What point is Hans Kristian Graebener of Spring, Texas even trying to make here? Does he think there's no skill involved in photography? Just point, click, and done? Nothing about lighting, depth, composition, any of that?
this post was submitted on 15 Apr 2025
86 points (98.9% liked)
Slop.
490 readers
412 users here now
For posting all the anonymous reactionary bullshit that you can't post anywhere else.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No bigotry of any kind, including ironic bigotry.
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
Rule 8: Do not post public figures, these should be posted to c/gossip
founded 5 months ago
MODERATORS
It's the fascist's favorite trick: a false dichotomy.
He presents a straw man version of an argument: "AI is bad because it's machine-made art."
Then he presents a counterpoint that is also stuffed with old hay: "a camera is a machine, therefore photographers are also making 'machine art'."
The final point is to trick you into accepting these premises and the nonsense conclusion drawn by the comparison: "photography and 'prompt engineering' are equally valid forms of artistic expression that require comparable levels of skill to perform."
The secret to avoiding this trap is realizing that the source is a fucking Nazi, and not trusting any part of the "argument." AI art has many downsides worth discussing, even and especially among enthusiasts for it: hallucinations, energy costs, environmental damage, economic damage, job loss, devaluing of content and skills, and on and on. All artists and creatives use tools of some kind. The degree of practice and skill varies considerably between mediums.
It's telling (of what a moron chudtoss is) that they can't actually connect the dots on various forms of visual expression. Photography and oil painting, for example, have sometimes similar end goals (a picture of something) but different skill sets and talents are needed by each to achieve good results. However, common ideas like composition, framing, lighting, and color balance will be shared across both. A multidisciplinary artist would learn and develops as an artist across all their mediums as these shared skills grow.
Prompt engineering shares very little with making visual art. You might develop the language needed to cheat off other artist's homework better, but you aren't learning what makes art work. As a comic "artist" you might expect him to have some sympathy or understanding of these things. That he doesn't is evidence that either: he knows and hides it to appeal to his chud audience, or else he's a shit artist with no professionalism or desire to grow. Both seem likely to me.
Part of it is to get you to explain.
I’ll spare you the wall of text, but it’s a trick as far back as Reagan: If you’re explaining, you’re losing.
Thought slime has a great video on this that they dropped on YouTube a couple days ago.
I found YouTube links in your comment. Here are links to the same videos on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
Link 1:
Link 2:
There's something to be said by how much the pornography industry silently dominates the discussion about AI.
The venn diagram of people interested in ai art, and people that go "erm akshuly she's a 3000 year old dragon princess" is a circle
On the flip side, the ones most upset about AI were previously drawing feet pics of that dragon princess. Not judging them for earning a living here. A lot of the motivation for ai is to replace sex workers. The ai gooners are pretty explicit about this.
By this stupid logic painting tools or pencils used to create art are machines too. What a stupid fucking thing to go to bat for, but, fash do be loving ai art.
"You claim you're making music, and yet you play an instrument? Curious."
Guy with lazy, dull art style is praising AI. I am shocked.
"The Ontology of the Photographic Image" and "The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction" allow us to distinguish these two forms.
Furthermore, to use a camera effectively requires far more than the slop generator.
However, to give a through line to comrades who do not wish to lose themselves in two great essays: The thing that photography and mechanical reproduction have is a connection to a history -- to a material process of production that eventually returns us to the real world -- even if digital capture of an image involves a translation of that moment of reality into data.
The Gen AI slop machines, however, do not retain a real trace to our world in the way a camera can -- instead, they actively efface that trace back to reality (hence the lack of citation, credit, etc).
Idiots and lazy "gotchas" that make them seem smart but are really the least charitable read of any situation. Teaming up once again to make the world just a little more insufferable
libs (and therefore fash) can only think in terms of gotchas
Finger painting with mud is the only true art form
The flash on the camera is an amogus
So why do they have to use real photos instead of training "AI" on itself?
Can someone replace stonetoss with ai
It would be cool if some of the blood in his veins was replaced with air.
I HATE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY!!! COPYRIGHT MUST BE DESTROYED!!!
disclaimer
i dont use AI art. also guarantee stonetoss thinks you should be able to copyright AI art, he is no friend of anti IP movementSuprised that a nazi is pro ai art