81–90 of 97 posts
This is cool, but the frame-to-frame variance is distracting. I really want to see this reimplemented with temporal constraints a-la this paper: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Khuj4ASldmU
I remember watching an interview with the creators of South Park in which they described the transition from animating using cardboard cutouts to a system with CorelDraw and other pieces of software which helped speed up the process. The bulk of the efficiency improvement came from carefully defining all the frequently used objects (characters, houses) once with movable components, and reusing those objects in the pe…
Another interesting problem would be the generation of filler pictures (I don't know the correct term). Normally there is a person who draws keyframes at a much lower framerate. Other animators then fill in the frames between to increase the framerate.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"It looks cool" is sufficient excuse for experimentation.
Yes, but it is no excuse to call it "in the style of Picasso" when it clearly isn't.
I have two opinions: 1) I don't think cubism transfers well into a motion picture format, 2) I think these experiments, as they are currently, attempt to merge two styles and end up with neither, and nothing novel in its place; there is little Kubrick or Picasso in the final piece. I think it's superficial and doesn't do either source justice.
1. I think cubism can benefit from an explicit time dimension, though exactly how it should be done, I don't know. 2. I agree, as they are in this video, but I think cubism could be used to capture the experience of entering the monolith even better than Kubrick captured it.
I think the folly of the Cubists was to embrace the still life after the methods had been fleshed out. Most Cubist works are created from a handful of discrete images, this destroys the aspect of motion in my opinion. I've been working to capture proper motion using GoPro POV footage from various sources, rather then pausing the video I let the colours wing by and try and place them on the canvas. What I am choosing to perceive at the moment ends up represented (I avoid faces, thus I have floating forms without heads!), loose marks capture a door frame which has half of a tree-roadway. It's abstracted, but still based on a concrete sequence. The most effective are when a part of the frame is static throughout (a mounting bracket, bike, wiper blade, etc) because that imagery comes through only modified by changing light which provides a contrast against the jumble of forms and colours elsewhere.
The first step towards a Cubist film will involve multiple cameras shooting the same scene from multiple angles and recording the absolute time of the shot. [b]An algorithm that takes n images as an input and applies a deterministic transform to them (weighting certain images)[/b] trying to reconcile the overlaps, looking for prominent forms, picking/merging a colour to use, etc eventually mapping down to a single image. Assuming this could be developed the director would compose the scene from these multiple sources, perhaps giving a effect similar to [1]. The face of a lover is modified woven with images of a child and the image of meal prep on a sunny day. The conversation uses the word cheating in an innocent way and the focus snaps sharply back to the lover where scenes of cheating with the other/secretive behaviours/worry and paranoia are gently woven overtop eventually leaving the lovers voice as the only signifier of this conversation taking place.
But proper cubist imagery cannot come from a simple mapping of styles.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"It looks cool" is sufficient excuse for experimentation.
Yes, but it is no excuse to call it "in the style of Picasso" when it clearly isn't.
"It means nothing to me. I have no opinion about it, and I don't care." On the first moon landing, quoted in The New York Times, (1969-07-21). https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Pablo_Picasso Curious about his feelings regarding this work. (I find it beautiful.)
Jesus what a curmudgeon. I love how solidly he bought into the whole pretentious modern 'artiste' personality that is still being emulated today. I guess having a world weary 'fuck you' attitude is probably the social signaling you need to do to get your stuff into high-end galleries.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Personally I'll just say the video's pretty fucking cool. Referring to stepvhen's comment. I find it comical in all seriousness. Even the must leisurely, casual or mundane topic, intended to be a refreshing change in colour (pun not intended considering the article but I'll take it) and\or conversation on Hacker News is subject to ridicule, assessment and biopsy. It's why I like it here. Some of us are completely inc…
Really I was just trying to be polite in what I expected to be dissent. The video looks cool, but I don't believe the network used has any understanding (however you define it) of Picasso's style, as another commenter has stated. It's a little misleading, especially since there's a lot more going on in Picasso than geometric shapes and crazy colors. Then again I might take things too seriously. There was only one oth…
> Then again I might take things too seriously.
if anything, too many people in this thread don't seem to be taking cubism and Picasso's style seriously either (signature faces? what ..?)
of course a deeplearning net can't actually do cubism.
if someone wrote a program to generate blocks of primary colours in pleasing ratios, really cleverly, it may look like Mondriaan to someone that has seen a couple of Mondriaan paintings. but everybody who knows what Mondriaan was trying to do, will instantly know that there's really no way today's computers could really perform the same process.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Really I was just trying to be polite in what I expected to be dissent. The video looks cool, but I don't believe the network used has any understanding (however you define it) of Picasso's style, as another commenter has stated. It's a little misleading, especially since there's a lot more going on in Picasso than geometric shapes and crazy colors. Then again I might take things too seriously. There was only one oth…
> It's a little misleading, especially since there's a lot more going on in Picasso than geometric shapes and crazy colors. > Then again I might take things too seriously. if anything, too many people in this thread don't seem to be taking cubism and Picasso's style seriously either (signature faces? what ..?) of course a deeplearning net can't actually do cubism. if someone wrote a program to generate blocks of prim…
It's more like an insta-Picasso plug-in for one particular form of abstraction.
It's interesting and unusual, and yes, it would be better with constraints.
I'm not sure I'd want to look at it on a big screen though.
>of course a deeplearning net can't actually do cubism.
One of the interesting things to fall out of this research is the realisation that a lot of art - even figurative art - is based on abstraction of visual invariants.
There's no reason that creative abstraction can't be automated to create new styles.
The difference when humans do it is the level of psychological insight and feel for what's visually important and interesting in a scene.
That can probably be automated too, but it's a very much harder problem.
The challenge for most developers in this space is that they have a much more superficial understanding of art (and music, and writing) than they believe they do, so a lot of content and detail that's important to experienced viewers gets ignored. The result is superficial lookalike output - pastiche.
Technically, the superficial output is an achievement in itself, but it's still a way short of being artistically innovative in its own right.