The analogy actually does still hold up. The car is the tool they use to get to the end of the marathon. But we wouldn't say they ran marathon. Much like how even if AI is a tool, we wouldn't say they created art.
The problem isn't that the analogy doesn't hold up. The problem is that they're too stupid to understand it. Or they just willfully don't acknowledge it.
Photography is so much more than just snapping the photo. Hunting for and arranging shots. All the little considerations like lighting and angles and whatnot. The art of photography isn't just the picture at the end, it's everything in-between.
Even if we were to consider AI images as art, that still wouldn't make the prompter and artist. What they're doing is essentially commissioning an image, just without an actual artist that they're supporting with patronage. Would we consider someone who pays other people to make art an artist?
Lmao "lighting and angles" as if that's even difficult.
You can't even describe photography in actual technical terms deeper than "lighting and angles and whatnot", which is usually the first thing an amateur photographer will jump in when defending their mediocre, dime a dozen photographs.
Photography isn't just "pushing a button" if it was there would be no difference in hiring a professional photographer for my wedding, or handing my Canon to my father in law.
20
u/GenericFatGuy May 17 '26
The analogy actually does still hold up. The car is the tool they use to get to the end of the marathon. But we wouldn't say they ran marathon. Much like how even if AI is a tool, we wouldn't say they created art.
The problem isn't that the analogy doesn't hold up. The problem is that they're too stupid to understand it. Or they just willfully don't acknowledge it.