The article I chose for my write up is BBC’s “AI art: The end of creativity or the start of a new movement?” by Claudia Baxter. In the beginning of this article she starts off by bringing up an AI humanoid robot called AI Da that can draw portraits. A robot that can make art? Is this the end of human artists? She then later brings up the point of Marcel Duchamp’s urinal art piece and what defines art? This point makes me think about who is really creating the art. AI cannot create things without prompts yet so we are still in control. It makes me think of how certain people put ink on their pets paws or a paintbrush in their mouth and tell them where to step or draw. It’s always the animal that created the art, not the person telling it what to do. Yet when a person does the same thing with a computer suddenly it’s the end of times. However, I understand the argument about if the AI steals other people's art and makes it their own without permission. This can be a touchy subject and unfair if people use AI just to steal other people’s art just to call it their own. Another topic that Baxter brought up is that AI is making artists act more human. Lots of artists make the same art over and over again, or if there’s a trend that is the only subject being created. AI is acting more human in the fact that it’s being creative and different. So much so that the images it creates can be incomprehensible.
Comments