5 ms·

To be honest the Girl with a Pearl Earing "variations" look a little bit like a crime against art. It's like the person who built this has no idea why the Girl

To be honest the Girl with a Pearl Earing "variations" look a little bit like a crime against art. It's like the person who built this has no idea why the Girl with a Pearl Earing is good art. "Here's the Girl with a Pearl Earing " - "OK, well here's some girls with turbans" Art is truth.

whateveracct 5y ago
Yeah Dall-E makes stuff that qualifies as art to the eye of a philistine. Makes sense it was built with VC money.
bbbobbb 5y ago
To be honest it's hard for me to imagine alternate reality where the 'original' is not swapped with one of the 'variations' without same comment underneath. Why is the 'original' good art?
sillysaurusx 5y ago
Maybe. https://cdn.openai.com/dall-e-2/demos/variations/modified/girl_with_pearl_earring/2.jpg https://cdn.openai.com/dall-e-2/demos/variations/modified/gi... was pretty impressive. I think the results are being poisoned by the fact that most old paintings have deteriorated colors, so the training data looks nothing like the originals. It's certainly a lot yellower than https://cdn.openai.com/dall-e-2/demos/variations/originals/girl_with_pearl_earring.jpg https://cdn.openai.com/dall-e-2/demos/variations/originals/g...
eks391 5y ago
> It's like the person who built this has no idea why the Girl with a Pearl Earing is good art. The people didn't program Dall E how to make art. They taught it to recognize patterns and create something by extrapolating from the patterns, all on its own. So the AI isn't a projection of what they think is good art, it's projecting what it thinks is good art, based on a prompt. The output is its best effort of a feeling, even if the feeling had to be inputted by a living person. So it's still art that's as good as the feeling that it came from-fleeting feelings being lower quality than those that required more time and thought

whateveracct 5y ago

Yeah Dall-E makes stuff that qualifies as art to the eye of a philistine. Makes sense it was built with VC money.

bbbobbb 5y ago

To be honest it's hard for me to imagine alternate reality where the 'original' is not swapped with one of the 'variations' without same comment underneath. Why is the 'original' good art?

sillysaurusx 5y ago

Maybe. https://cdn.openai.com/dall-e-2/demos/variations/modified/girl_with_pearl_earring/2.jpg https://cdn.openai.com/dall-e-2/demos/variations/modified/gi... was pretty impressive. I think the results are being poisoned by the fact that most old paintings have deteriorated colors, so the training data looks nothing like the originals. It's certainly a lot yellower than https://cdn.openai.com/dall-e-2/demos/variations/originals/girl_with_pearl_earring.jpg https://cdn.openai.com/dall-e-2/demos/variations/originals/g...

eks391 5y ago

> It's like the person who built this has no idea why the Girl with a Pearl Earing is good art. The people didn't program Dall E how to make art. They taught it to recognize patterns and create something by extrapolating from the patterns, all on its own. So the AI isn't a projection of what they think is good art, it's projecting what it thinks is good art, based on a prompt. The output is its best effort of a feeling, even if the feeling had to be inputted by a living person. So it's still art that's as good as the feeling that it came from-fleeting feelings being lower quality than those that required more time and thought