Is AI 'Art' Art?
Is AI ‘Art’ Art?
Krysantha Flores
Dr. O'Brien
Language and Literature 2
03/12/2025
As of recently, there has been an increased use of AI for many reasons, like medical use. AI has been used in many fields, including art, but this has sparked a debate. Is the art AI makes really art? No. ‘Art’ made solely by a machine will never have the creativity and hard work of art made by a living organism. The ‘art” AI makes is blatant thievery and anyone who uses it does not want to put in the effort to truly make art.
The Britannica Dictionary defines art as “something that is created with imagination and skill and that is beautiful or that expresses important ideas or feelings”(“Art”). AI lacks human emotions and thought processes, its process of making ‘art’ is turning prompts into images. The AI that makes the art has a set database in which it bases the images it generates off of, this causes a lack of creativity, which is one of the fundamentals of art. Art itself is constantly being evolved, meaning new ideas are put into physical form every day. Also, art made by AI is soulless, there's no meaning to it. To create art, you usually have to have a reason for what you want to draw, AI just spits out whatever image it generates based on a prompt.
Additionally, these images are taken from pre-existing art online. Say if someone were to give an AI the prompt with words like ‘Studio Ghibli’, the AI will copy art from the Studio Ghibli movies to generate an image. AI cannot make art without copying others' art or art styles. Many artists have sued many AI companies because of copyright, their art was in the AI's database without permission (“Is A.I. Art Stealing from Artists?”). What happens is that when the person who gives the prompt to AI likes a certain style of art, they will usually put that artist's name into the AI database. An artist's popularity increases the chance of their art being copied by AI. It has also been revealed that Midjourney allegedly trains its AI by using names like Frida Kahlo, Andy Warhol, Banksy, etc. (“Here are all the artists Midjourney allegedly uses to train its AI”)
In my opinion, AI will never be able to create real art. A robot that can only copy everything it sees is no better than a blatant thief. To me, AI is art theft. It can only rely on other artists to create things, without a database, it would never be able to create. People who use AI to try and create art are better off learning art themselves. It will give a person greater satisfaction looking at something they worked hard to create rather than looking at something made by AI that is a cheap copy of other artists.
Cited Works
CITATIONS
“Art.” The Britannica Dictionary. https://www.britannica.com/dictionary/art. Accessed 11 Mar. 2025.
Chayka, Kyle. “Is A.I. Art Stealing from Artists?.” The New Yorker, 10 Feb. 2023.
Waite, Thom. “Here are all the artists Midjourney allegedly uses to train its AI.” DAZED, 3 Jan, 2024.
.jpg)
OK, I agree with everything you said, but want to propose an idea (just to play the devil's advocate). If AI using databases to inspire its art is considered "stealing," then aren't all artists thieves too? I use tons of references off Pinterest---often copying directly off other artists's work---and my style is heavily influenced by the artists I like and whose pieces I consume. Sometimes, artists even directly trace---and yet that isn't considered copying, but AI art is. I actually think AI art is quite impressive; it says a lot about the amazing technology we're able to create now. The problem is not with AI art itself, but rather the fact that it's seeping into traditional art platforms. My take is that we should let AI art evolve and thrive, but keep it separate from real human artists.
ReplyDelete(I'm here to play devil's advocate against the devil's advocate haha) You're comparing two very different things here--a real human artist using reference images or taking inspiration from other people's art still counts as art, obviously. But that's because the works you're "copying" from are works that made you feel something, and it's something distinctly human that decides what you take away from a piece. AI, on the other hand, doesn't have those thoughts and feelings. It will only ever be capable of directly regurgitating images scraped from the internet, and what it produces will only ever be a warped simulacrum of what true art really is. I do agree that AI image generators are quite impressive, and it can be fun to play around with, but an image churned out by a computer will never be a proper substitute to real art.
DeleteI really liked the post and I agree with you. For one of my Agora classes this year, I chose a class that discussed words that are hard to define. Like… what is life? And one of the topics we debated was… what is art? And we also talked about AI art. And so I propose a question for you… if you go to an art gallery and you see a a piece of paper completely painted red… would you consider that art? But, AI “art” isn’t art while that piece of paper is?
ReplyDelete