Mquz
Versed in the lewd.
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2018
- Messages
- 2,147
- Likes received
- 8,429
I would argue that depending on the quality of work, the program itself is a type of self-expression, making the result of the program be art due to the program itself "coming from the soul". The works of art it creates are also works of art, though potentially lesser ones.
The thing that I believe matters in such situations is: how derivative the work is. If the program takes a huge amount of samples and learns to create original works of a style using something like machine learning (this should probably be possible, though difficult with modern tech), it's creations are definitely works of art, no more derivative than any others made by humans. However, if the computer just photoshops and applies a filter / blues the edges, that is still a piece of art, but as derivative as if a person does it. For example if they take an artistic photograph of a picture, it might not be art. Though then you get into the sort of works that are meaningless due to being a random collage of shapes with no feeling or meaning, and have to wonder whether those are also art. You know, the bad kind of modernism. Creation of those can also easily be learned by a computer, which can even learn to copy emotional meanings coming from random shapes or meshes of point colors and copy the "meanings" of those.
Also, what if Red Tornado were to make a drawing, would that not be a piece of art?
Last edited:
