myportfoliotest - Tumblr blog

[myportfoliotest]

das ist ein Test-Post

textgröße 1

textgröße 2

textgröße 3

bold

italics

durchgestrichen

bunt

schreibschrift

chat

"das hier ist ein Zitat"

hier sieht man ein Bild mit Quellenangabe und Bildbeschreibung:

ein link

[myportfoliotest]

Sonja Braas, “Tornado”, 2005.

From the series “The Quiet of Dissolution”.

[myportfoliotest]

The Rose Garden, c.1920 by Olaf Viggo Peter Langer (oil on canvas)

[myportfoliotest]

Art theory states that art should have intention. A dissertation on "AI Art".

A disclaimer first of all that I am someone that has dived deep into AI image generation, I've worked with and created my own models and generated my own images using the open source code. I did this to understand what it is and how it works and I'd say I understand it more than most artists that talk about it online. I feel confident saying that I know what I'm talking about in this matter. I know its capabilities and limitations.

I'm not going to get into the morality of the use of it. I won't defend the rampant theft and copyright violations, I'm someone that believes that AI image gen at the very least should never be used for commercial purposes, but in this post I only want to talk about something else: Tte plain and simple merits of AI art as "Art" itself.

I'll start with repeating my premise statement: "Art theory states that art should have intention in order to be art." Does AI generation meet this criteria? Well, no, not really. Specifically it's not an image generation user's "art" if it is art at all.

With pattern biased algorithmic image generation, AKA "AI art”, someone pressing a button after typing in a prompt just doesn’t amount to a person actually picking and choosing their subject, their composition, and ESPECIALLY their meaning and message. The result is most definitely not the button-pusher's art, the generation is too random and what comes out belongs far more to the machine than to the prompter.

And a machine cannot by itself cogently make the essential choices to make an image successfully have intent. Language models we currently have cannot communicate a person's intent to the machine beyond a few broad strokes tags and trigger words, and pattern bias will often supercede those prompts anyway. A discerning eye will always be able to tell which decisions were made by a machine because it is not making them in the way a human being would, they appear uncanny in the most basic way. The generator is not understanding and interpreting the space and subject in the way that someone who lives and breathes with binocular vision and a human's infinitely more adaptable brain would.

The generator is incapable of truly understanding stylization or design principals, and all its continual, persistent mistakes in numbers of fingers, in anomalous anatomy, and broken gestalt, in nonsensical perspective, and merged and floating objects are a byproduct of this lack of living intelligence. These are things that will never go away, no matter how much data is fed into it because it is flawed at the core by the very basis of its pattern bias. It cannot "learn" how to fix them and so it can only hope to, at best, get lucky enough, or generate enough iterations of the same prompt that the images won't show the cracks. And that process is not creative, it's gambling at a slot machine hoping for a payout.

AI gen really is just a parlor trick at this moment in time, it’s a parrot that’s been taught to repeat phrases in response to certain stimuli to fool you into thinking you’re having a conversation, but it’s just really been trained to recognize noises, not meaning. It's a very pretty bird, but it's no replacement for the real thing, and the longer you "talk" with it, the more obvious that will become.

Art, the real art that the machine is trying and failing to learn from and replicate, requires a human’s creativity and problem solving to be able to make the decisions that will create a piece of art that someone can confidently call their own.

[myportfoliotest]

Basic Color Theory Overview Guide With Examples

[myportfoliotest]

For the glowy effect I just used the same colour of the light and bounce light and just used an airbrush over it ^^

------------

You ask, I deliver 👀👀✨ @an4mations

Remember that this is just my own personal take/discovery and that it might not be 100% accurate! I'm still learning after all ^^

-

For people new to art and might not know what the diff terms mean...

Hue -> Colour (basically the original colours like red, orange, etc.)

Value -> How dark or light something is

-

[myportfoliotest]

I just had a small epiphany why you might like other people's art more than your own:

It's the lack of suspension of disbelief.

When you see something someone else has drawn or painted, you take in the content faster than you take in the technical aspects. You experience it as pseudo-real, the same way you stop perceiving animated characters as drawn or book characters as written as you get into the story.

On the other hand, when you yourself have made something, all you see is the machine behind the theater, so to speak. You're probably thinking about lines, shading, coloring in a "does this make sense? Is this the best decision I could have made?"-kind of way.

I think that's also why sometimes, pictures you haven't looked at for a long time starts looking nice to you again, à la: "Hey past-me was unto something! Why can't I replicate it nowadays?". It's probably specifically because you've forgotten the process of making it that you are now seeing it with fresh eyes.

Art is an illusion, but a magician has a hard time tricking themself. So don't be so hard on yourself: it's probably just that you can't see the magic right now, but that doesn't mean it's not there.

[myportfoliotest]

[myportfoliotest]

Is it me or does this broken tree branch look like a dragon? 🐲

[myportfoliotest]

@academia-lucifer

[myportfoliotest]

[myportfoliotest]

[myportfoliotest]

Fog day, Yamagata, Japan // 癒しの自然風景 ♡

[myportfoliotest]

colorful ecology

[myportfoliotest]

ID: three fish embroidered on an upholstery sample with a design that looks like coral. the fish are embroidered so they appear to be swimming in between the coral. the colors are shades of olive green and beige.

[myportfoliotest]

daphne's blessing 🌿

[myportfoliotest]

Contra:

wenig Wissenschaft/Theorie

leichte Ablenkung (keine Lernplattform)

nicht das beste Textbearbeitungsprogramm (Limitation beim Format)

nicht viele große/bekannte Künstler

nicht geeignet für Uni Notizen

Fehlinformation

Anonymität

Kunstdiebstahl/Reposten ohne Quellenangabe