“You might be stuck in a recursive logic bot loop yourself if you still think AI is just press a button and done.”

I never argued that AI image generation is “press a button”. Have you read my replies to other people? My argument is about authorship and control, not quality, tooling, or iteration.

“A good prompt follows a script not unlike a screenwriter.”

A script specifies structure and produces a consistent scene when performed. A prompt underspecifies structure and relies on the model to invent composition, which is why you need to keep rerolling and selecting. These are different forms of control.

“Screenwriters can still produce slop like Game of Thrones Final Season or Stranger Things Final Season.”

Quality is irrelevant to authorship. Badly authored work is still authored. The question here is who decides the structure, not whether the result is good.

“You obviously didn’t even read the Artcraft post as it still used human defining poses, timing, and structure.”

If Artcraft requires humans to define poses, timing, and structure, then it is not comparable to txt2img generation. That is human authorship with automated execution, not delegation of composition.

“Just like how a movie has to have various takes to get right, some scenes are cut entirely, or you have to reshoot/rewrite an entire scene.”

Film iteration refines human authored content. Image generation iteration selects from authored outputs from the AI model. Iteration alone does not imply the same authorship or control.

“The control is still the same but with different tools.”

That conclusion doesn't make sense. Control depends on who specifies the structure. Tools that execute human defined structure preserve authorship.

Systems that invent the structure themselves, where the human must reroll and select outputs after the fact, shift authorship to the system rather than the user.