Why I think AI-generated art is not art

[JunkMonkey]

When there wasn't much other media. Paintings were TV.

Church frescos and the like. Visions of Hell Damnation and Redemption altarpieces...

Architecture is definitely an art - The French count it as the first:

• 1er art : l’architecture
• 2e art : la sculpture
• 3e art : les arts visuels
• 4e art : la musique
• 5e art : la littérature
• 6e art : les arts de la scène
• 7e art : le cinéma
• 8e art : les arts médiatiques
• 9e art : la bande dessinée
• 10e art : le jeu vidéo

And literature comics and cinema are arts ... and you can't argue that they don't have a cultural impact...

It was a fatuous remark. Please consider it withdrawn. I'd fallen into the trap (of my own making) of thinking of 'Art' as salon/gallery/auction painting.

 

[Mon0Zer0]

When did art ever have cultural impact? Outwith the narrow confines of 'the art world' and related hangers-on?

Almost every where, all the time. The ideas flowing round the arts (including music and literature) trickle down into every facet of human cultural activity from fashion to politics to architecture to science to entertainment to language.

There's almost nowhere today that isn't touched by post-modernist conceptions of the world. Art was there before the literature departments of the late fifties and sixties were deconstructing literature and giving birth to the kinds of terms and ideas about gender and oppression and all sorts that came from them. Artists were there two decades before. Post-modernism was originally an art movement.

 

[Mon0Zer0]

The value of art is in constant flux. As has been mentioned, often these days the purchase of art is an investment on the basis that it will increase in value. It's likely that a Van Gogh bought today will be worth more in 20 years, but in relation to contemporary art - in particular AI art - I'm not sure that this will be the case. The bubble may burst, as it seems to have done with NFT. A computer generated piece of art sells for over $400k. Does that mean that the next piece of art the AI creates will sell for a similar amount? This is why I think that it is difficult to assess its value.

Why do I place no aesthetic value on AI art? When I look at a picture, or read a book, or listen to a piece of music I know that a part of the artist, has been put into it. It tells me something of them as a person, of the time they lived in and often how they were feeling at the time it was created. AI art is created by something that has no concept of beauty or has any form of imagination or inspiration; it is soulless.

Could you tell if you didn't know before hand? I'd wager at the pace technology is progressing most if not all would have to be primed to know which was AI and which was human to tell the difference. There comes a point when you see so much AI art that one accuses actual human artists of simply using AI.

 

[Mon0Zer0]

This just shows that your not an actual artist, unless you pick up a pencils yourself, and I do know how these programs work. I’ve tried these thing before and I gotta say; I don’t feel like I made these things and it feels like it completely defeats the purpose of why we make art. Have you ever drawn anything by yourself?

I've exhibited at the Tate Modern, so yeah, I've done a bit of drawing in my time (to be fair it was mixed-media - music / art).

 

[Swank]

The reason I specifically picked those three wasn't because of size, but because they aren't tied to any earlier cultural identities (maybe the Kelpies are because of Clydesdale Horses,) I could have posted the Bull Ring sculpture in Birmingham, but the Bull Ring was already a market called that, long before the sculpture.

I think it is more important that they are on public display, not locked away, and seen by many people, rather than that they are large. The Angel of the North is passed by every motorist on the A1. The SuperLambanana has miniture copies all over Liverpool.

However, size is probably important. Do we consider architecture to be Art? I'm thinking of the Liver Building, Sydney Harbour Bridge, Blackpool Tower, San Francisco Bay Bridge, The Eiffel Tower...

There is a town in North Island, New Zealand called Napier, completely rebuilt after an earthquake so that most of the buildings are in an Art Deco style. People flock from all over the world to see them.

There's the meat of it: What is "cultural impact"?

I would say it is a change in the thinking and behavior of significant portions of a society due to the existence and/or message of a particular work. Something beyond simple enjoyment or civic pride. Painting used to have strong ethical or moral sway. Sculpture framed man's significance in the universe and relationship to the divine.

I don't know if an enormous glider man changes the way anyone sees themselves - as much as I like that particular work.


Circling back: If the significance of art can be measured by its cultural impact, I think a case could be made that dehumanizing imitation of art by AI means that it is important stuff. You can't look at a picture that seems to capture reality at first, then turns a hand into a bizarrely vestigial detail without reflecting on what changes await us.

 

[Mon0Zer0]

I don't know if an enormous glider man changes the way anyone sees themselves - as much as I like that particular work.

It might or it might not change how someone sees themselves, but it might change how they view of something else or their relation to it - the perception of Gateshead, often in the shadow of Newcastle.... a connection to their industrial past... a sense of grandeur or an apprehension of beauty... even a sense of disgust or confusion. Whatever the piece arouses in an onlooker is valid so long as it rouses something.

Circling back: If the significance of art can be measured by its cultural impact, I think a case could be made that dehumanizing imitation of art by AI means that it is important stuff. You can't look at a picture that seems to capture reality at first, then turns a hand into a bizarrely vestigial detail without reflecting on what changes await us.

Putting aside that the hand problem has been pretty much solved now, this is an important point and I agree the ramifications of Diffusion tech and its potential are sending shockwaves through society that are likely to change almost everything.

 

[Dave]

It might or it might not change how someone sees themselves, but it might change how they view of something else or their relation to it - the perception of Gateshead, often in the shadow of Newcastle.... a connection to their industrial past... a sense of grandeur or an apprehension of beauty... even a sense of disgust or confusion. Whatever the piece arouses in an onlooker is valid so long as it rouses something.

Not everyone likes it. It's popularity may be as low as 50%. I've heard it called "a crashed Messerschmitt tail fin" before. But you are right, whatever your view about it, you do have a view. It rouses something. What you cannot deny is the "Cultural Identity" that it brings. The image appears everywhere you go in the North East. It's inescapable.

 

[Swank]

Not everyone likes it. It's popularity may be as low as 50%. I've heard it called "a crashed Messerschmitt tail fin" before. But you are right, whatever your view about it, you do have a view. It rouses something. What you cannot deny is the "Cultural Identity" that it brings. The image appears everywhere you go in the North East. It's inescapable.

Is "rousing" "impact"?

 

[Dave]

It doesn't get people to think about something in a new way. it doesn't shine a spotlight on anything. There is no social message, either hidden or explicit, within it. However, it's something that cannot be ignored, and it gets people of all backgrounds talking. It has a regional significance. It neither has that kind of Banksy "impact", nor does it have the shocking impact that many modern works do, but it certainly isn't something that only the rich and famous discuss, enjoy, and hoard, or can afford to see.

But the question must be, that given the same brief for the same location, is it something that an AI would have come up with?

 

[Christine Wheelwright]

Relevant to this thread:

Photographer admits prize-winning image was AI-generated

German artist Boris Eldagsen says entry to Sony world photography awards was designed to provoke debate

www.theguardian.com

 

[Mon0Zer0]

Is "rousing" "impact"?

On an individual level, yes. If culturally influential people are roused enough to be influenced and then go on to use that influence in their work or it affects the cultural conversation then it has cultural impact.

 

[Mon0Zer0]

It doesn't get people to think about something in a new way. it doesn't shine a spotlight on anything. There is no social message, either hidden or explicit, within it.

From The history of the Angel of the North - Gateshead Council

"People are always asking, why an angel? The only response I can give is that no-one has ever seen one and we need to keep imagining them. The angel has three functions - firstly a historic one to remind us that below this site coal miners worked in the dark for two hundred years, secondly to grasp hold of the future, expressing our transition from the industrial to the information age, and lastly to be a focus for our hopes and fears - a sculpture is an evolving thing."

I've always been non-plussed by the Angel - but viewed from that perspective makes me look on it differently.

However, it's something that cannot be ignored, and it gets people of all backgrounds talking. It has a regional significance. It neither has that kind of Banksy "impact", nor does it have the shocking impact that many modern works do, but it certainly isn't something that only the rich and famous discuss, enjoy, and hoard, or can afford to see.

That isn't quite what Perry means when they say "Tat for rich people". The function of art ownership is social as well as personal - its not just about "owning" but about "being seen to own". It's the dedicated wing in an art gallery. Their name as patron.

But the question must be, that given the same brief for the same location, is it something that an AI would have come up with?

One of the tricky things that people struggle with when we talk about AI is anthropomorphising it. AI doesn't come up with things, it responds to input. It's always a human being doing the "coming up with" and that's how it will be until AI's start to come up with their own goals.

 

[Mon0Zer0]

Also relevant to this thread:

Artists Talk About A.I. Art

Read “Octane Render,” a non-fiction comic by David Blumenstein.

www.fwb.help

 

[Dave]

@Mon0Zer0 I agree with what you said. However....

The angel has three functions - firstly a historic one to remind us that below this site coal miners worked in the dark for two hundred years, secondly to grasp hold of the future, expressing our transition from the industrial to the information age, and lastly to be a focus for our hopes and fears.

An artist will always say things such as this about their work. It may be what they truly believe, it may even be actually true, but it doesn't stop a great number of people from thinking that it just looks like a crashed Messerschmitt tail fin, and unless most people also "get it" too then the artist cannot really say they have succeeded. Having to explain your work tends to point to it not being widely understood.

I'm not saying that I don't like it myself. It has certainly grown on me over time, but that wasn't the point that I was trying to make in any case and I'm not sure that when I was that I was...

anthropomorphising it

Maybe I'm wrong, or maybe you misunderstood what I meant, but when I said that...

given the same brief for the same location, is it something that an AI would have come up with?

What I meant is that I think that it was great that Antony Gormley came up with something quite off-the-page like the Angel. I would have expected that (and been surprised if not) many human artists and any current so-called AI would have produced something that involved miners, or mining lamps, waggons on rail roads, pit head winding gear, but never a crashed Messerschmitt tail fin.

If I can give examples, the entrance to Beamish Open Air Museum is only a few miles away from the Angel and there you will find this:

And elswhere in Nothumberland and Durham you will find these:

While perfectly suited to their briefs, in comparison, they do seem derivative (and may I be so impolite to say boring after a seeing many of them) but I can't see how one the so-called AIs could make a leap to anything else.

 

[Swank]

On an individual level, yes. If culturally influential people are roused enough to be influenced and then go on to use that influence in their work or it affects the cultural conversation then it has cultural impact.

I don't know what that means. It is one thing for a work to raise awareness of something to the point that people act differently. That is quite different from simply noting that a thing exists. If it is nothing more than the latter, then everything has "social impact".

"Hey, did you see Glider Man?"
"Hey, did you see Tim's new shingles?"

"Hey, did you see Guernica? It makes me feel uneasy about supporting future wars."

 

[Mon0Zer0]

I don't know what that means. It is one thing for a work to raise awareness of something to the point that people act differently. That is quite different from simply noting that a thing exists. If it is nothing more than the latter, then everything has "social impact".

"Hey, did you see Glider Man?"
"Hey, did you see Tim's new shingles?"

"Hey, did you see Guernica? It makes me feel uneasy about supporting future wars."

Culture isn't confined to just raising awareness of causes. It's the ideas, customs, and social behaviour of a particular people or society. Cultural impact is the influence and extent an individual or group of individuals has over those ideas, customs and practices.

If I wear a blue tie and someone likes it and gets a similar one, the effect could not be said to be cultural because it’s limited to an individual. However when The Sex Pistols played the Free Trade Hall in Manchester in the late 70’s it gave rise to the entire Manchester Music scene for the next thirty years because they inspired almost everyone in attendance to pick up a guitar and start a band.

In other words there was an identifiable moment when certain people at a certain time create cascading chains of influence that ripple out through Culture to affect a significant number of people. It's the moment when a certain number of strands of phenomena come together into a cohesive entity.

In the world of academia you had the famous talk by Jacques Derrida at Berkley where he expounded his ideas on Post Structuralism and Deconstruction, and that methodology was widely adopted by literature departments almost immediately – his philosophical spark caused a wildfire that spread beyond the study of literature into all facets of life – even beyond Academia into politics, Corporate hiring practices and so on.

These ideas generated by, or explored within art articulate something about the nature of current reality that people might have a vague, unspoken sense of, or might be limited to the Arcane ivory tower of cutting edge philosophy departments but aren’t seen or understood until artists have generated the popular language to talk about it.

This is the difference between the world of craft and the Art world. The Art world is seen as the place these movements originate. Crafts are seen as bereft of novel and important ideas – they’re merely nice looking things for consumption by those outside High Society. Ironically, its this facet – of being at the frontier of cultural ideas - that gives Arts the kind of status that make it desirable to the wealthy.

The supposed Cultural importance of Art at the bleeding edge gives cachet and desirability to the product. Art gatekeepers decide who is regarded as an Artist and what is regarded as Art and the wealthy have the funds to keep this whole system ticking over.

 

[Bick]

If it's AI, it ain't art.
I blame Charles Babbage, the world's been going to hell in a handcart since 1823.

 

[Swank]

Culture isn't confined to just raising awareness of causes. It's the ideas, customs, and social behaviour of a particular people or society. Cultural impact is the influence and extent an individual or group of individuals has over those ideas, customs and practices.

If I wear a blue tie and someone likes it and gets a similar one, the effect could not be said to be cultural because it’s limited to an individual. However when The Sex Pistols played the Free Trade Hall in Manchester in the late 70’s it gave rise to the entire Manchester Music scene for the next thirty years because they inspired almost everyone in attendance to pick up a guitar and start a band.

In other words there was an identifiable moment when certain people at a certain time create cascading chains of influence that ripple out through Culture to affect a significant number of people. It's the moment when a certain number of strands of phenomena come together into a cohesive entity.

In the world of academia you had the famous talk by Jacques Derrida at Berkley where he expounded his ideas on Post Structuralism and Deconstruction, and that methodology was widely adopted by literature departments almost immediately – his philosophical spark caused a wildfire that spread beyond the study of literature into all facets of life – even beyond Academia into politics, Corporate hiring practices and so on.

These ideas generated by, or explored within art articulate something about the nature of current reality that people might have a vague, unspoken sense of, or might be limited to the Arcane ivory tower of cutting edge philosophy departments but aren’t seen or understood until artists have generated the popular language to talk about it.

This is the difference between the world of craft and the Art world. The Art world is seen as the place these movements originate. Crafts are seen as bereft of novel and important ideas – they’re merely nice looking things for consumption by those outside High Society. Ironically, its this facet – of being at the frontier of cultural ideas - that gives Arts the kind of status that make it desirable to the wealthy.

The supposed Cultural importance of Art at the bleeding edge gives cachet and desirability to the product. Art gatekeepers decide who is regarded as an Artist and what is regarded as Art and the wealthy have the funds to keep this whole system ticking over.

Demonstrating how the Sex Pistols impacts culture just demonstrates how Glider Man does not.

 

[Mon0Zer0]

Demonstrating how the Sex Pistols impacts culture just demonstrates how Glider Man does not.

According to Gasteshead council, "It was the catalyst for the cultural regeneration of Gateshead Quays that led to the Gateshead Millennium Bridge, BALTIC and Sage."

The history of the Angel of the North - Gateshead Council

The background of The Angel of the North and the artist Antony Gormley

www.gateshead.gov.uk

Having said that I don't think every single piece of art has to have huge Cultural Impact. It is something of a pre-requisite to being notable, though. The Art World has cultural impact as it sets the standards and stands on the frontier of cultural discourse.

Bringing it back, AI imagery is going to have an enormous cultural impact whether or not we think of it as Art or not. It's not going back in the box.

 

[tinkerdan]

So I've examined the output of this AI site and I'd have to say from some of the images I get.

AI Art by jl dobias (@jld) | Deep Dream Generator

Check out the latest, best and most liked AI art by jl dobias on Deep Dream Generator (DDG)

deepdreamgenerator.com

It doesn't much respect what input i give it as far as the actual text description.
What it seems to do is cherry pick words and then try to generate a picture interpreting those words.
it hardly ever respects the artists I ask it to imitate and usually the output is similar without inputing any artist.

So it seems to be temperamental and wants to do what it wants to do though trying to roughly to stay within it's own perception of what you say you want. And if you don't give it enough freedom in your input then it usually gives you something the grandkids might give you to put on the fridge.

Really that sounds like a lot of artists I know.

A seed picture gives it an extra push toward some shape and color preferences so if you can throw in a picture with enough elements it it it can get pretty creative.