AI and Art: An Unpopular Opinion

I firmly believe that works created with the help of AI can also be considered art. Art is defined not by the number of hours spent on it or the formal education of its creator, but by the idea behind it, the personality of the author, and the audience's reaction to the work.

Let’s explore two examples:

A "true" artist whose works have long been exhibited in galleries creates a series of paintings using AI. Their personality draws attention, the concept is there, and the public reacts. Clearly, this can be called art.

A musician - not a professional visual artist - creates an AI-based exhibition on the theme of music’s influence on people. Their name attracts interest, the exhibition sparks discussions, and reactions vary: fans are thrilled, while critics are outraged. Once again, all the elements of art come together: the creator, the idea, and the reaction. Isn’t this art? I think it is.

Now let’s compare this with photography. Today, everyone has a camera in their phone and can snap hundreds of pictures effortlessly. Does that make all those photos art? No. We don’t call people with thousands of images in their phone gallery artists. Yet, we still acknowledge the existence of photography as an art form - some photos move us deeply, and some sell for millions at auctions.A camera is simply a tool. AI is the same. What matters is how it’s used. Like any other tool, AI can be leveraged to create art that makes us think, laugh, cry, and feel.