*edited

  • mr_sunburn@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    22 hours ago

    With the amount of energy put into GenAI and the sheer bulk of content generated, why don’t advocates have at least one example of something artistically interesting, unique, or beautiful to showcase their claims? Has it yet made anything of cultural importance that will illicit more than a chuckle and a ‘like’?

    It seems to me I keep hearing non-artists assert that this will be a great thing for art, while real artists who disagree are labeled Luddites or not genuinely creative in some way. It’s frustrating to watch them openly say easily disprovable things. This isn’t speculative anymore these systems have been in production for years at this point. Let’s look at the actual results.

    • Mniot@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      21 hours ago

      Can the people advocating for AI art provide any examples of anything human-generated that is artistically interesting? I suspect not and that’s a big part of why they’re impressed with AI art.

      Like, they’d probably say “The Mona Lisa” because it’s well known to be Great Art, and then their AI can draw them in the style of the Mona Lisa, ergo it has generated Great Art.

      • discocactus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Business majors run everything. If you went to college, did you ever have an interesting conversation with a business major?

      • cloudskater@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        18 hours ago

        And resorting to The Mona Lisa just because it’s widely considered a masterpiece by everyone else shows how little they think about art and consider it themselves. If that’s your first and especially only example, you’ve already failed the test lol

      • Krudler@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        20 hours ago

        I like this mini thread, yeah I agree. It seems like most AI advocates do not understand the difference between graphics and art.

        Computers make graphics, and art is the human experience (often) expressed through a visual medium.

    • m0darn@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      19 hours ago

      I have a buddy that’s a professional singer/song writer & producer. He went out of town a few weeks ago to collaborate for a day or two with another producer. I don’t think he knew in advance but it turns out this other guy is pretty into AI music production. My friend (again: a professional artist and indie music producer) was really impressed with how useful it was. Sorry that this is an anonymous anecdote and not data but yeah some people have found ways to use AI to help them make art.

        • m0darn@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 hours ago

          I can ask him more about it when I see him at bowling on Thursday. But please understand I’m not claiming AI is good, I’m just reporting that some artists find it useful. I’m not sure that their final cut has any ai sound in it, they may have just used it to workshop their idea.