AI vs Art

In March the Sony World Photography Awards announced the winning entry in their creative photo category.

It was a black-and-white image of two women, entitled PSEUDOMNESIA: The Electrician.

But the artist, Boris Eldagsen, turned down the award. He said his photograph was not a photograph at all, but crafted through an AI image generator. 

His entry into the competition was designed to spark conversation about if... 

or when... AI-generated or assisted images should be considered art.

What do you think?

And before that, in February of this year an AI generated image won a photography competition in Australia, successfully fooling judges into believing the drone image was a 'real' capture. (And NOT Synthetic Photography)

The creators of the image said:
"The barriers to creating something truly eye-catching have never been lower. Our award-winning 'photograph' is a good example of that. We didn't need to wake up at sunrise, drive to the beach and send the drone up to capture the image. We created this image from our couch in Sydney by entering text into a computer program. This 'photograph' was convincing enough to win the world's first photography award for an AI image."

(source: Australian Photography)

What's your opinion?

Is this art? Is this lies? Is it unnatural? Is it evil? Is it weird? Is it confronting?

Boris Eldagsen calls it 'promptography' and Phil Steele calls it Synthetic Photography.

What do you think?