Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Blue" data-source="post: 9570547" data-attributes="member: 20564">No, let's not.&nbsp; I refuse your arbitrary limitation that avoid discussing the point.The post that I was replying to was someone else making claims that prompt generation was not art.&nbsp; I can make the same sort of claims against photography and such which are clearly accepted as art.A good photographer has loads that they take into consideration from composition to lighting to filters and effects.&nbsp; Ansel Adams takes many photographs, looks for the ones that embody what he is looking for, and it's art.&nbsp; (I might snap six photos of the same thing to get one with people's heads and not blurry, it's not.)&nbsp; Same thing with a prompt engineer who knows how to craft a prompt to get what they want, picks the right models, iterates over words, strengths, negatives, and goes through a bunch of images looking for just the right mix.&nbsp; (Someone else might put &quot;space elf&quot; into Bing and generate a Santa's Elf in a spacesuit, and just like by poor photos, isn't.)Which leads to someone responding snarkily that it's not art either through ignorance or emotion.&nbsp; If it's ignorance, I want to educate.&nbsp; If it's emotion, I want to show clearly to others that their point has no internal merit.Others brought up what does/doesn't constitute art first, and if you had replied to them to cut off the whole discussion that would be one thing.&nbsp; But to try to invalidate my reply to them while their statement still stands is not something I'll accept.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Blue, post: 9570547, member: 20564"] No, let's not. [I]I refuse your arbitrary limitation that avoid discussing the point.[/I] The post that I was replying to was someone else making claims that prompt generation was not art. I can make the same sort of claims against photography and such which are clearly accepted as art. A good photographer has loads that they take into consideration from composition to lighting to filters and effects. Ansel Adams takes many photographs, looks for the ones that embody what he is looking for, and it's art. (I might snap six photos of the same thing to get one with people's heads and not blurry, it's not.) Same thing with a prompt engineer who knows how to craft a prompt to get what they want, picks the right models, iterates over words, strengths, negatives, and goes through a bunch of images looking for just the right mix. (Someone else might put "space elf" into Bing and generate a Santa's Elf in a spacesuit, and just like by poor photos, isn't.) Which leads to someone responding snarkily that it's not art either through ignorance or emotion. If it's ignorance, I want to educate. If it's emotion, I want to show clearly to others that their point has no internal merit. Others brought up what does/doesn't constitute art first, and if you had replied to them to cut off the whole discussion that would be one thing. But to try to invalidate my reply to them while their statement still stands is not something I'll accept. [/QUOTE]

Verification