For a counterexample: suppose you're really good at sketching, and you go to the Louvre and copy out the Mona Lisa. Were you the sole artist of your sketch? Leonardo Da Vinci certainly wasn't drawing on your notebook.
In the case of AI Art, there is no point in the process where you are participating in the creation of the actual initial image unless the actual source/model is based of your own artwork that you created. What you are really doing with AI art is generating a concept based on a request you make (the prompt), and then modifying the result with other tools until you get what you want (inpainting masks, animate it, etc.).
The equivalent of this would be something of like a patron/commissioner and something like a sound engineer. You aren't creating the source material, but you can ask an AI art generator to create something based on your request, and then modify and tune it afterwards to your liking. It is more of like a producer/sound engineer/post-production role.
I don’t think anyone is arguing to AI personhood yet, so it must be the user who is the artist.
If we want to add extra conditions, that seems fine, but someone else will have to define them. If it were up to me… I’d probably end up being called a gatekeeper.
The "Desired Look" can be considered the "artistic" part of art, while the production can be considered the craft.
Koons is the most extreme example I can think of, but there are plenty of others who got their start creating stuff themselves and then hired people to do the total of the work.
Is a director an artist, when he doesn't write the script, touch the camera, edit the film, or act in the movie?
(don't tell my boss)
edit: not my opinion. just prevailing sentiment in yc discussions