05-02-2022, 02:03 AM
Wow, i'm pretty impressed. They all look like something a human would have come up with at first glance. I definitely think this technology is going to start to be used at least for marketing, children's books maybe. If you need an image like these, why would you pay an artist to do it if you can just generate them? It seems useful for visual research as well, it puts different aesthetics together in interesting ways.
However, the AI just doesn't have a human mind. The art that is genuinely treasured, and not just an acceptable product, will always have a human touch, and human pathos. If someone came to me with some of these images and I thought a human had done them, i might critique them by calling the ideas vapid and well, robotic! There's a few that I would never have guessed were AI generated, and actually seem to be thought provoking like these:
However that is the human showing through with clever prompts.
I think the fact that enough art like this has been made and posted that an AI can reproduce it might show that we will have to start thinking bigger. Maybe it will be a good thing if it makes our standards for art grow with the technology in the same way that the invention of the photograph didn't kill art, but sent it in a direction that looked for beauty away from mechanical accuracy. My natural reaction is to feel intimidated by this tech, it makes me understand the Luddites that tried to destroy new machinery. But new technology has always made us value great work done by hand even more. Now that chairs, tables, clothing, etc. are cheaply mass fabricated, how much more do we value a hand-carved piece, or a piece of really fine, tailored clothing? I think this makes me think a lot about what in art is really valuable and what may as well be generated by machine.
They are working on AI generated music as well, now which is pretty cool. It can look at thousands of scores and then kind of piece together something new that makes sense. But again it's like, it will probably get to the point where is sounds okay aesthetically, but it's no one's favorite song. People might even start to hate art and music that sounds computer generated.
However, the AI just doesn't have a human mind. The art that is genuinely treasured, and not just an acceptable product, will always have a human touch, and human pathos. If someone came to me with some of these images and I thought a human had done them, i might critique them by calling the ideas vapid and well, robotic! There's a few that I would never have guessed were AI generated, and actually seem to be thought provoking like these:
However that is the human showing through with clever prompts.
I think the fact that enough art like this has been made and posted that an AI can reproduce it might show that we will have to start thinking bigger. Maybe it will be a good thing if it makes our standards for art grow with the technology in the same way that the invention of the photograph didn't kill art, but sent it in a direction that looked for beauty away from mechanical accuracy. My natural reaction is to feel intimidated by this tech, it makes me understand the Luddites that tried to destroy new machinery. But new technology has always made us value great work done by hand even more. Now that chairs, tables, clothing, etc. are cheaply mass fabricated, how much more do we value a hand-carved piece, or a piece of really fine, tailored clothing? I think this makes me think a lot about what in art is really valuable and what may as well be generated by machine.
They are working on AI generated music as well, now which is pretty cool. It can look at thousands of scores and then kind of piece together something new that makes sense. But again it's like, it will probably get to the point where is sounds okay aesthetically, but it's no one's favorite song. People might even start to hate art and music that sounds computer generated.