AI generated photo

Chris Wolfgram · Sep 8, 2022

DMKAlex said:
This AI generated photo won first price in the digital category at the Colorado State Fair.

It looks very much like a copy cat pictures created by someone who appreciated composition and lighting after a visit from a art gallery.

Personally, I would question the existence and placement of the brighter red object on the far right.

Ordinarily, I don't like this kind of shot... man made stuff (with only a few exceptions) or shots with people in them. But this digital painting does have a really cool, unusual feel to it

Id have to see the paintings it beat, to give my opinion on, if it should have won. But I really like it

--
Photos are my paintings. The camera is my brush.
Website
www.LightInEveryCorner.com
DPreview gallery; http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/5075216809
No time or attention given for negativity or trolls.

SrMi · Sep 8, 2022

Phil A Martin said:
SrMi said:

Phil A Martin said:

WiltshireMoonraker59 said:

DMKAlex said:

This AI generated photo won first price in the digital category at the Colorado State Fair.

It looks very much like a copy cat pictures created by someone who appreciated composition and lighting after a visit from a art gallery.

Personally, I would question the existence and placement of the brighter red object on the far right.

Click to expand...

I see nothing wrong with this photo, so what if it is manipulated using AI, it still takes a lot of skill to produce a photo as good as that. Amazing stuff.

Click to expand...

Except it's not a photograph. It's a digital image that imitates photography.

Click to expand...

I do not think it even imitates photography. It imitates a painting. OP's title is misleading.

Click to expand...

No it has the sort of hyper realism you see in a photograph and the sort of cod surrealism that accompanies much digital imagery.

How about the recently unveiled Barack Obama painting

.

Rambow · Sep 9, 2022

The basis for photography is light, and a computer doesn't need any light to produce an image.

Further more, the computer cannot create anything either, but what it can do is use preprogrammed patterns and a database containing real art and basically create very clever, intricate collages.

I repeat, computers can't create anything, they just follow programming. Find an expresso machine that likes to discuss social policy, then i'il be impressed.

fferreres · Sep 9, 2022

BackToNature1 said:
WiltshireMoonraker59 said:

I see nothing wrong with this photo, so what if it is manipulated using AI, it still takes a lot of skill to produce a photo as good as that. Amazing stuff.

Click to expand...

I don't care how amazing it looks or how long it took to produce it, it should always be in an separate category for judging purposes in any given contests.

I agree 100%

fferreres · Sep 9, 2022

Rambow said:
The basis for photography is light, and a computer doesn't need any light to produce an image.

100% agreed. It's a fact. The computer can be closer to art, taking actual photos, man made art, artificial imagery AND texts, digests them, then has a process to create images based on text prompts and visual information (this last optional).

Note most can also do outpainting (adding content to the edges of photos).

Rambow said:
Further more, the computer cannot create anything either, but what it can do is use preprogrammed patterns and a database containing real art and basically create very clever, intricate collages.

Mhh, much like people in the way you describe it.

Rambow said:
I repeat, computers can't create anything, they just follow programming. Find an expresso machine that likes to discuss social policy, then i'il be impressed.

Here are your espresso machines, courtesy of Dall-E 2:

This expresso machines likes to discuss social policies - made using Dall-E

This one other as well - made with Dall E

JohnSil · Sep 10, 2022

DMKAlex said:
This AI generated photo won first price in the digital category at the Colorado State Fair.

It looks very much like a copy cat pictures created by someone who appreciated composition and lighting after a visit from a art gallery.

Personally, I would question the existence and placement of the brighter red object on the far right.

Oh that bright red area HAS to be there. That's the curtain from which behind it the Wizard of Oz is pulling and pushing the levers!!!

Likewise I'm surprised it won in Colorado and not Kansas!!! LoL

Actually it would depend on the category into which it was entered. Some categories allow any amount of digital manipulation/PS. For example it would have been disqualified immediately in Journalism or nature if it had been a digitized bird!

John

Mika Y. · Sep 10, 2022

fferreres said:
fferreres said:

I repeat, computers can't create anything, they just follow programming. Find an expresso machine that likes to discuss social policy, then i'il be impressed.

Click to expand...

Here are your espresso machines, courtesy of Dall-E 2:

This expresso machines likes to discuss social policies - made using Dall-E

This one other as well - made with Dall E

This espresso machine looks like it will blast social policy issues away rather than talk about them. Done with Stable Diffusion.

john isaacs · Sep 12, 2022

DMKAlex said:
This AI generated photo won first price in the digital category at the Colorado State Fair.

It looks very much like a copy cat pictures created by someone who appreciated composition and lighting after a visit from a art gallery.

Personally, I would question the existence and placement of the brighter red object on the far right.

This photo won a contest in digital arts:

AI-generated art won a fine arts competition – and artists are up in arms

But how long did it take to make?

www.creativebloq.com

First, it should not be called a photo or photograph. It is computer generated and had nothing to do with capturing light.

Second, the controversy is over the means of creation, and might lead to a second category of computer generated automation versus manual processes. That's a fuzzy line, of course, and I'll leave it to the digital arts community to sort that one out.

None the less, it is art, and it can be judged on whatever merits those that judge choose to use.

None of this appeals to my photographic side, which is about taking a picture with a camera. I will process it as much or little as I choose. Sometimes I sell my work, sometimes I sell my labor. Usually I just put a few selections on Facebook, print and hang even fewer, and go out to take more pictures. My satisfaction from photography is usually from going somewhere to take pictures as much as it is in producing a final result.

And, I don't enter contests of any sort. So I have nothing invested in these kinds of issues.

tbcass · Sep 13, 2022

WiltshireMoonraker59 said:
DMKAlex said:

This AI generated photo won first price in the digital category at the Colorado State Fair.

It looks very much like a copy cat pictures created by someone who appreciated composition and lighting after a visit from a art gallery.

Personally, I would question the existence and placement of the brighter red object on the far right.

Click to expand...

I see nothing wrong with this photo, so what if it is manipulated using AI, it still takes a lot of skill to produce a photo as good as that. Amazing stuff.

It's not a photo.

--
Tom

tbcass · Sep 13, 2022

Phil A Martin said:
DMKAlex said:

This AI generated photo won first price in the digital category at the Colorado State Fair.

It looks very much like a copy cat pictures created by someone who appreciated composition and lighting after a visit from a art gallery.

Personally, I would question the existence and placement of the brighter red object on the far right.

Click to expand...

Here is some information about the original piece. Whilst Photoshop was used to create it, there doesn't seem to be any attempt to suggest it is a photograph.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smar...gence-art-wins-colorado-state-fair-180980703/

In my opinion, it's not art then. We don't give grand master ratings to computer chess programs even though no human can beat them.

--
Tom

tbcass · Sep 13, 2022

Is it AI-generated or computer art? AI to me implies minimal human interaction. If it's AI-generated then it is not art IMO. Art should be the result of human design and creation.

--
Tom

Phil A Martin · Sep 13, 2022

tbcass said:
Phil A Martin said:

DMKAlex said:

This AI generated photo won first price in the digital category at the Colorado State Fair.

It looks very much like a copy cat pictures created by someone who appreciated composition and lighting after a visit from a art gallery.

Personally, I would question the existence and placement of the brighter red object on the far right.

Click to expand...

Here is some information about the original piece. Whilst Photoshop was used to create it, there doesn't seem to be any attempt to suggest it is a photograph.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smar...gence-art-wins-colorado-state-fair-180980703/

Click to expand...

In my opinion, it's not art then. We don't give grand master ratings to computer chess programs even though no human can beat them.

I don't believe there to be much point being dogmatic about art until we can actually see it. There might well be interesting art made with AI, we just haven't seen it yet.

tbcass said:
--
Tom

ovrebekk · Sep 13, 2022

tbcass said:
Phil A Martin said:

DMKAlex said:

This AI generated photo won first price in the digital category at the Colorado State Fair.

It looks very much like a copy cat pictures created by someone who appreciated composition and lighting after a visit from a art gallery.

Personally, I would question the existence and placement of the brighter red object on the far right.

Click to expand...

Here is some information about the original piece. Whilst Photoshop was used to create it, there doesn't seem to be any attempt to suggest it is a photograph.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smar...gence-art-wins-colorado-state-fair-180980703/

Click to expand...

In my opinion, it's not art then. We don't give grand master ratings to computer chess programs even though no human can beat them.

Thousands if not millions of artworks went into the creation of the AI model in the first place. And the creation of the AI model was done by humans, with the purpose of making images. I would argue the produced result is definitely art, even if you can't point to a single artist that is behind any of the pictures (rather it is an amalgamation of the source material, the ai model and the input prompt).

ovrebekk · Sep 13, 2022

Rambow said:
The basis for photography is light, and a computer doesn't need any light to produce an image.

Further more, the computer cannot create anything either, but what it can do is use preprogrammed patterns and a database containing real art and basically create very clever, intricate collages.

I repeat, computers can't create anything, they just follow programming. Find an expresso machine that likes to discuss social policy, then i'il be impressed.

To say a computer can't create anything just because it follows an algorithm is not really true in my opinion.

Add a true random generator into the algorithm and the computer can create an unlimited amount of content, which is part of the reason why I never get tired playing Civilization since you can generate a new random level every time

And while current random generators are pretty simplistic since they are mostly based on traditional programming methods, lookup tables etc, once you start combining random generation with more and more sophisticated algoritms (such as machine learning/AI) then it will drastically increase the things that computers can create.

In all fields I am sure computers will eventually be able to create things better than humans, whether it be artsy images, Civilization maps, impressive architecture, or clever chess moves.

Most likely our brains are just following 'preprogrammed patterns' and databases as well, it is just that we (and our computers) don't yet have the capacity to understand it.

ovrebekk · Sep 13, 2022

tbcass said:
Is it AI-generated or computer art? AI to me implies minimal human interaction. If it's AI-generated then it is not art IMO. Art should be the result of human design and creation.

The picture is the result of human design and creation. Humans wrote the AI framework, made most (if not all?) of the pictures used to train the AI, and guided the AI training itself.

Even if no human can understand how the AI model made that particular image using the provided prompt and data set, the final image would never have happened without human involvement.

Phil A Martin · Sep 13, 2022

ovrebekk said:
Rambow said:

The basis for photography is light, and a computer doesn't need any light to produce an image.

Further more, the computer cannot create anything either, but what it can do is use preprogrammed patterns and a database containing real art and basically create very clever, intricate collages.

I repeat, computers can't create anything, they just follow programming. Find an expresso machine that likes to discuss social policy, then i'il be impressed.

Click to expand...

To say a computer can't create anything just because it follows an algorithm is not really true in my opinion.

Add a true random generator into the algorithm and the computer can create an unlimited amount of content, which is part of the reason why I never get tired playing Civilization since you can generate a new random level every time

And while current random generators are pretty simplistic since they are mostly based on traditional programming methods, lookup tables etc, once you start combining random generation with more and more sophisticated algoritms (such as machine learning/AI) then it will drastically increase the things that computers can create.

In all fields I am sure computers will eventually be able to create things better than humans, whether it be artsy images, Civilization maps, impressive architecture, or clever chess moves.

Most likely our brains are just following 'preprogrammed patterns' and databases as well, it is just that we (and our computers) don't yet have the capacity to understand it.

But this image isn't an AI developed image, An AI image was only the starting point and the artist spent a further 80 hours refining it.

tbcass · Sep 13, 2022

Phil A Martin said:
tbcass said:

Phil A Martin said:

DMKAlex said:

This AI generated photo won first price in the digital category at the Colorado State Fair.

It looks very much like a copy cat pictures created by someone who appreciated composition and lighting after a visit from a art gallery.

Personally, I would question the existence and placement of the brighter red object on the far right.

Click to expand...

Here is some information about the original piece. Whilst Photoshop was used to create it, there doesn't seem to be any attempt to suggest it is a photograph.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smar...gence-art-wins-colorado-state-fair-180980703/

Click to expand...

In my opinion, it's not art then. We don't give grand master ratings to computer chess programs even though no human can beat them.

Click to expand...

I don't believe there to be much point being dogmatic about art until we can actually see it. There might well be interesting art made with AI, we just haven't seen it yet.

Phil A Martin said:

--
Tom

Click to expand...

I guess I am dogmatic in my belief it should be a human creation.

--
Tom

tbcass · Sep 13, 2022

Let’s agree to disagree and leave it at that.

Phil A Martin · Sep 13, 2022

tbcass said:
Phil A Martin said:

tbcass said:

Phil A Martin said:

DMKAlex said:

This AI generated photo won first price in the digital category at the Colorado State Fair.

It looks very much like a copy cat pictures created by someone who appreciated composition and lighting after a visit from a art gallery.

Personally, I would question the existence and placement of the brighter red object on the far right.

Click to expand...

Here is some information about the original piece. Whilst Photoshop was used to create it, there doesn't seem to be any attempt to suggest it is a photograph.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smar...gence-art-wins-colorado-state-fair-180980703/

Click to expand...

In my opinion, it's not art then. We don't give grand master ratings to computer chess programs even though no human can beat them.

Click to expand...

I don't believe there to be much point being dogmatic about art until we can actually see it. There might well be interesting art made with AI, we just haven't seen it yet.

Click to expand...

I guess I am dogmatic in my belief it should be a human creation.

We I'm a follower of Duchamp, art depends on the context and the idea behind it. I can easily see people repurposing AI images and giving them new artistic meanings

tbcass said:
--
Tom

tbcass · Sep 13, 2022

ovrebekk said:
tbcass said:

Is it AI-generated or computer art? AI to me implies minimal human interaction. If it's AI-generated then it is not art IMO. Art should be the result of human design and creation.

Click to expand...

The picture is the result of human design and creation. Humans wrote the AI framework, made most (if not all?) of the pictures used to train the AI, and guided the AI training itself.

Even if no human can understand how the AI model made that particular image using the provided prompt and data set, the final image would never have happened without human involvement.

Sorry but I disagree and that is that.

--
Tom

AI generated photo

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Attachments

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts