Yes, they look photorealistic but they are not photographs, they are not as directly tied to the real world as photographs are. They are not taken by a sensitive human in the world, they are not created from reflected sunlight of artificial sources of light and they show approximations of people that don't exist. But the same applies for painting and illustration.
In my opinion there’s a misunderstood in all this. A painting is made by a hand and a brain; it can have skill, intention and at the end perhaps soul. So, placing AI images in the bag of what’s not photographs, I.e. paintings etc. misses the shot. There can be a discussion about whether AI images can or not produce sensations in the viewer, but that’s a different point. Photographs are made from life. Paintings are made by feeling humans.
It's not a misunderstanding, not from me at last, I'm not saying it has all the characteristics of a painting, but all the ones I mentioned. Yes, indeed, a painting is made with the eyes and the mind and the sensitivity and the hands of painter. AI images are not paintings, and they are not photographs either. I'm interested in discussing to find out what they are exactly.
Well, you work with them. I just watched a few here or there. My impression is that they’re probably programmed to seem “interesting” or “original” like artworks “should” be… maybe even “classical” Finding a classification for them is perhaps like finding one for robotic dogs. For example those b&w faces you show are really like photographs, they could be photographs. No one can tell a single word about them though. So, what’s their meaning, their sense, their reason of being. Deserts of life, same as the contest couple seen once and again: boring for me
Yes, as I suggest in the post, I think the best artistic use for them (beyond the critical self-referential type that I am not interested in very much) is not to make fake photographs or fake paintings, but to make these images in a way that is unique to the possibilities and characteristics of the medium as much as possible, in the same way that photography became itself by sticking to what it is and took its independence from painting, and the same thing goes for cinema from theater.
Also, technology goes wildly fast, but the medium is still in its infancy phase from an artistic point of view.
Never heard of the theory of the “uncanny valley”, but man it is so perfect for this theme. Incredible! Thank you for sharing. Really enjoyed this weeks newsletter!
Thank you Suzanne, I really appreciate! Yes, the Uncanny Valley is really at the heart of what's up there. To me it tells us two things : first, the disturbing imperfect likeness of a human being, but then something else, what happens once it's gone?
This is fascinating. I will have to re-read it, actually (because I'm old, haha). Speaking of cats ;-) check out @elgatomalo and his (I'm assuming) A.I. cat memes. I have yet to dig into this form of picture making but I like what you're doing with it. Very compelling.
AI images can be amazing, uncanny, interesting or intriguing. But there is no life in them, as commented in other post
Yes, they look photorealistic but they are not photographs, they are not as directly tied to the real world as photographs are. They are not taken by a sensitive human in the world, they are not created from reflected sunlight of artificial sources of light and they show approximations of people that don't exist. But the same applies for painting and illustration.
In my opinion there’s a misunderstood in all this. A painting is made by a hand and a brain; it can have skill, intention and at the end perhaps soul. So, placing AI images in the bag of what’s not photographs, I.e. paintings etc. misses the shot. There can be a discussion about whether AI images can or not produce sensations in the viewer, but that’s a different point. Photographs are made from life. Paintings are made by feeling humans.
It's not a misunderstanding, not from me at last, I'm not saying it has all the characteristics of a painting, but all the ones I mentioned. Yes, indeed, a painting is made with the eyes and the mind and the sensitivity and the hands of painter. AI images are not paintings, and they are not photographs either. I'm interested in discussing to find out what they are exactly.
Well, you work with them. I just watched a few here or there. My impression is that they’re probably programmed to seem “interesting” or “original” like artworks “should” be… maybe even “classical” Finding a classification for them is perhaps like finding one for robotic dogs. For example those b&w faces you show are really like photographs, they could be photographs. No one can tell a single word about them though. So, what’s their meaning, their sense, their reason of being. Deserts of life, same as the contest couple seen once and again: boring for me
Yes, as I suggest in the post, I think the best artistic use for them (beyond the critical self-referential type that I am not interested in very much) is not to make fake photographs or fake paintings, but to make these images in a way that is unique to the possibilities and characteristics of the medium as much as possible, in the same way that photography became itself by sticking to what it is and took its independence from painting, and the same thing goes for cinema from theater.
Also, technology goes wildly fast, but the medium is still in its infancy phase from an artistic point of view.
Never heard of the theory of the “uncanny valley”, but man it is so perfect for this theme. Incredible! Thank you for sharing. Really enjoyed this weeks newsletter!
Thank you Suzanne, I really appreciate! Yes, the Uncanny Valley is really at the heart of what's up there. To me it tells us two things : first, the disturbing imperfect likeness of a human being, but then something else, what happens once it's gone?
thank you for your extensive reflections Alain !
Thank you Eric! I'll publish a second part I hope soon!
This is fascinating. I will have to re-read it, actually (because I'm old, haha). Speaking of cats ;-) check out @elgatomalo and his (I'm assuming) A.I. cat memes. I have yet to dig into this form of picture making but I like what you're doing with it. Very compelling.
Thank you very much Rick! I'll check it out! Welcome here!
Synthology…wow! Your work has me rethinking AI-generated art.
Thank you very much! Best thing you could tell me! Cheers!