@lupardus_tim@rootbeerbog@GenelJumalon You missed my point. While I do hate it, I do accept there isn't much I can do about it. The issue is the guy who won the contest claims to be an artist. He's not and thus should not win. He deserves to win as as much as an interior designer in a furniture making contest.
@Amala_Flamvell@rootbeerbog@GenelJumalon Its not a question of if its still art, its who is the artist. A painter who has a robot paint for him is not the painter. The bot is.
@KavehP2@rootbeerbog@GenelJumalon I mention a drone in that you still need to bring the camera to the subject matter. An autonomous drone would remove the need for human involvement. Other than just picking the best images.
@MiscFitt@VexingLive@GenelJumalon Its one thing to use tools in a program to create effects and another to have the program produce the image entirely.
@rootbeerbog@GenelJumalon The problem with this situation is more "who is the artist?" The AI produced pieces good enough to win. The problem comes to the person submitting claims to be the artist when they actually did very little in creating the work.
@JasonBe01306124@VexingLive@GenelJumalon Everyone has ideas, it doesn't make them an artist. Execution does. The executive chef has proven that they are able to create and have earned the right to delegate. Also, are those under him not considered artists? You would need some talent/skill to perform in a pro kitchen.
@rootbeerbog@GenelJumalon Say someone has a drone. This drone is fully autonomous, it can go out for weeks on autopilot and take pictures. It can also adjust images to a set of astetic parameters so no editing is needed, it just delivers pics ready to sell. Is the owner a photographer?
@VexingLive@GenelJumalon The problem is that it isn't just a tool. The program is the artist, the applicant just submitted prompts. The equivlant would be an painter asking someone for advice on what to paint. Does that make the artist the one who supplies the ideas or the one who actually makes it?