The Boundary Between Generative AI and Creation: Why We Should Call Them "AI Operators" Instead of "AI Artists" | Redefining AI and Creation (1)
[Series: Redefining AI and Creation (3 parts in total)]
This series analyzes the structural gap between generative AI and humans from the perspectives of definition, perception, and psychology, and presents a new image of the creator.
Part 1: The Boundary Between Generative AI and Creation
With the explosive spread of generative AI, opportunities to see titles such as "AI artist" and "AI composer" have increased rapidly. However, these terms are always accompanied by a persistent sense of discomfort and debate: "Can that really be called 'creation'?"
In this article, I would like to uncover the true nature of this discomfort. To put it briefly, the act of outputting via current generative AI is structurally different from existing "creation." It is more accurate to define those who perform it as "AI operators" rather than using the professional titles of existing creators.
1. The "Constructing" Creator vs. the "Instructing" Operator
First, the nature of the act itself is different. What creators (illustrators, composers, etc.) do is "creation." It is an act that presupposes the acquisition of specific skills (drawing, harmony, etc.) and involves fixing a vision from within oneself into the material world through a process involving significant effort. It can be called the work of "construction," creating something from 0 to 1, or 1 to 10.
In contrast, what generative AI users do is "operation." They give instructions (prompts) such as "I want something like this" to the AI, which is a vast collection of learning data. The skills required there are not "drawing" or "composing," but the techniques of "instruction and editing" to understand the characteristics of the AI and elicit the desired results.
Some might argue here that "operating AI is not simple either." Indeed, creating one's own LoRA or making precise corrections via Inpainting requires complex trial and error comparable to traditional digital production. However, the "complexity" of the process and the "quality" of the skill are separate issues. No matter how complex the process becomes, the essence of the skill lies not in "constructing" with one's own hands, but in "more precise instruction and editing" toward the AI model. It is a high-level "AI operation technique" and should be evaluated as a different skill set from creation.
2. The Decisive Difference Between "Works" and "Products"
The difference in process also appears in the nature of the output. What is produced by a creator is a "work," and value resides in the author's consistent thought, philosophy, and the production process itself.
On the other hand, the output that an AI operator extracts from a system is a "product." It is nothing more than a "product" manufactured to satisfy specific requirements or demands (prompts).
Of course, it is meaningful for an author to use AI as a "tool" for refinement or brainstorming. However, when presenting AI-generated content as a "finished creative work" as is, the human "construction" process and intentionality are thin, so equating this with a "work" in the traditional sense creates a structural impossibility.
3. The Path to "AI Artist" and the Essence of Duchamp
So, can those who use AI never become artists?
Looking at history, that is not necessarily the case. Just as photography, which was once called "not art because it's just a machine taking pictures," has now become a solid field of art, there is a possibility that "AI artists" will be established.Here, let's consider the case of Marcel Duchamp, the father of modern art. He once presented a work called "Fountain," which was just a ready-made urinal with a signature on it, and introduced "choosing" into the concept of art. However, the reality is not merely an "affirmation of choice." The essence of his act lay in a "critique of context," asking, "If it is placed in a museum, is it art?" He never claimed that "anything becomes art if you line up ready-made products."Turning to current AI operation, what is the situation? In many cases, it efficiently rides on existing contexts (e.g., trends in beautiful girl illustrations) and mass-produces products that those contexts like. This is the exact opposite of Duchamp's "destruction of concepts"; it is a "following of existing concepts."If one can present a unique critical perspective or authorship through AI, that person could be called an artist. However, "choice" without critique of context is no different from mere consumer behavior.
Conclusion: The "Collapse" Caused by Confusion of Categories and True Authorship
Think about it. A photographer would never call themselves a "painter." This is because they have solid confidence and pride in their own process and technique of capturing light and composition. There is no need to borrow the authority of a painter.
However, some AI operators call themselves by existing categories. This is the core of the current confusion. The "definitional confusion" of calling different skill sets by the same professional name is creating unnecessary conflict.
The collapse caused by this confusion is already becoming a reality. The "Yokai Senryu Contest," which was decided to end in 2025, is a typical example. The organizers cited the reason that "it is indistinguishable from AI works, and the fairness of the judging cannot be maintained." If AI "products" are mixed into a place that evaluates human "construction" without distinction, the evaluation criteria themselves will collapse, and the cultural framework itself will become unsustainable.
The attitude of relying on existing frameworks and authorities is the best proof that the person has not yet left the realm of an "operator." If one truly wants to be a creator (artist), shouldn't they be proud of the complex AI operation process itself, rather than relying on others?
"What kind of intention, what kind of prompts were combined, and how was the result derived?" The new authorship of the AI era resides in that process. When one proudly declares, "I am not an artist, I am an AI operator," and wins evaluation through that unique technique and process, perhaps the true "AI artist" will be born for the first time.[Magazine] Mirror in the Shell: AI Navigation Chart
Philo