But DME isn’t theft.

Art is theft is hyperbole.

its facinating to me that this conversation focusing on painting, and not you know, the fact that art is everything. sunglasses: art. computer: art. Dr pepper bottle: art. this lego flower i have at my desk: art. the fact that i made a great poop joke over the weekend: art

like basically anything that a human expresses or communicates a state of humanity, is art.

If it's useless, it's art. Yeah, I know a Coke bottle is useful, but the design isn't. Any other design that held the liquid in would do.

I agree with the Oxford dictionary definition of art (and I'm sure many others):

the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power.

of course its art. art can be useful, in fact, the best art is very useful.

as much as i do appreciate art as whimsy. so of my favorite art is dada, which is by its very nature, whimsical.

I'll suggest that everything we do is absolutely derivative.

I don't know; I believe humans need the emotional trigger that art provides.

"Useless" except as a means to fill an often unidentifiable empty void.

For some people that might be a gold toilet, and for others the curve of a fender.

Art, at least "fine" art, is money laundering.

That's art as a commodity. Very different from art as a concept or an impression.

What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun. Eccl 1:9 NIV (written sometime between 970–931 BC)

Wait a minute... I stand corrected.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1749597513.jpg

There's also theft of art.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/stolen-paintings-linked-to-retired-couple-who-supposedly-moonlighted-as-art-thieves-returned-to-new-mexico-after-40-years-180986765/

Agree!

Every bit of knowledge we have and share is being harvested without compensation by big tech as we speak. The gravity of this is something rarely mentioned and it is indeed theft- theft of the human condition. And the sharing of that condition is art. Nothing computer generated can be real art because that computer never felt anything and thus cannot share that feeling.

A favorite!!!!! So much wisdom in this!

this is also why Ai art never makes you feel anything. at best, it can replicate an aesthetic, but it has no emotion. its flat. you can see it in the image.

A very similar sentiment erupted when photography came to be.

But the photographer saw it and felt it. And when you feel something you get a human connection. I think that is much of the joy and value of art. WE like this. WE see beauty in it.

no it didnt.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...old_Laufer.jpg

Art? What is art? Something created to evoke a response, emotion? Response and emotion are equally dependent upon the person experiencing the creation.
If I don't have a response, am I stealing from the artist the honorific of the title?
I think we get too bent out of shape by the whole "art" thing. Headlines about Banksy and the reaction to their installations are really sociological commentary, a sort of Rorschach test.
If I write a song, using the language I have learned throughout my life and the construct of the western music paradigm in which I have been immersed am I a thief or an artist? What if the song is about something I have experienced, does that reduce the theft? If someone applauds my song, am I then an artist?
The arguments of mages are infinite. (I stole that line from Ursula K Leguin)