I remember listening to some discussion a while back about a guy who won an art contest using AI generated work, which outraged a lot of people(artists likely). But he neither hid that it was created by AI and he spent something like roughly 80 hours filtering through generated content and stitching elements together to create a comprehensive piece. So in his own way, he put the work and time in. But that's superficial as fuck. Art isn't about time put into a piece.
Here's what I think the outcome is. You know how vintage shit sells for high prices? And model replicas of vintage shit can also sell for high prices, but rarely the same as the real deal? That's what AI art will be.
There'll be a market for the original "organic" hand/person produced shit, and there'll be a market for the high quality replica stuff. But again, this is all superficial shit, and I'd suggest to any artist complaining about AI work denting their profits that they stop and take a look at whether or not they're actually an artist, or just a very good craftsman selling their trade.
There's a difference because art's not about the money, and it doesn't matter who else makes what, or what makes what, because an actual artist plays the game for themselves. When I make art, I make it because I want to, or I want to see if I can. I test myself, I express whatever's left of me as a person either as emotional representations, concepts and ideas, or just going with the flow. You could fill the markets with AI art and it wouldn't bother me because I'd still be tinkering on my own time, making shit not with the intent to sell it, and even sometimes with nobody in mind to show it to.
The only real threat AI art poses is to the tradesman who calls themselves an artist.