1) Art can be anything I think using skill and a creative imagination. It’s been developed throughout the year in many different ways and aspects. Using A.I. you have be creative with the way you write your prompt as well as an understanding of the vision you want for the piece. So after reading the two articles by Kevin Roose and Sarah Kuta they explained Mr Allens intentions in using A.I., and the process of which he did so. For these reasons I agree that A.I. should be considered as another aspect of art. Mr Allen spent around 80 hours working on his entree piece, its not like he typed up anything, took the results and submitted it. Then after careful evaluation he picked his favorites and edited them more using other programs. So with that being said A.I. generated art should definitely be considered art.

2) Artist’s most certainly have a reason to worry about the use of A.I.. When I think about handcrafted, I think about the time, skill, and patients that are needed to bring their image to life. The artist point of view tells us how A.I. could potentially take jobs from illustrators and commissioner, which in some may be their source of income. I think it really depends on the circumstances of the situation. A.I. generated art will not put an end to other forms of art. Each peice of art will have its own targeted audience. So I do believe artist have a point, but it is exaggerated.