AI-Generated Artwork Wins First Place At a State Fair Fine Arts Competition - Slashdot

2022-09-02 19:59:56 By : Mr. Gary Zhang

Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

I'm no art critic, but I know what I like, and this isn't even close.

I'm no art critic, but I know what I like, and this isn't even close.

I also know what I like, and I think it looks pretty good. The judges thought it was the best when compared side-by-side with human-generated art, without knowing an AI created it.

Perhaps you are being overly negative only because you already know how it was made.

You are as judgemental as the bartender in Mos Eisely who wouldn't let the droids in his bar.

I've been engaging with AI "art" content for a while and there's basically a handful of problems that need to be solved: - Who owns the training data. Many "image" data corpus are images that are not copyright-free. The AI can learn from these under research fair use rules in the US, but not other countries like Japan where there is no fair use and the moral rights of the artists will prevent "AI" from learning from artists in the country, or even developing models that can be used in the country. - Who owns

Here's looking forward to an human future where a human can make fresh jokes that keep me laughing all day, make paintings that make me cry, draft melodies I'll whistle for the rest of my life, and write stories that make me a better human.

Here's looking forward to an human future where a human can make fresh jokes that keep me laughing all day, make paintings that make me cry, draft melodies I'll whistle for the rest of my life, and write stories that make me a better human.

Funny how that criteria doesn't magically apply to humans also. Kind of weird that AI has to be superhuman for it to be considered worth your time. Wake me when there's one human who can do all those things very very well.

It is sometimes used by museums, galleries, authors, or artists to generate a wider audience. You can apply it to make custom art, as per the example of artist Kolli Putri’s project Poetry Robot (see more). So you can expect AI generated art to be widespread in the near future. So I ask again, when can we expect these performances, symposia and exhibitions to be ruled out of existence forever?

- The above comment was AI generated. (app.inferkit.com/demo)

"No, four meaningless strings of english words, contradicting themselves and referencing a fake example of synthetic nothing-stuff is barely of note."

So... no different from critics, then?

"Yeah that's pretty fucking shitty." "We're watching the death of artistry unfold before our eyes," a Twitter user going by OmniMorpho said in a reply that gained over 2,000 likes. "If creative jobs aren't safe from machines, then even high-skilled jobs are in danger of becoming obsolete. What will we have then?"

"Yeah that's pretty fucking shitty." "We're watching the death of artistry unfold before our eyes," a Twitter user going by OmniMorpho said in a reply that gained over 2,000 likes. "If creative jobs aren't safe from machines, then even high-skilled jobs are in danger of becoming obsolete. What will we have then?"

I guess you aren't that "high-skilled" after all. Welcome to the world of the rest of us talentless folks.

The "laws of CRUD" have been fairly stable since the RDBMS was invented. It would be fairly easy for AI to pick out patterns and at least assist with a lot of it. The hard part is keeping up with the Fad of the Month and reworking & relearning everything. Developing the same CRUD app takes roughly 3x the people hours than in the 90's. We somehow de-evolved, probably due to chasing eye candy and fads instead of value parsimony. We became feature and/or potential-feature pack-rats, nuking YAGNI in the bal

AI is not currently hastening the death of creative jobs in general, only the low ones that were just doing basic queries (here Dave, please make "a drawing of a cat on a chair" to illustrate page 3 of our newsletter) that indeed AI can do faster.

Photography replaced basic portrait painting, and 3D animation software replaced drawing frame by frame. But creative drawing and cartoon animation exist more than ever.

AI artwork are just a new tool to help creative people produce awesome drawings faster.

Classical figures in a Baroque hall stair through a circular viewport into a sun-drenched and radiant landscape.

I'm presuming the writer was doing this article pro bono. Either that or the editor didn't do their job.

I was rather amazed that those actually returned relevant responses. But you're right, I never would have searched for those without prompting.

If AI ever took my job, plan B is to become a backhoe operator [dreamstime.com].

"To developers and technically minded people, it’s this cool thing, but to illustrators it’s very upsetting because it feels like you’ve eliminated the need to hire the illustrator." -- cartoonist Matt Borrs

"To developers and technically minded people, it’s this cool thing, but to illustrators it’s very upsetting because it feels like you’ve eliminated the need to hire the illustrator." -- cartoonist Matt Borrs

Suddenly, it's become possible to make full and detailed illustrations with minimal skill. As these tools progress, they'll be able to transform the most crude of drawings seemingly into masterpieces with a few identifying labels.

I've given some thought as to where this kind of generated imagery is going and I've concluded that these generated works will replace a lot of artists. Right now 3d models ("assets") are all manually made and/or procedurally generated. It only makes sense that an image processing pipeline (because there are many of steps) will be made to generate complete 3D scenes with assets that can be manipulated. It may need tweaks every step of the way but the benefits are the radically reduced time and cost of asset development. Both game and movie development are going to be impacted and most likely there will be close to a one-to-one overlap in the technology. I say this because when this happens then the movie industry is going to shift into being entirely motion capture and CGI because it will be MUCH cheaper to make movies this way and you won't have to pay the latest dreamboat and make sure the scene looks perfect, just get someone that can act, use mo-cap and make everything/everyone look/sound the way you want thanks to computers.

I'm pretty sure that neural networks will be produced for each asset to minimize computational time while making them move just right.

Indeed. That would be a perfect application for a GAN.

It's not just physics, it's understanding how the world moves and how those phsyics apply to it visually. And I suspect it's far easier/cheaper to amass and analise large datasets of static images than large datasets videos.

As far as these particular models are concerned, the world is static.

That's an overly simplistic model. Notice how things shift as you walk around. Generally I find that I separate things into three flat planes at different mean distances. (They can be at angles to each other.) And most things are seen as flat images on one of those planes. When I look at any particular object, that particular object is popped into a more detailed image, but I'm still only modeling (at visual levels of detail) the surface facing me, though now different parts of it can be at different di

I have a friend who works as an animator for video games. They use motion capture but then tweak it manually. Apparently the issues are usually down to the model not having the correct joints to mimic the real-life version (e.g. the human body), and the motion capture rig producing less than perfect results.

Suddenly, it's become possible to make full and detailed illustrations with minimal skill.

Suddenly, it's become possible to make full and detailed illustrations with minimal skill.

So... kind like photography then?

Will nobody think of the poor portrait painters?

No, it's more sophisticated than that but this also put photography on the ropes.

I disagree but here's the thing, everything have put out was manually made and modified by humans. By utilizing a pipeline of various AIs, it will be far more realistic in a fraction of the time with a fraction of the people needed to work on it. AI isn't magic but it can boost productivity exponentially.

How I read what you said: "Deep Fakes will become even more realistic"

No, this is next level stuff. Face mapping is a parlor trick in comparison.

.. or when the elephants [catersnews.com] were painting.

Never had a serious problem, and my local Aldi store has a member of staff on duty to resolve any issues. But the store still has traditional checkout staff as well.

Given the competition in, at least the UK's, grocery trade, all the savings will go back to the consumer as prices are competed down.

Aldi arrived in Manchester in 1990, at a time when a loaf of ordinary white bread was universally on sale for 54p. Aldi started selling the same for 17p. This immediately forced other bread sellers to match this lower price.

This is merely a single example of the effect of Aldi; indeed Tescos, the biggest UK food retailer, having lost market share massively, has resorted to advertising some its prices as 'price matched' against Aldi. This is a perverse effect as it reminds us that Tescos is more expensive fo

This distinction has caused controversy on Twitter where working artists and enthusiasts accused Allen of hastening the death of creative jobs.

This distinction has caused controversy on Twitter where working artists and enthusiasts accused Allen of hastening the death of creative jobs.

Why is it that art people seem to think that non-art jobs don't require significant creativity skills, and also be "creative jobs" ?

“Technology is increasingly deployed to make gig jobs and to make billionaires richer, and so much of it doesn't seem to benefit the public good enough,”

“Technology is increasingly deployed to make gig jobs and to make billionaires richer, and so much of it doesn't seem to benefit the public good enough,”

Uh, hey, dumbass, the reason why those billionaires are getting richer is because of the improvements to the public good that they help generate. See, how capitalism works is that when a company does shit people like...such as say, make Google Maps, which they let your dumb ass use for free, they are rewarded by making money. That encourages them to make more shit that the public wants. Companies that don't contribute to the public good by making shit people want just fade away....unless they're subsidized

the reason why those billionaires are getting richer is because of the improvements to the public good that they help generate.

the reason why those billionaires are getting richer is because of the improvements to the public good that they help generate.

That's how free markets work, not crony capitalism.

Even for free markets, that's an idealization that only captures one stage of their development. At least for anything that's complex to build or requires ingredients not locally available.

There is no historic record of a "free market" existing. They always exist in a context. A minimal rule would be something like "you can't use violence to produce customers", but in the examples I've looked at, there have always been additional rules (although the one I proposed isn't always present).

There is no historic record of a "free market" existing.

There is no historic record of a "free market" existing.

Yes. That's why there's no historic record of capitalism not being shitty.

Uh, hey, dumbass, the reason why those billionaires are getting richer is because of the improvements to the public good that they help generate.

Uh, hey, dumbass, the reason why those billionaires are getting richer is because of the improvements to the public good that they help generate.

Nah it can't be because of endless lobbying to corrupt the laws in their favor.

Coporations war on public domain:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

The reason copyright and patent had limited times was to spur innovation, now the fact that copyright has been endlessly lobbied for what is effectively infinite time, no one should respect copyright law at this point. The whole intention was to preserve human culture, right now in the game industry, valve and everyone is bent on destroying it by monopolizing it f

People are getting hip to AI fakes. I suppose it's time to confess. Over all these years, the comments attributed to me were actually written by an AI called Smegma that I created on a Commodore Amiga. In recent years its comments have been getting higher scores than most.

Sorry, I'm just musing over the question of whether it is worthwhile for anyone to pretend an AI did creative work that was actually done by a human. This might work if you were trying to get venture capitalists to invest in your AI startu

...it is a cool picture. And do note the author admitted they curated it, as the bot generated multiple candidates, and tuned parameters. Good curating is a skill in itself. After all, we'd never know about the Beatles if a record co. didn't recognize the talent. They were turned down multiple times before.

An analogy of this scenario is the rise of chess computer software such as Stockfish. Now a smartphone running Stockfish will easily defeat a grandmaster. But it hasn't killed chess. Human vs. Human competition happens. Importantly, using an engine like Stockfish, while purporting to be a non-computer-aided-human is considered cheating.

It should be the same with art. There is a place for computer AI generated art, but it must be made clear that it is. Examples like in the TFA are like the time that computer

I really don't care whether a picture is drawn using pencils the artist made and paints that they personally created by grinding colourful rocks, or whether it's AI 'created'. Do I enjoy it? Great. Does it cause me to yawn? Let's go do something else.

I really don't care whether a picture is drawn using pencils the artist made and paints that they personally created by grinding colourful rocks, or whether it's AI 'created'.

I really don't care whether a picture is drawn using pencils the artist made and paints that they personally created by grinding colourful rocks, or whether it's AI 'created'.

If we're talking about an art competition, and we are, then only when people create the art should they be permitted to enter it in a competition. So is giving text prompts to software creating? Not unless you create the software.

That's right, it's only creation if you wrote the software yourself. It's cheating if you just tell some AI, "Paint me a pretty picture."

Likewise, it's cheating if you can just tell Photoshop to use the smudge tool or various filters to manipulate your image. Unless you wrote those filters yourself.

And it's cheating to use MS-Paint to hand-place each pixel specifically. Unless you're the guy who wrote MS-Paint, obviously.

And it's cheating to use paint and brush that you purchased at an art store. It

That's not a good example, because chess is a performance art. Yes, the finished games of grandmasters are studied, but the act of chess is the playing of the game. This is not true of painters, or even photographers.

For some reason the original "Mona Lisa" is automatically considered a lot more valuable than any copy, regardless of the quality of the copy. In fact, various paintings have lost considerable value when it turned out that the artist that painted them wasn't the one that had been believed to have painted them. See Elmyr de Hory.

I'm not going to defend that as sensible, but it's something that's actual, and therefore needs to be accepted as such.

My argument is you don't deny reality. If reality involves lots of people acting stupid, it's still reality, and should be accepted as such. This isn't an argument that YOU should act stupid.

It's not art, any more than a collage of renaissance painting parts, cut out and stuck to cardboard, is a renaissance painting. There's no craft in it. If an obvious text request has a chance of being as good as a "secret text prompt" - it's clear what part of the system is doing the heavy lifting, and it's not the human.

Call me when an AI wins a comedy improv

There may be more comments in this discussion. Without JavaScript enabled, you might want to turn on Classic Discussion System in your preferences instead.

Court Orders Telegram To Disclose Personal Details of Pirating Users

Dashlane Is Ready To Replace All Your Passwords With Passkeys

Mr. Cole's Axiom: The sum of the intelligence on the planet is a constant; the population is growing.