Art made by an AI: What makes art great? a TOK presentation | AmorSciendi

[@riodiaz7241]

As an artist I'm concerned about AI art - than you for the video, gives me much to consider

[@lucasmerat9522]

Love the last question about what part of the process we should be defending. I think this extends beyond art and can be applied to any area where machines replace humans. An example would be automated trucks taking work from drivers. Here we're talking about the loss of a job so it's a different discussion, but still relevant since that job is that person's livelyhood and part of their identity. I think the reason the question being applied to art is so interesting and powerful, is because we consider art to be deeply human on sacred level. Personally, I think in this case the developer of the AI is still participating in the process of creating art. They're still deeply involved in considering how an algorithm and machine learning can create something we percieve as art. Which in itself is, I think, an artistic process. Granted it's a different process of creation and it's worth discussing whether we'd lose too much removing the person behind the brush etc. But then again, Socrates feared the impact that writing would have on humanity and look where we are now. Super interesting topic. Thanks!

[@susannadavis92]

What a great response! I guess I won't both defending these stick figures I just created, but I'm happy to report that I didn't have to outsource to produce the final product.

[@willemvandebeek]

I agree, for me personally; art has to have intent. The programmer said he selected a few from a large quantity; this makes him the artist, not the AI. Anyway, very interesting video, merry Christmas and happy 2019! :)

[@KayWhyz]

This was great! I'm loving the new style of production you've taken up, and the longer form suits you.

[@AmorSciendi]

Thanks!

[@OfficialJabe]

Interesting food for thought. This is the content I love to see. I was always judging art in a similar manner to how you described in the video but I'm glad I have a more concrete equation for the strength of a piece.

[@misam2124]

Dude, j'adore your videos and I agree the french is tough, keep going. Greetings from Saudi Arabia

[@thedotisblack]

"What makes art great?" is a difficult question. But I think it's more important that coding starts to get the (mainstream) attention that it actually deserves, especially in regard of digital images/visuals (which is good for me as well). Mario Klingemann, one of the experts in GAN and such portraits will have an auction at the Contemporary Art Day Auction (Sotheby's, 6 March 2019, London)... I think Sotheby's learned from Christie’s huge mistake, as compared to this Edward Bellamy portrait (fake/copy), Mario's work and process are extraordinary!

[@AMcAFaves]

As long as the artist is doing the filtering of what gets outputted as art, I don't think that any of the other criteria for the process in the art matters if it is outsourced. Because many successful artists outsource the actual construction of the art, does that mean it isn't art? Like was implied with your reference to Duchamp's Fountain, are ready-mades not art because all Duchamp did was select what type of items he wanted to use and then selected the specific items and announced them as art. To me this is analogous to the artist with algorithmic art selecting the algorithm to use and then selecting which output of the algorithm to announce as their art piece. I agree with you that what makes art great is completely arbitrary and subjective. For instance, I am very interested in computers and computer programming as well as interested in art and I find great emotional satifaction in algorithmic art, and so have a contradicting perspective when it comes to if algorithmic art can be great. (As an aside, I happen to find the Belamy piece not great art personally, but that doesn't mean that someone else would find it great art.) I think the closest anyone could come to objectively determining what great art is is to survey a particular group of people and if a significant percentage of that group deems it great art, then it is great. But then there is great subjectivity in determining the criteria. Which population do you pick? The Art World? Art Industry? Popular opinion at a specific place and time? All people that have ever existed? And then there is the subjectivity of determining the "significant percentage". Is it 100%? 20%? 72.00003%?

[@chopsonyou2007]

I like the topics and the ideas but there is something very difficult to listen to how this is delivered. It’s sort of a unending stream of verbiage that is delivered in a flattened aspect with a metronome like tempo. Like… try pausing occasionally? It’s a bit tortuous.

[@maht0x]

How much things have changed since this video. NFT craze and 1000s of generated pictures posted to Instagram every day, my own 3 per day included. And many of them are visually stunning or provoking. Some struggle to see my work as art, but I - and others I talk with - certainly put in plenty of creative effort into developing our output. I have a moodboard, I have a library of images to use as image prompts I gathered - including my own drawings, photographs and collages. It might be easy to make *something* that doesn't need manual dexterity or even knowing anything about composition or colour theory but there is still some worth in the output. What you see on my Insta are images that *I* had an emotional response to, and when others like and comment then it has been provoking. OK not weak at the knees but still not just 'keep scrolling'.