Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Should AI art be Considered "real art"? - Coggle Diagram
Should AI art be Considered "real art"?
Thesis Statement
Ai art should not be considered real art for AI art doesn't actualy creates its own art, more of as it copies/replicates art by using refrence and taking pieces from real artists work, therfore not making the art generated by the AI orginal and not created on its own
AI art is not real art becuase it lacks any sentiment or intrinsic physic meaning to the peice, an AI generator cannot feel emtion nor convey the strong emtion into the artwork, emotion is a major key to making a true masterpeice.
Hook
“A work of art which did not begin in emotion is not art.”
Paul Cézanne
“The object of art is not to reproduce reality, but to create a reality of the same intensity.”
Alberto Giacometti
“An artist is not paid for his labor but for his vision.”
James McNeill Whistler
Have you ever thought how AI art is affecting human artists and jobs?
Art isn't about how much money value the piece holds, or how "good" the piece looks. Its about the story it tells, the emotional meaning to the pice, the resemblance it holds.
History and Backround
Before written records were made, art was used in the Prehistoric era to tell stories and keep track of History. France and Spain are found to have to most of the prehistoric art pieces
Art comes in different forms, such as performing arts, canva's arts, and much more. Art can be tied to acting and orchestra.
The oldest, and recorded as first painting in the world is a cave painting found in Chauvet, France. It is dated to be made about 30,000 years ago.
Argument #1: AI art is plagiarsim
It doesn't come up with the art on its own, it takes ideas from other artists
Anyone use an AI generator for their commissions and claim the stole fragments as their own with no credit
It takes parts from an already made and claimed peice
AI art is completely based, it can't think of anything original so it tends to take idea from another artist perspective ont he general subject
Specialized info
Art is a visual history.
Art is a way of expression, it is representation, it is a form. It comes from the heart, art always has meaning. It is somehting special, an originial piece that comes from the heart
Agrument #2: AI art lacks emotional sentiment
The artwork has no real meaning behind it, it can represent something like it can be a "picture of a dog" but it has no intricit feeling or desire
AI art seems to be more lifeless or mechanical/logical compared to art a human artist made
It cannot convey emotion into a piece and make it truely sentimental and powerful
AI art does not have imagination, imagination adds the curious factor to the piece ( which would be considered emotional menaing )
Argument #3: AI generators are mearly a tool and not an Artist
Through a more "tool" use perspective artist and non artist should use the AI to work with algorithims to set up rules or to explore a usage of aesthetic wihtout hard research
Instead of being seen as a easy and fast way to make art, AI can be seen as a way to test and expand your creativity as an artist, challenging yourself to make an AI "peice" more creative, or asking AI to give a a topic to work on.
AI art is not really making art, it is replicaitng. An original idea behind AI art was to put your art through the AI too see if there was anything else you could add or improve in the peice. The intention was not to "make art" for free