So I'm super good then, thanks!
And so it begins
-
- Thread starter Paul Howell
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Trade For Trade, Nikon D750 DSLR for Leica lllf
- Started by dankapsner
-
For Sale Yashica GSN Rangefinder -- $100 shipped CONUS (read)
- Started by Kino
-
For Sale 220 Film - Kodak/Fujifilm
- Started by corposant
Forum statistics
Sort of like submitting a urinal as a piece of art.
Sort of, yes. The word that comes to mind is 'despondency'.
Duchamp was nothing like AI But Sol Lewitt sure was. He was "doing" AI long before AI was invented.
Here is an example from the Whitney where his brief instructions were his only involvement in the wall art, which he did not produce:
You can see many of these realized on a grand scale at MASS MoCa. Lewitt and James Turrell are worth the trip alone imho.
Sol LeWitt: A Wall Drawing Retrospective | MASS MoCA
Sol LeWitt: A Wall Drawing Retrospective comprises 105 of LeWitt’s large-scale wall drawings, spanning the artist’s career from 1969 to 2007. These occupy nearly an acre of specially built interior walls that have been installed—per LeWitt’s own specifications—over three stories of a historic...
massmoca.org
Typing Lewitt's exact instructions into Dall-E produces nonsense fyi:
But that wasn't the point of @VinceMT's remark as I read it. I think Vince emphasized the criticism that ready-mades formed to the dominant views in the art world. Submitting an AI artwork and/or selecting it as a winner can be seen as a similar form of criticism of the views that prevail in the world of photography. Well, that's my take on the parallel between both examples, in any case.
Btw, I don't think the motivations are actually the same in both cases. I think Duchamp's flavor of activism was a different one, and inspired by different motives, than that of the photographer who submitted the AI work to a contest.
Yeah I wasn't trying to refute what Vince was saying, he just made me think of Duchamp. I get what he (and you) are saying. (No offense Vince!)
The photographer that submitted the AI should have kept with it and done the Q&A that the organizers were hoping for imo rather than dropping out. And he should have accepted the prize too.
Thank you. That IS what I was referring to. I can’t mind read the motivations of either the subject photographer or Duchamp but I can see the resulting impact on the art world.
Photo stock companies could license their photos to AI creators. Then there wouldn't be copyright violations. In fact, Getty Images is already suing an AI software company in Europe and the US for theft of their photos for just this purpose. They're trying to get the courts to rule on this to establish precedence and case law.
Getty Images lawsuit says Stability AI misused photos to train AI
Stock photo provider Getty Images has sued artificial intelligence company Stability AI Inc, accusing it in a lawsuit made public on Monday of misusing more than 12 million Getty photos to train its Stable Diffusion AI image-generation system.
www.reuters.com
There is an entire genre/technique in art known as “collage.” Maybe that is where AI photography lands.
No one is magnifying a negative 60x unless it’s microfilm. An LVT negative can easily be magnified to usual sizes without looking different than one produced in camera. Just look at Salgado’s recent work.
The judges were unaware it was an AI image and pulled it when they realized the origin.
Unless it's projection where maths tells me (my setup): enlarge 36mm wide positive to fit 1.86m wide screen and you get: 1860/36=~52
So, you're right, it's not 60x in my case actually! But go to film cinema and itl'll be much more magnified, because cine film progresses vertically in most applications.
And another one comes to mind: CPU lithography. So this too should be "easily" doable too if needed.
Last edited:
You don't mean regular photolithography as used in the semiconductor industry, do you? Because there, the reticle holding the pattern is generally reduced 4x in size as it's projected.
I actually don't know exactly what it's called - I mean the machine that's used to create 5nm and smaller structures on silicon that operates with UV light - produced by a single manufacturer in the world.
It's mentioned here:
It's mentioned here:
I'm quite familiar with that. The image on the reticle is reduced (not enlarged) in size 4x during projection. There's also a lot of hocus pocus going on within the projection path to compensate all sorts of optical effects that play a role at such extremes. I think most of the reticle manufacturing is done with e-beam lithography, but that's a bit of a guess. I never really looked into the reticle supply chain very much.
Btw, to the best of my knowledge, AI has been used extensively for years already in semiconductor layout, in various approaches. Much of the literature on this is out in the public domain, so shouldn't be too hard to get some insight into this.
My point/idea being - if you can make structures sub-5nm, you can print them on film in pictorial context, and such a film should hold up to projection no problems.
Uhm. No.
Printing sub-5nm structures on photographic film as we know it is not a realistic idea. But for sake of the argument let's assume we're talking about some kind of inorganic material with excellent surface flatness - a bit like a silicon wafer, but transparent. Some form of high-grade optical glass perhaps.
You'll then run into the problem that projecting sub-5nm structures will involve wavelengths that are invisible and can only travel in a perfect vacuum, so the whole projection idea is kind of moot to begin with. They won't be able to penetrate the theoretical slide with the pattern. Sure, you could work with reflective optics instead of transmissive (that's how it's done in extreme UV lithography), and you'll still be left with the problem that the whole projection would have to take place in a vacuum and for the benefit of an observer that's somehow capable of recording radiation in the single-digit nm region.
Evidently, there's no realistic application for this that somehow relates to a 'pictorial context'. The only thing that comes to mind is a gimmick that has been around for many decades: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chip_art But it's not intended for projection...
With much larger structures, let's say in the micrometer scale, all of this of course is perfectly possible. But it has been possible for decades already, and again, real-world applications related to pictorial use pretty much end at common stuff like DLP projectors.
Printing sub-5nm structures on photographic film as we know it is not a realistic idea. But for sake of the argument let's assume we're talking about some kind of inorganic material with excellent surface flatness - a bit like a silicon wafer, but transparent. Some form of high-grade optical glass perhaps.
You'll then run into the problem that projecting sub-5nm structures will involve wavelengths that are invisible and can only travel in a perfect vacuum, so the whole projection idea is kind of moot to begin with. They won't be able to penetrate the theoretical slide with the pattern. Sure, you could work with reflective optics instead of transmissive (that's how it's done in extreme UV lithography), and you'll still be left with the problem that the whole projection would have to take place in a vacuum and for the benefit of an observer that's somehow capable of recording radiation in the single-digit nm region.
Evidently, there's no realistic application for this that somehow relates to a 'pictorial context'. The only thing that comes to mind is a gimmick that has been around for many decades: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chip_art But it's not intended for projection...
With much larger structures, let's say in the micrometer scale, all of this of course is perfectly possible. But it has been possible for decades already, and again, real-world applications related to pictorial use pretty much end at common stuff like DLP projectors.
I don't know the scale required (no tech background to have an idea) for such a theoretical slide to look natural and you probably are right that it doesn't require nanometers, but micrometers. I was just entertaining an idea from top of my mind.
There are technologies that could be used to such an end. Something like this: https://heidelberg-instruments.com/product/μmla/
The really challenging bit would be to come up with a meaningful application
The really challenging bit would be to come up with a meaningful application
And so it begins...
: D
: D
Thank you. Very interesting. As a retired electrical engineer who complained when US manufactures in the early 1970's started sending chip manufacturing overseas, this is personally interesting.
Last edited:
Yeah, I too found this interesting and amazingly fragile per se: have a turmoil in a single country and hi-tech gets threatened as a species.
Sean
Admin
No idea how this passed as a real photo. AI has known issues (at the time) with fingers and hands:
Seriously?
Seriously?
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |