"AI Art" as a medium arguement

[garystu]

Music can certainly be considered a medium. Examples (just from a quick search):

https://wordpress.clarku.edu/musicresearch/scott/the-medium-of-music-as-a-means-of-understanding/
https://medium.com/@robinlee_48716/music-as-a-medium-for-expression-cultural-tension-aa8fc7ab14cf

and it is only logical: Music expresses and transports ideas.
Please don't take it as an affront: It seems to me that your definition of medium is incomplete!

If we take McLuhan (I don't want to "pull his authority" here, but this might help), every medium is a "repackaging" of another, more "primitive" (in the sense of technically preceding) medium. If we take it this way, this might be a possible chain:

Image on Screen > AI Image -> Digital Image -> Photography -> Picture -> Idea (of an object that is to be depicted)

I hope this is comprehensible ;). Do you agree?

Even more clear, if I use a trumpet, the medium would, if we apply the logic described in your post, be air? I'd argue that the medium that is produced is trumpet music, and it is something different from an oboe, even if I manage to make my trumpet sound like one.

Each instrument isn't its own medium, and none of the articles you link argue that. That's all I'm saying.

Like how each image editor isn't its own medium.

[ThunderPerfectWitchcraft]

Each instrument isn't its own medium, and none of the articles you link argue that. That's all I'm saying.

But each instrument can produce its own medium ("Trumpet Music", "Cello Music", "A cappella Music"); at least they are if we apply McLuhan, who, to my knowledge, coined the common usage of the term; if I miss something here, please tell me! The articles that I linked of course don't say that every kind of instrument produces its own medium, since I brought them up as a reaction to your claim "that only the distribution is considered as a medium". The other part of my post should help to understand what I meant, though :).

Like how each image editor isn't its own medium.

The editor not, but the images produced by it might be one specific to this editor!
An editor that creates a very unique style might be considered to produce its own medium; other cases include tools that are in the focus of the public debate ("Photoshopped Images" might be considered as a own medium if we regard a niche of images as such, and if they are discussed as such!). I tried to give various examples for the ambiguity of making something a medium earlier in this thread.

To link this back to the OP:
All of this certainly often applies to "AI images", that have often very distinct features that make them recognizable, and that are a product of a hotly debated technology; making them - if I'm not mistaken - clearly a medium of their own (that does, however, at the same time belong to a wider category of media and might be included and transformed into other media! An example for this is a banner featuring an AI generated image - both the banner and the image depicted are a medium).

[TheMessengerVEVO]

i'm chill with ai when it's used for stuff like researching cancers and stuff, or when it's used clearly as a means of expression. i'm NOT chill with ai being used as a catch-all "infinite money glitch" and being sold it by investors pretending to be excited about technology to try to wring money out of us.

[Stonmann]

i'm chill with ai when it's used for stuff like researching cancers and stuff, or when it's used clearly as a means of expression. i'm NOT chill with ai being used as a catch-all "infinite money glitch" and being sold it by investors pretending to be excited about technology to try to wring money out of us.

I've used ai a TON while learning coding. Especially HTML and JS. U need to be kinda careful with research tho :v It does make mistakes. Coding is less an issue. If it makes mistakes u can trouble shoot. Just takes a bit of time. But if it makes mistakes with research, that can lead to accidentally spreading misinformation :((

[nihil0]

Generative AI is a medium only in the most literal interpretation of the word, yes you can make images/videos/etc. with it but to me the only value the generated product has is reminding me why I dislike it so much.

It has intent, as any coded thing has, because the systems that make Generative AI are biased as all things made by humans are, but there's no soul. The only reason anything genAI makes has ANY feeling behind it is because it was fed the work of others that poured their feelings into their work only to get it stolen.

I don't hate AI as a medium, because it's a computer, what I CAN AND DO despise are the people that use it and create it, they have no respect for the work of others or the mediums the people they steal from express themselves with, even if they say they do I just straight up don't believe them, you DO NOT respect them if you continue to use something that has so obviously harmed the people behind the actual work.


It disgusts me as an artist.

Not even mentioning the environmental impacts, jesus lol.

[ThunderPerfectWitchcraft]

Since last posting in this thread, I learned that the definition of "medium" by McLuhan is even more comprehensive than I thought: He said that everything that humans use or utilize is a medium - so, the case is rather clear: AI is a medium, and AI art can be media.
The pressing question is (and this is what most people here answered to primarily, anyway): Is it a good or a bad medium?

[solbeth]

i see ai more as a tool than a medium. and what comes out of it: as a product.

it's hard for me to consider said product as art, as for me personally art requires deliberateness that many self-proclaimed 'ai artists' will not have, especially if they did not train the ai themselves. they can adjust the prompts however they want, but in the end the end result, even with editing, is just letting yourself be content with the presented result. letting it be 'close enough'. i am not sure where to find intent in that.

there is a reason why ai is mostly appreciated in two areas: memes and porn. they are products. ai can provide products.

on another hand, there are ways to utilize ai IN art. the product of ai will not be art itself, but it can be a part of something greater. the reason why i think that, is because of a specific upcoming game (called 'dead meat' i believe) that uses dev-trained(! important for it not to be generic and directionless) ai chatbot for interrogation mechanic part of the gameplay. and the game itself is a work of art, i must say.

[Misanthropic Monster™]

I really don't know how I feel about AI being defined as an art medium, any opinions I've had thus far have been very fluid and easily abstracted.

I will say this video is definitely a very interesting and thought provoking argument for it being an art form and I enjoyed this person's take on that.

I consider myself a neutral observer of reality these days - I used to feel strongly about things but I don't have the energy anymore but I still find this topic and all the various human feelings on it really fascinating.

[GYARU~TAU♪]

Oh man, do I have a lot of opinions on this!!

I do feel that some aspects of the AI landscape are more black and white than others, but I also try to approach the topic with nuance since that perspective is an important one to have for anything!!

For example, there is absolutely no question that using other people's artwork without permission to train these AI models is not a great thing to do in a climate where artists struggle to find work as is, and I believe there is no world where AI could ever be a suitable "replacement" for the inherent human desire to create, But I can't help but wonder where our stance would be as creatives had the introduction of AI generated works been done ethically (It's asking a lot from capitalism to do this- it's like watching a baby shove a square into the round hole, but just imagine with me for a second).

I think techbros have in some regards, shot themselves in the foot by relying so heavily on technically-legal-but-still-a-copyright-hellscape theft, as well as treating AI like a replacement for art. Artists now tend to fully associate AI with those two things more than anything else as a result.

Back in our Ethical AI hypothetical, I can think of a few ways that AI could work in tandem with artists without acting as a replacement! Such as just gaining inspiration for pieces from the weird shit it's capable of generating, or photobashing for reference material! It's definitely far from perfect, but those are just a few examples that I can see it being feasibly used without completely overtaking the creative process- at least on the visual art side of things!