Wanna Bicker about/discuss Digital Art vs digital "art"?

[SteelPoint]

Fine, provided you accept that "tiniest level" creativity = tiniest level talent.

I suspect, put like that, that acceptance will rarely be forthcoming from such people... they really do want to defend the use of their artificial aids and pretend the talent actually comes from them. It's like watching the antics of kids with new toys.

 

[MonikaE]

Fine, provided you accept that "tiniest level" creativity = tiniest level talent.

I don't agree with your untalented interpretation of my words.

 

[SteelPoint]

I don't agree with your untalented interpretation of my words.

Q.E.D.

 

[fabfables]

I think a lot of the discussion so far has confused the difference between good and bad art with that between art and non-art. I see discussion of the second as a waste of time. Most art since at least the impressionists would be dismissed by pretty much any artist practicing before the 19th century.

Good and bad art is a matter of opinion. Opinions need to be supported by argument if you want others to agree with you. Saying something is crap is not enough on its own. Most people don't supply arguments or explanations for their position, so in the end that sort of discussion is usually also a waste of time.

I look at everything. If it resonates with me, I spend more time with it. That includes so-called AI. If some people try to pass it off as their own work, the issue is their dishonesty, not AI. That's not denying all sorts of potential problems, even with the technology as it stands now.