3 ms·

There are many theories of what "real" art is: that which is beautiful, that which powerful institutions put in a museum, that which satisfies a particular psyc

There are many theories of what "real" art is: that which is beautiful, that which powerful institutions put in a museum, that which satisfies a particular psychological itch, that which captures the values of our times, and so on. There are entire courses built up on this. For my purposes, I am happy to say art is whatever people decide to call art. So this is art. But it isn't "valuable" art, and this is not a deep philosophical point about intention in the making of art, or the ability to pick up human emotions or something. This is a shallow point about economic supply and demand: if we can produce a lot of this in bulk -- and from this demo it seems we can -- then in general it will be devalued. I think there is still a role for critics to play though, and that part might be exciting to us old school humans still deploying "natural intelligence." The interpretation for art is still constrained by our ability to imbue the visuals with meaning. In fact, we may be able to use that ability to make particular outputs more valuable than others.

sandworm101 5y ago
Art exists in context, in its place within history. This junk lacks any context. It's creator lacks understanding, rendering only images without meaning. If people find them pleasant then that's good for them. I find many trees pleasant to look at. That doesn't make them art.
dfxm12 5y ago
If anything, it might be valuable in that a printer can have access to "unique" designs to print and sell. Some of this stuff (especially cityscapes & landscapes) reminds of posters you buy, pre framed, off the shelf at home stores. The difference here is that these images are somewhat unique, and royalty free (assuming it is...). Once sales of a design start slipping, roll a new image and get a new one to sell. Also imagine, if a printer can print different images on demand, being able to sell a random image generated with the prompt being your wedding day, etc. It's like printing out and hanging your DNA sequence. A bit of you was the seed for its creation. It's the sentimental bit that could be valuable.

sandworm101 5y ago

Art exists in context, in its place within history. This junk lacks any context. It's creator lacks understanding, rendering only images without meaning. If people find them pleasant then that's good for them. I find many trees pleasant to look at. That doesn't make them art.

dfxm12 5y ago

If anything, it might be valuable in that a printer can have access to "unique" designs to print and sell. Some of this stuff (especially cityscapes & landscapes) reminds of posters you buy, pre framed, off the shelf at home stores. The difference here is that these images are somewhat unique, and royalty free (assuming it is...). Once sales of a design start slipping, roll a new image and get a new one to sell. Also imagine, if a printer can print different images on demand, being able to sell a random image generated with the prompt being your wedding day, etc. It's like printing out and hanging your DNA sequence. A bit of you was the seed for its creation. It's the sentimental bit that could be valuable.