It is a bit like comparing photography and cinema.
Cinema is moving photography.
AI art is digital painting.
Then it is up to the taste and pleasure of the person whether they prefer to have an image on a video medium, or an oil painting framed on a wall.
So the artwork does not hold any inherent value, it is the interpretation of the audience which gives it value?
In your opinion can a canvas with a cut in the middle be considered a valuable work of art?
Yes
No, but I also don’t know the context of the rip in the canvas. What is the artist attempting to show with this statement? What aspects of the human condition are they trying to represent? A ripped canvas is nothing to me, without knowing the story behind the artwork.
Yet this too is art.
Indeed, it is art that represents the relationship of the canvas to the surrounding space.
Lucio Fontana and his conceptual works are art.
No, AI art is not digital painting.
Digital painting is when an artist paints with digital brushes that attempt to mimic how real brushes work.
AI art is when a person commissions a program to do the work, without doing the work themselves.
Art is simple.
But simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.
