Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Should A.I Art be Considered "real art" - Coggle Diagram
Should A.I Art be Considered "real art"
Argument #1- A.I art isnt creating original art, rather it is copying from already existing art
Does not have "talent" or "skill"
A.I agenets typically don't ask permission to take from an artist, rather they do it without the knowledge of the original artist
Often copies style of artists
Argument #2 - Devalues art from actual people
Easier than actual art
Can make art without 'mistakes' where as an artist will make hundreds of mistakes before reaching the final product
Takes secends to create something
History & background
First piece of art was created in 1973
Was first created to help scientists and engineers to visualize patterns by seeing neural art work
First A.I was created in 1951 by Christopher Strachey
Hook
A.I art has been around for decades, typically used to better the scientific community and our way of life. Now many artist and engaging in the debate of A.I degrading the value of their art.
"I spent hours of my own time to create a piece of art that is uniquely mine! Just for it be ripped off and copped by an A.I in seconds!" Many artists find themselves in this position because of A.I generators
Argument #3 - Copyright
Their is nothing artists can do to reclaim their art or prevent a.i from taking more
Copyright laws don't yet know how to deal with A.I copyright infringement
Those who create the art A.I copies from are not paid or acknoledged
Thesis
A.I art should not be considered real art because it is incapable of making an original piece of art, rather it copies art from already existing pieces of art. It also devalues artists and their work.
Specialized info
A.I blurs the lines of art and creativity
A.I can be used for many more things than just art, it is often used in research that benefits society
Creating art with A.I is a tad pointless, it doesn't really better society like other uses for A.I