Food for Thought

[Bartc]

Agreed! I didn't mean to post this to get divisive. Just a "food for thought" kind of thing. Something to think about, and perhaps discussing it wasn't the best idea.

It's one of those things like religion and politics, I guess. Not the easiest to discuss.

 

[Terri]

...and here I've been thinking how overall polite this group has been! No flame throwing, no name calling...take a bow, Creative Spark!

We all have opinions but, unlike the writer of this article, have any of us had the issue dropped in our laps like this? If you're being called on to take an action, either way there will be judgment and criticism from another opinion. So this guy has his moral compass as well as his livelihood to consider. So he's done some research and written about it.

I appreciated the discussion and hearing lots of viewpoints. Thanks to all.

 

[brianvds]

I can think of a few non-white males that have been "cancelled" in recent times. Depending on what they have done (and have been found guilty of). I don't think race or ethnicity matters. It's usually been men in positions of power. But let's face it, who are most of the people in power? How often can an impoverished woman of color (for instance) exploit a white man and get away with it? Just sayin.

As I noted in my first post on this topic, I think it depends to some extent whether we are dealing with living people. Canceling some creep who abused his power over women to get them in bed (we have seen such cases in Hollywood) is one thing. Canceling the entire artistic output of some long dead artist or composer is another.

Nowadays they don't even have to be that long dead. Check out what's being done to Roald Dahl:

Augustus Gloop no longer fat as Roald Dahl goes PC

Sensitivity readers were hired to scrutinise the text with parts rewritten for a modern audience

www.telegraph.co.uk

Now that's little short of vandalism, if you ask me.

Also, South Africa and America are two very different cultures seeing how Apartheid wasn't abolished all that long ago. They are very different climates in many ways. We also have statues dedicated to slave-owners and such in the South here where many (with the same, ongoing views) still object to having them taken down. Everyone, everywhere have their views on these thing--what is "fair" and "unfair" and toward what kinds of people. And so perpetuates the hatred and the wars, and the animosity towards one another. We can only hope it will get a little better. Will it ever be cured? I have no such pipe dream.

Yes, the ruckus over those statues have made international news. Particularly of course figures like Robert E. Lee, though I see nowadays even Washington gets targeted. I would think one solution there is simply to keep it local, i.e. the people who live in that particular town should make the decision, because they are after all the ones who will have to live with or without the statue. One doesn't need protestors from all over the country to descend on the town in question; it's none of their business.

Also, as with the case of Roald Dahl above, part of the whole point of books and monuments is that they give us a glimpse into how people thought in the past. We cannot unmake history by erasing all signs of it, though such erasure will probably ensure that we'll never learn anything.

 

[Artyczar]

Yes, the ruckus over those statues have made international news. Particularly of course figures like Robert E. Lee, though I see nowadays even Washington gets targeted. I would think one solution there is simply to keep it local, i.e. the people who live in that particular town should make the decision, because they are after all the ones who will have to live with or without the statue. One doesn't need protestors from all over the country to descend on the town in question; it's none of their business.

Brain, on some of these things, we'll have to agree to disagree.

 

[Artyczar]

As I noted in my first post on this topic, I think it depends to some extent whether we are dealing with living people. Canceling some creep who abused his power over women to get them in bed (we have seen such cases in Hollywood) is one thing. Canceling the entire artistic output of some long dead artist or composer is another.

Nowadays they don't even have to be that long dead. Check out what's being done to Roald Dahl:

Augustus Gloop no longer fat as Roald Dahl goes PC

Sensitivity readers were hired to scrutinise the text with parts rewritten for a modern audience

www.telegraph.co.uk

Now that's little short of vandalism, if you ask me.



Yes, the ruckus over those statues have made international news. Particularly of course figures like Robert E. Lee, though I see nowadays even Washington gets targeted. I would think one solution there is simply to keep it local, i.e. the people who live in that particular town should make the decision, because they are after all the ones who will have to live with or without the statue. One doesn't need protestors from all over the country to descend on the town in question; it's none of their business.

Also, as with the case of Roald Dahl above, part of the whole point of books and monuments is that they give us a glimpse into how people thought in the past. We cannot unmake history by erasing all signs of it, though such erasure will probably ensure that we'll never learn anything.

I agree that texts shouldn't be changed. They tried (or did) change the Mark Twain's book Huckleberry Finn as well, using the word "slave" in place of the N-word, which I thought was stupid.

 

[brianvds]

Brain, on some of these things, we'll have to agree to disagree.

Well, seeing as I am not even on the same continent as the controversial statues, it's definitely none of my business.

I agree that texts shouldn't be changed. They tried (or did) change the Mark Twain's book Huckleberry Finn as well, using the word "slave" in place of the N-word, which I thought was stupid.

What I found particularly alarming about the Dahl thing is that the books' covers are not amended to reflect the information. They are not listed as being by Dahl but with amendments by others; no, it's still just Dahl, who now goes down in history as a boring writer. Imagine you saw one of your own posts here on this board, except it has been completely mangled by someone else, anonymously, without your knowledge or consent.

As far as I know, in many jurisdictions, it is in fact illegal to alter an artist's work in this way, even if you own it.

Well, let this be a warning to all authors, about the perils of being careless about the rights to your work. It is one more reason why I have serious doubts about current copyright law, but of course, writers can simply arrange for their work to enter the public domain upon their death. I would recommend this to all who do not want their work to end up the sole property of some or other company.

 

[Bartc]

Was not aware of this law, but it has interesting implications: https://www.congress.gov/bill/101st-congress/house-bill/2690

 

[Artyczar]

I was aware of that. But it's not easy to enforce.

 

[mill]

Well I've spent a good deal of time looking at the results of googling AI Art and I must say I am not impressed.

The first impression I get is that the results only emphasize that worst of concepts that are present in computer games dealing with the eerie and fantastic. Many adolescent illusions about what defines sexy are exploited to the full. A preoccupation with the macabre underlines many of the pictures.

Most of the pictures are just illustrations, that is comprised of a central figure or object in meticulous detail and a far off scene or just a textured background behind it.
Some manga influence is evident with overlarge eyes and references to and borrowings from Japanese animated films.
Pictorial books, what we used to call comics are frequently used especially those which deal with macho or violent subjects.

Competent artists need not fear any of this output so far, the only pictures that show any sign of useful graphical composition is when it is obvious that it is copied from a well known existing painting by a specific popular artist.
The basic rules of composition regarding balance, depth, relationships between dark and light, large and small shapes, areas of interest and direction pointers towards them are completely ignored.

Any properly trained artist who has these abilities at his command will be able to judge the emptiness of these collections of visual qualities and how lacking in cohesion and appeal they are.
If you don’t quite know what I’m talking about, I explain it all at length in my book available free to read on line at: Into Composition

The many comments of enthusiastic public approval that appear under each of these pictures shows the complete worshipping of detail fostered by the avalanche of detailed photographic images appearing on the web. The images pervert the critical facility of everyone who doesn't have the sensitivity of the practising artist.

The only people who might be affected are the dealers in fine art and rare documents, we all know that AI can improve itself by learning from its mistakes, copies of many documents and sketches attributed to artists and celebrities are going to be much harder to pick out.



John Kay

 

[Martin C]

John, while I agree with much of what you say, it is the case that AI-generated works have fooled supposed art experts, so they are not always quite so easy to pick out.

I believe the algorithms will quite quickly run into a lack of original data as they sweep up increasing amounts of stuff they (or their rivals) have themselves generated. A growing number of websites are already AI-generated and this is going to cause the same problem for ChatGPT etc. Human-generated material may even grow in value as a result of AI. Can you tell that I'm an optimist?

 

[Bartc]

John, I thank you for your analysis. However, I have far less faith in the viewing public than you seem to have, and they are almost all not practicing artists. I have a feeling that human art will go the way of esoteric pursuits; sublime and valuable to the connoisseur but oddball to everyone else.

 

[Enyaw]

Who really cares what could happen? One thing dies and is replaced with another and life goes on. Life is.

 

[Bartc]

Who really cares what could happen? One thing dies and is replaced with another and life goes on. Life is.

Um, Wayne, this thread and many articles indicate that there are many who do care. Should be self-evident. And sadly, the masses are as yet uninformed, but someday they will wake up to a world changed in ways with which they are unequipped to deal.

 

[Enyaw]

Talk does not equalivate to care.

someday they will wake up to a world changed in ways with which they are unequipped to deal.

...and where are we now?

 

[Terri]

Talk does not equalivate to care.

...and where are we now?

Why, Wayne - you sound like an old curmudgeon. I don't believe it. Your paintings give you away.

 

[Enyaw]

Why, Wayne - you sound like an old curmudgeon

I have my moments.

 

[Bartc]

Talk does not equalivate to care.

...and where are we now?

On the atomic doomsday clock we're half a minute from midnight. But on the AI doomsday clock we're already at half past Skynet.

 

[E.J.H.]

As the chinese curse goes, "May you live in interesting times"...

 

[Artyczar]

Yes, I still think human-made art will always be in demand. And the truth will reveal itself. I guess, on this ONE subject, I am an optimist.

 

[ZenDruid]

Yes, I still think human-made art will always be in demand. And the truth will reveal itself. I guess, on this ONE subject, I am an optimist.

I think you're right. AI art will become identified as the cheap alternative. It's not that hard to spot and all the client has to do is ask to see the original art. Discriminating clients who value more expensive hand-made quality will want a real artist to illustrate their product. To justify the expense they may even help promote the artist. That could be a selling point.
An example might be the old Saturday Evening Post magazine that featured new weekly cover art by Norman Rockwell. Each was original subject matter. AI might be able to copy his style but not his originality.