by valentinvieriu on 2/16/20, 11:47 PM
by kengor on 2/17/20, 12:29 AM
Not trying to denigrate the amazing technical skill needed to make this thing, but from the point of view of someone who makes art, this is a pastiche image maker. I have yet to see AI generate anything that's not a combination of existing images and techniques.
Probably wading into murky philosophical waters here but I reckon art needs to be more than a nice 'arty' looking image to be considered any good. If you are going to make Art that is worth the capital 'A' on the front, then it has to mean something.
However I suspect the days of actually making Art are in the past. We're on to something else now. Not necessarily better or worse, just different. Art is an old idea, not entirely relevant any more.
by allovernow on 2/17/20, 3:45 AM
This is indistinguishable from something that would be hanging in an art museum, and anyone pretending otherwise only believes so because they know a priori that it is generated by ML.
Honestly I would consider buying something like this, though I'd never waste my money on something so pretentious from a human. This, however, is an achievement, and there's beauty in that.
Edit: in fact, if love to see two tests: a blind test with a series of humans, and a classifier trained to differentiate between machine and human generated art. I have no doubt that the humans would not score much better than chance - I bet only an artificial discriminator would be able to tell, and then only because of subtle differences in pixel distributions that humans won't perceive. Throw in a couple different GANs trained on different distributions and even a machine will have trouble telling the difference!
by mattsahr on 2/17/20, 5:12 AM
The further down the page I scrolled, the more I got a kind of despair. To realize that the space was infinite, and I would never reach its end. Each individual image is pretty cool. As a collection, they're sad.
What's funny is that I then tabbed back to HN, where I was deep down the comments tree, and momentarily I forgot that real humans make these comments. I thought "I shall never reach the end of the HN comments. It's all AI - generating a pastiche of plausible opinions and sentences-that-appear-sentient." Same despair. Quite a relief, then, to get to the end of the page.
by anigbrowl on 2/17/20, 12:21 AM
Now we just need an infinite stream of AI generated art criticism to tell us how to talk about it at parties.
by alharith on 2/17/20, 12:01 AM
I get the appeal from a "it's fascinating we can make computers do this" stance.
I don't get the appeal as trying to appreciate this as actual art (or music in the case of ai-generated tunes).
Art for me is about the connection I can make with the person who made it. I can't make a connection with an algorithm. I view it and I am like "OK this is interesting" but that's about it. There's no desire to try and understand it because it was programmatically generated.
Does anyone else feel this way?
by Rochus on 2/16/20, 11:48 PM
I wonder how art experts would assess these paintings in a blinded experiment ("blinded" figuratively, of course ;-)
by zsz on 2/17/20, 2:58 AM
Is this a portent of truth's final days? Is absurdism the only final, knowable truth, in a world where only fact carries meaning, as humanity has been deconstructed and rendered noumenal? The voices of a million potential future artists just cried out in agony and were silenced forever. The Tesla CEO has it right. AI is the end of humanity -- but (probably) not in a SkyNet sort of way, but one that is much worse because it renders the term "hope" itself meaningless.
by dsco on 2/17/20, 12:37 AM
This is fantastic! Wrap it in a SmartTV app and sell it for a dollar or two as a monthly decorative art subscription!
by dvh on 2/16/20, 11:40 PM
I think modern art is not about creation, it is about ability to sell.
by starchild_3001 on 2/17/20, 1:19 AM
To my untrained eye, many of these images are as good as anything else I've seen from humans. What qualities make me say that? Your images create a visceral response. They evoke a lot of interesting thoughts and feelings. If anything they remind me of 20th century modern art. Very impressive stuff. It'd be amazing to make these bigger, ensure texture is there, print them large like an oil painting.
by alainchabat on 2/17/20, 6:40 AM
I love this idea of generated content. I'm wondering what artists thinks about that.
There was a recent Show HN project about generate quotes having some great results having sense : https://machineswisdom.com
by flyGuyOnTheSly on 2/17/20, 2:20 AM
The results are really impressive.
I have been studying art non-professionally for the past 5 odd years now and I would be hard pressed to tell you if any one of the pictures your software generated was created by a human artist or not.
Nice work!
by jcims on 2/17/20, 11:44 AM
This one is amazing
https://vcloud42.com/file/art42-cdn/cubism/seed_0000086582.j...
It reminds me of those time slice type photos, where the bottom is when the little 'tree' on the right is young and each layer is a new year or three along the way, in which the environment gets a bit older and gnarlier over time.
Absolutely wonderful work.
by gdubs on 2/17/20, 2:01 AM
by FpUser on 2/17/20, 12:00 AM
http://www.sanbase.com/ - these were created long before AI became a household name. Actually no AI involved at all. All just pure math. Think it is called "generative art" or something to that tune
by davidajackson on 2/17/20, 2:01 AM
They look great. If you make something where people can pick say paintings/styles they like, and then you generate custom for them until they choose one (and presumably then un-watermark or high res it), you may have a business here.
by Fnoord on 2/17/20, 12:13 PM
Reminds me of Debris by a NullSoft employee. It would download random pictures using a search engine, and it would craft it together. The end result is unique, and allowed you to look into the details. You could even edit the search terms or the result, add cameos (some vague nudity, for example). What I found really funny though, is that the end results often had actual funny easter eggs. I guess if you add up all of this randomness, and you watch closely, the chances of something funny being included increase. It just might take a while till you find it.
by ecmascript on 2/17/20, 9:33 AM
Looks exactly as "modern art" to me.
I do not appreciate modern art anyway, but I love this since it will for sure upset some artists that think they're talented.
by lchiodi on 2/17/20, 10:29 AM
I love cubism and this plain sucks. You see clearly that is not human work, there is no subject, there is no meaning, there aren't emotions...is garbage.
by bluetwo on 2/17/20, 1:48 AM
by ramoz on 2/17/20, 3:55 AM
Impressive on the surface. but, with a general idea of how the art was created, I fail to gain emotion, resemblance, or
some form of appreciation that I've felt from certain art before.
Still, I guess "art" is all subjective anyway & this is still great stuff.
by bawana on 2/17/20, 12:04 AM
warhol would have been all over this
by lsb on 2/17/20, 12:09 AM
What do you like about the latent space that you are sampling from? :)
by mrcms on 2/17/20, 5:23 AM
This looks fantastic! Amazing that it is possible to make an AI output images that you want to hang on your walls.
by neetodavid on 2/17/20, 12:37 AM
I like these. It feels like the paintings version of lying in the grass trying to find images in the clouds.
by Jolter on 2/17/20, 12:44 PM
Just an infinite stream of dead picture links, right now. I suppose something is down?
by sub7 on 2/16/20, 11:36 PM
This is awesome. There's a business here somewhere.
by dillonmckay on 2/17/20, 11:48 AM
The written code to create these images has a copyright, but the generated images themselves do not.
by ritwik310 on 2/17/20, 11:45 AM
Doesn't AI generated art violate the whole definition of art?
