richardmurray

How does this impact the artistic landscape, and who will ultimately define the future of this digital renaissance?

The good news in modernity is who defines anything culturally is not as limited as in the past. In the pre internet age, all to often the lack of recorded media by individuals, the ability of one community to dominate the media sphere at every aspect meant that what is defined as art or not, what is defined in general is controllable by a few to their betterment. Today, and going forward if resources remain at least as they are today, the media world will always have various voices that will keep all perspectives alive.

Does this commercial focus dilute the essence of art, or is it merely a modern adaptation of the age-old struggle between artistic purity and financial necessity?

I don't think it is a struggle at all. The problem is defining what is or isn't art is always something that is unarithmetic, it can not be made into anything attributed to numbers, at least real numbers. Human beings will always be able to have a differing opinion on what is art, what is not art, what commercial activity is allowable or acceptable or injurious to an objects determination as art. If anything, what is commonly called AI just adds another talking point to those who wish to define what is art or what is not art. If you stop trying to define what is art or not art and convey what you like or not like, then the conversation goes away from what is or isn't art but simply how any piece of art relates to various folk, which is more clear cut, not arithmetic, but no longer trying to reduce human imagination to what some humans want.

Will it be those who wield their tools out of love for the art, or those who view their canvases as commodities?

Both will, all always do. No art form at its greatest extent of definition dies, Diminishes yes, but not dies. Yes, many native american ways are dead, most native ameriance ways are dead, but not all of them. Maybe 99% of the native american ways are dead, but the one percent is alive. Nippon had taiko drummers, China with all the piano forte love, had traditional instrument players. Their are stuill gullaha nd geechee speakers descended from blacks living off the coast of the carolinas. Cultural ways will live on. Now if the question is, who will be more common in the future, that is explainable.

When the usa obtained illegally stolen land that was called the louisiana purchase by some, most of the people of new orleans spoke french. But anyone could see overtime, french would be less spoken. The usa federal government even set up a governor and mayor with the intention of reducing the prevalence of french in new orleans later on. But, anyone with eyes knew, french would become spoken by a small minority in the future of new orleans and that is the modern truth. so, Who will be stronger. Currently, those who use computer programs to make art they have always wanted to see but don't have the skill or time or inclination to learn techniques is at a high growth rate, so are those who see said ability as a chance to make financial fortunes through said art. Both are growing. OVer time, financial value always lessens, yes resurgences occur, but over time most always do any art for the creative love, not the commercial ease. Notice I said ease, making money from art doesn't mean you make enough money off of art to be financially secure or safe.

Full comment and link to the referenced post

https://www.deviantart.com/comments/1/1051883948/5140671334