A bit of a disclaimer, that I know I can be wrong, in fact I expect that I am never entirely correct, so no opinions are final (a hazard of being human). Even if I work at a company which works with AI, I make VR simulations in unity. So I am definitely not an expert. I am just trying to organise my thoughts by posting them here. If you enjoy reading them or find them interesting, that is just a bonus.

So with that out of the way… 

What is art? Art is self-expression, it comes from a well deep within and forces itself onto the page - when it comes easily at least. When things are difficult it is something that you have to dig deep for. Either way art is a way to articulate the self. So can an AI which is trained on human art produce art itself? I am reminded of a video I watched years ago about AI. AI like this seemed so distant and academic then, now it is something to think about. I think the answer is both yes and no. 

AI is a tool - at least for the moment. It has no sense of self. I won’t say that will always be the case, but I think humanity doesn’t want or need a sentient AI. It wants useful tools. AI generated art is simply a tool. So if a human uses it, it can become a form of expression and become art. So rather than making artists obsolete is it not a tool to empower artists? I watch videos from the channel Adam Duff LUCIDPIXUL and he has recently been talking about how current AI is actually a great referencing tool. It takes in art and tries to find the most likely piece to fulfil your criteria. It has no creativity to deviate from its input. Since it learns from what is popular, it will essentially spit out what is popular. Which in many ways is what an artist who has no real artistic vision would do. So the AI could replace someone like that but… So what? If you want your product - whatever it may be - to stand out to people you don’t want that kind of art.

You want something distinctive, something which shows the echo of the artist. The story behind the art and the artist is important. A painting in Van Gogh’s style isn’t worth much, but an original is worth a fortune. No matter the technical skill of a painting created by AI, it would never end up being treasured like the Sun Flowers. It doesn’t have an artistic vision.

For an AI to produce art with one - that would mean it would be producing either the vision of the data it was fed into which is most likely a copyright infringement. Or in a much more interesting way what if the AI could execute your artistic vision. If all it did was the painting for you, it would empower those that don’t have those skills to express themselves in that medium. In that aspect it would be all about pairing the AI with the right person to get the best results faster. An artist could do more in less time. It would give them a greater ability to express themselves, not less. It would mean that there was less work and perhaps less collaboration but it wouldn’t be all bad. This issue with less work would not be unique to art and may change the way we live our lives dramatically but maybe that too could be a good thing - as a society we work too much. I can see a vision of a world where we all have the time and ability to create. 

I would prefer to draw something myself and improve my own skills. I am sure I am not the only one. People still paint with paint even with the advent of digital painting. People still read real books with digital media. I think we will still choose the tools that we prefer. Even so AI can be integrated into that workflow without devaluing the process - for instance as a referencing tool as Adam mentioned in his videos. More tools give us more power and more options. Which makes it all the more important that AI is properly managed so that it is a tool to empower and not to devalue. A tool to make our lives easier and not a tool to rip away livelihood.