Raw LLM Responses

people who are against ai art have never tried to create real art using it. It’s not about writing a one-sentence prompt and calling it art. It’s about accessibility. For centuries, the only way to create art (an idea portrayed through imagination) was to have a skill to. So now people stopped seeing “skill” and “art” as something different, they have mistakenly merged into one phenomena of “art”. AI now allows people to show and interpret their ideas (art itself) more easily. You see, when you call a simple prompt like “draw a painting with four nuns” not artistic, saying that what it lacks is expression to make it art, it’s the same as if a person just drew an actual emotionless painting of four nuns, which, according to this logic, would not be art either. In contrast, if a person really has an idea he’s willing to portray, he should write a long prompt, explaining all the tiny details, slight expressions and subtle gestures. Art is a thought, a meaning. Also, in fact, if you follow the logic of “not created by you, but reflects your idea — still not art” then you should not call Rembrandt’s paintings a work of his art, since he was known to use apprentices, who each were exceptional in specific techniques, to help create his pieces. It only supports the idea of separating “skill” and “art” itself. Therefore, using AI correctly, explaining your whole vision, if this vision is unique and artistic in itself, is nothing but a means to make art more accessible. An AI generated image is not always art, but is neither necessarily part of AI slop