I understand what people are saying, and agree it is a bit soulless, but, there is plenty of human art that is also in the same bracket is there not? Not all art is beautiful, sometimes it's ugly, sometimes it's meant to be, its point is to make you feel something, or to express grief or loss or frustration. I guess the difference lies in the intent!!! and the AI can't have intent when making images, so that's probably why it feels cold or soulless!?
But there's beauty in the gloom of some of those dark songs I think, most people, me included, remember sad songs as some of the most beautiful ones.
What I think others mean by soulless, and please correct me if I am wrong, is that the images while colorful and aesthetically pretty, lack the humanity in them that evokes the artist's being in you, and what they were feeling when they painted, wrote the song, played the music. Does that make sense? there's no one on the other side to connect with.
Sad songs written and played in dark moments, that perhaps convey a feeling of wanting to disappear or something, for instance, convey that, and can evoke deep emotions in people. And I think there's a difference between that, and simply not feeling anyone else on the other end of piece of art.
And I think if we take that a bit further, the reason art is so powerful, is because it connects us with someone else across time and space...but also, there's perhaps a recognition at some level that the artist was connected to existence itself. I think we recognize a lot more in a work of art than the artist, if that makes sense.
Now, that isn't to say that there's not a creative process in writing up the AI, that was a human effort and has its own beauty and order. But I think that there's the purpose of the tool that might clarify my position. With Photoshop, for instance, I can manipulate and create something, the purpose of Photoshop (roughly speaking) is to enhance or make more efficient my ability to create (photoshop is also used for darker purposes too).
The purpose of this AI, seems to me, is to attempt to translate feelings into a picture, not enhancing the efficiency of creativity, but attempting to create a shortcut for the creative process, that's where humanity disappears from the pictures IMO. It's a process that can't be skipped. It's like if a machine asked you for a few thoughts and then wrote your song for you. Harmonious and with the "right" tones and melodies.. but the musician wouldn't be there.
Personally, I don't find any of the images truly beautiful, and many of them really are quite creepy. But then I suppose that's to be expected given that this is apparently just 'machine learning' hoovering up everything humans write, say, and do, and creating 'art' that is a reflection of the current state of 3d existence.
Speaking of which, I caught
this the other day, go figure
AI-generated artwork wins first place in fine arts competition, sparks controversy
The image represents a kind of 'opera in space' and gives the impression of having been painted by a masterful hand.
Jason Allen, president of the board game company Incarnate Games, won first place in the fine arts competition at the Colorado State Fair (USA) on Monday, using a work of art generated by artificial intelligence (AI).
According to the pamphlet with the results, published by the fair, the work in question is called 'Théâtre D'opéra Spatial' and won in the digital art category. The image represents a kind of 'opera in space' and gives the impression of having been painted by a masterful hand.
However, according to Allen himself, the work was made by the AI software Midjourney, which specializes in creating artistic images using text instructions.
This sparked controversy on social media, where artists and enthusiasts accused Allen of pushing for the death of traditional painting.
"The biggest problem is that (presumably), the judges didn't realize it was AI, yet they thought it was good enough to win. Doesn't bode well for the 'human vs. AI' illustration debate," wrote one user. "This is disgusting," lamented another.
However, some people reacted in the opposite way, expressing support for the news. "The end product is what matters. If AI can create amazing art, isn't that a good thing?" one Twitter user wondered.
"It's actually great. The process of exploration and guidance by a human is really something unique. Just because it's not your niche, doesn't mean it's the end of your world," noted another user, concluding that, if anything, traditional artists should learn to use AI, "if only for inspiration."
