/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

[Anonymous No.7019345]

I don't get something.
If pic related is art because it makes people mad, why AI art isn't when it has the same effect?

[Anonymous No.7019348]

>>7019345
>If pic related is art
it's not. /thread

[Anonymous No.7019356]

if everything is art then nothing is art. I don't care about art. I care about drawings and paintings and stories and music that align with the highest value at multiple levels and stir the human soul at an irrefutably core level. Art is a broad term that is near functionless aside from giving a name to that umbrella category of human creation.

[Anonymous No.7019377]

Art has 2 specific and distinct definitions as far as I am concerned:
>Definition 1
Any piece or performance that intends to or succeeds in eliciting a response in the viewer and that is appreciated as such.
>
This definition is liquid, non-deterministic, and can be applied transitively; "This is not art" becomes "This is art" as your understanding of it changes.
>
>Definition 2
Any piece or performance that is created, crafted, organized, or articulated with skill, dedication, persistence, and/or quality, and is made with general beauty or pleasantness in mind.
>
This definition is hard-coded and based on natural and intrinsic human predilection, with the only negotiation or debate being whether something outside of its normal form is also considered art. This definition has the distinction of being able to be applied to something not intended to be made on the outset as art; a novel written for entertainment or monetary gain that was so well-received that it was considered artful, or an accident that was preserved because of its aesthetics.
>
>
I don't believe in the former definition.

[Anonymous No.7019382]

>>7019345
>pic related is art because it makes people mad
The toilet isn’t considered art because it made people mad. It was meant to make a statement that art doesn’t necessarily need to be a drawing or a painting depicting something (see: retinal art). Duchamp believed that the idea behind art is more important than the execution (ai troons are trying to revise history and credit themselves for this revelation). It was revolutionary at the time but it started a downward spiral into mediocrity. It was never meant to mean “everything is art, no questions asked” as normies interpret it. Proompter “idea guy” types don’t have any ideas that are worth anything and are stuck competing with hordes of retards just like them so they will never be successful.

[Anonymous No.7019383]

>>7019345
Go back to /g/ and take your retarded strawman with you.

[Anonymous No.7019399]

>>7019383
>Go back to /g/
sadly, ai trash is infesting just about every board on 4chan. Not even just images made from it, but these fags derailing threads, posting generals on boards they don't belong on, and directing discussions like this thread here. If you sample a 24 hour period from let's say a few weeks ago, maybe when that bing ai was new, I guarantee you every single board would have had a thread made about it except for the absolute most obscure or impossible to post on.

[Anonymous No.7019404]

>>7019345
its fair to say on /ic/ no one really goes by that iconoclastic logic
most here aim to be actual illustrators or concept artists so believing "lol everything is art" doesn't fly. if this was posted on /ic/ everyone would call them a scitzo and tell them to fuck off just like we'll tell aifags

[Anonymous No.7019425]

>>7019356
Reminds me to picrel

[Anonymous No.7019442]

banana_duct_taped_to_wall.jpg

emepero's new clothes

[Anonymous No.7019457]

You do not pass.

[Anonymous No.7019465]

>>7019442
>emepero's

[Anonymous No.7019504]

>>7019382
>It was meant to make a statement
People say it was a joke then they say it was a statement against art exhibitions during wartime. What's even the truth at this point?

[Anonymous No.7019747]

>>7019345
Because you can't use AI art in obvious money laundering schemes.

[Anonymous No.7019987]

>>7019345
Art is not just a consumable, not just a product.
A great piece of art makes people think, it inspires discussions. It makes people question traditional ways of thinking. At best.
This is a consumable, a product. But putting it in an art context actually creates an interesting discussion the true nature of art.
I don't know if you can follow me but this product itself is not a piece of art, but the act of presenting it as art is an art.
Drawing lines on paper can be mundane lines on paper or art, depending on context.
In the same way the pure existence of AI art and presenting AI creations in an art context could be art. Because it makes people think and discuss about the true nature of art.

[Anonymous No.7019988]

>>7019747
somebody already forgot about nfts.

[Anonymous No.7020013]

if a person types in some keywords and calls the result their art, so be it. But the AI itself is just a tool

[Anonymous No.7020023]

>>7020013
The AI is the artist the prompter is the tool

[Anonymous No.7020024]

>>7019987
OP pic is from 100 years ago and "conversation pieces" in the same vein are still being shat out and hailed by the fine arts establishment.
Taking random, meaningless shit and try to shoehorn meaning and profundity into it is a practice that is old, done, trite and boring since decades. Everyone is sick of it except the circlejerking talentless hack clique capitalizing off of standards being thrown out the window.

[Anonymous No.7020051]

>>7020023
If I tell 100 guys vaguely how to paint a mural, I'm still an artist. You don't have to think I'm a GOOD artist, but I'm still an artist.

[Anonymous No.7020055]

>>7020024
> old, done, trite and boring
>"circlejerking talentless hack clique"

[Anonymous No.7020074]

>>7019345
>If pic related is art
It is.
>why AI art isn't
It isn't.
No, I will not elaborate.

[Anonymous No.7020096]

>>7019345

Who said it isn't? If someone did, don't listen to them.

[Anonymous No.7020196]

>>7019988
I certainly do my best to scourge those from my memory.

[Anonymous No.7020197]

>>7020051
You're the director, not the artist

[Anonymous No.7020218]

>>7019345
>someone mention "SOUL" in their post
>opinion immediatly disregard

I don't believe in religion or spiritualism

[Anonymous No.7020226]

>>7019345
I asked this exact question on /g/ recently. Imo the toilet is more offensive as it takes even less effort to just pick up a piece of trash and call it "art" than prompt something nice

[Anonymous No.7020227]

>>7020051
.t michaelangelo

[Anonymous No.7020228]

>>7020218
this is a catholic forum man.

[Anonymous No.7020237]

>>7019382
I think the question OP is asking is what makes AI art any worse than Duchamp if neither of them have to do with putting a pencil to paper

>Proompter “idea guy” types don’t have any ideas that are worth anything and are stuck competing with hordes of retards just like them so they will never be successful.
You can literally say this about art in general, though. Not everybody is Michelangelo, even at my best I can't compete with the Top 50 or Top 100 artists. AI just streamlines the process so it's not so painstakingly tedious

[Anonymous No.7020243]

>>7019382
>calls others troon when the anti-ai twitter/tumbler crowd is the trooniest of troons

[Anonymous No.7020246]

I live under a rock, what is that thing and why would it/not be art?

[Anonymous No.7020257]

>>7019348
This. OP is not art, it's a Jewish scam.

[Anonymous No.7020258]

>>7019345
The toilet is even less "art" than AI, it's harder to setup the gay ass model and proompt than it is to just take a piece of trash and write barely legible letters on it.

[Anonymous No.7020322]

>>7020246
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fountain_(Duchamp)

Although the article is calling it a "readymade sculpture" (whatever that means), it is literally just a toilet that he found. As for why it is considered art, that is a question for people who wrote the modern art history textbooks

[Anonymous No.7020351]

>>7019345
>why AI art isn't
the pro ai poster is an ESL niggerjeet, who would have guessed? Kindly do the needful and kill yourself, sar

[Anonymous No.7020493]

>>7020322
so its a toilet? Its as valid as art as any other toilet is then. Whats the fuss about?
Why are they calling a toilet a "readymade sculpture"? how pretentious can you get?

[Anonymous No.7020498]

>>7019345
>we used to piss in toilets and put great art in museums
>now we piss on great art and put toilets in museums

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metamodernism

>To describe "the structure of feeling" of metamodernism, Vermeulen and van den Akker use the metaphor of a pendulum continually oscillating from the sincere seriousness of modernism to the ironic playfulness of postmodernism

basically thanks to the internet, everything oscillates between the extremes of modernism, structured calculated art and ironic LE MEME art. to call memes art is one thing, but one cannot deny that we are basically on edge post rick astley rickrolling and 4chan to never take anything anyone says literally because you have no clue whether they are participating in an ironic ruse or being 100% honest and sincere. its led to this wacky dichotomy that we live in now.

[Anonymous No.7020503]

AI itself could be then considered performance art, but not the drawings it makes.

[Anonymous No.7020517]

>>7020493
>Why are they calling a toilet a "readymade sculpture"? how pretentious can you get?

the whole point is to introduce post modernism as an intellectual seriousness over physical handcrafting.

While you shit on modernism why not call crafts like pottery art?

who moves the first mover? Who made god etc

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_of_Theseus
>is a thought experiment about whether an object, after having had all of its original components replaced, remains the same object.


Who TRULY makes the couch? The man who paints an image of a couch? The carpenter who actually BUILDS the couch? The man who comes up with the idea for the couch and commissions the carpenter? The art thief who steals the couch painting?

art is a spectrum ecosystem of lesser artists working in the shops of talented masters, and kitsch and etc.
theres always going to be somebody making more real art than you, with a chop stick and one arm in malaysia and somebody you're better than.

just find a way to pay it all forward.

[Anonymous No.7020529]

>>7019348
fpbp

[Anonymous No.7021264]

>>7020503
>AI itself could be then considered performance art, but not the drawings it makes.

Not sure about this. Maybe it could be applied arts. Like crafts or fashion?

[Anonymous No.7021272]

>>7019345
its literally just the artist going "look i can put my name on anything and you retards will love it just becauseit has my name on it"
its shitposting, which i guess is an artform

[Anonymous No.7021949]

>>7019345
Because it does not:

A.) Involve some form of human, creative input (in the actual generation of the image itself, not the prompt)

and the people using it aren't:

B.) Learning an antiquated skill

[Anonymous No.7023790]

"art" was over a century ago

[Anonymous No.7025497]

>>7019345
>I don't get something.

you are not worthy

[Anonymous No.7026027]

>>7019356
that was a surprisingly thoughtful post.

[Anonymous No.7026164]

>>7019345
One thing seriously lacking in these dicussions of duchamp and ai art, is that historically there are really two major branches of the arts: Fine Art and Illustration. Each branch with very different histories, artistic lineages, and schools of thought.

in duchamp's time, "fine art" was basically physical paintings and sculptures meant to be viewed in a gallery and appreciated. "Illustration" was art made to be reproduced and consumed on a mass scale (think images for newpapers, magazines, books)

Fine Art is all about appreciating and thinking about something on an intellectual level. Illustration is more about communicating to a mass audience, often for the sake of entertainment, advertising, or editorial purposes.

stuff like abstract painting, readymade sculpture, conceptual art, and performance art all come from Fine Art branch.

Animation, comics, video game art, etc. come from Illustration. Any art made for the entertainment industry can trace its roots back to the great masters of Illustration

this is a huge oversimplification of art history from the past 100 years obviously. there's plenty of overlap between fine arts and illustration, and it's impossible to put a strict definition seperating the two. but this is a 4chan post not a history book

So anyways, that's all to say, it makes ZERO sense to bring up duchamp's fountain when talking about illustration work or the entertainment industry. Because that is a piece from a completely different field of art, with a totally different mindset and school of thought on what "art" is.

i garantee you most animators or concept artists would scoff at the idea that you could take a piece of trash, scribble your name on it, and call it Art. Yet AI bros will bring up duchamp's toilet as some sort of gotcha, because they don't know anything about art or the people who make art.

[Anonymous No.7026202]

>>7019345
>If pic related is art because it makes people mad, why AI art isn't when it has the same effect?
Apples to oranges comparison

[Anonymous No.7026210]

Anon, how many of these schizo threads are you going to make before you're bored?

[Anonymous No.7026250]

>>7023790
This

[Anonymous No.7026253]

>>7019356
>align with the highest value at multiple levels and stir the human soul at an irrefutably core level

Gonna need you to define these ideas, sir

[Anonymous No.7026344]

>>7026164
AI means it's over for Illustration, graphic design and every kind of "art made to be reproduced and consumed on a mass scale".
It's also over for translators and writers of generic texts.
It's the last artisan craft wiped away by industrial revolution.
You can still draw as a hobby and you can still have your art on display in a gallery. Duchamp was not able to end this and AI will not stop it as well.

[Anonymous No.7026625]

>>7020237
>AI art
>Not tedious

[Anonymous No.7026958]

anti AI tards keep getting BTFO

[Anonymous No.7026987]

>>7026958
It was hilarious how low iq zoomer activists in this board fell for this obvious bullshit

[Anonymous No.7026992]

>>7026958
>>7026987
Ok trannies.

[Anonymous No.7026994]

>>7020237
>AI just streamlines the process so it's not so painstakingly tedious
Do something else. It's obvious that you don't even like art.

[Anonymous No.7027001]

>>7026958
Is this another whomst, situation my nigga

[Anonymous No.7027105]

>>7020243
Computer science is as full of troons as the visual arts, if not worse

[Anonymous No.7027128]

>>7027105
not after the massive layoffs of diversity hirings from last year: only white and asian men can program. modern ""arts"" and anti-whatever activists don't require any talent whatsoever

[Anonymous No.7027150]

> search engines are polluted with AI faggotry
> AI fags wonder why everyone hates them

[Anonymous No.7027564]

>>7020237
>Not everybody is Michelangelo
true

[Anonymous No.7027828]

>>7019356
Mommy's little artistic boy

[Anonymous No.7027830]

>>7019348
yep
thread ended here

[Anonymous No.7028555]

>>7019345
you made this thread alread

[Anonymous No.7028722]

>>7019345
Human art is over.
This whole board is over.
That's a fucking huge deal: if that only makes you think about mad twitter troons and hacks in the gallery mafia, you never belonged to /ic/, in the first place

[Anonymous No.7028742]

>>7028722
Fuck off and die, tourist.

[Anonymous No.7029249]

>>7027128
This is how we know you don’t work in tech lmao

[Anonymous No.7031301]

This still bothers people?

[Anonymous No.7031323]

>>7020237
I can answer this question.

Art is produced inside an insular community of artists. This is why the term "outsider art" even exists. The art community attracts the most open, most 'creative' personalities - these people crave novelty above all else. In the same way that authoritarian, hierarchical, procedure-driven people succeed in the military, it is the openminded and creative who succeed in art. This is not to lionize artists - if you open your mind too much, your brain will fall out.

"Art" is not synonymous with "the art community."

Therefore, within the art community, there is a neverending search for novelty. That's what drives this endless progression towards new for the sake of new. It's not a bad thing - most new ideas are shit but some are good. Indoor plumbing was a new idea once. You might wonder what art has to do with plumbing, but that's because you're a myopic retard. Life imitates art: just look at all the engineers who grew up on great sci-fi novels trying to make those dreams a reality. We're spirits, not animals, and art is food for the soul.

The "art community" is where the new ideas are incubated, because people in the art community aren't looking for GOOD, they're looking for NEW. It's a pressure cooker. The good ideas escape, the bad ideas die.

When you look at the urinal you don't need to have an opinion on it. You can just shrug and say "eh, it's not for me," without having to call it shit. Calling it shit fundamentally misunderstands the function of the art community in society. Of course it's shit. Most everything they produce is shit. But you have to dig through shit to find the diamonds, and someone's gotta do the shitting.

This is the proper relationship of artists with society.

[Anonymous No.7031325]

>>7031323
I got so high on my own farts that I forgot to answer the question.

AI art is not obsessed with novelty. That's why it has nothing on Duchamp. It does not fulfill the function of art in society. This is not because it isn't art, but because it isn't being made by artists.

HOWEVER, this is not an inherent limitation of AI per se, and I foresee a lot of novelty arising out of AI once you don't have to be a computer nerd to get it to run.

For context I have spend ~18 hours over the last few days cooming to AI art while playing Free Cities. Pic related is AI generated, but it contains no novel idea. It's just porn. This is what 99% of people will spend 99% of their time using AI doing. AI art is a bigger threat to sex and the family than it is to actual art.

[Anonymous No.7031326]

>>7031323
>I can answer this question.
>I got so high on my own farts that I forgot to answer the question.
Ladies and gentlemen, the artist.

[Anonymous No.7032016]

>>7019377
This has been up for 10 days and it still hasn't gotten a single (You)? Are you serious?

[Anonymous No.7033245]

>>7019504
You retard, it's called subjectivity, art isn't even objective, hence this thread full of clashing opinions. There is no "truth". You've been lied to.

[Anonymous No.7033268]

>>7019345
ai art is art

but at the same time I wouldn't consider a mass produced conveyor belt of fast food to be fine dining, same goes for artwork. There's levels to this shit

[Anonymous No.7033279]

>>7031325
From your perspective I wonder, did you enjoy or appreciate the old ai "art" when it was new, novel, and super weird? 2-3 years back? I did.

[Anonymous No.7033320]

> AI shill spent a year trying to convince a discord that AI belongs on pixiv
> later admits to turning on filter because he didn't want AI in their search results
Fucking snakes.

[Anonymous No.7033847]

>>7033279
I thought it was cool but I didn't enjoy it as art per se because the only idea it contained was "random chaos generated by a computer."

Like, it was different, and cool to look at because it was different, but there was nothing beneath the surface, no point being made. It was just chaos.

That's why I don't see AI art as a threat, and indeed >>7033320 reveals the truth of it. AI art with near-perfect technical execution can be churned out in batches by computers running on automatic, and endless firehose of coomerbait, and yet nobody cares. Nobody wants to look at it. Even the non-coomer stuff - the landscapes, the concept art, etcetera - is boring. It's not enough to generate art. There has to be an idea behind it.

The real threat to artists is that previously someone who had an idea but no art skill would have to pay an artist to realise that idea (e.g. videogame concept art) and now they don't.

To oversimplify, imagine an artist has two attributes: technical skill and conceptualisation. AI art removes technical skill from the equation so all that matters now is conceptualisation. AI art actually refines art down to the essence of itself by removing all obstacles between the artist and his idea.

I write a lot and there's a principle in writing which is true, that ideas don't matter - all that matters is execution. But in a world where execution is instant and flawless every time thanks to AI, the only thing left to matter are ideas. Rather than this killing art, we might end up transitioning into a higher form of expression.

I apologise for the length of this post but I can't be fucked editing.

[Anonymous No.7033888]

>>7033847
artists are creative and got ideas, most people got no creativity and no original ideas, AI makes this even more obvious

[Anonymous No.7037042]

>>7019345
Ironically, AI couldn't have made this piece.

[Anonymous No.7037072]

>>7019348
>>7020257
It was literally made as a parody on the art establishment by some French guy who was mad at galleries; neither a Jewish scam nor an art piece, just a middle finger

[Anonymous No.7037118]

>>7019345
this is a board about drawing

[Anonymous No.7037129]

>>7019345
I'm sorry OP, that question is too controversial to ask even on 4chins. Art's definitions are too broad and we now need to create a new word or genre to describe media created by AI. Creative types are very sensitive people that constantly see shadows jumping out at them from the corners of their vision. That's why agents exist.
>>7020498
Has the right idea.
>>7032016
Of course not, it's too threatening to even broach.

[Anonymous No.7037131]

>>7019356
why you got a khajit, that’s not a regular cat

[Anonymous No.7037547]

>>7019377
>general beauty or pleasantness in mind
So if you go out of your way to make something that is extremely unpleasant to look at and is meant to provoke negative emotions, it isn't art anymore?

[Anonymous No.7037555]

>>7019345
My definition of art
1: It is created first and foremost with the intention of provoking an emotional response and/or to get you thinking. If it was created with a focus on simply being practical and useful, it is not art. This does not mean an artwork cannot be functional or useful.
2: A work of art doesn't have to be a good work of art to be art.

[Anonymous No.7037596]

>>7020237
>>7020237
>>7031323
>>7031325
>>7033279
>>7033847
these are the most elucidated and hopeful posts ive ever seen on the subject and board. i wonder how long it will take normies to understand it like they do the other arts

[Anonymous No.7037603]

it will take two - three lifetimes for this to become widely respected. we will not live to see vindication.

[Anonymous No.7037827]

>>7037547
he is just a moron and knows nothing about art, in fact the opposite is true

[Anonymous No.7037988]

A little messy, but I've always been fond of it.

[Anonymous No.7038065]

>>7033847
Second this. Art prompts would naturally evolve the artistic project, making complexity even more complex, thus rendering even higher levels of creativity, because it liberates the mind from the shackles of tedious skillset, making the conceptual ability into the skill instead; it will evolve art, not as a medium or a craft, but as an evolving visionary process.

[Anonymous No.7038068]

>>7038065
Furhtermore, art will transition into higher and more varied forms, profilerating into new unprecedented forms of presentation, which may make art even more interactive, thus allowing for more meaning, more aesthetic and more emotion to be conveyed, which augments inspiration and the role of art in our lives. The virtual worlds of computers, 3D printing, potentially bioarchitecture, and future sculpting are a few good examples of future deviations of the form of presentation of high art.

[Anonymous No.7038071]

>>7038065
This is already present within the development of 3D graphics for video games to a great extent; AI art is just an experimental approach to 2D flat art, of renaissance art.

[Anonymous No.7038318]

>>7037547
yeah

[Anonymous No.7038324]

>>7038068
>bioarchitecture
What are your thoughts dog breeding "specifically pugs" than

[Anonymous No.7038336]

>>7038324
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbPHojL_61U

[Anonymous No.7038361]

>>7037988
Me too anon

[Anonymous No.7038377]

>>7038361
W..w..wwould

[Anonymous No.7038389]

>>7038336
First seconds "novelty" gets repeated 6 times
>Insta makes me want to close the vid
>I guess the novelty already wore off
>Looks in comments section
>Hmmmm...

[Anonymous No.7038455]

>>7038389
Well, whatever. I am not particularly fond of her, except for the fact that she is attractive.
I found the idea of biomass interesting; even if it may not go anywhere, it is still interesting to explore, but it does not have to be through her necessesarily; this is just the video where I first got wind of that idea.

[Anonymous No.7038460]

>>7033847
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-MUEXGaxFDA

[Anonymous No.7038501]

>>7037072
>it's art becsuse teehee subversive

The guy is a jew in all but genetics

[Anonymous No.7038505]

>>7038501
The Jews and the other minorities in art just copied from that guy; he was the beginning of the rot
Before him we had White guys who taught non-Whites art of pity and a lot of Jewish dudes made non-subversive work

[Anonymous No.7038676]

>>7026253
the jew senses a closed door behind which are unsubverted beauty ideals

[Anonymous No.7039259]

>>7019345
This made people even more mad
This is the all time best work of art perhaps

[Anonymous No.7039346]

>>7038676
I don't get why /pol/ thinks its the Jew when it was the fucking French. Post-modernism was invented in part by right-wing Whites