7 ms·

Yeah that's the point of the discussion, the lines are blurring. In your example, you cannot deny that the client has done at least some amount of artistic work

Yeah that's the point of the discussion, the lines are blurring. In your example, you cannot deny that the client has done at least some amount of artistic work, too. If you insist that they are 100% client and 0% artist, then let's look at other situations: What about an art director at a video game company? 0% artist?

dahfizz 4y ago
> What about an art director at a video game company? 0% artist? Yes. My CEO has excellent technical (and business) knowledge. He will often give me direction on my projects because he knows both the business requirements but also the technical implementations that might fulfill those requirements. His input is very valuable, but to say he is a programmer or that he is creating these programs is wrong. He hasn't written a line of code in many years. Being an Art director is a management position. Having domain knowledge is surely useful, but you're managing, not creating.
- krisoft 4y ago
  > Being an Art director is a management position. Are you sure you know what an art director does? They might or might not be the line manager of the artists but that is not their main responsibility. To quote wikipedia: “It is the charge of a sole art director to supervise and unify the vision of an artistic production. In particular, they are in charge of its overall visual appearance and how it communicates visually, stimulates moods, contrasts features, and psychologically appeals to a target audience. The art director makes decisions about visual elements, what artistic style(s) to use, and when to use motion.” I would call that creation. Sure they don’t just grab a brush and start painting. (Except when they do, because that is the best way to communicate what they want from others.) Would you also say that movie directors are not creating just managing?
  - dahfizz 4y ago
    > It is the charge of a sole art director to supervise and unify the vision of an artistic production. <snip>. The art director makes decisions about visual elements, what artistic style(s) to use, and when to use motion.” I don't see how you can call it creation when they don't create anything. They make decisions about what to create, they provide input on how to create, but they do 0 creation themselves. If I ask my partner to cook dinner, does that mean I made dinner? > Would you also say that movie directors are not creating just managing? Yes. It's in the name - they are directing. They are managing the creation of their team. They themselves just sit in a chair and bark orders - not creating anything.
    - whywhywhywhy 4y ago
      > I don't see how you can call it creation when they don't create anything The page was blank before they showed up. >If I ask my partner to cook dinner, does that mean I made dinner? Did you just ask "Cook dinner" and wait or did you stand behind them and tell them exactly the measurements and process and throw it out every time it didn't taste right?
    - slfnflctd 4y ago
      Whether or not you consider movie directors to be artists, film students have been for around 75 years. https://www.britannica.com/art/auteur-theory https://www.britannica.com/art/auteur-theory For art predating films, see also: Richard Wagner and his concept of Gesamtkunstwerk
  - taylorius 4y ago
    "Would you also say that movie directors are not creating just managing?" No, but I wouldn't give them all the credit for the acting, set design etc. Which is what the guy in this article is claiming - when his picture is patently 99.9% the skill of the creators of midjourney, plus the millions of EXISTING artworks that were fed into it, to teach it what art is.
taylorius 4y ago
Yes, 0% artist. They're an Art Director, directing artists - not acting as an artist. (though they may well be one, of course) Being an artist is a fusion of the creative impulse and the detailed creation of that work. typing a few words does not constitute detailed creation.
- davidivadavid 4y ago
  Art directors routinely execute artistic/creative tasks themselves. In many cases it's just title inflation.

dahfizz 4y ago

> What about an art director at a video game company? 0% artist? Yes. My CEO has excellent technical (and business) knowledge. He will often give me direction on my projects because he knows both the business requirements but also the technical implementations that might fulfill those requirements. His input is very valuable, but to say he is a programmer or that he is creating these programs is wrong. He hasn't written a line of code in many years. Being an Art director is a management position. Having domain knowledge is surely useful, but you're managing, not creating.

krisoft 4y ago
> Being an Art director is a management position. Are you sure you know what an art director does? They might or might not be the line manager of the artists but that is not their main responsibility. To quote wikipedia: “It is the charge of a sole art director to supervise and unify the vision of an artistic production. In particular, they are in charge of its overall visual appearance and how it communicates visually, stimulates moods, contrasts features, and psychologically appeals to a target audience. The art director makes decisions about visual elements, what artistic style(s) to use, and when to use motion.” I would call that creation. Sure they don’t just grab a brush and start painting. (Except when they do, because that is the best way to communicate what they want from others.) Would you also say that movie directors are not creating just managing?
- dahfizz 4y ago
  > It is the charge of a sole art director to supervise and unify the vision of an artistic production. <snip>. The art director makes decisions about visual elements, what artistic style(s) to use, and when to use motion.” I don't see how you can call it creation when they don't create anything. They make decisions about what to create, they provide input on how to create, but they do 0 creation themselves. If I ask my partner to cook dinner, does that mean I made dinner? > Would you also say that movie directors are not creating just managing? Yes. It's in the name - they are directing. They are managing the creation of their team. They themselves just sit in a chair and bark orders - not creating anything.
  - whywhywhywhy 4y ago
    > I don't see how you can call it creation when they don't create anything The page was blank before they showed up. >If I ask my partner to cook dinner, does that mean I made dinner? Did you just ask "Cook dinner" and wait or did you stand behind them and tell them exactly the measurements and process and throw it out every time it didn't taste right?
  - slfnflctd 4y ago
    Whether or not you consider movie directors to be artists, film students have been for around 75 years. https://www.britannica.com/art/auteur-theory https://www.britannica.com/art/auteur-theory For art predating films, see also: Richard Wagner and his concept of Gesamtkunstwerk
- taylorius 4y ago
  "Would you also say that movie directors are not creating just managing?" No, but I wouldn't give them all the credit for the acting, set design etc. Which is what the guy in this article is claiming - when his picture is patently 99.9% the skill of the creators of midjourney, plus the millions of EXISTING artworks that were fed into it, to teach it what art is.

taylorius 4y ago

Yes, 0% artist. They're an Art Director, directing artists - not acting as an artist. (though they may well be one, of course) Being an artist is a fusion of the creative impulse and the detailed creation of that work. typing a few words does not constitute detailed creation.

davidivadavid 4y ago
Art directors routinely execute artistic/creative tasks themselves. In many cases it's just title inflation.