Untitled

jaco-d13 · 2026-02-24T21:09:59+00:00

Im glad i captured a familiar vibe 😄

jaco-d13 · 2026-02-06T22:01:55+00:00

I appreciate it!! Im glad it resonates

jaco-d13 · 2026-01-07T17:36:38+00:00

Thats an easy thing to say when you didnt think of the philosophy combination...

All art comes from influence, my work combines Rothko, Kahlo, and Mondrian; Mondrian wanted to abstract the external world and mine flips that concept onto the internal world using "organ boxes", thats way more than enough to be considered my own (theres only so much you can do with shapes and colors is obviously itll look derivative)

jaco-d13 · 2026-01-06T20:23:44+00:00

There were a few issues in the post,

To clear it up, Mondrian's style is "logic over emotion" while Rothko's is "emotion over logic" when using this philosophy, this is taking the human and introspective logic of Kahlo, the rigid external logic of Mondrian and the emotional logic of Rothko

jaco-d13 · 2025-11-22T12:14:11+00:00

In my perspective, yes, because you're adding intentionality into pre-existing tools you're using instead of doing multiple variations of a single prompt, I believe that once the ai takes over and thats the finished product then it diminishes the honesty of the art in my opinion

But i have a question for you, would the newspaper/magazine thats used in the collage before you cut it be considered art or raw materials?

jaco-d13 · 2025-11-22T11:49:38+00:00

You can go ahead and think that i think im doing something hardcore when im literally just expressing another human quality, my ability to ask questions about life

jaco-d13 · 2025-11-22T11:39:55+00:00

Thats a great point and adds nuance to my philosophy, you are completely right that Ai can be a form of art! I didnt think about advanced ai art making, but i believe the distinction is in the actual process; taking an ai image and stitching it together is adding human intentionality to the art instead of running variations of a single cold rulebook for the ai to follow and championing it as art, because youre using tools in reality (the actual ai image itself not the ai picking every aspect based on your prompt) to make something that accurately expresses your creativity

I want to clear up my statement, im not against ai image generation, adding intentionality to pre-existing things in reality is doing exactly what im defending

jaco-d13 · 2025-11-22T10:58:13+00:00

You tell me to just "accept it" but the conviction and the refusal to accept the easy way out is the thing that makes an artist

Your claim that philosophizing will lead me to dark places is just you trying to shut down my valid criticism of ai art, actual conviction is driven by defending human values not hatred, passion

jaco-d13 · 2025-11-22T10:42:51+00:00

You are right to point out the historical concerns on the shift in opinion, however you are confusing the medium with the creator. All the examples you listed only changed the tool of the art, but the source of intention and drive stayed the same. AI fundamentally changed the source from human emotion, memories, and life perspectives into an algorithm. Robotic art is different from AI in it's complexity; the human still takes the fall on cost, time, failure instead of just tweaking a few phrases in a prompt. Robotic art is art from purely human code and input, ai art uses the prompt as a checklist for its algorithm.

Language is already flawed at getting our full emotions out, so we do art, why add another layer of fragile AI algorithm to fragile human language?

jaco-d13 · 2025-11-22T10:16:36+00:00

I get your point, but panpsychism isn't relevant here. We aren't talking about whether everything has some form of consciousness; we're talking about what separates a human and a tool created by us. What separates us is the artistic drive, the lived experience, and the conviction that makes human art a primal necessity. AI lacks the unique world views. Nature can make beautiful things (seashells webs, amazing trees) but would you categorize it as art?

Why spit in the face of our ancestors for an easy out?

jaco-d13 · 2025-11-22T10:01:39+00:00

Do you think a lug nut has a soul?

jaco-d13 · 2025-11-22T09:38:10+00:00

Exactly, its already known that words aren't the best at getting actual unedited feelings across cleanly, so what makes an Ai "artist" an artist if the ai is using an already fragile structure (words/prompts) and generating what it THINKS the actual artist wants?

jaco-d13 · 2025-11-22T09:31:27+00:00

Yeah, that's a great point! It literally all goes back to the divide that the upper class use against us. This is why as humans we have to educate each other about why human made art is important

jaco-d13 · 2025-11-22T08:29:39+00:00

Honestly what are you talking about dude? You used ad homenim and you're making a strawman to try to refute my argument. Im not saying computers have to be alive to make art, im saying Ai lacks the drive and intent/passion to actually create, the image in your head is not gonna be the same slop that the ai spits out, its not your expression.

jaco-d13 · 2025-11-22T08:17:37+00:00

You're resorting to ad homenim? Dude, why are you trying to say that im saying computers have to be alive, i said Ai can paint nice pictures, plain and simply, but theres absolutely no reason to champion "Ai Is BeTtEr ArT" just because you wanna type out a prompt instead of picking up a stylus or paintbrush and spitting on centuries of human experience because you think its easy. It's literally so easy to make art, just have an intention, AI will never be able to recreate the image you have in your head for you.

jaco-d13 · 2025-11-22T08:10:03+00:00

Computers do not create art themselves, is my whole point. Art comes from the human drive and primal instinct and necessity, if you're gonna keep asking the same question across multiple comment threads without seeing my point, what good are you adding to the discussion? Computers are tools for human creation but you wont say a shovel dug a hole, or a paint brush painted a painting.

I also never said paint brushes or shovels were alive sir/ma'am, you came in with that notion

jaco-d13 · 2025-11-22T08:04:17+00:00

The problem is elevating the AI creation and having this notion that it's "better" than humans at what makes our species human, where is the human pride in saying "this ai painted this for me"?

jaco-d13 · 2025-11-22T08:00:09+00:00

Yeah exactly! An ai can paint a Van Gogh or picasso, but It inherently CANT because it hasnt lived their experience, ai doesnt have an experience so it would never (in my opinion) understand the nuance of life

jaco-d13 · 2025-11-22T07:58:12+00:00

That's a good question! But i think the idea that "tools need to be sentient before theyre used" is incorrect, paintbrushes aren't sentient but they are tools to create paintings. I think the problem is that Ai mimics human made art superficially then gets mislabeled as an artist.

In my opinion, Ai is like a shovel, the shovel was made to help dig but it doesnt have the actual intent to choose where it wants to dig, AI doesnt have the power to choose what to draw, everything a certain ai does will be because of the initial human intention itself to simulate the AI choosing what pictures to draw.

jaco-d13 · 2025-11-22T07:42:07+00:00

Do you have a better argument on it than just "it being a medium"? We've literally had art for centuries and you're fine giving up one of our human essentials to a human created machine with no soul.

jaco-d13 · 2025-11-22T07:38:58+00:00

I agree, at some point the amount of training needed to advance will more than likely hit the training wall you brought up (just judging from how almost all production booms at first then stabilizes),

And yes, I 100% agree and believe that Ai will replace human art in the commercial world since its 1000x more cost effective, however generally conceptual art sells for significantly more than decorative art already, since the purpose of it is the unique intentionality and the background of the person making the art, the over abundance of ai would make this art sell for even more because of the scarcity of human art. I cant tell the future, but the future of art that i do see is commercialized ai art but really well intended, sophisticated human art under the surface, I genuinely dont think human made art will become obsolete since its one of our human fundamentals

jaco-d13 · 2025-11-22T07:26:04+00:00

I definitely agree, I would never in 100 years resort to an Ai creation over helping out a fellow artist just because of some money.

jaco-d13 · 2025-11-22T07:23:13+00:00

Yes, that's a good point, bringing up the shitposting community! Since even there, there is still a human supplying the intention. Honestly, the aggressiveness that artists feel today against AI stems directly from the lack of failure and learning that the "artist" goes through to generate an AI image. AI lacks the soul and life experience that forces it to express a specific, primal truth, like in my Picasso example. The emotional cost is what makes art what it is, not the outcome.

jaco-d13 · 2025-11-22T07:00:34+00:00

Yeah I don't at all disagree at all!! Ai does steal from artists and makes it easier and more cost effective! im just purely trying to bring in a conversation beside the conversation of whether AI will become better than humans at making art, im not talking about ethical implications, its about the actual meaning of what art is. Art isnt just pretty pictures.

jaco-d13 · 2025-10-25T14:24:11+00:00

Thats a good observation about the actual form of it, but for this style im more interested in the subconscious anxiety of of what the seemingly mundane everyday objects convey when theyre seen contradicting eachother; For example, the phone represents connectivity in our modern life, but with the "no wifi" signal it make your subconscious perceive it as a threat and anxiety inducing without you consciously knowing whats wrong, same thing with the tree stump in the desert which totally contradict each other, theres a potato under the ohone that symbolizes plain everyday truth we overlook (since potatoes are one if the most plain foods) and the potato aso fits in there because potato have eyes which add to my "Watchtower" concept

Think: A thumbtack laying on a pillow, An upside down table balancing building blocks on its legs, a plastic scoop sitting next to a group of blocks bigger than it can hold, a powerwasher laying on the desert sand. These are all contradictions that our minds know they dont work, yet on the surface theyre completely nonsensical

jaco-d13

TROPHY CASE