 |
 |
Dear João, The problem with this kind of computer generated images is that their "authors" or "generators" don't have the faintest clue about what art must be when it is done today. All contemporary art must be Contemporary, otherwise it will fall out from any definition of Art. There is a complicated system to validate Art that goes far above "stunnement". In that system you have Art Historians, Art Critics.Art Galleries, Museums, Art Schools and Established Art Publications. I thin that these images would fail legitimation in almost all those instances. I'm quite sure what to think about this. Cheers, Eduardo Corte-Real On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 3:15 PM, João Ferreira <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Dear all, > > I stumbled upon some research by google. I think this might be interesting > to anyone interested in artificial intelligence, visual communication and > art. > > > http://googleresearch.blogspot.co.uk/2015/06/inceptionism-going-deeper-into-neural.html > > Here we were thinking that androids dreamt of electric sheep, when in fact > they were dreaming of Van Gogh and Dali’s paintings. > > I’m not sure what to think about this. The images are quite stunning! > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]> > Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design > Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > ----------------------------------------------------------------- PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]> Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design -----------------------------------------------------------------