Oh, I'm sure that you write those prompts super artistically. I wasn't intending to gatekeep.

Just people too lazy to learn a skill who want to flip the narrative.
A bit like when you copy/paste a command grabbed online in a linux terminal and then feel like "a programmer" when the system do the thing it was built to.

Source.

After reading the first sentence I wasn't sure if you were anti-AI "too lazy to learn how to paint" or pro-AI "too lazy to learn prompt engineering"

As for your actual comment, while I'm also generally against AI, I feel like a shift in perspective is inevitable and has already happened to an extent.

I think it makes sense to compare image genAI to photography. It also made it far easier for people without "artistic talent" to produce images. Same as with AI, it is technically a purely mechanical process, a machine designed to make images. Also similar to AI, most of those images were kind of trash. However, it soon became its own separate art form, with its own language and a set of rules for "what makes a picture good". Would you say that photographers are not artists because they use a mechanical (or, nowadays, electronic) contraption for their art?

I feel like something similar is happening with AI. There are be certain kinds of AI-generated images that people like, and it will take increasing amounts of effort and skill to generate new, interesting ones. As time goes on and the hype wears off a bit, there will be a relatively small community of hardcore AI prompt engineers making something novel and interesting, while most people just use AI for practical purposes or just fun, similar to photography.

The main differences between photography and genAI are the insane amount of energy required for generating batches of images, and the fact that it steals from human artists to produce its results. This is the reason I'm opposed to the current AI hype, not just because it's mechanical.

After reading the first sentence I wasn't sure if you were anti-AI "too lazy to learn how to paint" or pro-AI "too lazy to learn prompt engineering"

As for your actual comment, while I'm also generally against AI, I feel like a shift in perspective is inevitable and has already happened to an extent.

I think it makes sense to compare image genAI to photography. It also made it far easier for people without "artistic talent" to produce images. Same as with AI, it is technically a purely mechanical process, a machine designed to make images. Also similar to AI, most of those images were kind of trash. However, it soon became its own separate art form, with its own language and a set of rules for "what makes a picture good". Would you say that photographers are not artists because they use a mechanical (or, nowadays, electronic) contraption for their art?

I feel like something similar is happening with AI. There are be certain kinds of AI-generated images that people like, and it will take increasing amounts of effort and skill to generate new, interesting ones. As time goes on and the hype wears off a bit, there will be a relatively small community of hardcore AI prompt engineers making something novel and interesting, while most people just use AI for practical purposes or just fun, similar to photography.

The main differences between photography and genAI are the insane amount of energy required for generating batches of images, and the fact that it steals from human artists to produce its results. This is the reason I'm opposed to the current AI hype, not just because it's mechanical.

art requires some form of effort, AI "art" does not have that

Now explain that to people who brainstorm for hours on a prompt to put into AI to create something lol. Both parties make an effort wether it's physical or mental to create something /s although without AI the range in art is quite limitless and you don't have any boundaries so it's more preferred and logical. I never used AI but I could make up why people would use it for, because you need to have a serious talent and experience to turn it into perfection but i do agree that, ai should not count as art or such

Source.

Now explain that to people who brainstorm for hours on a prompt to put into AI to create something lol. Both parties make an effort wether it's physical or mental to create something /s although without AI the range in art is quite limitless and you don't have any boundaries so it's more preferred and logical. I never used AI but I could make up why people would use it for, because you need to have a serious talent and experience to turn it into perfection but i do agree that, ai should not count as art or such

Source.

Now explain that to people who brainstorm for hours on a prompt to put into AI to create something lol. Both parties make an effort wether it's physical or mental to create something /s although without AI the range in art is quite limitless and you don't have any boundaries so it's more preferred and logical. I never used AI but I could make up why people would use it for, because you need to have a serious talent and experience to turn it into perfection but i do agree that, ai should not count as art or such

Source.

sure thing ill do.

typing a few prompts is no effort. you literally just type what you want, then just slightly adjust your prompt. it doesn't even take me 5 minutes to achieve a satisfactory result, and not even 10 to get exactly what i want. you may generate to your hearts content but dont call it art. and especially dont call it "my art".

It was a sarcasm, I thought people would get it because of the “lol” — my bad. All I was trying to say is, to me, using AI without putting in real effort, time, or actual skill doesn’t feel like art. If anyone can just type a few words and get results instantly, then it loses meaning. That’s not creativity, that’s convenience. And yeah, I get that it can still look good — but calling it “your art do also just doesn’t sit right with me too.