But wait, I did paint the Mona Lisa. Here’s the video evidence of me doing so. Scroll down, it’s the second video on the page:
http://www.codecooker.com/projects_video/misc/
Photography AI as art
-
- Thread starter cliveh
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale ORIGINAL ROLLEIFLEX LENS SHADE
- Started by Philippe-Georges
-
For Sale T-max 4x5 100 kodak ready loads. expired 2008, kept frozen
- Started by Early Riser
-
For Sale Images in Science, excellent scientific imaging. $10
- Started by laser
-
Sold Book: PhotoShop Restoration and Retouching. $20
- Started by laser
Forum statistics
But wait, I did paint the Mona Lisa. Here’s the video evidence of me doing so. Scroll down, it’s the second video on the page:
http://www.codecooker.com/projects_video/misc/
Well, Piss Christ is a photo of a crucifix submerged in pee, the artist had to create that first in order to make the photograph. And if a banana duct-taped to a gallery wall passes as art, the rest has either been done or will be soon. Clouds could surely qualify as conceptual art. Robert Rauschenberg had a paint-covered tire driven over 20 sheets of paper and the result is now in the collection of the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art.
You are not grasping my point at all. If an artist renders those subjects in some medium - painting, sculpture, music, photography etc. - then it's art. But the topics I listed as examples do not, in and of themselves qualify as art. Art is made only by artists and with intention. It does not occur naturally, it isn't made by animals, and it's not the output of some factory spewing sludge into a river.
Whether it is good art or not is another matter. A crucifix in urine is the intentional act of a human. But it's barely art at all, it's an anti-religious propaganda hit piece in artistic drag, presumably so the "artist" can hide behind "you don't get to take me to task for this, it's aaaaaarrrrt." Art as a scam has a long and malignant history. As a different example, fashion photography may be "artistic" and very well executed, but it's ultimately advertising which - if it's art at all - it's a fairly low form of it.
Last edited:
Again we agree. I will buy your drinks at the bar tonight.
That is your personal definition. Why does it have to be an "artist"? What defines a "medium"? An oil spill on water is media.
Because art is made by people, not natural process or other parts of the animal kingdom.
Once again, your definition. I have seen "art" painted by elephants and insects.
Not a problem. Your finding the bar that I am in may be a problem for you though.
The definition isn't "mine", it's what art has understood to be historically, etymologically, and philosophically through pretty much all recorded human history across culture and geography. It's one of the very few things people of widely differing experience mostly agreed on.
There has been vast destruction of knowledge that took place in the last hundred years at hands of linguistic, deconstructionist, and postmodern philosophers that has more-or-less robbed us of any kind of meaning about ... well, almost everything.
Your view is very postmodern and in that those traditions. And it has a significant downside. If elephants and insects can make art, then,everything - in principle - either is- or could be art. The term then loses any meaning. The notion gets completely destroyed.
That said, natural processes can have beauty, which exists independently of art.
So is human waste.
Yabut "all humans make waste" isn't the same things "everything humans make is waste".
I'll just look for someone with their head on the bar with a Hassy hanging off their neck
Until someone paints it or photographs it and then their rendition of it could be art.
That's right. The thing itself isn't art. The thing humans make from it is art. That's why when people ask me what I'm doing when I have a field camera stretched out and the hood over my head, I tell them "I am making pictures." Art is a human construction process that uses the natural world, plus imagination, plus technology to create an artifact.
And that's the point. The thing you're observing - nature, waste dripping from a factory, animal tracks ... - isn't the artifact. You create the artifact using those things as inputs.
In my opinion, a grapefruit is a vegetable. Therefore, a grapefruit is a vegetable. Now let me tell you my opinion about art. So much nonsense. So many people just blurting out the first thing that pops into their head.
You have just succinctly described 20th Century philosophy in 3 statements.
Either there is a more-or-less objective and agreed-to definition for words: "Art is the intentional act of a human" , "A grapefruit is a cylindrical citrus fruit of yellowish coloration."
Or you don't: "I am a toaster oven", "Quantum physics is entirely a social construct"
The first approach preserves and grows human knowledge of all kinds - intellectual, artistic, scientific, and so on
The second is entirely defined by each individual for themselves and has no meaning whatsoever beyond making the speaker feel good about themselves. It certainly has no value in transmitting knowledge of any kind to other people.
I have to go now, I think the dog just arted all over the lawn.
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2011
- Messages
- 13,974
- Format
- 8x10 Format
Life would be so much simpler if not only religion and politics are banned from this forum, but the ambiguous and contentious term "art" itself. It's been a curse on photography since Day One.
What would Ai produce if you told it to make an "art photograph"? - another goofy million of them?
What would Ai produce if you told it to make an "art photograph"? - another goofy million of them?
Not really a curse. Like most things, it has its positive and negative aspects.
If I were to put a painting made by an elephant or an insect side-by-side with one made by a human, could you tell me which is art and which is not?
Without art, what would be the point of non-documentary photography?
Who told you the elephant and insect paintings were art? Why did you believe them?
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2011
- Messages
- 13,974
- Format
- 8x10 Format
Better still, Ask Ai to take a Selfie. If it turns out looking like the Terminator, or names itself Hal, we know we're all in for deep trouble.
Alan - around here, everyone with green hair and a nose ring is an "artiste". And the more they try to look different, the more they all look the same. So does their "art".
So now let us debate the meaning of "documentary". All actual photographs could potentially be classified as documenting something. But no Ai or PS-concocted ones should be.
Alan - around here, everyone with green hair and a nose ring is an "artiste". And the more they try to look different, the more they all look the same. So does their "art".
So now let us debate the meaning of "documentary". All actual photographs could potentially be classified as documenting something. But no Ai or PS-concocted ones should be.
Last edited:
Photos reach the level of art when they also stir our souls.
| 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:  |