TL;DR — Someone entered an art competition with an AI-generated piece and won the first prize.
Yeah that's pretty fucking shitty.
Conversation
24
50
401
For the record, I think AI can be a useful tool for artists. The issue I have at hand is someone straight up taking full credit and in this case not properly informing the judges what Midjourney is.
Going forward AI art should have it's own category.
25
48
572
"after may weeks of fine tuning and curating" ...as if that takes any effort at all
This is so gross. I can see how ai art can be beneficial, but claiming you're an artist by generating one? Absolutely not.
I can see lots of kids cheating their way through assignments with this
27
4
332
Fine tuning and curating is the art here.
If they just presented generic midjourney art then... It wouldn't have won.
Figuring out what looks like good digital art is the art itself
2
20
My problem with this is not that they 'used AI', but that using AI means that everything here was very literally stolen off a bunch of artists work in a way that not even a homage or study does. It is like, a state fair tho so....
18
28
1,267
google.com/amp/s/80.lv/ar according to this article you can’t copyright ai art which means you don’t own the art. If there’s a rule about you must own the copy right for the art in the fair (Which I bet there is) you wouldn’t be able to enter with ai art.
3
6
76
It's the journalist writing that statement - I guess from incorrectly understanding that "you can't copyright AI art" link that's always spreading around.
1
13
I see a whole lot of non-artists arguing against actual artists about why they think AI generated art is art.
imagine spending years honing your craft to lose a piece made by an Ai and operated by someone who never done anything.
It isn't just "a tool".
13
3
95
