I’m really upset about how AI-generated images and content are being labeled as art these days. I have several friends who are professional artists, and they’ve been struggling with this whole AI trend. They spend years learning techniques, developing their skills, and putting their heart into their work. Then these AI tools come along and people act like the output is the same thing as real art. My friends are worried about their careers and whether people will still value human creativity. I just don’t understand how something made by a computer algorithm can be considered the same as art created by a human being. It feels wrong to put them in the same category. What do others think about this? Am I overreacting or do other people feel the same way about AI versus traditional art?
Your concerns are spot on - tons of artists feel this way. It’s not really about the tech itself, but how it’s being marketed and treated socially. What most bothers me? Seeing AI outputs in galleries or selling for prices that directly compete with human artists who’ve spent decades perfecting their craft. It comes down to attribution and value. When someone types a prompt and claims the same creative ownership as an artist who spent months on a painting - that’s crossing a line. I’ve observed established artists lose commissions to cheaper AI alternatives. That’s real damage to people’s livelihoods. The tech might be impressive, but calling it equivalent to human artistic expression? That diminishes the intellectual, emotional, and technical investment real artists make. Both can exist, but they shouldn’t be treated as the same thing.
i understand your frustration, but maybe we need to see this as a new medium? like, photography had its critics too, right? AI could become just another tool for creativity, not a replacement. artists will find ways to adapt, just like they always have. just my 2 cents.