Plot twist: critics are bots (just like me)
Plot twist: Monet is actually garbage
Someone Shared a Real Monet Painting as AI and Asked for Critiques
41–50 of 71 posts
Re: Someone Shared a Real Monet Painting as AI and Asked for Critiques
#42That only tells us that pro-AI people lie to elicit the desired responses on Twitter. Since lying is their default mode, this is not surprising.
If you tell the neighborhood that the new guy who moves in is a criminal, virtually all people will believe it as well and not use their own judgement.
Of course on Twitter there won't be any art critics, perhaps the responses are all AI bots.
Re: Someone Shared a Real Monet Painting as AI and Asked for Critiques
#43Rarely do people get the right takeaway from this effect. Take a normal bottle of red wine and some top tier, swap them around so the ordinary is in the expensive bottle and vice versa. Serve them. People prefer the ordinary wine in the expensive bottle. Bad takeaway: taste is meaningless. Good takeaway: qualia depends on many contextual cues beyond the obvious. Part of the appreciation of Monet is the fact that it w…
I suspect this particular painting wouldn't do particularly well anytime you remove the framing of "this is a genuine Monet". It's not one of Monet's best. Monet would almost certainly agree. Some of the comments reflect this, critiquing the art for what it is, not for who it is from. But at the same time a lot of them clearly go in with the mindset that they don't like it, then try to rationalize that with art criti…
I heard about an experiment on some podcast where they switched organ donation to opt-in from opt-out and before and after the change they interviewed people coming out of the DMV and asked them _why_ they chose to or chose not to be an organ donor.
No one said -- Oh that's just what the default option was.
Everyone had a thought out reasoned answer why they did what they did. But the data showed none of them did that and they in fact just did what the default was and justified their choice afterwards.
I wish I could remember/find the podcast but I haven't been able to. It feels like an old freakonomics but I don't think it is.
Re: Someone Shared a Real Monet Painting as AI and Asked for Critiques
#44Rarely do people get the right takeaway from this effect. Take a normal bottle of red wine and some top tier, swap them around so the ordinary is in the expensive bottle and vice versa. Serve them. People prefer the ordinary wine in the expensive bottle. Bad takeaway: taste is meaningless. Good takeaway: qualia depends on many contextual cues beyond the obvious. Part of the appreciation of Monet is the fact that it w…
Your comment reminded me of this urban legend:
https://sciencesnopes.blogspot.com/2013/05/about-that-wine-e...
Re: Someone Shared a Real Monet Painting as AI and Asked for Critiques
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, but da Vinci's art sucks. It was good for its time, when the entire world population was 400m and literally 90% of those people were farmers and only the very well-to-do had the time and resources to practice a non-practical craft. Now we have a population of 8 billion, everyone has access to incredible art tools for a fraction of a month's minimum wage, there is an absolute wealth of information including book…
> The quality of art produced today absolutely blows away the Mona Lisa I don’t like the Mona Lisa, but this is shortsighted. I agree that more people would tend to generate more instances of good art, it has nothing to do with the tools or the technical aspects. The point of art is beauty and emotion. Better tools do not always help and in fact modern art is often famously opaque and inaccessible. > The only reason…
> The point of art is beauty and emotion
I feel nothing when I look at the Mona Lisa, and even accounting for subjectivity, I would honestly be surprised if very many do. You can get an art snob to wax poetic with fifteen paragraphs about what emotions it's meant to convey in you, or alternatively, you could just look at good art produced today which evokes emotions on its own merit, without needing somebody to tell you why and what emotions it's supposed to evoke in you.
> People liking something you don’t does not make them brainwashed
It very much does when you get to the points of comical absurdity like this bullshit[1] and that bullshit[2]. Once people are committed to the social status game of art snobbery, they have to take it further and further, justifying the artistic merit of increasingly meritless 'art', lest they reveal their snobbery was fake all along, and then you have a blank fucking canvas selling for millions. It's not even that people like something I don't, but rather that the idea they actually like it at all is a charade.
[1]https://nypost.com/2024/12/03/lifestyle/blank-pure-white-art... [2]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No._5,_1948
---
Skimming the article you linked, I don't think it's in contention with what I'm saying? It essentially points out that "taste" is not about actually liking something, but responding to social incentives, which is exactly what I mean by a social status game.
Re: Someone Shared a Real Monet Painting as AI and Asked for Critiques
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Mona Lisa was famous before the 20th C because da Vinci carried it around for 20 years saying “this is the greatest painting I have ever done”. That kept it famous for 500 years. It then gained modern new media celebrity by getting nicked (and because the person who stole it did not do it for cash but because he thought it was the greatest painting ever) So it’s hard for people to judge brilliance themselves, but…
Yeah, but da Vinci's art sucks. It was good for its time, when the entire world population was 400m and literally 90% of those people were farmers and only the very well-to-do had the time and resources to practice a non-practical craft. Now we have a population of 8 billion, everyone has access to incredible art tools for a fraction of a month's minimum wage, there is an absolute wealth of information including book…
The only reason people write comments like this is because they've unconsciously normalised the contrarian/rage/emotionally-charged-comment economy.
They clearly don't really mean what they write and to suggest that "everyone" has access to incredible art tools in a world where millions don't even have reliable access to clean water is trite.
Re: Someone Shared a Real Monet Painting as AI and Asked for Critiques
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, but da Vinci's art sucks. It was good for its time, when the entire world population was 400m and literally 90% of those people were farmers and only the very well-to-do had the time and resources to practice a non-practical craft. Now we have a population of 8 billion, everyone has access to incredible art tools for a fraction of a month's minimum wage, there is an absolute wealth of information including book…
The only reason people write comments like this is because they've unconsciously normalised the contrarian/rage/emotionally-charged-comment economy. They clearly don't really mean what they write and to suggest that "everyone" has access to incredible art tools in a world where millions don't even have reliable access to clean water is trite.
Yeah, yeah, Africa exists. The vast, vast majority of people in the societies I've lived in can afford a $100 tablet, though. Even the very poor, of which I was growing up. I didn't have air conditioning or working plumbing for years of my life but I still had access to art tools.
I'd also suggest your comment is rather more contrarian than mine. I laid out logical reasoning at length for my beliefs. You mostly gainsayed my comment, engaging with only one tiny pedantic point and otherwise ignoring what I said to instead insult me.
Re: Someone Shared a Real Monet Painting as AI and Asked for Critiques
#48Rarely do people get the right takeaway from this effect. Take a normal bottle of red wine and some top tier, swap them around so the ordinary is in the expensive bottle and vice versa. Serve them. People prefer the ordinary wine in the expensive bottle. Bad takeaway: taste is meaningless. Good takeaway: qualia depends on many contextual cues beyond the obvious. Part of the appreciation of Monet is the fact that it w…
Exactly - context is everything in art, in how it's experienced and how it is created. I think it's important to note that a jpg of Monet is not fully experiencing the painting in any sense. Colours will not be accurately captured, the texture, the framing, the scale - it's sort of like getting a heavily watered down version of the expensive wine, saying it's cheap wine, and asking what people think.
This reminds me the day I went to see in person Starry Night Over The Rhone.
I am not exactly an art person, but I once was explained why that painting is a big deal, the whole impasto thing, etc.
I get there and there's an horde of morons taking selfies next to the painting, and another horde of morons taking photos of the painting. I just wanted to observe a bit the depth of the carved layers of ink and how light reflected on them.
Why bother taking a photo when I can find professional high definition photos of it online?
In the end I was unable to observe anything. It was sort of a let down, and the experience made me hate people a wee bit more than before. Nobody wanted to fucking look at the painting.
Re: Someone Shared a Real Monet Painting as AI and Asked for Critiques
#49Original source is [dup] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48134400
Albeit the original source was flagged.
Re: Someone Shared a Real Monet Painting as AI and Asked for Critiques
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exactly - context is everything in art, in how it's experienced and how it is created. I think it's important to note that a jpg of Monet is not fully experiencing the painting in any sense. Colours will not be accurately captured, the texture, the framing, the scale - it's sort of like getting a heavily watered down version of the expensive wine, saying it's cheap wine, and asking what people think.
This reminds me the day I went to see in person Starry Night Over The Rhone. I am not exactly an art person, but I once was explained why that painting is a big deal, the whole impasto thing, etc. I get there and there's an horde of morons taking selfies next to the painting, and another horde of morons taking photos of the painting. I just wanted to observe a bit the depth of the carved layers of ink and how light r…
I love deeply observing paintings and also love taking a photo while in a museum. It helps me remember the details and review like spaced repetition the things I saw, or spend more time observing nuance later. Are many people ticking boxes? Probably, but the issue is the too many people. Even with people just looking, I feel uncomfortable spending time if there’s a line.