People have recently gotten more irritated with AI-generated art, but possibly they are seeing it incorrectly. Many of the unhappy and upset argue that it is not true art, that it is minimal effort, and that it just replicates the style of other artists and reuses photos. The Guardian reported last week that a Dune subreddit has banned AI-generated art for being ‘poor effort.’
In August 2022, an artwork named Théâtre D’opéra Spatial made by Jason Allen using the AI tool Midjourney won first place in the digital art category at the Colorado State Fair. People were horrified that an AI software could win such a tournament. However, the AI software did not win anything. It did not enter this competition or add its work to these group sites. That was the artist’s creation.
These arguments would equally dismiss traditional art. Describing anything as ‘minimal effort’ is also a somewhat erroneous predictor of how well-regarded art should be, since many artists produce work that is not physically difficult, or do not physically manufacture their own work but are the masters behind their thoughts. Take, for example, Damien Hirst or Jeff Koons, who design the idea for the art and what they want it to look like and be constructed of, but they often outsource the job owing to the size and specialty materials utilized.
The notion that AI generators just reproduce identifiable images is particularly dubious, considering that idea formed the cornerstone of the whole pop art trend. Should Warhol’s ‘Soup Cans,’ Lichtenstein’s ‘Mickey Mouse,’ and Richard Hamilton’s ‘Marilyn Monroe’ all be ignored? The cornerstone of creative practice is the imitation of images and style by other artists. For example, during the Renaissance, it was customary practice for painters’ pupils to finish incomplete works begun by their masters. This would help them to learn and attain their ultimate aim, which was to successfully mimic the manner of their mentor.
AI as a tool
If utilizing technologies to make “art” implies it cannot be considered actual art, does it imply all photographers have no right to be called artists? They’ve also utilized a ‘low effort’ method to take photographs of their surroundings rather than laboriously creating a fanciful landscape. Some might even say that this is an easier way for people who can’t use more traditional art-making methods, like people with disabilities, to make art.
There are worries, notably among artists, who are rightly concerned about copyright infringements. As a result, several picture licensing agencies have begun to remove AI-generated photographs off their sites. To address this, we must verify that every AI picture generator is given photos for which license costs have been paid or that are totally royalty-free.
AI’s new direction
What constitutes art is and will always be very subjective. However, instead of perceiving new technology as a hostile foreign phenomena, we should view it through the lens of familiarity. If we are to grow and integrate new technology in a harmonic and rational manner, we must consider it as a tool that we manage, evaluate, and work with. Perceiving it as a different creature that is met with kneejerk reactive rage will not develop a strong working relationship with new technical tools.