4 ms·
These are evocative images. I love a bunch of them! Knowing that this model was trained on a huge corpus of existing images makes them feel a bit like the outpu
by zaking17 4y ago
These are evocative images. I love a bunch of them! Knowing that this model was trained on a huge corpus of existing images makes them feel a bit like the output of a visual search engine -- finding relevant pieces and stitching them together. But it's more than that, because the stitching happens at different levels. They are often thematically and aesthetically cohesive in a way that feels intelligent.
Maybe we're just search engines of a similar kind.
An additional aspect of human art is that it (usually) takes time to make. The artist might spend many hours creating and reflecting and creating some more. The artist's engagement with the work makes its way into the final product, and that makes human art richer. Could future Dall-E version create sketches and iterations of a work; is there a limit to this mimicry?
I'm feeling future shock; heavy future shock.
- rndphs 4y agoHuman artists also do a whole lot of mimicry. One could look at art produced by many artists and say that it is just things stitched together from pre-existing art. “Good artists copy, great artists steal.”
- zarzavat 4y agoFor example the “enterprise vector people” graphics you see on every corporate website. Most human art is extremely repetitive. AI art seems to be coming from the opposite direction to human artists - from a starting position of maximum creativity and weirdness (e.g. early AI art such as Deep Dream looked like an acid trip) and advancements in the field come from toning it down to be less weird but more recognizable as the human concept of “art”. And DALL-E is impressive exactly because it has traded some of that creativity/weirdness away. But it’s still pretty damn weird.