All that amounts to just more complex ways of nudging the prompt, because that prompt is all an LLM can "comprehend." You still have no actual creative control, the black box is still doing everything. You didn't clear the barrier to entry, you just stole the valor of real artists.
So wrong. There are some great modern artists in the AI space now who are using the advanced AI tools to advance their craft.. look at eclectic method before AI and look at how he evolving artistically with AI
Shadiversity made the same class of attribution error. AI users aren't evolving artistically, the software they are using to simulate art is improving over time. They are not creators, they are consumers.
Photographers have a great deal of creative control. Put the same camera in your hands versus a professional and you will get different results even with the same subject. You taking a snapshot in the woods are not Ansel Adams, nor are you taking a selfie Annie Leibovitz. The skill and artistic intent of the human being using the tool matters.
Meanwhile with AI, given the same model and inputs - including a prompt which may include the names of specific artists "in the style of x" - one can reproduce mathematically equivalent results, regardless of the person using it. If one can perfectly replicate the work by simply replicating the tools, then the human using the tool adds nothing of unique personal value to the end result. Even if one were to concede that AI generated content were art, it still wouldn't be the art of the user, it would be the art of the model.
