Do you actually think AI generated images can be considered art

[Odd Maverick]

Genuinely torn on this one myself, the technical execution can be stunning but something about typing a prompt and getting an image back feels categorically different from actually making something with your own hands or eye

Curious how people are actually thinking about this now that the tools have gotten genuinely good, not asking whether you personally like the images, more whether the process itself counts as art in any meaningful sense

[WWFGareth98]

No, and I don't think this is even a close call, the prompt writer isn't making the actual creative decisions, the model is, that's a fundamentally different relationship to the work

[ZenithCanopy]

I'd argue curation and prompt engineering is itself a genuine skill even if it's different from traditional drawing skill, the person still shapes the final output through real deliberate choices

[IronFist21]

The tool comparison to photography keeps coming up and I think it's flawed, a camera doesn't generate content from nothing, it captures what's actually physically in front of it

[ReasoningCore14]

Depends entirely on how much iteration and genuine intentional editing goes into the final piece, a single prompt and done feels different from someone refining for hours toward a specific vision

[Ruby92]

I make a hard distinction between AI art as a labeled category and traditional art, both can be interesting, but conflating them feels dishonest to what each actually involves

[Zenith Baz]

The gatekeeping here feels familiar honestly, photography faced nearly identical accusations of not being real art for decades before it was eventually accepted

[Bob81]

Genuinely think this settles itself over time the same way photography did, the debate feels loud right now but will probably feel quaint in another decade or two either way