A.I Art: For Better or Worse?

A.I Art: For Better or Worse?

by Matthew S. Joung, Reporter

As artificial intelligence develops even more into the world of art generation, new AI algorithms (such as DALL-E 2) began to take hold of social media. But much like other AI-related problems, this has its own fair share of them too. The first instances of the generated art were, at first, received with amazement, but artists began to brew up a storm against it. This backlash includes the “lack of creativity” from AI, or how its efficiency and inhuman capabilities can potentially replace artists. 


However, most artists rebuttal this by stating that, “art is a creative liberty brought about by one’s ability to express their mind or imagination through words and/or imagery.” For AI, this principle does not apply as they instead use a series of algorithms and neural networks to create artificial artworks based on given algorithms and inputs. Therefore, AI lacks creativity which means they do not make art, they just remix previously existing pieces. Another argument that artists have against AI is the potential replacement of artists.


The efficiency, speed, and quality at which AI works can outweigh a human’s potential. Generating tens upon thousands of images, studios might even consider replacing their animators/artists with more advanced AI. Artists have extinguished this fear for the time being, as companies also consider the flaws of AI, that being the ethical and economical concerns. 


The argument on AI being the better or worse artist still continues, but it’s safe to say that human artists won’t be going away. So, is it for better or for worse? The conclusion is yet to come to light, but some artists do believe that even though “AI art does kind of discredit actual artists and their work,” continuing on with, “it’s [not] detrimental to the future of art.” With that said, human artists will not be replaced but rather enhanced with the help of technology.