GomerStuckInIowa

GomerStuckInIowa t1_j2c9hk8 wrote

You really don’t understand metaphors or art. I’m a retired chef and my wife is a professional artist that owns a gallery that represents 22 other artists. We’ve sold hundreds of pieces of art. You somehow ended up talking about people not having a mom?

1

GomerStuckInIowa t1_j2b29n4 wrote

The point is misdirected here. Not that AI art is bad or good. A robot can fix good soup vs your mom fixing good soup. But which do you want? Also AI art is not unique. Your mom's soup is unique. This bowl of chicken noodle might taste like somewhat others, but it is still unique to her. The AI art is unique to nothing. It is reproducible to infinity. One might call it soul instead of uniqueness. Or love or even that life is infused into the soup or the art. In the article, take the picture of Kennedy for example. AI art is nice and that is the end of the story. In fact, there is NO story. But the artist might have a story. "I painted this the afternoon when he found out that his son has just learned how to pitch softball underhanded, properly. He was so full of pride that day." No AI can infuse a painting or any artwork with emotion. All it can do is lay down lines, shapes and colors. Maybe we can add our interpretations to it later, but that it all. If you want miscellaneous colors and shapes, AI will be fine, if you want art, turn to a human for that.

1