|
all good dogs
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 00:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 22:07 |
|
|
The Oldest Man posted:No it doesn't. i think that's kind of necessarily does given how machine learning works. AFAIK its just trying to place pixels in the statistically most likely places given the input text, so if your input text is just "dog" then it's going to be drawing from every image with a dog in it you can use that to search through all of SD's training images and see exactly what it's trying to recreate for any given prompt
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 00:50
|
|
|
turn off the TV posted:i think that's kind of necessarily does given how machine learning works. AFAIK its just trying to place pixels in the statistically most likely places given the input text, so if your input text is just "dog" then it's going to be drawing from every image with a dog in it that's pretty cool! it also shows how it is in no way a generator of a platonic ideal of a dog picture.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 00:53
|
|
|
mawarannahr posted:that's pretty cool! it also shows how it is in no way a generator of a platonic ideal of a dog picture. ok
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 01:01
|
|
|
Corridor crew did a podcast about it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FqSGP37pu5k They explain the AI picture are coordinates made from the pictures its trained on. but if you throw the image into photoshop and altered it, it can be copy-writed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 07:25
|
|
|
mazzi Chart Czar posted:Corridor crew did a podcast about it. AI art is in a quantum super position until compressed into a PNG which collapses the wave function and determines how much of it Disney owns
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 09:24
|
|
|
porfiria posted:But, even supposing that's true, the live question is--can you tell the difference? Yes. This is what I have been saying. If you know art or art history, you can very easily tell the difference. Remember that artworks have a specific taxonomy, not just vibes, so they can be accurately dated and attributed to a region. Ceramics are the best example of this as there are whole manuals for determining the age and place of origin of amphorae. Relationships between whole societies were first identified through the relationship between their material culture and other, known, material cultures. So, if we can tell if a bronze, for example, is from Classical Greece, Hellenistic, a Roman copy, then we can tell if it’s AI produced because of the many discrepancies from the existing body of art. When it comes to Roman copies, which is an important issue in Mediterranean art history, nobody asks “can you tell the difference?”. People spend their whole careers establishing the provenance of works of art and methods to differentiate Greek originals and Roman knock-offs, what we might extrapolate about lost originals from extant copies and so on. For painting, not my area, but if you’re familiar with a painter and style, say Academic Art and Benjamin West, you can tell why AI art “in the style of Benjamin West” is not actually in his style, the school of his training, methods, subjects, composition, and therefore not really like his art at all. More about relative dating and taxonomy here Frosted Flake has issued a correction as of 11:01 on Feb 7, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 10:20
|
|
|
Art theory is just astrology for people in berets
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 13:03
|
|
|
You would think typology would be one of the more workable ways to do this, since if I understand the “AI”, you could get a computer to follow typology systems, a series of checks based on clearly defined criteria, the same way you would consult the manual yourself either on a dig or while doing museum archeology. It’s like playing 20 Questions, I suppose. It would be able to better identify art, but of course still not create it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 14:57
|
|
|
webcams for christ posted:via pastiche, sometimes, thanks to the human inputs on which it's based what human artist doesn't base their style on human inputs and use various attempts at pastiche as training though quote:more simply put when someone sets out to create a visual work, something is intended to be communicated to someone, which is not reliably replicated in the composite/collage output of a text-to-image model and again most human artists will fail at this, probably more often than not. they're not reliably replicating their ideas via art either this is what I mean when I say these arguments fall apart when you try to create a rubric based on individual aspects of learning, practicing, and creating art. just say that art is the sole domain of self aware creatures (again, this is my stance) and leave it at that, there doesn't need to be any further examination
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 18:02
|
|
|
Frosted Flake posted:Yes. This is what I have been saying. If you know art or art history, you can very easily tell the difference. you won't be able to reliably tell the difference between an art student's attempt at learning a style and an AI generated image someone put through 50+ iterations to perfect. people are also really bad at art and acting like you can gerrymander a definition that includes lovely human-created art but excludes better ai-created art without resorting to sentience/awareness as an exclusionary metric is silly
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 18:08
|
|
|
look, some people just have a strong need to put everything in the world in a neat little box with a perfectly written set of labels, and they just so happen to get really, really viscerally upset at situations that defy such easy compartmentalization, okay
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 18:09
|
|
|
some things just can't be explained. it\s NOT that i don't know what i'm talking about.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 18:12
|
|
|
Tree Reformat posted:look, some people just have a strong need to put everything in the world in a neat little box with a perfectly written set of labels, and they just so happen to get really, really viscerally upset at situations that defy such easy compartmentalization, okay Again, imagine trying to establish relative dating without this approach. Typology provides a way to categorize works of art, and place them in context, chronologically, geographically, culturally and yes artistically and stylistically.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 18:24
|
|
|
Zodium posted:some things just can't be explained. it\s NOT that i don't know what i'm talking about.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 18:26
|
|
|
indigi posted:what human artist doesn't base their style on human inputs and use various attempts at pastiche as training though I'll have to come back to this when I get home from the gym, but my one of my points is that regardless of intent, when a human sets about creating some sort of visual artifact (and regardless of whether is meets someone's definition of "art"), it is an attempt to fulfill a need or desire, usually attempting to communicate something, often on behalf of a patron or client. a probabistic model is a tool which reproduces fragments of human artifacts in a composite. some symbols and intentions may yet be recognizable, but a tool cannot intend anything, and it doesn't "know" what intentions or symbols are I think your definition of art is perfectly fine, but I'm not really interested in the ontology and taxonomy of Art
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 18:30
|
|
|
Frosted Flake posted:Again, imagine trying to establish relative dating without this approach. Typology provides a way to categorize works of art, and place them in context, chronologically, geographically, culturally and yes artistically and stylistically. so your definition of art is limited to culturally significant art that has passed through the historical record
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 18:32
|
|
|
webcams for christ posted:I'll have to come back to this when I get home from the gym, but my one of my points is that regardless of intent, when a human sets about creating some sort of visual artifact (and regardless of whether is meets someone's definition of "art"), it is an attempt to fulfill a need or desire, usually attempting to communicate something, often on behalf of a patron or client. well if you want to go down that road the brush doesn't "know" anything either, and these AI models are just tools used by humans to create art
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 18:34
|
|
|
my definition of art is "the episode of joe pera about hearing baba o' riley for the first time"
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 18:34
|
|
|
indigi posted:well if you want to go down that road the brush doesn't "know" anything either, and these AI models are just tools used by humans to create art that's fine. there aren't any VCs seeking billion dollar valuations by telling customers and investors that brushes know things
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 18:36
|
|
|
oh yeah, I don't care what VCs are telling idiots. their fault
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 18:37
|
|
|
webcams for christ posted:I think your definition of art is perfectly fine, but I'm not really interested in the ontology and taxonomy of Art They only want to define it to either deny it exists or say AI art is equivalent if it checks off the same boxes through the most generous interpretations possible
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 18:43
|
|
|
indigi posted:so your definition of art is limited to culturally significant art that has passed through the historical record In this context, it’s just material culture. Much of what’s survived is not artistically significant, the literal hill of amphorae at Ostia contains no ornamentation, but they do help us recognize and understand surviving works of art, Greek red figure amphorae. Telling those apart is pretty important. The date and place of origin of even unadorned amphorae can be established by characteristics of local styles and that’s invaluable for understanding the movement of goods in antiquity. Just one example, but this is why categorizing art, ceramics in this case, is useful. If you’re trying to say “what even is art?”   The human makers of these objects left traces of their identities, and as others said intentions, in their work and it is not only identifiable but useful 
Frosted Flake has issued a correction as of 18:53 on Feb 7, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 18:45
|
|
|
seems like those categories wouldn't be able to contextualize all the ephemeral art created by non-artists on a daily basis that didn’t survive
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 18:55
|
|
|
indigi posted:well if you want to go down that road the brush doesn't "know" anything either, and these AI models are just tools used by humans to create art is this somehow controversial
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 18:59
|
|
|
indigi posted:seems like those categories wouldn't be able to contextualize all the ephemeral art created by non-artists on a daily basis that didn’t survive To put this in a more contemporary setting, most people who quilt, we can say definitely before the internet, quilt in a locally specific style so even if they are doing their own thing, the bounds of what they think a quilt is and looks like is determined by their culture, and so their style, while giving them artistic space to express themselves in the work, is part of a greater regional and chronological textile style and so can be classified alongside other similar quilts. Even if you said, okay, what about magazines? It doesn’t matter how the style is transmitted, magazines had an area of distribution, and usually there will be some trace of local style mediated through it. Styles change over time, literary sources like magazines make it much easier to categorize and date. Or, more personally, the magazine taught them a new pattern but they use local textiles, or colour ways, or otherwise make it “just like Mom’s”, or again, they’ve seen Mom’s quilt and that is a part of their work, what they think a quilt is. Well, what about today? Even now when people could order fabrics and find patterns globally, they don’t. Of course there’s less local specificity, but midwestern quilters are not ordering traditional mud-dyed cloth from Mali, and they’re not using quilting patterns from Alsace. They are using at the very least, English language websites so their mental horizon of artwork, what they consider a quilt to be, it’s still part of a larger material culture to which they belong. More simply, everybody who makes art has seen art, and that shapes their style in various ways that allow for categorization. Even the Piss Christ guy knew what a crucifix was, how it should look, of course the symbolism, and so that shaped his intentions and execution. La Trahison des Images was painted by someone who went to Beaux-Arts, studied under an instructor in Art Nouveau, and so even though Surrealism was a new style, we know what he understood une pipe to be and how to represent it artistically, all because his painting was not removed from his material culture but a part of it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 19:21
|
|
|
I feel like you still haven't addressed the 'what about an art student's also inaccurate attempts to replicate the same style.'
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 01:31
|
|
|
reignonyourparade posted:I feel like you still haven't addressed the 'what about an art student's also inaccurate attempts to replicate the same style.' you're comparing a human being to a labor saving device. what about an apprentice weaver that reproduces a similar defect to a particular loom? webcams for christ has issued a correction as of 09:37 on Feb 8, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 09:31
|
|
|
reignonyourparade posted:I feel like you still haven't addressed the 'what about an art student's also inaccurate attempts to replicate the same style.' A human being can recognize their inaccuracy without being taught, the machine only knows what we tell it to know.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 13:53
|
|
|
Hmm... okay... but what about (some other bullshit)
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 14:48
|
|
|
Pepe Silvia Browne posted:A human being can recognize their inaccuracy without being taught, the machine only knows what we tell it to know. The machine is the tool, not the artist
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 15:17
|
|
|
Seems like the resolution to this is that punching a prompt into a bot really does make you an artist, or at least a person who is doing art, but the idea of that is repulsive
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 17:20
|
|
|
Slavvy posted:Seems like the resolution to this is that punching a prompt into a bot really does make you an artist, or at least a person who is doing art, but the idea of that is repulsive why do you find that repulsive?
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 17:23
|
|
|
Terror Sweat posted:The machine is the tool, not the artist Yes, that doesn't matter in the context of what the person asked.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 18:16
|
|
|
Slavvy posted:Seems like the resolution to this is that punching a prompt into a bot really does make you an artist, or at least a person who is doing art, but the idea of that is repulsive Listen I'm not saying that I'm always correct, just most of the time
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 18:30
|
|
|
Zodium posted:why do you find that repulsive? Not me personally, I have difficulty caring at all tbh, it's just the undercurrent that seems to be present in the discussion It would satisfy both the people who say ai art is art, and the people who say dall-e is a glorified chat bot that steals people's big boob Mario pics. But it would mean that prompt typers are artists, which seemingly upsets art people, and that dall-e isn't in any way smart or revolutionary, which upsets tedious dorks
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 18:46
|
|
|
Slavvy posted:It would satisfy both the people who say ai art is art, and the people who say dall-e is a glorified chat bot that steals people's big boob Mario pics. But it would mean that prompt typers are artists, which seemingly upsets art people, and that dall-e isn't in any way smart or revolutionary, which upsets tedious dorks yeah I agree with this. also not only are the big boob Mario pics being stolen, they're monetized by 3rd parties and the revenue is not being shared in kind.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 19:43
|
|
|
I mean yeah but that to me is a capitalism problem and has little to do with the technology or what it means or what the output it produces is. New technology is used to rent seek and exploit people even further under capitalism, news at 6. What ai art would look like under luxury gay space communism is an interesting thought
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 20:04
|
|
|
it’s kitch can still be relevant for instance making you feel happy or giving historians 2000 years in the future some insight into how you lived your weird little life (unlikely though I won’t rule out the possibility of some turbodorks putting their ai art on some metal displates that could withstand the ravages of time)
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 20:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 22:07 |
|
|
until there are (reasonably) ethically-sourced training corpora I kind of view playing with image models as similar to getting into other harmful/anti-social hobbies, like rolling coal
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 20:22
|
|