Brilliant! Just today, I was listening to a panel of world class artists being asked (now trite) questions on AI taking over their jobs and they concluded something like:
"For mediocrity, turn to AI. If you want masters, call us".
Windows 10 wallpaper was physically built and photographed (2015)
271–280 of 291 posts
Re: Windows 10 wallpaper was physically built and photographed (2015)
#272should somebody tell them about ML models?
Re: Windows 10 wallpaper was physically built and photographed (2015)
#273Earlier quoted context omitted.
Interesting but I am not sure I understand this: >> contact-and-removal operation takes constant time, the worst-case time complexity of the algorithm is O(n). How is the contact-and-removal operation constant time? How can that assumption ever be true? If you use a parallel processor like human vision or human feel (ie. which pressure nerve activates on the hand) it may appear constant, but if you use a computer it…
You can simplify the "human hand" to a rigid metal sheet that comes down from the top and stops on the highest object. Still constant time, but no "parallel processing" needed. The point is that reality itself is highly parallel
I wonder if the removal operation is not actually O(sqrt(n)). Depending on the way we structure thought experiment of course. But as the pile of spaghetti gets bigger, the act of picking the largest one is constrained by:
1. how fast your hand can reach for the next spaghetti piece - on average proportional to the radius of the pile of spaghetti, which is proportional to sqrt(n).
2. to actually notice the biggest piece, you need to again wait for a time proportional to sqrt(n) - light propagation is not instant.
So if we start thinking about this algorithm more like a computer scientist would (how fast it is as n grows to the infinity) it doesn't seem to be O(n) IMO.
Re: Windows 10 wallpaper was physically built and photographed (2015)
#274Re: Windows 10 wallpaper was physically built and photographed (2015)
#275Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nah that's post hoc rationalization. The amount of busy-work that went into it is ridiculous. Just because a colossal amount of effort was poured in this wallpaper doesn't mean that they used the right tool for the job or that the output was better because of it.
You're thinking like an engineer, and speak as if there is a right amount of time to spend on artistic endeavours; if you cross this threshold for you it is a "ridiculous and colossal amount of effort". Budget aside, art isn't constrained or criticized by how much effort the artist put in. All that matters is the result. A wallpaper or any other artistic creation isn't less beautiful or evocative because the artist s…
It's a ridiculous and colossal amount of effort from (I think...) 34 people for something that looks like it was knocked together in a garage.
The proportions and composition are weird, messy, and obviously asymmetric in both axes. Both the horizontals and verticals are slightly off, which makes it feel unsettled.
It seems quite clumsily edited, with a blotchy cut-off at the left that feels claustrophobic and doesn't seem to be there for a good aesthetic reason.
IMO it would have been stronger and more powerful rotated left through 90 degrees so the light was shining down.
Re: Windows 10 wallpaper was physically built and photographed (2015)
#276Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, he's just being realistic. Even without getting into semantics about "what is art", the reality is that this is promotional material for advertising. This wasn't commissioned by a rich patron to put up on exhibition for MoMA. This isn't to take away from the artists skill, effort, creativity etc. but the context of this is inherently a business and economic decision. There's no artistic impetus, no political/soci…
You know, it's art even if it has no ambitions to be exhibited at the MoMA. > It's a computer wallpaper that monopolistic megacorp funded to show off how wealthy it is. Groan. It's not possible to have a serious discussions with someone starting from such a cynical position. After all, what is even the point of creating anything? We're all going to turn to dust and be forgotten forevermore.
The point is it's poorly done by the standard you'd expect from top level no-expense-spared commercial graphic design. And that reflects poorly on the company and the product.
The Win XP field was the opposite. It was organic, calming, and oddly fascinating because you couldn't tell if it was a plain photo or an edit or... what. And it had an unexpected reference to the Windows branding in the composition.
Win 10 was more like meaningless window-shaped visual noise.
Re: Windows 10 wallpaper was physically built and photographed (2015)
#277It was tacky and horrible from day 1.
Re: Windows 10 wallpaper was physically built and photographed (2015)
#278Seeing that they put that much attention to detail into a wallpaper, it seems petty to get hung up on the fact that their software is a shit show. So it's all forgiven.
Re: Windows 10 wallpaper was physically built and photographed (2015)
#279I've been spending a lot of time on photography (though mostly w/ film cameras) during recent years, and only recently realized this is actually photographed. (It took long because I'm a long-time Linux user, so I barely seen the image.) Many people say this would've been easier with VFX, but I disagree. The image has highly convincing details that would take a long time even for highly talented VFX artists to nail.…
Here's someone recreating the same wallpaper on Blender in 13 minutes: https://youtu.be/EIfrP365iTQ
That's a cool animated wallpaper.
Re: Windows 10 wallpaper was physically built and photographed (2015)
#280When I was young we had a PC running Windows 3.1.1 (not the first computer I remember using, but the first one whose OS I remember the name of), and I recall it having this neat feature where you could draw an image in a tiny box and it would tile it across the screen as background image.
It probably wouldn't work so well for a "4k" monitor, but I thought it neat at the time.