[ukFxqnLa2sBSBf6]

You were going to claim the “win” on this one no matter what anyone says. That’s one of the features of being arrogant.

I have zero desire to get into a semantic argument over this. That would be very boring and is a poor refuge for anyone trying to have an honest discussion.

It’s not a coincidence that nearly all the people today with actual artistic talent universally despise AI. Meanwhile it’s all the talentless tech bros who won’t shut up about how they’re now incredible “artists” that love AI.

I don’t see prompting an AI as creating art in the same way that commissioning a painting doesn’t make you an artist. In this example, it’s the AI model that is the artist creating the “art”, but since AI models aren’t sentient (yet) then what they create isn’t art anymore than a sunset is despite being aesthetically beautiful.

Your “it’s just a tool” argument is especially ridiculous when you consider that the “tool” can create the same “art” in its entirety without you. It would be like if I googled the Mona Lisa and copy pasted it into Paint and then called myself an artist because I used Google and Paint as my tools.

In the case of AI models anything you can think to prompt is already embedded in the model so it’s not like you’re even creating anything. It’s already there. If you have infinite monkeys on a keyboard prompting AI they can generate every single possible image an AI is able to generate. Where is the artistry again?

[aeon_ai]

I'll note I used no pejorative terms to describe you in order to make my points. I don't need to cast you as a villain or "unwise" individual to argue against the statements themselves.

--

Your framing of AI presumes that my proposal is prompt in >> art out. False frame.

You also state "near universal" disdain of AI from people with "actual" talent. A bold claim to make with little data, and at least for me, clear examples of being false.

I know award-winning directors, iconic creatives, and career/professional artists who are all excited by the technology, exploring ways to use it, and learning how to composite it into their work.

Perhaps you would propose that they have no talent and are not "true" artists! This is why I ask for the definition of art. It's not a "poor refuge" for an honest discussion, it's something that is the fundamental term upon which your argument is hinged. You can't gatekeep "art" without defining what the gate is.

The OP talks about Suno Studio - A DAW experience with recording, editing, generative tools, and generative restyling. This is, objectively, a different level of tool than a "prompt to music" generation experience.

Something that is composited through multiple decisions made by a human, toward some end that only they see, through an iterative process...

Well, I'd say that's where the artistry is.

[ukFxqnLa2sBSBf6]

No, there is nothing artistic about tools that help you modify or organize your prompts aka commissions for all the reasons I already stated above.

Let’s play a game. I’ll pick an artist who hates AI and you reply with an artist that loves AI. Let’s see who runs out first.

https://www.wired.com/story/guillermo-del-toro-hopes-hes-dea...