4 ms·

Well, who knows him really? What I‘d gather about him over the decades of work, is that he deliberately uses provocation/expressive words for his art/communica

by dav_Oz 4y ago

Well, who knows him really? What I‘d gather about him over the decades of work, is that he deliberately uses provocation/expressive words for his art/communication. I think in the context of that little clip he was hinting at the ruthless commercialisation of American cinema/comics; and indeed since then it had well developed to today‘s Marvelization of Hollywood[0], a multi-billion industry of its own. He is 93 now, so I think he doesn’t give a shit about anything at this point, but I like to think that back then as a young artist he would have embraced/explored/experimented with AI generated good shit to enhance/help his artistic vision. In the end it seems that mattered to him most. [0]https://www.paudal.com/2022/11/24/quentin-tarantino-marvelization-of-movies-means-captain-america-is-a-bigger-star-than-chris-evans/ https://www.paudal.com/2022/11/24/quentin-tarantino-marveliz...

gsatic 4y ago
Commercialization and info overload has diluted the impact of ALL art to just sensory stimulation. After the oohs and aahs there is nothing else going on in anyones head, cause there is always something else thrown infront of them on their infinite streams. And while AI generated art is just another tool in a giant warehouse of ever expanding tools, who gives a shit? Cause take a look around at the impact of the best of the best. There is none.
- dav_Oz 4y ago
  >And while AI generated art is just another tool in a giant warehouse of ever expanding tools, who gives a shit? Cause take a look around at the impact of the best of the best. There is none. The quality of that “tool” in particular is imho markedly different as opposed to non-AI digital tools. It opens up a space of possibilities for “visual art” which is now tangentially comparable to the impact of computers (i.e. computations per unit time) to the art of proofs in mathematics. One way of using its power is by calculating pi to the n-th place (“eye candy” in “visual art speak”) or another to overcome the sheer amount of calculations necessary (technical limitations) for a viable proof.[0] If there is one way to prove it can inspire confidence for a more elegant/aesthetically pleasing/understandable proof. As for the impact, I agree, we have yet to see. Maybe I’m too optimistic. One [1] of my favourite music clips from now over 20 years ago which looks (in its sterility) entirely AI/computer generated but actually is modelled frame by frame in Lightwave 3D (by the artist Alex Rutterford). [0]https://www.quantamagazine.org/computer-helps-prove-long-sought-fluid-equation-singularity-20221116/ https://www.quantamagazine.org/computer-helps-prove-long-sou... [1]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ev3vENli7wQ https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ev3vENli7wQ
  - stemlord 4y ago
    >The quality of that “tool” in particular is imho markedly different as opposed to non-AI digital tools. Do you remember the printing press? Computers? How is it different than just another jump in magnitude of production (if it pans out to establish itself as such to begin with)? It seems like a continuation of the same process which is what grandparent seemed to be saying

by dav_Oz 4y ago

gsatic 4y ago

Commercialization and info overload has diluted the impact of ALL art to just sensory stimulation. After the oohs and aahs there is nothing else going on in anyones head, cause there is always something else thrown infront of them on their infinite streams. And while AI generated art is just another tool in a giant warehouse of ever expanding tools, who gives a shit? Cause take a look around at the impact of the best of the best. There is none.

dav_Oz 4y ago
>And while AI generated art is just another tool in a giant warehouse of ever expanding tools, who gives a shit? Cause take a look around at the impact of the best of the best. There is none. The quality of that “tool” in particular is imho markedly different as opposed to non-AI digital tools. It opens up a space of possibilities for “visual art” which is now tangentially comparable to the impact of computers (i.e. computations per unit time) to the art of proofs in mathematics. One way of using its power is by calculating pi to the n-th place (“eye candy” in “visual art speak”) or another to overcome the sheer amount of calculations necessary (technical limitations) for a viable proof.[0] If there is one way to prove it can inspire confidence for a more elegant/aesthetically pleasing/understandable proof. As for the impact, I agree, we have yet to see. Maybe I’m too optimistic. One [1] of my favourite music clips from now over 20 years ago which looks (in its sterility) entirely AI/computer generated but actually is modelled frame by frame in Lightwave 3D (by the artist Alex Rutterford). [0]https://www.quantamagazine.org/computer-helps-prove-long-sought-fluid-equation-singularity-20221116/ https://www.quantamagazine.org/computer-helps-prove-long-sou... [1]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ev3vENli7wQ https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ev3vENli7wQ
- stemlord 4y ago
  >The quality of that “tool” in particular is imho markedly different as opposed to non-AI digital tools. Do you remember the printing press? Computers? How is it different than just another jump in magnitude of production (if it pans out to establish itself as such to begin with)? It seems like a continuation of the same process which is what grandparent seemed to be saying