OPINION: Is AI-generated art real? 

Artificial intelligence is certainly capable of creating images, but can it create art?

AI generated photo of “University of Idaho Argonaut” | Generated by NightCafe

Artificial intelligence is everywhere in our lives today. We have Siri in our phones and Alexa seems to be everywhere. Now, we have seen a rise in websites that allow AI to create random images from whatever we can imagine. But are these images real art? And are they the future? 

In Sept. 2022, the Colorado State Fair had its annual art competition. One of the entrants, Jason Allen, didn’t create his art with a brush or clay, but with Midjourney. Midjourney is an AI that turns lines of text into realistic graphics.      

Allen’s work, “Théâtre D’opéra Spatial,” took home the blue ribbon in the fair’s contest for digital art. This was the first AI-generated piece to win a prize like this, prompting backlash from other artists who accused Allen of cheating.  

In an interview with the New York Times, Allen defended his work by saying he never deceived anyone and was clear from the beginning that he used an AI to create his entry.  

“I’m not going to apologize for it,” Allen said. “I won, and I didn’t break any rules.” 

AI-generated art has been around for years and with recent developments and tools like DALL-E 2 and Midjourney released to the public for anyone to use easily The question arises whether AI art should be considered real art, or if it’s just “cheating.” 

Most definitions of art call it a human expression of skill or imagination with an emotion or idea through a medium.  

A lot of the criticism AI-generated art gets is that it is incapable of being imaginative or emotional because it isn’t created by a human. However, all of these tools, including Midjourney, need human input to start. Allen had to type out and describe a scene for Midjourney to create and visualize.  

So, if a human imagination is still the central part of it, is an AI really any different than using a paintbrush or a pencil? Isn’t AI just another tool or method to visualize your idea?  

I believe it is. Ultimately the idea for “Théâtre D’opéra Spatial” was Allen’s, and Midjourney was the medium he chose to visualize it outside of his own mind.  

Another debate over AI art is whether the human involved such as Allen can really be called or credited as the “artist.” When Allen submitted his work, he specified that the piece was created by him via Midjourney.  

I think this specification is important when it comes to the debate over this kind of art, because it eliminates any possible feeling of deception. It’s no different than when another artist specifies what they used to create their art.  

I think a lot of reasoning why so many artists are against AI art is the worry that it will overtake regular art, negating the need or market for other artists. I just don’t think that’s something artists will have to worry about anytime soon, if ever.  

AI, while rapidly improving every day, will always have limitations in what it’s capable of understanding and creating, there will always be a place for more traditional artists. AI art won’t appeal to everyone the same as any other kind of art and there will always be different appeals, markets and collectors of all different mediums.  

Artificial intelligence is prevalent in today’s world in many ways, including the art world. While there has been a debate over the legitimacy of this art, I think AI should be seen as just another medium for artists to visualize their creativity and imagination. AI certainly won’t be replacing artists anytime soon, but it’s here to stay and worth being considered as real art.  

Tracy Mullinax can be reached at [email protected] 

Leave a Reply

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.