Sure, you still use a prompt in those, but it's not really the focus in many cases -- you just use it to give a very rough guideline of what you're trying to do, then start drawing.
Depending on approach you'd either start sketching your astronaut and see the AI turn the sketch into something polished in real time, or you'd generate an image then polish up the details. I think most artists are more likely to prefer the first approach.
This sentiment is reminiscent to the attitudes around photography when it first became practical. People wondered how photography could be considered a form of art when all one had to do was point and press a button. The amount of effort is minuscule compared to what it takes to depict the same subject using traditional media. That being said, there is a lot of skill necessary to capture a photograph properly; lighting, composition, shutter speed, exposure, and so on. I agree that generative AI images will disrupt the market segment for stock photos and "clip art" used for articles, presentations, et cetera.
There will be a need to study and acquire skills related to the use of generative AI image creation. While technology will make simple prompts "good enough" for most outputs, just as our smartphone cameras make taking a picture "good enough", people will still need to study and practice in order to make high quality output.
The best tools in this space are spatial editors and node editors. Text is weak sauce.
Also, you can't use text modalities for film and 3D. It has to be art tooling to get good results.
Artists will always have a job. They'll just be doing way more than they were before.
I think style transfer + pose detection + edge detection gives artists a bunch of new tools to play with.
OP I would look into learning comfyui
if the amount of new offer is not paired by demand, there will be pain.