31–40 of 78 posts
Being able to imitate Monet doesn't make you Monet. AI can't create anything original.
This is a real Monet.
AI art enjoyers and missing the point of art: name a better duo. No one has ever claimed AI cannot imitate a Monet, but however good the imitation, it still isn't art any more than a Xerox of a painting is art. This is the exact reason why most people feel bad after discovering that what they felt was work of human ingenuity, is just a fake, a simulacrum of it. The creation of art, arguably the most human of instinct…
It proves that people don't actually know what they like about "art" or even why they think some art is good, and some is bad.
These people criticized and trashed a widely regarded, famous painting because they were told that it was a cheap imitation.
If the AI generated a real imitation and the Met hung it on their walls I guarantee these same people would celebrate it just the same because they are told that it is real.
AI art enjoyers and missing the point of art: name a better duo. No one has ever claimed AI cannot imitate a Monet, but however good the imitation, it still isn't art any more than a Xerox of a painting is art. This is the exact reason why most people feel bad after discovering that what they felt was work of human ingenuity, is just a fake, a simulacrum of it. The creation of art, arguably the most human of instinct…
As a digital artist, of course I rolled my eyes at the time, but these days I just keep thinking about that storyline more and more.
We've basically transitioned to a world where digital art is almost the default, but I think the world is going to value physical art much more highly in the coming years.
AI art enjoyers and missing the point of art: name a better duo. No one has ever claimed AI cannot imitate a Monet, but however good the imitation, it still isn't art any more than a Xerox of a painting is art. This is the exact reason why most people feel bad after discovering that what they felt was work of human ingenuity, is just a fake, a simulacrum of it. The creation of art, arguably the most human of instinct…
> All this proves is that most people cannot tell if that picture is a Monet or not. It proves that people don't actually know what they like about "art" or even why they think some art is good, and some is bad. These people criticized and trashed a widely regarded, famous painting because they were told that it was a cheap imitation. If the AI generated a real imitation and the Met hung it on their walls I guarantee…
That's because those are famously difficult questions to answer.
Two interesting replies: It’s not a physical painting made by a well known artist. It’s trying to hard to be a late Monet. How much of our opinions are driven by context, rather than the actual subject? If Monet’s work is not so great without the context, is it still great? Or is context a critical piece of the art itself? Do we need to view a Monet piece within the scope of other Monet pieces, other artists, time pe…
[1] https://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28...
Very good. We need more of these experiments in all areas. Hopefully it helps people to at least be more conscious of their bias.
I do think this reveals peoples' biases, but not in the way you probably do. I think Monet just wasn't as good as his renown purports. EDIT: I doubt this experiment would go similarly for a Caravaggio or a Michelangelo.
Two interesting replies: It’s not a physical painting made by a well known artist. It’s trying to hard to be a late Monet. How much of our opinions are driven by context, rather than the actual subject? If Monet’s work is not so great without the context, is it still great? Or is context a critical piece of the art itself? Do we need to view a Monet piece within the scope of other Monet pieces, other artists, time pe…
Being able to imitate Monet doesn't make you Monet. AI can't create anything original.
> AI can't create anything original.
Can we? I mean, don't we base our output on experience and reprocess references + memories of things past to create what we deem as "new"?
Being able to imitate Monet doesn't make you Monet. AI can't create anything original.
Define «original». Under many definitions, where novel composition of existing knowledge or techniques is counted, it certainly can.
Original is something that is out of the data distribution. AI can't do anything original, because it's job is to imitate the data distribution.
Originality in itself is not hard, because pure noise is original. It should be original and beautiful.