Raw LLM Responses

Sorry for the long post or messy English in advance: Giving him the BIGGEST benefit of the doubt by actually considering it a “new art form we’re too old-fashioned to acknowledge”, he still fails. Imagine an art competition where everyone sends in drawings and paintings, but one person submits a photo. The judges look at that photo and go “god damn, that painting looks so realistic! This is the winner!” Anyone can see how unfair that is. The winner should reasonably be disqualified because we measure the quality of different art forms differently. In an a drawings or sculptures “realism” or “accurate anatomy” COULD be a factor but it’s obviously not a judging factor in photography or modeling. A photo should be judged amongst other photos for fairness. They’re usually judged by other factors. Some factors are the same as painting, like “composition”, but other factors will be photo-specific, like “timing/rarity of event” (eg: photographing an aurora, or the vast majority of wildlife photography— quick tangent, google “comedy wildlife photo awards” and you’re in for a fun time). It sounds obvious, but all art forms have different criteria they get judged on, and just because some criteria overlap, doesn’t make the art form the same. Eg: Songs can get judged for the writing, and poems do too, but songs also get judged for the music so treating them the same is unfair. I also feel like some “artsy hobbies” can be hard to judge. A lot of people love to collect seashells, but how do you “judge” who has the best one? How would people compete? People could argue “you just walk around until you find a nice one. There’s no skill involved” and luck does play a fair factor in it… and that’s not something I’m knowledgeable enough to argue about. My point is that: - Different art forms are judged under different criteria (like how it would be unfair to enter a photo into a competition and “trick” people into thinking it’s a painting) - Some artsy hobbies can be “simple to do” or “repetitive” and still hold value/be a part of a competition, but it will need to figure out what criteria they’re going to judge based on. (Like how seashell collecting may not require “skill”, but is still a valid and lovely hobby that has beautiful results) - AI art will have to be submitted as part of an AI art competition, and honestly reported as “AI art”, and the community will need to decide what makes one AI art “better” than another (are certain images hard to create? Are certain depictions rare, etc) Again, sorry for the long post, and I hope my grammar wasn’t that bad. I’d love to hear your thoughts. I hadn’t even touched upon the ethics of AI art and I feel like that’s a big issue/factor too.