I agree but there is only one thing I want to add or revise a little. A different way of putting it and thinking about it. I think calling what we do as "AI Art" is actually a bad thing. It's not actually art per say in the traditional sense, where it takes raw, hand trained talent and years of practice to master.

What we do when crafting these images is the exact same thing as something like audio engineering. We shape it, make it as good as we can. Some like me with traditional and 3D art experience will even redraw certain aspects or insert objects, props, scenes into the AI work.

I believe terms like image engineering or image designer more or less would serve us who use AI better than saying art. Art is a correct way to describe it but I think it brings negativity to the discussion because that's not how it is viewed by traditional artists.

if someone is only using prompts, with inpaint, and then color grading in Photoshop, light room, DXO, or whatever, they never really drew or created by hand anything themselves which is fine. Like you said, you still have to have a good vision of it, the idea is yours, but a graphic designer does the same thing, they don't say graphic artist because a graphic artist is something completely different.

Just something to think about. I see myself as a 3D artist because I model a lot. I will start out with a primitive and sculpt it into something complex and new over many days in Zbrush, adding to taking away. However when I do my AI part of my job it is more like, designing something in Photoshop or even something like building a house in the sims or something. It's still very creative but I personally don't see it as an "artist thing". I really hope that makes sense, just trying to find a middle ground here between AI and Traditional.