Female artist, 27
Artist, programmer, web designer, writer…
As an artist with a strong inclination towards technology, I have consistently embraced the realm of AI art. It is essential to acknowledge that AI art is not solely reliant on technology, but rather heavily reliant on appropriation.
Without the contributions of real artists, its aesthetic appeal would never reach its current level of excellence. While I utilize AI in my work out of necessity, I am fully aware that the true talent originates from the billions of artworks that have been unlawfully(?) appropriated. It astounds me how few users of AI art even acknowledge this prevalent issue of theft(?).
Programer and webmaster, business owner
I believe that AI-generated art will primarily serve as a cost-saving measure for projects and during the initial stages of design. The art community, as a whole, does not appear to embrace AI, and the general public, who may not have a strong interest in art, would likely not be concerned that it is created by AI.
All the same, I anticipate that AI art will become a highly specialized aspect of the broader spectrum of AI applications. If one wishes to capitalize on generating income from AI-generated images, it would be wise to do so promptly and frequently exploit this opportunity.
The inherent simplicity and limitless production potential of AI-generated images will likely relegate them to being disposable content on platforms like Instagram, at best. Companies stand to save substantial amounts of money by replacing artists with unskilled labor or even fully automated processes to create certain images during the early stages of design.
While I understand the potential cost-saving benefits of AI-generated art, I worry about the impact on the artistic community. By replacing artists with AI, we risk devaluing the skills and creativity that artists bring to the table. It's important to recognize that art is not just about the final product, but also the process and the unique perspective that artists provide.
