I find that i can spot AI Images fairly easily these days, especially the sort of fantastical tableaus that get posted to the various AI communities around lemmy. I’m tired of seeing them; it all looks the same to me. Was wondering if im being too sensitive, or if other people are similarly bored of the constant unimaginative AI spam…

For the record, I block any explicit AI Art communities that pop up in the feed, but there are more every day…

  • trafficnab@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    10 months ago

    Funnily enough people said the same thing when photography was first invented (“No one pressing a button and getting a perfect representation of the real world will EVER be called an artist by me, nor will their heartless imitations be called art.”)

    • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      10 months ago

      I wonder how often this has happened in history. Imagine the first person making a handprint on a cave wall being told that it only counts as art if you make stacks of animal bones.

      • trafficnab@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        10 months ago

        But even this application is limited to the mere reduction of copying of works previously engraved or drawn; for, however ingenious the process or surprising the results of photography, it must be remembered that this art only aspires to copy, it cannot invent. The camera, it is true, is a most accurate copyist, but it is no substitute for original thought or invention.

        -The Crayon, 1855

        In particular, art historians are wary of the “high-tech” look of computer-generated images, and they tend to keep away from them for that reason alone. In a sense, this is a self-fulfilling prophecy: as long as the majority of art historians shy away from computer art, the historical discourse surrounding the new images will remain an impoverished “ghetto”… … It is true, I would point out, that any new technology seems at first to have an overwhelming, often irrelevant meaning that comes from the peculiarities of its medium. When prints first appeared in the fifteenth century, they had such a different “look” that they were segregated from more traditional media.

        -James Elkins, Art Institute of Chicago, 1993

        • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          10 months ago

          Freaken crazy. I admit I was being a bit cheeky, I didn’t think anyone ever wrote something like that and published it. It just feels so obvious, of course photography and computer generated art is art. Thanks for doing the homework!