Yup it’s AI generated. Does that make it Art?
IMO no. It’s derivative drivel. But I guess the jury is still out.
I can go both ways on this.
Is it art in the sense that a human being conceived of exactly (or nearly) this image in their mind and used tools at-hand, digital or analog, to put it on some medium or other? No.
Is it art in the sense that a human being conceived of the textual description to make the digital tools at-hand (AI) build something as described? Maybe.
Art is anything that one chooses to think of as art. This doesn’t mean that I, you, or anyone else must like it or be impressed by it.
I was supplied a Word file for a classified ad. It was artfully curated so that even if one enlarges it the characters (each one of which was keyboarded in by human hand) still retain their clean shape! At the same time some spelling and grammatical mistakes were crafted in strategically to give it an organic feel. It definitely is art, and I firmly believe it is. Those who think otherwise obviously don’t understand art.
I suppose that is true (thinking of a urinal hung on museum wall.)
But where this is generated by a machine that has been programmed to associate words with imagery and lifts everything from content to style, even if the words are keyed in and the image is curated by a human, it’s still gives a whole new, and IMO, unacceptable definition of derivative.
Then again, all Art might be considered derivative in a way. It’s very rare any more for someone to come up with a new concept in Art. Maybe AI is it.
Just label it as AI so my clients can have their legal-eagles determine if they want to take the risk of using it.
Moved to it’s own posting
It’s the difference between curation and creation, right? It’s more accurate to say you directed it than to say you created it.