I create these using the phrase, something like: "Old man writing a sonnet about hating AI created poetry". I used an AI Picture creator as well as an AI poetry creator.
I did editing on the photo as well as the Sonnet, but not by much.
I failed to keep track of the Phrase and either website as I wasn't expecting much. But, it was fun.
LOL! This is really good, Dean. I like the idea behind it all the most. Good job.
Scary how good both are. Glad to have art as a hobby and not a job in this day and age.
I am tending away from AI creations myself, but these are excellent examples of how far the technology has come.
It really is amazing what can be produced by creative and cleverly crafted words.
I love the theme of this, and the pairing of creative elements.
I'm of the opinion that we should really avoid AI images here. One, it takes up tons of energy to create and second, soon it's going to look so real no one can tell. I think that if we condone its use that people will come and feel free to use it - especially any newcomers.
Hence the Title: Creative Irony.
I kinda thought that was what you were going for Dean, thanks for stirring the pot!
Can AI images fall under that category of Minimalism, Abstract, Experimental?
Are AI images considered Photography?
Is AI being used in Post-Processing?
How much AI does it take for a Photo to shift to AI?
I'm glad we are having this discussion and have my own personal views on the subject.
First off, a bit of history. A precedent was set on fstoppers as soon as the founders adopted the technology by way of setting an AI competition a couple of years back. This was closely followed by the MAE group funder posting AI generations for review.
With such precedents set, it is hard to fight what has gone before.
That said, I personally do not view AI-generated images as photography, bur am more than OK with it having (and staying in) its own lane.
I follow the editor of FRAMES magazine with my definition of photography in that it must come from the mind of a human, using a capture device and a lens (or pinhole).
I am also fine with AI being used to elevate an original photograph in processing. My reasoning being that ALL photographs are manipulated in one way or another (even down to basic film/paper type and lens choice), and just like painters who choose what to (or not!) include in a painting we are making artistic choices that reflect our own vision.
How far is too far? That would be extremely difficult to nail down, but at the end of the day I feel we have to judge the final product.
I do feel that AI should be its own artform, and those pursuing comfortable enough to identity AI work as such. I also feel strongly that AI generated images cannot reflect the personality of the creator (as the creative burden is placed on an algorithm), but that is just another debate.
How do we feel as a group on this? are we able to flat out say no to AI-generated images (other than perhaps use as a point of reference), or are there some out there that feel the pursuit of AI imagery is a suitable use of the group?