StriderTR wrote on 2024-10-27, 21:11:

I missed a lot of conversation. 😜

Personally, I look at art as ... in the eye of the beholder.

Art has never been my thing, I would often look at much of it and wonder what people see that makes them call it "great", and think to myself, what am I missing? After a while I came to realize, that beauty truly is in the eye of the beholder.

i agree but would add that i find some art more interesting and appreciable when i know things about it - like when it was done, the context, anything about the artist that seems relevant. It's interesting because you could argue that you should just look and then decide if you like it, liking it more (or less) after learning things isn't something false or pretentious though, it could mean appreciating techniques more or understand particulars that relate to the time or context of it.

a similar process would go for car enthusiasts - some cars get more love because the enthusiast appreciates the technical aspects, being advanced for the time or having some design constraint that was met - all stuff you need to learn to appreciate.

Maybe that's a missing link for critics of AI art, its "context" is a thinly diluted mix of source art

When it comes to this so called "AI" art, and I use that term loosely becasue even though this is branded as AI, I don't see it that way. To me, these are just really advanced algorithms performing a task, some of them are static, some are "learning", but I don't really see it as true artificial intelligence. I think it's cool, I think it's a powerful tool, and while it is indeed artificial, I don't see it as intelligent, at least not yet.

yes i do think the phrase AI gives some folk the impression that there is the equivalent of a thinking "person" or consciousness behind it

of course any criticism of AI is readily "countered" by musings like "but what if there isn't really any difference between AI and us" which can be repeated ad nauseam, an interesting idea but one that never seems to lead to insight ("but what if it does" ..etc , you get the idea)

I think I'm going to have to put the ones I really like on my blog. 😀

that last one really works, it does look cool 😀

gerry wrote on 2024-10-28, 09:10:

of course any criticism of AI is readily "countered" by musings like "but what if there isn't really any difference between AI and us" which can be repeated ad nauseam, an interesting idea but one that never seems to lead to insight

Simulation leads to insight, and along the way you have to determine the extent that AI is human. You can say it isn't and that's that, but then you won't expect insight in the first place.

gerry wrote on 2024-10-28, 09:10:

i agree but would add that i find some art more interesting and appreciable when i know things about it - like when it was done, the context, anything about the artist that seems relevant. It's interesting because you could argue that you should just look and then decide if you like it, liking it more (or less) after learning things isn't something false or pretentious though, it could mean appreciating techniques more or understand particulars that relate to the time or context of it.

I would have to agree. There's definitely art that I personally like based on its story, or context, more than I would if I knew nothing about it and just took it at face value.

I've also decided to put some of all my testing and playing around to work, and managed to get an image I think makes a good new banner for my retro blog! 😀

Now I'm working on generating a new background.

What do you think?

StriderTR wrote on 2024-10-30, 15:09:

Now I'm working on generating a new background.

What do you think?

Out of curiosity, are you looking for legitimate critiques?

I'm happy to provide a critical analysis of the images from an artist perspective, but only if that is something that is wanted.

StriderTR wrote on 2024-10-30, 15:09:

I've also decided to put some of all my testing and playing around to work, and managed to get an image I think makes a good new banner for my retro blog! 😀

Now I'm working on generating a new background.

What do you think?

as a banner i like it, the colors, the light and the sense of being surrounded by equipment 😀

Shponglefan wrote on 2024-10-30, 18:22:

StriderTR wrote on 2024-10-30, 15:09:

Now I'm working on generating a new background.

What do you think?

Out of curiosity, are you looking for legitimate critiques?

I'm happy to provide a critical analysis of the images from an artist perspective, but only if that is something that is wanted.

I was mainly looking for what people thought of it as a banner for my blog. I'm a simple geeky old man who has no business critiquing anything, especially art. 😀

That being said, I always enjoy reading other people perspectives.

AI created art in general seems to generate a lot of very mixed opinions from people. Me for example, I don't see what I'm doing with Leonardo.AI as "art" in any way, in my mind it's just generating random images based on complex mathematical algorithms, a defined set of parameters, and a bit of randomness. I suppose one could argue humans do it much in the same manner, but I think the AI stuff lacks something. I mean, even to an untrained eye such as myself, many of the creations made with these publicly available AI tools can often be distinguished from creations made by humans. To the trained eye, it's likely even easier to tell the difference. There will always be exceptions of course, but I think we still have a way to go before the two are indistinguishable from each other. In fact, I personally think humans would probably have an easier time making art look "AI" than an AI would making art look more "human", at least with any level of reliability.

That all being said, these are just my personal opinions. I like using AI in general for two reasons, it's a tool to save time , and it helps make-up for gaps in my skills. I use ChatGPT to assist when programming with Arduino projects becasue I'm a novice at it's simplified version of C++. I prefer it to fix my mistakes, go back and review what it changed, and learn from that. This method is easier and faster than scouring Google looking for where I went wrong. The same goes for imagery. Like I keep saying, I'm no artist. I may know my way around various image editing tools, but that does not mean I have the skill to create much beyond basic cut & paste layered images to get my basic point across. Hobbling together something from pre-existing imagery is vastly easier than creating something something original, or from scratch.

So I guess the short of it is, I like AI as a tool. It's great for assisting with productivity and security tasks. I also like it as a toy to have a little fun with. Beyond that, I really don't think of it as "creative". Even when it's used to generate something "artistic", I still look at is as "just a human tool", an advanced programmable autonomous paintbrush I guess you could say. At the end of the day, I suppose one could argue that AI art is still human art, since it was itself a tool created by humans.

Now we're getting into philosophical territory, something I'm even less qualified to talk about. 😜

gerry wrote on 2024-10-31, 09:54:

as a banner i like it, the colors, the light and the sense of being surrounded by equipment 😀

I kinda felt like my silly blog needed something new, so why not use one of many images I managed to get out of Leonardo that I actually liked. 😜

I really never really liked by old hobbled together banner, but it was the best I could do. I think this just looks better.

With a tool you have to consider the interface. The interface for AI is more human-to-human than human-to-object, and to that extent it's a tool in the way a human is a tool when they're a means for you.

StriderTR wrote on 2024-10-30, 15:09:

I would have to agree. There's definitely art that I personally like based on its story, or context, more than I would if I knew […]
Show full quote

gerry wrote on 2024-10-28, 09:10:

i agree but would add that i find some art more interesting and appreciable when i know things about it - like when it was done, the context, anything about the artist that seems relevant. It's interesting because you could argue that you should just look and then decide if you like it, liking it more (or less) after learning things isn't something false or pretentious though, it could mean appreciating techniques more or understand particulars that relate to the time or context of it.

I would have to agree. There's definitely art that I personally like based on its story, or context, more than I would if I knew nothing about it and just took it at face value.

I've also decided to put some of all my testing and playing around to work, and managed to get an image I think makes a good new banner for my retro blog! 😀

Now I'm working on generating a new background.

What do you think?

That really works!

The art feels to me like something out of Byte magazine during its golden age .

It kinda says mixture of Byte covers, Sci-Fi anthology covers and Electronic Component Catalog covers 🤣 ( Last one might only make sense if you remember the exciting ones like Maplin ... )

StriderTR wrote on 2024-10-31, 13:55:

I was mainly looking for what people thought of it as a banner for my blog. I'm a simple geeky old man who has no business critiquing anything, especially art. 😀

That being said, I always enjoy reading other people perspectives.

TBH, I'll probably withhold any critiques then. My critique would be focused on more traditional approaches to art, where you could go in and correct specific things in the image.

But given current AI image generation tools, there's not really a way to do that. You'd have to otherwise manually paint over and rework parts of the image.

Regardless, if you're having fun with it, that's all that really matters. I'll refrain from any more negativity in this thread.

Shponglefan wrote on 2024-11-02, 02:14:

But given current AI image generation tools, there's not really a way to do that. You'd have to otherwise manually paint over and rework parts of the image.

Inpainting is a standard way to rework specific details, and there are various other ways depending on what you're using. Incidentally, AI are criticized for hallucinating confidently, but of course this reflects human interaction, and that would again make AI more human than tool.

darry wrote on 2024-11-02, 01:39:

That really works!

The art feels to me like something out of Byte magazine during its golden age .

BitWrangler wrote on 2024-11-02, 02:09:

It kinda says mixture of Byte covers, Sci-Fi anthology covers and Electronic Component Catalog covers 🤣 ( Last one might only make sense if you remember the exciting ones like Maplin ... )

Perhaps that's why I like it so much more than my original banner...

I didn't even make that connection in my head until I read your reply. I used to love the artwork in the old computer magazines of the 80's and 90's, and that image definitely has that feel to it.

I'm still in the process of coming up with a new background image, based on the idea of an old computer magazine, I may go with some sort of paper style background for the blog as a whole. This is why I love it when I get feedback of any kind, it often gives me ideas I had not considered.

Shponglefan wrote on 2024-11-02, 02:14:

TBH, I'll probably withhold any critiques then. My critique would be focused on more traditional approaches to art, where you could go in and correct specific things in the image.

But given current AI image generation tools, there's not really a way to do that. You'd have to otherwise manually paint over and rework parts of the image.

Regardless, if you're having fun with it, that's all that really matters. I'll refrain from any more negativity in this thread.

I'm definitely having fun with it. Like I said above, I'm no artist, and I'm not all that good at creating imagery for use on my projects unless it's very basic. My wife is vastly more creative in that sense than I am. So having tools like this, even with their limitations and quirks, not only gives me something fun to do, but a way to perhaps create things I can actually use, and even share with others. The most frustrating part is its randomness, I have gotten far more "unusable" results than what I would consider good enough to share or use. Still, It's cool, and it does a much better job than I ever could.

To share one more of the "Cyberpunk City" creations I managed to get out of several attempts that I actually liked.

From my point of view, there is something ascetic about retrocomputing. Some time ago I asked AI to generate images of a scriptorium full of XT class computers. I find the idea very retro and futurist at the same time. It also brings vibes from Anathem; I love calling my computers syntactic devices:

I've added a page to share some of the creations I really like.

I also abandoned using AI art for the site background, and instead used an old magazine ad (thanks archive.org!), altered to fit.

What do you think?

https://theclassicgeek.blogspot.com/p/ai-gene … wallpapers.html

StriderTR wrote on 2024-11-13, 06:23:

What do you think?
https://theclassicgeek.blogspot.com/p/ai-gene … wallpapers.html

Like it a lot, in fact i enjoy generating AI retro pc images as well (with leonardo AI)

dreamblaster wrote on 2024-12-14, 17:54:

StriderTR wrote on 2024-11-13, 06:23:

What do you think?
https://theclassicgeek.blogspot.com/p/ai-gene … wallpapers.html

Like it a lot, in fact i enjoy generating AI retro pc images as well (with leonardo AI)

Very cool! I like those.

I've also been messing around using ChatGPT's image creation tool, but unless you want to pay $20 a month, you're limited to 2 per day. So I haven't got that far yet.

I made a few more using Leonardo, but nothing I really liked. I'll mess with it more in the near future. I've currently been sidetracked by the holidays , life, and my other retro hobbies.

That being said, I'm going to try using Leonardo and ChatGPT to come up with another banner for the top of my blog. I like the one I have on there now, but I want more options, and something a bit more "banner-like" and less of a cut-down picture I altered to fit.

StriderTR wrote on 2024-12-15, 03:25:

That being said, I'm going to try using Leonardo and ChatGPT to come up with another banner for the top of my blog. I like the one I have on there now, but I want more options, and something a bit more "banner-like" and less of a cut-down picture I altered to fit.

oh yes that sounds like fun.
I generated a few, just as a test

We have to consider everything art to cater to the sensitive and the pc. We even had to change the very definition of art to include all the people with no art skills or talent at all. We don't want another pissed off Adolf, do we?!
Once we are beyond that it is what it is: low effort shit.
By the way I just typed this sentence using human technology so I consider it art.

Mandrew wrote on 2024-12-15, 07:07:

We have to consider everything art to cater to the sensitive and the pc. We even had to change the very definition of art to include all the people with no art skills or talent at all. We don't want another pissed off Adolf, do we?!
Once we are beyond that it is what it is: low effort shit.
By the way I just typed this sentence using human technology so I consider it art.

That's your opinion. I'm glad that you have one and were willing to share it.

That being said, I'm reminded of a Dirty Harry movie quote about those (opinions) that you might have heard about. If not, please do feel free to look it up.

Have you guys looked at running any of the stable-diffusion like models locally?

https://github.com/AUTOMATIC1111/stable-diffusion-webui

You need a reasonable GPU (4070Ti here), but it can be fairly quick to turn around images.

I've mainly been using it to generate abstract background art that is vaguely "scientific computing" related for a website I am building for our new institutional supercomputer, and it turns out to be surprisingly good for those types of themes.