AI Art: Do you think they have talent?

[Clayton]

So do you think AI have talent in art? We give them little information and they can make amazing pictures. I personally am impressed with some they have come up for me to use as covers on my books. 

 

 

 

Edited July 8 by Clayton

[Moxie]

I think it's a bit of both. It's def impressive what AI can create. At the same time, I see AI as building on patterns it's learned from human art, so I still think the creativity of human artists is something different. For me, AI is a great creative tool but shouldn't be a replacement for artistic talent by humans

[Clayton]

On 7/10/2026 at 5:05 AM, Moxie said:

I think it's a bit of both. It's def impressive what AI can create. At the same time, I see AI as building on patterns it's learned from human art, so I still think the creativity of human artists is something different. For me, AI is a great creative tool but shouldn't be a replacement for artistic talent by humans

How is that different than many human artists?

[Moxie]

On 7/14/2026 at 12:12 AM, Clayton said:

How is that different than many human artists?

Humans do learn from other artists, but we aren't trained on millions of works in the same way AI models are. We imitate and develop our own style over years, while AI is designed to extract patterns from vast datasets at a scale no person can. Whether that difference matters is up for debate, but I think it's a meaningful distinction.

 

[animechat]

On 7/13/2026 at 11:12 PM, Clayton said:

How is that different than many human artists?

They use human art to train AI to make this generation of photos.

[Clayton]

On 7/18/2026 at 5:56 PM, animechat said:

They use human art to train AI to make this generation of photos.

They use human art to train humans too. What's your point?

[animechat]

They work to train AI and didn't get paid for that.

[Clayton]

12 hours ago, animechat said:

They work to train AI and didn't get paid for that.

I'm asking about the Ai itself

[Moxie]

I'm curious, would you reckon the same with AI writing? Do you think that's okay?

[KaiyaSaysHaiya]

The way I see it, AI can not be inherently talented.

If talent is the natural ability to do something, AI has no talent. AI is trained on human creation. Everything from the way it scans millions of pre-existing content to the prompts put into it stems from real human creativity. That isn't natural ability or talent.

Edited Sunday at 02:16 AM by KaiyaSaysHaiya

[Myouya]

On 7/24/2026 at 3:46 PM, Moxie said:

I'm curious, would you reckon the same with AI writing? Do you think that's okay?

For me, it just takes away the whole point of art, If you let an algorithm do the interesting part for you, you're not making art, you're just making content

[Uncrowned Guard]

AI art is honestly a bit torn for me. I can’t ignore that there are people putting a lot of work, skill, and time into learning how to prompt, refine, and shape AI art; and most casual users can’t replicate what those folks do. It gives people who don’t have traditional artistic talent a way to express ideas visually, and I feel like that part gets brushed aside way too often.

In a lot of ways, it reminds me of how people used to say graphic design “wasn’t real art” because it wasn’t done on a physical canvas. Today, everyone accepts graphic design, CAD work, and other technical mediums as legitimate art forms. I see AI art fitting into that same evolution as it is far more than 30-second prompts.

But you also can’t ignore the bad side. Tracing, stealing, and copying have always existed in art, but AI adds several new layers to that problem. And realistically, most AI art isn’t being made for artistic expression; it’s being used for cheap promo graphics, fake images, misinformation, labor replacement, and other purposes that don’t really respect the idea of art at all.

So yes, I do think AI art can be art, and I do think the people who genuinely create with it can be artists. The issue is that while traditional art has a few bad apples, AI art feels more like a barrel of bad apples with a few good ones mixed in; and that imbalance causes a lot of friction.

And then there’s the ethics. The companies behind these tools have absolutely devastated copyright norms, data ownership, and public trust. Artists didn’t consent to having their work scraped, and while the companies may hold the legal high ground, it doesn’t change the fact that they built highly profitable systems by exploiting centuries of human creativity. That was a choice, not a necessity, and I fully understand why so many artists are angry about it.

[Clayton]

On 7/24/2026 at 7:46 AM, Moxie said:

I'm curious, would you reckon the same with AI writing? Do you think that's okay?

So long as I enjoy it. If it's good, it's good. I rarely actually meet any author, so why would I care?

 

Have you had Google make you any art? 

Edited Wednesday at 08:54 PM by Clayton

[Moxie]

On 7/26/2026 at 12:33 PM, Myouya said:

For me, it just takes away the whole point of art, If you let an algorithm do the interesting part for you, you're not making art, you're just making content

I agree with this!

On 7/29/2026 at 10:45 PM, Clayton said:

So long as I enjoy it. If it's good, it's good. I rarely actually meet any author, so why would I care?

 

Have you had Google make you any art? 

Not art per say but I've used my fair share of AI assistance in writing which has been quite helpful