[rfeague]

I think you have an opportunity here --- I found myself wondering how much it would cost to get a nice-quality print on canvas or metal. Something I could hang in my office. They look that good. Are they (or could they be) generated in sufficiently high resolution for a large format print?

[jacobwilliamroy]

Working in an office decorated by a bot is the most demoralizing experience I could imagine. I would probably go into an existential rage and start breaking things until someone more physically powerful came and subdued me.

[GistNoesis]

It can be worse you could also work on SAP, like the author (No harsh feeling/flame war ; thank you to the author for this artsy experience ; but I couldn't help but notice this, I believe, relevant context).

To me these pictures are very nice looking from afar, but once you try to look in the details it makes you feel stupid that you don't get it, until you realize that it is senseless, there is no coherence, no point, no soul and it's normal that there is nothing to get from the picture as it's not in the algorithm.

The technique is perfect. But the art side reflection and emotion must still come from the eye of the beholder. It is deeply moving art in the sense it inspire strong negative emotions, the feeling that there are some stronger forces coming to crush you.

One such reflection that these collection should inspire is : "Is this the direction we want to take ?". Infinitely many garbage art stealing attention away from human artists.

Don't get me wrong, I like generated art but it's necessary to situate it in its context. That what makes it interesting. I even believe you can have machine explore thing and discover interesting thing on their own without it being formulaic, but we are not there yet.

[valentinvieriu]

Your SAP remarks are funny and somehow true (maybe), but I'm maybe one of the lucky guys. I work for an interesting Labs section inside SAP (https://cxlabs.sap.com/) and we are lucky enough to do research on some interesting topics.

I don't fully agree with you on the purpose of art. Art can create different meanings for every watcher and they could be quite far away from what was the intended purpose ( the message ) of the artist. I would say that main function of art is to ask questions, and also to give you a way to experience life in a way you would otherwise not be able to. In this context I think AI generated art can bring something new, a new layer of reality, a new set of questions, that might not been surfaced because we use brains to create art and brains to interpret it. It could be a new type of input that would push humanity further.

[shrimpx]

I think that postmodern view on art has fallen out of popularity. It’s silly to abstract away the artist and kinda pretend there may as well not be one, and that the full meaning may be purely in the sensory matter... because this leads to an “everything is art” perspective: everything in the field of my senses at any point is art. Which is preposterous for “art” to tell me that my senses are meaningful because I can ask questions about them and learn something. Thank you, art, for intervening to add a completely vacuous annotation on my experience.

These pictures are interesting though. To me the thing that popped out, without having read background on the project, was how this robot artist is copying modernists like Picasso and possibly Pollock and DeKooning. And doing it along a few themes, with high degree of repetition; or tweaking some small things in each variation. The limitations are glaring and I’m wondering will it evolve and how.

[hoki]

> To me these pictures are very nice looking from afar, but once you try to look in the details it makes you feel stupid that you don't get it, until you realize that it is senseless, there is no coherence, no point, no soul and it's normal that there is nothing to get from the picture as it's not in the algorithm.

My train of thought exactly. Even second-rate/beginner/hobbyist paintings, like those on Binned Art for example, are absolutely crushing these in every dimension.

[willvarfar]

Is your problem that you know its bot-generated, or that you think there's some flaw in the pictures?

What if you didn't know that the painting was the work of a bot?

What if it was just some abstract painting that someone took enough fancy to to pay to have put on a canvas?

Personally, I couldn't really tell them from the human-generated wikiart pictures that seeded the algorithm. Those human-generated pieces didn't speak to me either.

I'd love to see the algorithm work on some other art style seeds.

[jsaldes]

I'd say it depends. For me art is as much about the artist behind a specific piece as it is about the actual piece. I agree with the person you responded to. I want human feelings in my art, no matter how abstract, for it to truly speak to me!

[willvarfar]

Playing devil's advocate: it sounds like you're deluding yourself ;)

Perhaps the Vogels https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbert_and_Dorothy_Vogel knew the artist? The way they amassed their collection is truly inspiring.

Picaso's wife infamously knew he was having an affair with his muse from glancing at a painting. But did every other Picaso fan who saw that same painting? Did truly know anything about the artist behind the picture?

So the chances of everyone else who appreciates an artist actually truly knowing anything about the actual artist? Complete rubbish, say I!

Take Turner, for example: turns out, the location of a lot of his pictures have been wrongly attributed! How everyone can claim to 'know' the artist and yet not realise that the picture is of Portsmouth or a lake in Scotland instead of Venice or somewhere else seems like they didn't really know the artist after all?

So there's a picture on the wall by Satoshi Nakamoto. You feel that genuine, because it's signed? Then when you get told that its painted by a bot, you feel cheated? Because you felt you knew something about the artist by looking at the art?

[jacobwilliamroy]

Having bot-made art in the office just gets me asking all the wrong questions like "What is this? Why is it here? Why am I here? What am I doing with my precious finite time on earth? Why did they automate the creation of art? Why didn't they automate my job?"

[gradschool]

Ironically a human artist who could evoke a response like that would be doing better than most.

[ribs]

Those seem like difficult questions, and maybe we don’t usually want to grapple with them, but they don’t sound like the wrong ones.

[mental1896]

One might argue that there is plenty of human feeling in this bot-art. After all, it's trained on art with human feelings. Seems like it might be a very effective way to propagate it. It's a sort-of dispassionate third party who finds the thread common to all of the cubist pieces in the training sets.

[bobly_today]

Such as a security bot?

[thomasahle]

Sure, once those things are common place it'll be dystopian; but for now it's just a fun conversation starter.

[pozdnyshev]

This sounds like a plotline of a Ligottian short story.

[joshspankit]

Tbh, with direct printing to (large) canvas being reasonably priced now, this could be an easy sell

Especially if they can be generated at 300dpi+

[valentinvieriu]

Well the resolution is good enough.I've gave it a try and looks quite good on a 50cmx50cm canvas. You need to upscale it once or twice with a Super-Resolution AI algorithm

[jtms]

So meta

[valentinvieriu]

I've added the option to print now. Feel free to give it a try

[jksmith]

In the spirit of the effort, might as well complete the value stream and just hang a big display. Very cool project tho'

[kernelsanderz]

You can use a super-resolution tool like https://letsenhance.io/ to upscale the image which might make it better for printing.