entitled to having your prompt outputs held in the same esteem. > If somebody spends hours prompting various resources and curating it, is that then "slop"? In my opinion, yes. Some people may disagree with the term "slop" in this case, but that does not step it all the way up to "art". It can still be non-slop, non-art. | | |
| ▲ | orangedog 28 minutes ago | parent [-] | | I mean sounds like it's a your problem if you are saying that certain tools, no matter how they are used or the effort put into using them can't qualify as art. You're right, I don't gatekeep art that same way. I don't lack respect for art, I lack respect for your standards which I think are artificial. | | |
| ▲ | byronturncoat 10 minutes ago | parent [-] | | GenAI only exists because it steals from a vast corpus of human creative output. It then regurgitates it back, stripping away the emotion, care, and talent that made it art. No amount of prompting will touch the amount of accumulated skill that the original work required. If you cannot understand why trying to pass off GenAI output as "art" is disrespectful and illogical, I cannot help you. Someone that pretends prompting is "effort" will always just be that, regardless of how you, personally, set your standards. |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | tverbeure an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | I don’t think you understand the meaning of the word gatekeeping. | | |
| |
| ▲ | Ariarule 13 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | Is a painting not art because individual pigments aren't art? |
| |
| ▲ | sunrunner 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > There is an artistry in assembling other art into a single cohesive piece I never said there wasn't, but I also wasn't talking about human roles where people in larger creative teams have some kind of artistic say in the final output of a much larger process involving other talented humans. That is a very different example and I think you know that. | |
| ▲ | righthand 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Oh yeah I can just remember all those famous renowned collages that everyone associates as art. A director does a hell of a lot more than select what goes in a frame and then sit back and watch it come together. | | |
|
|
| ▲ | RandomLensman 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Getting an AI to create the imagine you want isn't necessarily easy. |
|
| ▲ | tempfile 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| I think they would obviously be happy with the alternative wording "it's about what was created" or just "it's about the product". I don't think they care about any aspect of how it came to exist. |