@BreachCat i think these tools make art creation more accessible, which is a good thing.
it's like with a camera. everyone can create something decent, by luck. but there are professionals that really master the tools and get incredible results
painting with a brush is different than digital painting. and using AI tools is very different, but i think it's still a tool
maybe similar to an artist that does not paint themselves, but has a team of painters to realize their vision
@Rasp at least AI art isn't just a get rich quick grift and actually looks really good.
Like, at the simplest, visual art is about being pleasing to the eye. If AI can do that, is it not considered art?
Or if you think art should be provocative, the massive shitstorm that AI art has caused, with both sides at each other's throats, squarely satisfies that goal. This reply included.
I mean I get it AI art didn't really have an "artist" behind it so nobody should really get credit for it. At least digital artists have to do.... ya know... art in order for their pieces to come to life.
Using AI art as references is totally cool with me but if you just take what the AI spits out and claim you "Made" it is questionable.
@malin @AgreeableLandscape I've commissioned art pieces before I've described what I want and artists have created it for me. I might have described what I wanted and given the money I might even have the rights to the piece in full signed over... but it still not MY art.
Anything the AI generates is the AI's art and nobody should be stealing credit.
Different countries are drafting different laws concerning AI, and doubtless different processes will have different conclusions. Some AI art will require just one prompt, while others may require programming, or gathering a data-set -so lots of human work before the output.
It's pronounced ʁaʁyʁe.
And written RaRuRe, or R3 for short.
You can find more infos on this place by clicking there.