This article, titled "An A.I.-Generated Picture Won an Art Prize. Artists Aren’t Happy," discusses the blue ribbon winner of the Colorado State Fair annual art competition. Jason Allen won in the digital art/digitally manipulated photography category for his work Théâtre D’opéra Spatial. The piece faced a lot of backlash, as he created it using Midjourney. Midjourney is an AI tool that generates images from word prompts. However, the use of AI was within the bounds of the competition. I thought it was interesting that the artist refused to share the series of words he used to generate the image. With AI-generated art, it seems that the artist must find a way of maintaining "ownership" of the art through guarding the text prompts. However, with traditional methods of art, the artists inherent skill makes paintings and sculptures difficult to copy to the same level. Having used AI software myself to generate art, I have conflicted feelings about it. I think it changes what it means to be a digital artist, but it also adds a new element. I did not feel as if the GIFs I made with the AI-generated art were not my own work. It just seems to be a tool that artists can use with their own touch.
The artist stated in response to artists objecting to the AI-generated art: “This isn’t going to stop,” Mr. Allen said. “Art is dead, dude. It’s over. A.I. won. Humans lost.” The artists view on AI generated art is troubling. If art is dead, how does he feel that he can submit the AI-generated work to an art show and accept that money for himself? Does he believe himself to be an artist still? I personally do not believe that art is dead. Someone still needs to curate the art that the AI is producing, and it will never be able to capture the human experience.
Théâtre D’opéra Spatial by Jason Allen
