https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gsy-SeAxNGM
>>7773597yes, and I'm the superior one
>>7773958And still chooses not to draw handsPERMA-BEG
>>7773597I think that saying 'everyone is an artist' dilutes the term and the achievement of mastering the techniques of an artist.I'll agree that anyone can be an artist, and that everyone is creative, but I don't think everyone is an artist in the same way I don't think everyone is a doctor or plumber.But semantic quibble aside, it seems like a cute course, but she desperately needs a better mic.>>7773958I like your 'shitty' old drawing far more. You'll probably write that off as artist cope, but think what you want, the new 'masterful' rework is so stock standard and just reeks of blandness.
Wrong. I despise this type of shit; it makes light of all the fucking training and practice actual artists have to go through, Not everyone is a musician or a neurologist either. Get fucked.
Bro, why are you trying to agitate the, "art needs a single all-encompassing definition autismos"?
>>7773958but you don't draw anymore. sad.
>>7773597>
>>7773597>85 year old permabeg
>>7774001Because words shouldn't have definitions, right retard?Ah, don't worry, if you're insulted by me calling you a retard, it's because you're using a single all-encompassing definition for it.Why is it we mostly expect words to have solid strict definitions, but 'art' can mean literally anything if the person contorts themselves enough to shove their head up their own ass. I blame scott mccloud for spreading this shit with his 'anything is art if it's not a requirement for survival' definition - by his definition, me lifting my leg to fart even more loudly is art... I'm going to lift my leg now, to let you all know what I feel about that definition.
And when everyone's an artist...
>>7774022Sure, art can be anything just like speech can be me blowing raspberries at everyone and expecting them to understand me. If I want anyone to value my speech I need to conform to a more rigid system. If you want people to value your art it probably should exist within a definable form that an intended audience can relate to. Worthless art is still art, in fact it underscores the value of intentional art with craftmsnship behind it.
>>7773597I'm not. I don't draw.
>>7774092Pro tip: You can still call yourself an artist
>>7773958Old drawing unironically looks better
>>7773597cool grandma, would eat her cookies
>>7773958Old drawing has more soul.
>>7773958old charming soul vs generic machine generated slop, get your eyes fixed nigga
>>7773958the only way the second can look better is if you see art as nothing but a technical challenge. notice how much more vibrant and expressive the first one is in comparison. color choice is more more interesting. the ai couldnt even copy the colors right
>>7774245>the ai couldnt even copy the colors rightlmao, its just his skill issue that he can't tard wrangle the diffusion model>>7773958Its basically a different character, in a different style, just in the same pose. Learn to use those tools mr retard.>OH LOOK AT ME, I TOLD THE AI TO DO SOMETHING VAGUELY SIMILAR TO MY DRAWING, OH ME OH MY
>>7773597oh thank you for reminded of her! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbNR_mGHY_g
>>7774095I can call myself the emperor of the entire universe, but that's just not true.
>>7773958>promptcel still stuck at img2img>using novelai's basic model too
>>7773597i think it's more accurate to say that everyone CAN BE an artistif there's anything everyone definitely is, it's a critic, for better or worse
>>7773973who cares, it's a meaningless title, and there's no solid definition of art
>>7775725if you think the title of artist is meaningless then why are you here
>>7775725I care, I don't think it is, and I think there is a solid definition of art.
>>7776027I'm here cause I like drawing and looking at drawingsare you here for a title?>>7776032that's finehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art
>>7776074>Art is a diverse range of cultural activity centered around works utilizing creative or imaginative talents, which are expected to evoke a worthwhile experience,[1] generally through an expression of emotional power, conceptual ideas, technical proficiency, or beauty.>technical proficiency, or beauty.Yeah, that's the short and the thick of it. We can say that everyone is an artist, but can they truly make a beautiful piece of work that displays a high technical proficiency? Then their piece isn't an artwork, and they're not an artist - and I'm not saying that in a derogatory way, they can BECOME an artist, but that doesn't mean they're one automatically simply because they put the brush to canvas, or pencil to paper.Being recognised as an artist should be a recognition of their mastery in a (for lack of a better term) artistic medium.If a carpenter makes a good table, we could say he's skilled, but if he makes a truly exceptional table, you could describe the table as a work of art - to do so is a recognition not just of the table's aesthetic beauty, but the craftsmen mastery of his medium.If all tables can be described as art, then such a comment means nothing.Likewise, if everyone is an artist, then such a title means nothing.Anyway, this is a ramble, lol.
>>7776142
>>7776142>orPersonally I think it's a bad definition still, it's just too damn vague. But I also think there's really no helping it. We've decided a wide enough breadth of things count as art now that to retroactively define the category that encompasses them all is necessarily just as vague.The problem with allowing everyone to be an 'artist' is that there is no guarantee of quality and the mean will inevitably regress to the state of lowest energy, aka slop. Being an artist should be as aspirational as being an engineer, otherwise the non-existent barrier to entry incentivizes low effort.That isn't to say I think we should have guilds or something. I think it's mostly an issue of a lack of education. We can have pop artists, but it requires viewers to have the necessary skills to appreciate good art. Right now they just don't. Most people are culturally and intellectually vacant, and whatever they choose to be 'art' is as well. Even among educated people, the humanities are going extinct.
>>7776188>Someone has an opinion you don't like>"Heh, um, whoah there buddy. Don't you think that your opinion is a little fascist? Did you consider that?"Ironically, the nazis would demean the 'degenerate art' they didn't like by calling it jewish, and you call opinions you don't like fascist.The anons on this thread my have a single opinion that vaguely aligns with fascists or nazis, but you have the mindset of the fascist and nazis.Also, imagine on being too much of a pussy to even put your argument into words on an anonymous forum - you knew whatever argument you're formulating in that little peanut was dogshit.Get fucked.
>>7776216>Ironically, the nazis would demean the 'degenerate art' they didn't like by calling it jewishThat because the jews back then were the ones controlling degeneracy and leading Germany to it's downfall, like how they are doing now
>>7773990>Not everyone is a musician or a neurologist eitherI'd like to see a neurologist /ic/, just full of prebegs posting lobotomized patients and bitching about which way to hold a scalpel
>>7776142>>7776205the wiki says it all>There is no generally agreed definition of what constitutes art,[5][6][7] and its interpretation has varied greatly throughout history and across cultures.
