I decided that I needed to find out more about AI, when it comes to visualization. I had seen examples of AI rendered art, some looked awkward, others looked fascinating.
I took this Heinrich Kley sketch, and asked AI to turn it into a classic oil painting. A woman emerging from a large shell on the surface of the ocean. She is surrounded by fantasy creatures. The lighting should be magical.
The second image shows what AI created.
You can see how AI interpreted my prompt. In the original sketch one of the human characters is blowing into a shell. The AI version shows him holding a round light source instead, which creates "magical lighting".
In the Kley version the walrus on the right is smiling. This got lost in translation. But keep in mind the Kley sketch leaves a lot open for interpretation.
As you know AI is here to stay, and it is fair to say that it will do a lot of damage as well as a lot of good.
There are major ethical and philosophical issues regarding visualization, but on a different note I can not wait for the cure for cancer.
Sigh... ain't it the truth.
ReplyDeleteI appreciate you opening up with your concerns, Andreas. It's an understatement that animation artists share them.
My argument against AI incorporates my love of going off-model, or at the very least, pushing a character design so far into an expression that there's a discernible change in shape. I think Chuck Jones did it beautifully in the 1950s, and it's a great tool for comedic animation... not for everything. But it is my way of fighting back. I decide what shape the characters are and try to keep the robots from catching up.
The only show where I was happy enough boarding in the style that I didn't feel the need to break it was on Season 1 of the Proud Family reboot-- Bruce Smith's designs are great and allowed themselves to be pushed. When I got on shows that were debatably more cartoony with their storytelling, but cruel and disdainful for model-breaking, I began to wonder why they weren't replacing me with Midjourney already.
The robots aren't good at making art that feels warm, genuine, or funny, and I think the mockup above exemplifies that. To a lot of non-artists, though, it's enough. I'm just holding on to the hope that even if a general audience doesn't always know what's "bad" at a glance, they won't be willing to stare at it for 90 minutes.
I seem to recall you going to trouble explaining how Ollie Johnston, understanding how unfun it would be to watch Penny 'being sad' throughout The Rescuers, imbued her with an inner feeling that reveals she holds out "hope". A. I. appears incapable of these kinds of subtle observations. I recently asked A. I. if the slight smile on Gustave Moreau's Prometheus was intended to exhibit a sense of triumph. A.I.'s answer: Prometheus is not triumphant.
ReplyDeleteI'm glad the Milt Kahl book is gonna be a strictly Deja production. I'm partial to poetry.
Haha, I dont think its in the interest of AI makers to cure cancer....just like it could free up workers to enjoy their lives more but will only be used to benefit the "owners" at the expense of workers....
ReplyDeleteHaving said that the image looks pretty good, I wouldnt know its AI....its only a matter of time before animators will no longer be needed....imo ppl should just not use it and advertise their art as ""all natural"...
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI'm definitely an "AI" hater through and through. Though as I understand it, the more legitimate uses of 'ai' in science are quite different to the media generators
ReplyDeleteJa, AI kann viel, aber häufig und zum Glück noch nicht alles! ... Ich wünsche mir so sehr, dass die Wertschätzung für Handmade nie verloren geht! 😊
ReplyDeleteVielen Dank für dieses Beispiel! 😚😊
Up to this point, my attitude to the so-called "AI"* is to not have anything to do with it, insofar as I can help it. Having said that, the issue is hardly what this Simulated Intelligence can do. Even if tomorrow it develops a soul, and starts doing the most magical & good things like a genie from a bottle, what would follow from that?
ReplyDeleteThat we should stop drawing?
Think of ourselves as superfluous?
Conclude life has no meaning, or has a reduced meaning?
Pocket calculators have been with us for over half a century, faster than any human. Cars are faster than any human. Yet, we still walk, run, race, and many (most?) of us still haven't stopped calculating.
The problem is, rather, in what's being insinuated.
the thing that ai will never replicate (and i use that word carefully) is that art speaks to human nature and connection. 99% of the joy of a work of art is knowing another person created what you see... every mark and nuance. be it a thumbprint in a degas, or the expression of a muscle that only ever shows when the pinkie is flexed out on a Michelangelo..
ReplyDeleteai, bears all of that and none of that at the same time.. imprints and echos of others works that look vaguely familiar, and yet without any semblance of heart. its less a tool and more an imitator.
its been quite a few years now and every year the same words rings true "not there yet"... but with a subscription fee, it will be.. one day... honest! :D
always happy to see a Kley...
not AI Kley though... for a moment i thought that was Kleys younger brother Al... lol...