[croon]

I have a DSLR and several fairly good lenses and like taking pictures, but I'm by all accounts a layman, and seeing as I'm unfamiliar with that photo, obviously not well versed in the industry.

But honest question: Is that a good picture? I don't assume that the AI is trained enough to give accurate critique on all photos, but in this case I might agree with it.

I'm not trolling nor mean any offense, but is there quantifiable skill behind that photo, or is it just as subjective as painted art? A simple example would be a Pollock painting which I don't care for at all.

[theoh]

Art MA holder here: Pollock is a really good example of the hard-to-pin-down quality of optical balance or energy or "eye". It's a learned thing like most aspects of culture. There are personal variations in "eye" judgement but enough consensus to keep the art market afloat. It does also have something to do with hierarchical structure, fractals etc., especially in Pollock's structurally simple drop paintings. His idea was a conceptual innovation but now does look pretty boring.

You might also dislike Pollock not only for being boring but for being associated with a tedious CIA-sponsored moment in art in the 50s, in which case I applaud you.