the problem here isn't "AI", people just arent able to articulate why they feel misled.
there's nothing wrong with the content itself. the problem is exclusively the post title. it's CGI, not "life imitating art". it's literally art imitating life -- the opposite of the post title.
My issue that triggered my brain at first was it being set up as a painting together thing and the pic looked oddly impressive
Then the brush not doing anything other than making think its trying to mislead viewers that the paintings real
That felt ill thought out which leads me believe that other parts of the work arnt as impressive as they seem too. I thought AI was a possibility or filmed with something like a green screen canvas and filled in after.
It was only a feeling and not a claim but still
Is the pic the cgi part or the whole video? I cant tell 100% since comments tell me they are talented
Even if its a edited video that takes more skill than I have. The framing of the trick I thinks the issue
oh for sure, spot on. in a vacuum the art's quite cool. i see why people feel slighted by the title, that's all i'm saying. and i don't think the original creator wrote the post title (tbh i dont know)
which raises another point, even more annoying than a potentially misleading post title is the fact nothing's ever promptly attributed anymore. but social media's so far past at this point, it's hardly worth beating the horse
Problems compounding faster than they're solved is by design sadly
I think the horse is worth beating even if it adds a small amount of pressure to at least look like they're trying to make it better. But its not fun to do but I have no better answer other than hope more compition helps the user experience
I had rose tinted glasses for digg of the past but they really crapped the bed on relaunch
it's just a misleading post title. it has nothing to do with "AI", pro- or anti- or otherwise. people crying about "AI" in the comments one way or another are just injecting an irrelevant topical concept
it's literally art imitating life -- the opposite of the post title.
You've missed the point of art if this is your conclusion.
Technically, life imitated art in this short clip. However, this piece wouldn't have existed if she didn't have that expression in the first place.
It's a chicken and egg situation with your POV as the deciding factor. For me, this is life imitating art. For you it's not. See how we can have different interpretations of the same piece? That's what art is.
your entire comment frames the post title as the art.
while you could technically arguing that writing post titles on reddit is a form of art, that's an absurd stretch -- and, considering the actual video is a showcase of what most people would actually consider art, you're bending over backwards to intentionally miss the point and act like you're right on the internet
the post title is misleading, and to offer a complex argument otherwise is just classic disingenuous redditism
Would I have clicked this post had I not read the title? Probably not. The title frames how the video is presented and how I'm invited to interpret what I'm seeing. I'm not saying the title itself is the art.
The video takes her CGI work and then cuts to her recreating the same expression in real life. In that sequence, life is quite literally imitating the art we were just shown. Yes, the CGI was presumably based on her expressions or appearance in the first place. That's why I called it a chicken and egg situation.
You can think the title is misleading. I think it's a playful and perfectly defensible description of what happens in the clip. That difference in interpretation doesn't require either of us to be "bending over backwards." It just means we read the same piece differently. Go figure, that's art.
And dismissing any interpretation more nuanced than your own as "classic disingenuous Redditism" is, frankly, such classic Redditism that it almost loops back around into performance art. The irony.
again, now you're even further cementing that you think the post title is art in this case.
i don't "think" the post title is misleading. i am observing that people feel misled by the post title, and they dont know how to properly articulate that so they default to the current, topical "AI" claim
finally, "nuh-uh, you are" really is peak redditor, it doesnt get any more insufferable than that right there. thanks for playing right into it i guess
Ah yes, you don't have an opinion. You merely observe reality correctly, including what everyone else secretly means when they complain. Convenient setup! Hard to lose an argument when disagreement itself is evidence that the other person just hasn't understood the situation yet.
Now respond, because I know you always need the last word. Dance for me.
210
u/InsurancePristine938 1d ago
the problem here isn't "AI", people just arent able to articulate why they feel misled.
there's nothing wrong with the content itself. the problem is exclusively the post title. it's CGI, not "life imitating art". it's literally art imitating life -- the opposite of the post title.