I feel like AI has the potential to make mundane tasks simple, but it could also make us terribly lazy. Also, as an artist, I am bothered by the fact that AI completely dismisses an artist's job as simply a means to an end. The true beauty of art is in the process of creation, not in the resulting image. You gain most of your creative skills in the flow state while working. The final image is just a visual representation of this process. Anyone who is deeply passionate about their craft understands this feeling. AI is stripping away the artist from the process. If you don't feel "talented" enough to create your vision and need to use AI to do so, then put the hours in and work for it. I promise you it's worth it because doing the work is humbling and it changes you as a person.
The cool thing about art is that you know a human made it and you are mesmerized at the skill and thought it must have taken to make it. When you know it was a machine that made it, it loses its magic. Most people think like me but a few are promoting this technology for profit without any regard to ethics and love for the art process itself.
"It's always about capitalism, not the technology, right?" Perfect statement and translates all the worry with this tech and all the previous ones that ended up been turned for damage to whole societies, democracies and etc.
EXACTLY WHAT IVE BEEN THINKING. sooner or later machine will be able to do most of the work. thats why we need a different social system to deal with it.
@@zzzmzzz4466 You may need it, but most don't. Liberal capitalism has succeeded in doing what no dictatorship has ever been able to do - it has convinced the majority that the system is fair (or needs little change to be fair).
Soul? If you are not aware that it is not human made, you can sense soul? Technically, it is always you the beholder who experience the art, not the maker.
well how would you know? I mean it, not as joke or anything an ai may actually dream what it is showing, you know, it's using real photos and real data to make new ones.
I look at AI art and see every hallucinogenic trip I've ever been on. Interesting and occasionally educational, but I really need to stay reality based to keep my sanity. Are losing our collective sanity? Human relationships have become social media relationships. The future looks like human reality becoming an artificial reality. I live on a farm at the edge of a desert and we are no longer visited by butterflies. None of my neighbors seem to be aware of this. They live in a Trumpian, MacDonald's, TikTok, Walmart, asphalt, and digital reality. Will the only butterfly my grandkids know be an AI simulation? I remember the "DARE" program in grade school telling me if I drop acid just once I could have flashbacks my entire life. What they didn't tell me is flashbacks would not be any crazier than the reality our culture builds for itself.
Cameras are machines (photography), AI is also a machine (computer) that works when plugged in to another machine (electricity). Designed for a social media society (FB, YT, IG) where everything is timed. AI in a visual artist’s hand, and mind is a tool to expand (academically) the world of art. AIGen is totally another matter-this will be challenging for me.
@@IsThatYouSimon I know for certain that a brush is a tool and a camera are physical things and I can manipulate as my creativity please. Artist is manipulating AI or the other way around ?
@@IsThatYouSimon Ai(artifical intelligence) is not an object, its a term to describe a long "boring" definition. The functionality within a computer program that auto completes tasks on a personal computing device, which does require human input but less so that older programs of the same nature.
So many aspects to this great conversation! One thing to keep in mind....if the electricity stops flowing, Ai ceases to exist. And humans have endured no matter what tools we have been presented with. If we view life from a Creationist perspective, we can rest assured that our individual, unique, souls/spirits are what make us a) human, b) be able to live without fear from threat of ANY machine. Machines are tools. Pencils evolved from charcoal sticks. Typewriters evolved from hand writing. Printing presses, computers, colored paints, hammers, shovels,...every tool evolved and has been created to help and better humanity. Even weapons help protect us. What we should fear is not keeping in touch with our Creator. We stop listening and start doing our own thing, then we are in trouble. But, if the lights go out, we can always draw and paint by hand. As we have done for centuries!
He says that he want to use generative AI in a non-conventional way, but generating images based on a corpus of images is like the most conventional way ever xD
I don´t think humans will ever stop making art, even if Ai is better then us doing it. Ai was able to defeat humans in chess a long time ago, that didn´t stop us from continuing to play it. Even though photography was able to out do painters, and many looked away from realism to more abstract ways of expression, that still didn´t stop people from painting and drawing in figurative ways, hell many of us are still exploring how figurative images can do and express. New technology has always been scary, I´m scared too, there´re a lot of political and economic implications to Ai that we can´t understand and control yet. But at least for now we can look at Ai as a very cool tool that will allow us to learn and create far beyond what has ever been possible before.
Personally I wouldn't conpare the introduction of photogrsphy to ai. Photography is a skill, unlike ai which is just prompts and scrapping people's work
Part of the issue is that the endgame of this is kinda eliminating art as a profession for 99% of artists. And in the world we live in we are trending towards just having to work work work to scrounge up enough money to live not really leaving that much time and energy for the average person to do art. Also to know that almost every piece of “art” you see in movies, billboards, ads, etc is not human, I think it would be quite depressing.
what an eye opening and thought provoking experience, thank you MOMA. and I were to take one single thing that really impressed me, it's this idea: "I also believe that AI algorithms may have a different purpose. It's kind of this finding the language of humanity by using collective memories to create collective dreams and eventually collective consciousness." what an awe inspiring thought, what an awe inspiring goal to motivate one towards learning these systems 🙇
Interesting take on what it means to train AI and how that relates to art itself. The artist has turned the concept of genAI artmaking around to emphasize the human element of these systems.
This is amazing. I'm an artist and have been struggling with motivation lately. Even though AI-generated art lacks key qualities that differentiate from real art, we all experience the world more and more through screens. So the difference to most people is arbitrary. And that's terrible for society. Grateful for the sharp mind of the artist to cut through the machine and reconnect us with our humanity. Thank you for the work you're doing.
All I know is that AI's impact on art- and the world at large- will be unprecedented. The best we can do right now is start figuring out the ethical/legal frameworks that will ensure that AI doesn't work against humanity. Companies like OpenAI need to be held accountable for the data that is fed to these models.
The approach is quite fascinating but is just an art form. It can’t be the future of Art but definitely an exiting Art Form for the machine learning enthusiasts or alpha generation. Whatever the case be, an original hand made art will always be more valuable. But who knows, what lies ahead!! This digital unsupervised art form is definitely exciting. Kudos to MOMA for Thai modern form of art.
A big problem with technology-based art in recent decades is that many of the artists creating it have a weak grasp of the technology itself. Much of it has basically been word clouds and screen savers. A lot of good art begins with mastery of tools, technique, and medium.
You're partly right, but there are certainly new challenges to crafting artistic mastery that are more challenging than traditional tools like brushes: For 6 years I have only been painting 3-dimensional in VR, for 6 months I have been integrating AI into my art worlds. (Just 1 example: AI generates amazing endless textures that can be used for (animated!) VR brushes. Painting with VR glasses in a virtual 3d space is the most demanding way of using a brush because the hand now also has to manage a third dimension. Happy colored Greetinx!
Using the AI to have it create interesting results requires great skill. Its a tool and requires practice time, patience and mastery. I say this who is actually using AI to generate ideas and render stuff in to save time and improve my creative process. Its my actual job. I'm not just commenting on stuff I barely if at all use.
That’s great, but I wonder if they consult any of his artist in the database about if they wanted to be in the AI, aren’t they reducing their previous artist to only tools for the AI?
It's funny that even though the IA doesn't use our human reference points, it ends up generating pretty cute images to satisfy the public. It seems to me that this people pleasing lava lamp is based on the erroneous idea that the moma archive is just images and forgets that these works have a body, that without that body they are just ghosts, incomplete specters that can only generate an odradek innocuous and futile as the work of Anadoll.
Someone was reading Ben Davis.. These results are pretty emotionally and even formalistically vacant, as with most procedurally generated art or architecture. However, arguing that just because something is digital, it must be a floating ghost without substance is stupid. You can see a level of detail and contrast in a scanned artwork that is not attainable in a classical gallery environment. Moreover, we should not be afraid of this new outlook on the past that can also show us some uncomfortable characteristics that come from statistical analysis.
Oh, the (romantic) dualism. "All Bibles or sacred codes have been the causes of the following Errors. 1. That Man has two real existing principles: Viz: a Body & a Soul." [...] "But the following Contraries to these are True 1. Man has no Body distinct from his Soul; for that call’d Body is a portion of Soul discern’d by the five Senses, the chief inlets of Soul in this age"
@@evetrue2615 No even cringier... hes quoting the scifi video game, "Death Stranding" created by a Japanese man named "Hideo Kojima" he made the video game series called "Metal Gear Solid" the entire plot of which as well as the videogame he is quoting, is about technology taking over human life. Hyper common trope in Japanese fiction.
So the future of art is having the capital, the funding, and the team to super-process art over massive computers that no average artist will have access to. Mmkay, message received.
How would A.I. identify the abstract? I recently had a revelation about abstract expressionism in that it doesn't look like anything, and that is the point. Like that song from Audioslave "It Doesn't Remind Me of Anything". It lets your brain see whatever you want instead of recognizing a figure or a landscape. Great video, very provocative.
It feels like biological scans - the complexity and textures hold a certain beauty but it makes me feel how I do seeing pictures of fractals or snowflakes. The narrative speaks to me a of a transitional time and a sadness as corporations shape these tools and artists get on board exploring the technology.
True. A lot of artists jumped on the anti ai bandwagon only to be the first to utilize the technology. This shows that not many were actually anti ai, but more looking after their personal interests. Very sad indeed.
Perhaps we should start examining the links between commerce and art more closely; the priority of industry has never chiefly been to progress art in any direction other than the one that makes the most money.
Рік тому+6
I thought AI would bring us free energy, zero gravity devices, all that good stuff... we've been framed again.
Unsupervised learned isn't bad. It's what we do all the time. I'll read a book and figure out what I think about it myself. Supervised learning is what we do with kids. We have them read something but also tell them what they should think about it.
As the great Ian Malcolm once said: "Oooh, ahhh, that's how it always starts. Then later there's running and um, screaming" Yes, let's unleash the A.I and let it do whatever it wants with no regulations, no strings. We will see the result in the future...
I enjoyed the examples where the artists used their work to explain important parts of how these systems work. Training data is an important part of AI. So are the related ideas of embeddings, an embedding / latent space, encoders and decoders. These are AI details worth knowing about for the general public.
Awe inspiring. The longterm fascination with machine learning, as always, has been egocentric. Manifesting human qualities in machines. Personally, I think it is vitally important for artists to document the processes of machine learning as we know it now, just as we need to record any other aspect of contemporary life for posterity but I find it so exciting that we also have an opportunity to facilitate the production of art in wholly new ways, as shown here to tremendous effect. Just as humans have problems sometimes tagging or classifying thoughts and ideas, we can expect machine learning to produce odd and eccentric outcomes from the mis interpretation of training data. As with anything else associated with AI this will provoke hostile and fearful reactions in some people. My take on that is that AI cannot possibly exceed the boundaries of horror and depravity that human kind has not already presented so bring it on!
Everyone is so proud of the data they curate and train the AI on and they are too eager to see them as unique but with your "flavor." That you're blind to the commonalities across the board that need to be concerning.
I really appreciate the way MOMA is pushing the boundaries of traditional art and I'm excited to see more of their groundbreaking work in the future. However, I was intrigued by the concerns about human will versus machine will, as well as issues of perception. I didn't notice anything related to political art or for visually impaired people in the video presentation. It would be interesting to see how MOMA could address these issues in their art.
what that machine is making is not art sir art is a human concept we can look at nature and call the beauty of it a work of art because we recognize patterns that relate to our unique imagination a machine that learns from humans and without it they couldn't do just that is not capable of creating art, but this is software engineers putting artists out of work and their weapon is capitalsim this is making our minds lazy and kills imagination i just hope your livelihood is not dependent on commissions like mine (i know this was long and im sorry) my highest paid job was a city mural, now i hear they can print the image on the wall, you cant expect me to welcome it and call me uncultured or fearful of technology when its pushing me towards being homeless
Very thought-proving for human artisits in the age of AI. I wonder how diverse are the small group of AI developers, are they diverse enough to determine what material 'they' choose to feed and train AI...
Even if they're not diverse enough, human artists are driven by an inner impulse not a mechanical one, AI is just a tool, like a canvas or Photoshop or any editing software. My only concern is over saturation of AI Art. I think the companies have to be tasteful in publishing these powerful tools. It's like you won't find that many experts in excel unless their careers requires that from them. That's how I see it.
00:07 Artists are using and confronting machine learning 01:57 Unsupervised learning allows the machine to dream and speculate an imagination of a machine. 03:23 AI Art explores the potential of machine learning in creating new realities 05:22 AI systems are not scientifically objective, but skewed from the beginning 07:18 Artists use machine learning to reveal biases and implications of AI systems 09:02 Labeling images as single words ignores their complexity and diversity. 10:57 Artists redefine the concept of art and explore the relationship between humans and machines. 12:55 AI systems have a high planetary cost and are influenced by capitalism.
I understand the frustrations many artists feel about AI-generated art, but I’ve been thinking about it from another angle. I recently came across the idea that no one truly owns a work of art because creating art inherently involves drawing inspiration from the world around us-something that belongs to everyone, and from other painters aswell. For example, if I draw a tree in a cubist style, I might be inspired by Picasso and by the natural world. That raises a question: how much of my painting is truly 'mine'? Isn’t it more like a tapestry of influences? Isn't it cool that these processes of letting the machine dream maximize the process of inspiration? Taking in the countless paintings, we could also argue that with each painting comes with a sea of inspiration behind it. Then again, it's just a different perspective and idea and artists frustrations are totally understandable. What do y'all think?
As a traditional artists, if i incorporate the images of my work with the ramdonly selected images from the AI data, will this make my work more unique! While I am using the AI data, do I have the control over how much or how little data I can borrow from the AI data base to inject into my personal data base, will my art be more reflective of my personal characteristics or personalities!
I think that the appreciation of the artist being displaced by the machine (photographic camera) in his/her function, is wrong. First off, artists in the nineteenth century were not necessarily interested in depicting reality identically as we visually perceive it, artists were more interested in the psychic qualities of the new paradigm of reality. Second, Duchamp intention was not necessarily changing the role of an artist, but making a joke about what art is. The ready-made was not just an automatization of the artistic process, but it was a political statement to undermine art institution.
This is super interesting, but I wonder how he deals with the fact that AI can’t come up with new images or patterns - it can only repurpose. So any “dream” that it comes up with is ultimately a re arrangement of elements (colour, shape, form) from other’s (humans) work in MoMa’s collection.
They will probably say this is some philosophical reflection on humanity's error that we believe anything is original, while in fact everything is copied or stolen, as Dali once said. But we know that's alot of bull. Humans have created incredibly original tools with no precedent.
Thesis: The real power of generative AI unfolds in VR. The creation of 3 dimensional, immersive image and sound worlds, will become a new art direction...VR art means I can give the viewer an almost 100 percent distraction-free experience. ...and the AIs will enable previously unthinkable applications in this area...... ...and yes: I vacillate between fascination, creative euphoria and vague anxiety....
The future of art: artists doing nothing but examining what it means to live in the world of machine learning because nothing else will matter. No worries. There will still be nepotism, favoritism and snobby little art worlds. Old habits die hard.
this feels like data visualization done with extra steps and showing to people saying "this is special, it has meanings and we don't know". funny, that'd cost a data scientist's job hahaha
Seeing artists harness AI in this way is beautiful. This is why we need a dialogue between science and the humanities lest our works become soulless or feeble.
Most people don't understand that there is no such thing as true randomization or objectivity in computer programming. Everything from the first keystroke of the program has a bias to it that is generally based upon the programmer's preference and own understanding. Likewise for as incredible as our technology has become it is flawed because we created it and we are flawed.
This is interesting and awesome stuff. The guys repeating the whole "ai image generation is completely uninteresting to me" comes off as pretentious. AI image generators are still really new, evolving tech, it's inherently fascinating...
I'm sorry but 7 months ago my patron asked me to look at the ai. A generation that trained with Photoshop, CGI, etc., Tools, will eventually become the tools. Campbelltown, NSW, with Packer sponsorship, and Western Sydney University instituted an ai award November 22. Awards for tools.
I've been hand drawing painting several mediums over last few decades, graphic digital art for 20 years, and photography for 15 years...... Out of curiosity I tried out the Mid-Journey to it's fullest potential....It's quite amazing what it can do for now...I think between 5-10 years it will pretty much come close to what I can do....But most definitely lacks compared to the real thing...But I have no doubt in 10 years
There is certainly a big misunderstanding around what the collective unconsciousness is. AI can only pretend or mimic this so-called collective unconsciousness because unconsciousness itself is not a random collage of things from internet. C.J is probably spinning in his grave now.
This is a dream within the dream. THE Dream. Start there. "Who" perceives or is aware of this? "Who" knows anything about this? And with any knowing that is based ... based on what?
I expected to hear something about rights. Did all the artists give their consent to see their art being used for these AI processes? I personally would hate to see my images being dumped into a digital garbage can.
just alghoritms, there is more verbal art in the oniric description of just binary alghoritms that are as automatics as roomba that cleans your floor...
Good to finally see a backswing on the negativity as people embrace the future in regard to AI being here as part of a future we are all going to live in. I can't tell you how frustrating its been to be the kind of person who is always hunting for new experimental technologies for 10 years just to suddenly have friends brainwashed into seeing me as a bad actor for even looking into AI art workflows. I've always seen a weird pushback on these new technologies like mocap, 3d scanning, quadcoptors, procedural generation. In 2016 I was using quadcoptors to 3d scan people and scenes for unreal engine before that was normalized. Its exhausting to have someone who barely understands technology come at us with the cliff notes of someones copy pasted social media rant and a head full of half baked paranoia. Just the big talking point of the moment and if there is anything this species likes to do its confidently speculate and project regarding things they have no grip on what-so-ever. Things change, things will continue to change, adapt, survive.
i mean, to be fair AI art does pose an enormous risk to the art communities. now that this tech is here, there are definitely going to be hundreds if not thousands of artists put out of work. not that it will completely destroy art, but this will create a massive shift in the art world which we will need to adapt to. i think refik here has showed some very excellent artistic merit with this project, its intriguing and emotional and beautiful and harnesses the power of this new technology in an awesome way. but it also makes sense for many to be upset by AI arts existence.
I can easily imagine contemporary artists getting fascinated by AI, things in category of art or not doesn't matter anymore, just loving the new possibility that haven't been before - that's me at least
Gosto muito da noção de que hoje se vive em uma época contraria ao que Platão dizia sobre sair da caverna. Hoje existe tanta luz e claridade, tanta observação e categorização de que o mais saudavel seja buscar o mistério. Talvez.
I do think that the AI is using our value system and points of reference. The model fills up the voids with inferences of the art collection categories. I challenge anyone to create these inferences without our value system and points of reference as raw input for the resulting weights and biases.
For God's sake, let's stick to beautiful art made by man as a co-creator with God. He makes the physical life as we know it beautiful and is the ultimate archetype of archetypes.
![The moment we stopped understanding AI [AlexNet]](/img/n.gif)
I feel like AI has the potential to make mundane tasks simple, but it could also make us terribly lazy.
Also, as an artist, I am bothered by the fact that AI completely dismisses an artist's job as simply a means to an end. The true beauty of art is in the process of creation, not in the resulting image. You gain most of your creative skills in the flow state while working. The final image is just a visual representation of this process. Anyone who is deeply passionate about their craft understands this feeling. AI is stripping away the artist from the process.
If you don't feel "talented" enough to create your vision and need to use AI to do so, then put the hours in and work for it. I promise you it's worth it because doing the work is humbling and it changes you as a person.
The cool thing about art is that you know a human made it and you are mesmerized at the skill and thought it must have taken to make it. When you know it was a machine that made it, it loses its magic. Most people think like me but a few are promoting this technology for profit without any regard to ethics and love for the art process itself.
I’m going completely analog and off grid and going back to how art comes truly from our soul and body movements
"It's always about capitalism, not the technology, right?" Perfect statement and translates all the worry with this tech and all the previous ones that ended up been turned for damage to whole societies, democracies and etc.
EXACTLY WHAT IVE BEEN THINKING. sooner or later machine will be able to do most of the work. thats why we need a different social system to deal with it.
I'm not even very surprised that this comment received such limited attention compared to pathetic complacency or dumb optimism
@@zzzmzzz4466 You may need it, but most don't. Liberal capitalism has succeeded in doing what no dictatorship has ever been able to do - it has convinced the majority that the system is fair (or needs little change to be fair).
Man I’m printing this and probably making a tattoo
Bookmarks
1:28 unsupervised ML
5:09 existing value system / turn
Though visually appealing, my reaction is the same as it was to those early 2000s Windows screen savers. There simply is no soul in it.
Soul?
If you are not aware that it is not human made, you can sense soul?
Technically, it is always you the beholder who experience the art, not the maker.
Frutiger Aero is a legit art style and humans made that... sooo
well
how would you know?
I mean it, not as joke or anything
an ai may actually dream what it is showing, you know, it's using real photos and real data to make new ones.
We disagree, there are many pieces which invoke various emotions. Just need to find artists which resonate with you. There are plenty fantastic pieces
There is no soul when someone paints a canvas black, leaves it blank or flips a urinal on its side.
I look at AI art and see every hallucinogenic trip I've ever been on. Interesting and occasionally educational, but I really need to stay reality based to keep my sanity. Are losing our collective sanity? Human relationships have become social media relationships. The future looks like human reality becoming an artificial reality. I live on a farm at the edge of a desert and we are no longer visited by butterflies. None of my neighbors seem to be aware of this. They live in a Trumpian, MacDonald's, TikTok, Walmart, asphalt, and digital reality. Will the only butterfly my grandkids know be an AI simulation? I remember the "DARE" program in grade school telling me if I drop acid just once I could have flashbacks my entire life. What they didn't tell me is flashbacks would not be any crazier than the reality our culture builds for itself.
Cameras are machines (photography), AI is also a machine (computer) that works when plugged in to another machine (electricity). Designed for a social media society (FB, YT, IG) where everything is timed. AI in a visual artist’s hand, and mind is a tool to expand (academically) the world of art. AIGen is totally another matter-this will be challenging for me.
You keep your AI, I keep the Art.
Real Art.
AI is a tool. As a camera or a brush are. Open your mind if you speak about Art, you should enlarge your vision
@@IsThatYouSimon I know for certain that a brush is a tool and a camera are physical things and I can manipulate as my creativity please. Artist is manipulating AI or the other way around ?
You are too young to remember life before computers. People had the exact same criticisms against machines. Ask your art professor
@@IsThatYouSimon Ai(artifical intelligence) is not an object, its a term to describe a long "boring" definition. The functionality within a computer program that auto completes tasks on a personal computing device, which does require human input but less so that older programs of the same nature.
I'm sure someone from the modern era made this comment years ago but changing AI to Abstractionism
So many aspects to this great conversation! One thing to keep in mind....if the electricity stops flowing, Ai ceases to exist. And humans have endured no matter what tools we have been presented with. If we view life from a Creationist perspective, we can rest assured that our individual, unique, souls/spirits are what make us a) human, b) be able to live without fear from threat of ANY machine. Machines are tools. Pencils evolved from charcoal sticks. Typewriters evolved from hand writing. Printing presses, computers, colored paints, hammers, shovels,...every tool evolved and has been created to help and better humanity. Even weapons help protect us. What we should fear is not keeping in touch with our Creator. We stop listening and start doing our own thing, then we are in trouble. But, if the lights go out, we can always draw and paint by hand. As we have done for centuries!
and if you lose your hands you be able to create anything, what's your point
He says that he want to use generative AI in a non-conventional way, but generating images based on a corpus of images is like the most conventional way ever xD
hmm there's more to trevor paglen than just that. He has a couple photo series about surveillance and US bases
He generates images by travelling through the latent space. You have entirely misunderstood his work process.
I don´t think humans will ever stop making art, even if Ai is better then us doing it. Ai was able to defeat humans in chess a long time ago, that didn´t stop us from continuing to play it. Even though photography was able to out do painters, and many looked away from realism to more abstract ways of expression, that still didn´t stop people from painting and drawing in figurative ways, hell many of us are still exploring how figurative images can do and express. New technology has always been scary, I´m scared too, there´re a lot of political and economic implications to Ai that we can´t understand and control yet. But at least for now we can look at Ai as a very cool tool that will allow us to learn and create far beyond what has ever been possible before.
Art won't go away, but doing it professionally to make a living will. And a piece of humanity's soul will be lost forever.
Personally I wouldn't conpare the introduction of photogrsphy to ai. Photography is a skill, unlike ai which is just prompts and scrapping people's work
Bruh lol it literally only steals.
Part of the issue is that the endgame of this is kinda eliminating art as a profession for 99% of artists. And in the world we live in we are trending towards just having to work work work to scrounge up enough money to live not really leaving that much time and energy for the average person to do art. Also to know that almost every piece of “art” you see in movies, billboards, ads, etc is not human, I think it would be quite depressing.
Well said! I agree
what an eye opening and thought provoking experience, thank you MOMA.
and I were to take one single thing that really impressed me, it's this idea:
"I also believe that AI algorithms may have a different purpose. It's kind of this finding the language of humanity by using collective memories to create collective dreams and eventually collective consciousness."
what an awe inspiring thought, what an awe inspiring goal to motivate one towards learning these systems 🙇
Interesting take on what it means to train AI and how that relates to art itself. The artist has turned the concept of genAI artmaking around to emphasize the human element of these systems.
This is amazing. I'm an artist and have been struggling with motivation lately. Even though AI-generated art lacks key qualities that differentiate from real art, we all experience the world more and more through screens. So the difference to most people is arbitrary. And that's terrible for society. Grateful for the sharp mind of the artist to cut through the machine and reconnect us with our humanity. Thank you for the work you're doing.
Ok.
All I know is that AI's impact on art- and the world at large- will be unprecedented. The best we can do right now is start figuring out the ethical/legal frameworks that will ensure that AI doesn't work against humanity. Companies like OpenAI need to be held accountable for the data that is fed to these models.
The approach is quite fascinating but is just an art form. It can’t be the future of Art but definitely an exiting Art Form for the machine learning enthusiasts or alpha generation. Whatever the case be, an original hand made art will always be more valuable. But who knows, what lies ahead!! This digital unsupervised art form is definitely exciting. Kudos to MOMA for Thai modern form of art.
A big problem with technology-based art in recent decades is that many of the artists creating it have a weak grasp of the technology itself. Much of it has basically been word clouds and screen savers. A lot of good art begins with mastery of tools, technique, and medium.
You're partly right,
but there are certainly new challenges to crafting artistic mastery that are more challenging than traditional tools like brushes:
For 6 years I have only been painting 3-dimensional in VR, for 6 months I have been integrating AI into my art worlds.
(Just 1 example: AI generates amazing endless textures that can be used for (animated!) VR brushes.
Painting with VR glasses in a virtual 3d space is the most demanding way of using a brush because the hand now also has to manage a third dimension. Happy colored Greetinx!
@@coloryvr Btw do you still paint in VR now that Google Brush has been discontinued? If so, how, if you don't mind me asking?
Using the AI to have it create interesting results requires great skill. Its a tool and requires practice time, patience and mastery. I say this who is actually using AI to generate ideas and render stuff in to save time and improve my creative process. Its my actual job. I'm not just commenting on stuff I barely if at all use.
@@coloryvr VR is amazing. I use gravity sketch a lot these days. It feels very natural.
A lot of good art begins with mastery of tools, technique, and medium. Thoughtful.
It took me a while to realize this was an advert for the MOMA.
That’s great, but I wonder if they consult any of his artist in the database about if they wanted to be in the AI, aren’t they reducing their previous artist to only tools for the AI?
As an AI artist, you have to see fellow artists as tools.
It's funny that even though the IA doesn't use our human reference points, it ends up generating pretty cute images to satisfy the public. It seems to me that this people pleasing lava lamp is based on the erroneous idea that the moma archive is just images and forgets that these works have a body, that without that body they are just ghosts, incomplete specters that can only generate an odradek innocuous and futile as the work of Anadoll.
Someone was reading Ben Davis.. These results are pretty emotionally and even formalistically vacant, as with most procedurally generated art or architecture. However, arguing that just because something is digital, it must be a floating ghost without substance is stupid. You can see a level of detail and contrast in a scanned artwork that is not attainable in a classical gallery environment. Moreover, we should not be afraid of this new outlook on the past that can also show us some uncomfortable characteristics that come from statistical analysis.
Oh, the (romantic) dualism.
"All Bibles or sacred codes have been the causes of the following Errors.
1. That Man has two real existing principles: Viz: a Body & a Soul."
[...]
"But the following Contraries to these are True
1. Man has no Body distinct from his Soul; for that call’d Body is a portion of Soul discern’d by the five Senses, the chief inlets of Soul in this age"
@@evetrue2615 people consider it a floating ghost with no soul for obvious reasons...
"doesn't use our human reference points"
Ai developer literally steals data from real life artist. Wtf u saying?
@@evetrue2615 No even cringier... hes quoting the scifi video game, "Death Stranding" created by a Japanese man named "Hideo Kojima" he made the video game series called "Metal Gear Solid" the entire plot of which as well as the videogame he is quoting, is about technology taking over human life. Hyper common trope in Japanese fiction.
So the future of art is having the capital, the funding, and the team to super-process art over massive computers that no average artist will have access to. Mmkay, message received.
How would A.I. identify the abstract? I recently had a revelation about abstract expressionism in that it doesn't look like anything, and that is the point. Like that song from Audioslave "It Doesn't Remind Me of Anything". It lets your brain see whatever you want instead of recognizing a figure or a landscape. Great video, very provocative.
It feels like biological scans - the complexity and textures hold a certain beauty but it makes me feel how I do seeing pictures of fractals or snowflakes. The narrative speaks to me a of a transitional time and a sadness as corporations shape these tools and artists get on board exploring the technology.
True. A lot of artists jumped on the anti ai bandwagon only to be the first to utilize the technology. This shows that not many were actually anti ai, but more looking after their personal interests. Very sad indeed.
Perhaps we should start examining the links between commerce and art more closely; the priority of industry has never chiefly been to progress art in any direction other than the one that makes the most money.
I thought AI would bring us free energy, zero gravity devices, all that good stuff... we've been framed again.
Unsupervised learned isn't bad. It's what we do all the time. I'll read a book and figure out what I think about it myself. Supervised learning is what we do with kids. We have them read something but also tell them what they should think about it.
As the great Ian Malcolm once said: "Oooh, ahhh, that's how it always starts. Then later there's running and um, screaming"
Yes, let's unleash the A.I and let it do whatever it wants with no regulations, no strings. We will see the result in the future...
I enjoyed the examples where the artists used their work to explain important parts of how these systems work. Training data is an important part of AI. So are the related ideas of embeddings, an embedding / latent space, encoders and decoders. These are AI details worth knowing about for the general public.
Is there any way to get Info about the Music used in this video? Loved it!
Awe inspiring. The longterm fascination with machine learning, as always, has been egocentric. Manifesting human qualities in machines. Personally, I think it is vitally important for artists to document the processes of machine learning as we know it now, just as we need to record any other aspect of contemporary life for posterity but I find it so exciting that we also have an opportunity to facilitate the production of art in wholly new ways, as shown here to tremendous effect. Just as humans have problems sometimes tagging or classifying thoughts and ideas, we can expect machine learning to produce odd and eccentric outcomes from the mis interpretation of training data. As with anything else associated with AI this will provoke hostile and fearful reactions in some people. My take on that is that AI cannot possibly exceed the boundaries of horror and depravity that human kind has not already presented so bring it on!
Perfectly said!😊
Everyone is so proud of the data they curate and train the AI on and they are too eager to see them as unique but with your "flavor." That you're blind to the commonalities across the board that need to be concerning.
11:34
“Art is dead
Long live the new machine art
Oh, Tatlin
Art is dead
Long live the new machine art”
- Richard Jobson, from “Armoury Show”
does anybody know the site from 09:17?
I really appreciate the way MOMA is pushing the boundaries of traditional art and I'm excited to see more of their groundbreaking work in the future. However, I was intrigued by the concerns about human will versus machine will, as well as issues of perception. I didn't notice anything related to political art or for visually impaired people in the video presentation. It would be interesting to see how MOMA could address these issues in their art.
what that machine is making is not art sir art is a human concept we can look at nature and call the beauty of it a work of art because we recognize patterns that relate to our unique imagination a machine that learns from humans and without it they couldn't do just that is not capable of creating art, but this is software engineers putting artists out of work and their weapon is capitalsim this is making our minds lazy and kills imagination i just hope your livelihood is not dependent on commissions like mine (i know this was long and im sorry) my highest paid job was a city mural, now i hear they can print the image on the wall, you cant expect me to welcome it and call me uncultured or fearful of technology when its pushing me towards being homeless
strong infomercial vibes
Very thought-proving for human artisits in the age of AI. I wonder how diverse are the small group of AI developers, are they diverse enough to determine what material 'they' choose to feed and train AI...
Even if they're not diverse enough, human artists are driven by an inner impulse not a mechanical one, AI is just a tool, like a canvas or Photoshop or any editing software. My only concern is over saturation of AI Art. I think the companies have to be tasteful in publishing these powerful tools. It's like you won't find that many experts in excel unless their careers requires that from them. That's how I see it.
I didn't expect @andrewhuang to be featured in this video!.
Great job!!!
where? damn I didn't catch that
00:07 Artists are using and confronting machine learning
01:57 Unsupervised learning allows the machine to dream and speculate an imagination of a machine.
03:23 AI Art explores the potential of machine learning in creating new realities
05:22 AI systems are not scientifically objective, but skewed from the beginning
07:18 Artists use machine learning to reveal biases and implications of AI systems
09:02 Labeling images as single words ignores their complexity and diversity.
10:57 Artists redefine the concept of art and explore the relationship between humans and machines.
12:55 AI systems have a high planetary cost and are influenced by capitalism.
8:50 is really important!
“True Art is Truthful.” ~ Jackson Mack McGuinness
I understand the frustrations many artists feel about AI-generated art, but I’ve been thinking about it from another angle. I recently came across the idea that no one truly owns a work of art because creating art inherently involves drawing inspiration from the world around us-something that belongs to everyone, and from other painters aswell.
For example, if I draw a tree in a cubist style, I might be inspired by Picasso and by the natural world. That raises a question: how much of my painting is truly 'mine'? Isn’t it more like a tapestry of influences?
Isn't it cool that these processes of letting the machine dream maximize the process of inspiration? Taking in the countless paintings, we could also argue that with each painting comes with a sea of inspiration behind it.
Then again, it's just a different perspective and idea and artists frustrations are totally understandable. What do y'all think?
Anybody remember when Jerry Saltz called this exhibition a "MoMA’s Glorified Lava Lamp"? lol
As a traditional artists, if i incorporate the images of my work with the ramdonly selected images from the AI data, will this make my work more unique! While I am using the AI data, do I have the control over how much or how little data I can borrow from the AI data base to inject into my personal data base, will my art be more reflective of my personal characteristics or personalities!
I think that the appreciation of the artist being displaced by the machine (photographic camera) in his/her function, is wrong. First off, artists in the nineteenth century were not necessarily interested in depicting reality identically as we visually perceive it, artists were more interested in the psychic qualities of the new paradigm of reality. Second, Duchamp intention was not necessarily changing the role of an artist, but making a joke about what art is. The ready-made was not just an automatization of the artistic process, but it was a political statement to undermine art institution.
This is super interesting, but I wonder how he deals with the fact that AI can’t come up with new images or patterns - it can only repurpose. So any “dream” that it comes up with is ultimately a re arrangement of elements (colour, shape, form) from other’s (humans) work in MoMa’s collection.
They will probably say this is some philosophical reflection on humanity's error that we believe anything is original, while in fact everything is copied or stolen, as Dali once said.
But we know that's alot of bull. Humans have created incredibly original tools with no precedent.
Everything is a copy of a copy of a copy anyway
Isn't this what humans are also doing?
Do human artists also not repurpose elements from the prior art/experiences to create their work?
Neither can we. Nobody’s ideas are actually original
6:16 his Aeron is broken?
can AI understand and create irony, sarcasm, innuendo, double entendre, and all the intricate ways that humans communicate?
Nice screensavers
Thesis:
The real power of generative AI unfolds in VR.
The creation of 3 dimensional, immersive image and sound worlds, will become a new art direction...VR art means I can give the viewer an almost 100 percent distraction-free experience. ...and the AIs will enable previously unthinkable applications in this area......
...and yes: I vacillate between fascination, creative euphoria and vague anxiety....
Bring back Retro-Futurism Vibes.
Stray away from Dystopian pessimism that is solely ruled by fear, power & capitalistic ideas.
The future of art: artists doing nothing but examining what it means to live in the world of machine learning because nothing else will matter. No worries. There will still be nepotism, favoritism and snobby little art worlds. Old habits die hard.
We need art. Give me painting, drawing, sculpture.
this feels like data visualization done with extra steps and showing to people saying "this is special, it has meanings and we don't know". funny, that'd cost a data scientist's job hahaha
Nice screensaver, bruv. We could call it "creeping featuritis".
Seeing artists harness AI in this way is beautiful. This is why we need a dialogue between science and the humanities lest our works become soulless or feeble.
On the other hand, that looked like a cool af screensaver to have.
Most people don't understand that there is no such thing as true randomization or objectivity in computer programming. Everything from the first keystroke of the program has a bias to it that is generally based upon the programmer's preference and own understanding. Likewise for as incredible as our technology has become it is flawed because we created it and we are flawed.
Fascinating. Thank you
Refik Anadol is an unbelivable creative and modest artist and human. Thank You Refik,Thank You MOMA
Art is literally human expression.
If it was made by a machine, it is not art.
iinteressted in seeing new ways of using ai
This is the kind of art that can help with understanding other living beings. Like whales or dolphins.
This is interesting and awesome stuff. The guys repeating the whole "ai image generation is completely uninteresting to me" comes off as pretentious. AI image generators are still really new, evolving tech, it's inherently fascinating...
I'm sorry but 7 months ago my patron asked me to look at the ai. A generation that trained with Photoshop, CGI, etc., Tools, will eventually become the tools. Campbelltown, NSW, with Packer sponsorship, and Western Sydney University instituted an ai award November 22. Awards for tools.
What a great video
I've been hand drawing painting several mediums over last few decades, graphic digital art for 20 years, and photography for 15 years...... Out of curiosity I tried out the Mid-Journey to it's fullest potential....It's quite amazing what it can do for now...I think between 5-10 years it will pretty much come close to what I can do....But most definitely lacks compared to the real thing...But I have no doubt in 10 years
There is certainly a big misunderstanding around what the collective unconsciousness is. AI can only pretend or mimic this so-called collective unconsciousness because unconsciousness itself is not a random collage of things from internet. C.J is probably spinning in his grave now.
5 years ago I was hoping I could have access to all these images and play with the ML algorithms.
This is a dream within the dream. THE Dream. Start there. "Who" perceives or is aware of this? "Who" knows anything about this? And with any knowing that is based ... based on what?
"literally flying"
its really boring technical stuff after some time itll be a daily thing people have in their life and thats it.
You're just gonna turn off your brain and then cry AI is copy pasting 2 minutes later when videos explain it's not.
Like photography and computers right?
Exactly ! Just like the e-art was in the late 90s and early 00s.
Just like pens and paper huh? Why follow an art museum if you don’t recognize the value of a new tool for creating art?
Imagine a movie where Alexa is a failed artist and causes an AI-fascist uprising.
it screams DEVALUATION! but in fairness the way they present the images using a joystick and flying through it looks innovative.
This is unbelievable
It's a dissolve effect like in premiere pro. Dreaming would be a too-fancy word for it.
I expected to hear something about rights. Did all the artists give their consent to see their art being used for these AI processes? I personally would hate to see my images being dumped into a digital garbage can.
People saying AI art is Art is like saying a robot singing has soul in it 🤦🏻♂️ Art=the human experience 🤷♂️
These still have human behind to curate so it’s just a tools
This is only the beginning of AI Art...
just alghoritms, there is more verbal art in the oniric description of just binary alghoritms that are as automatics as roomba that cleans your floor...
Groundbreaking, absolutely groundbreaking!
it doesn't look as spectacular as they make it sound. such a hype 😅
Good to finally see a backswing on the negativity as people embrace the future in regard to AI being here as part of a future we are all going to live in. I can't tell you how frustrating its been to be the kind of person who is always hunting for new experimental technologies for 10 years just to suddenly have friends brainwashed into seeing me as a bad actor for even looking into AI art workflows. I've always seen a weird pushback on these new technologies like mocap, 3d scanning, quadcoptors, procedural generation. In 2016 I was using quadcoptors to 3d scan people and scenes for unreal engine before that was normalized. Its exhausting to have someone who barely understands technology come at us with the cliff notes of someones copy pasted social media rant and a head full of half baked paranoia. Just the big talking point of the moment and if there is anything this species likes to do its confidently speculate and project regarding things they have no grip on what-so-ever. Things change, things will continue to change, adapt, survive.
i mean, to be fair AI art does pose an enormous risk to the art communities. now that this tech is here, there are definitely going to be hundreds if not thousands of artists put out of work. not that it will completely destroy art, but this will create a massive shift in the art world which we will need to adapt to. i think refik here has showed some very excellent artistic merit with this project, its intriguing and emotional and beautiful and harnesses the power of this new technology in an awesome way. but it also makes sense for many to be upset by AI arts existence.
jaw dropping...
I can easily imagine contemporary artists getting fascinated by AI, things in category of art or not doesn't matter anymore, just loving the new possibility that haven't been before - that's me at least
Credits go to the training data
Gosto muito da noção de que hoje se vive em uma época contraria ao que Platão dizia sobre sair da caverna. Hoje existe tanta luz e claridade, tanta observação e categorização de que o mais saudavel seja buscar o mistério. Talvez.
consciousness is the only thing Ai will never know, this is humans only value.
what is consciousness?
@@lexa7250 is to be...
Beautiful
Oh that's cool. "Nothing exists here, but what *could* exist."
a new language!
As a musician I am reminded of the advent of the synthesizer, which did displace many human beings, but also created a new world of sound.
a machine can not have imagination period
AI will absolutely create an even more inequitable society...it's foolish to think otherwise.
giving more people the ability to be creative = inequity. ok low iq. learn something useful.
Ok. So what? The word "Equality" immediately elicits Conflict. There never has been equality, and there never will...its foolish to think otherwise.
Aah, the innocence.
So, you're saying that AI is more than just an opaque projector.
Cool. How can I use/see the thing they talk about at the end with the Alexa example?
Is little boring is like the mode ( math term) of the conventional
I do think that the AI is using our value system and points of reference. The model fills up the voids with inferences of the art collection categories. I challenge anyone to create these inferences without our value system and points of reference as raw input for the resulting weights and biases.
The art of the artist using the Al is missing the "Kavanism" element
This is really fascinating and incredible!
For God's sake, let's stick to beautiful art made by man as a co-creator with God. He makes the physical life as we know it beautiful and is the ultimate archetype of archetypes.