4 ms·

> what really matters in art is the process You don't get to define what is art. Art can and does move people who have absolutely no idea of what the process t

by MrNeon 4y ago

> what really matters in art is the process You don't get to define what is art. Art can and does move people who have absolutely no idea of what the process to create it was. You have your way to experience art, it isn't the only way. In fact you have a limited ability to learn about the process, how much of it are you making up in your head?

tines 4y ago
When the flush of a newborn sun fell first on Eden's green and gold, Our father Adam sat under the Tree and scratched with a stick in the mold; And the first rude sketch that the world had seen was joy to his mighty heart, Till the Devil whispered behind the leaves: "It's pretty, but is it Art?" - Rudyard Kipling
- drdaeman 4y ago
  "Hey, anything's art if you do it in a black sweater". - Mr. Wiggles This said, according to the renown authorities on the matter, it's definitely about the process. :-)
danogentili 4y ago
I can very well get to define what art means to me. Process is actually very easy to infer if the art is made by a human, since the emotions that are being conveyed by the humans behind the screen are displayed directly on screen. I don't deny that I might get moved by a piece of AI art, but even so, my first thought goes to what human art was used to generated this specific piece that inspired this emotion. An AI can't feel emotions, but the humans that made the art powering its model can, and that's the only way AI art can make you feel anything, when it isn't just a garbled mess. As usual, it's always about the humans behind the screen, not about what's on the screen itself; and the people working on these models fail to understand that that's what people are really looking for: human interaction via creativity, not an instant "product" to be displayed on screen; and that's why AI art will always be relegated to the niche of 4channers generating AI porn and enthusiast devs generating nightmare fuel logos for their projects. For once, I would absolutely refuse to consume any AI-generated content, and I'm happy in the knowledge that I'm not the only one taking this stance. I also trust that legislation will eventually catch up with the insult to human creativity that are AI art models.
- visarga 4y ago
  > I don't deny that I might get moved by a piece of AI art, but even so, my first thought goes to what human art was used to generated this specific piece that inspired this emotion. Yes, exactly, behind AI art there are countless human artists and their experiences. You should not dismiss AI so easily. What it offers you is a new way to see your favourite artists, to interact with their works, to continue dreaming the same dream, and add your own story to their own. AI art is a deeper way to engage with art than simply viewing. For the first time we can ask questions, we can explore vast landscapes of style and content. Only imagination has similar characteristics - goal directedness, freedom of movement, extreme creativity, one-time-use - imagine and throw away most of your ideas, a space of privacy and freedom - assuming you run your own models, AI art is more private than using the internet.
  - danogentili 4y ago
    Sure, it's a fun toy to play with, I don't deny it. Like a kaleidoscope, it can be fun to recognize familiar patterns and beautiful colors, but it's nothing more than that: a toy. What I look for in art is intent and human passion; for me, the excitement of suddenly getting a nice number out of a PRNG or a cool story out of GPT is a very different from experiencing a story passionately crafted by a human. When I read an amazing story like the Iron Widow, I feel respect towards the skills of the author, excitement for her future plans for the sequel; I follow the author on twitter and maybe interact a bit, because I appreciate what that human made me feel. I can't do the same for a GPT story, because even if it was generated from multiple human stories, there is no actual human intent behind it; no one to thank, and no one to blame in case of messups: it feels like an empty shell.
    - visarga 4y ago
      GPT-3 is a synthesis of written human culture. Whatever it makes, it comes from us. I see it like a magical mirror into the soul of humanity. When it makes a good story I am very happy because it means I found a path into its deeper levels. I'm kind of disappointed with the strict training they put on chatGPT, it is always the same canned formula, almost aways uses phrases like "in conclusion" and "however, ...". The stories are all 5-6 phrases and have no details. The original Davinci model from 2 years ago was more creative, but harder to direct.

by MrNeon 4y ago

tines 4y ago

When the flush of a newborn sun fell first on Eden's green and gold, Our father Adam sat under the Tree and scratched with a stick in the mold; And the first rude sketch that the world had seen was joy to his mighty heart, Till the Devil whispered behind the leaves: "It's pretty, but is it Art?" - Rudyard Kipling

drdaeman 4y ago
"Hey, anything's art if you do it in a black sweater". - Mr. Wiggles This said, according to the renown authorities on the matter, it's definitely about the process. :-)

danogentili 4y ago

I can very well get to define what art means to me. Process is actually very easy to infer if the art is made by a human, since the emotions that are being conveyed by the humans behind the screen are displayed directly on screen. I don't deny that I might get moved by a piece of AI art, but even so, my first thought goes to what human art was used to generated this specific piece that inspired this emotion. An AI can't feel emotions, but the humans that made the art powering its model can, and that's the only way AI art can make you feel anything, when it isn't just a garbled mess. As usual, it's always about the humans behind the screen, not about what's on the screen itself; and the people working on these models fail to understand that that's what people are really looking for: human interaction via creativity, not an instant "product" to be displayed on screen; and that's why AI art will always be relegated to the niche of 4channers generating AI porn and enthusiast devs generating nightmare fuel logos for their projects. For once, I would absolutely refuse to consume any AI-generated content, and I'm happy in the knowledge that I'm not the only one taking this stance. I also trust that legislation will eventually catch up with the insult to human creativity that are AI art models.

visarga 4y ago
> I don't deny that I might get moved by a piece of AI art, but even so, my first thought goes to what human art was used to generated this specific piece that inspired this emotion. Yes, exactly, behind AI art there are countless human artists and their experiences. You should not dismiss AI so easily. What it offers you is a new way to see your favourite artists, to interact with their works, to continue dreaming the same dream, and add your own story to their own. AI art is a deeper way to engage with art than simply viewing. For the first time we can ask questions, we can explore vast landscapes of style and content. Only imagination has similar characteristics - goal directedness, freedom of movement, extreme creativity, one-time-use - imagine and throw away most of your ideas, a space of privacy and freedom - assuming you run your own models, AI art is more private than using the internet.
- danogentili 4y ago
  Sure, it's a fun toy to play with, I don't deny it. Like a kaleidoscope, it can be fun to recognize familiar patterns and beautiful colors, but it's nothing more than that: a toy. What I look for in art is intent and human passion; for me, the excitement of suddenly getting a nice number out of a PRNG or a cool story out of GPT is a very different from experiencing a story passionately crafted by a human. When I read an amazing story like the Iron Widow, I feel respect towards the skills of the author, excitement for her future plans for the sequel; I follow the author on twitter and maybe interact a bit, because I appreciate what that human made me feel. I can't do the same for a GPT story, because even if it was generated from multiple human stories, there is no actual human intent behind it; no one to thank, and no one to blame in case of messups: it feels like an empty shell.
  - visarga 4y ago
    GPT-3 is a synthesis of written human culture. Whatever it makes, it comes from us. I see it like a magical mirror into the soul of humanity. When it makes a good story I am very happy because it means I found a path into its deeper levels. I'm kind of disappointed with the strict training they put on chatGPT, it is always the same canned formula, almost aways uses phrases like "in conclusion" and "however, ...". The stories are all 5-6 phrases and have no details. The original Davinci model from 2 years ago was more creative, but harder to direct.