My collaborative project with Marta Abba is coming to an end. Through the past few months, we have interviewed various artists that use generative AI in their creative practice. This has helped me understand the diversity of it’s application and build a language that can be used to communicate them to others looking to explore the tool. We have had experts, add comments and context to our interviews and the article has found publication space, possibly in late December. Without disclosing too much information at this time, we interviewed 7 artists, 1 cultural expert and 3 AI experts.
Artists – Themes
Bacchi Moriniello – AI in the present age; counterculture
Ilarai Merola – Future and fantasy
Roberto Baragnoli – Emotions in time and space
Helena Pink – Challenging AI bias
Maria Macropoulou – The past reborn
Farbod Mojallal-mehr – Iran through the lens of time
Experts:
Francesco D’Isa – Philosopher, theoretician, and prominent digital artist
Eugenio Marogiu – Photographer & AI expert
Georgia Aiello – Media, Culture and Communication Researcher at the University deli Study di Milano
As I share my intervention outcomes, my collaboration with Marta Abba saw an introduction from Italian AI artist Francesco D’Isa. His work explores AI data, errors and kitsch. Following is an except from my response to his email on the nature of misinformations and it’s association with vested interest and power:
As I discuss some of my findings on past images and AI, I’d like to put forward some examples I found on this subject, so as to build on the discussion-
Radio:
The infamous 1938 incident of a halloween special on the book ‘War of the worlds’ preformed by Orson Welles created a mass panic in America. This was a radio show and the public had taken the portrayal of the fictional radio show to be an actual news broadcast. The public had not expected the radio, the main source of information at the time to be broadcasting a fictional show. Today, it is unlikely anyone would it so seriously. Despite many such shows being produced and broadcast, eg. Dragons : Fantasy made real (2004) on the Discovery channel and Doomsday 2012 (2007) on the History channel, it has not cause a similar reaction or panic.
Visual effects in films have seen a steady increase in usage and technical expertise, but so has the discernment of the audience. Visual effects considered exceptional a few years ago, now are seen as cringe or clearly unbelievable. The exposure and increase of VFX usage has led to a more discerning audience that now distinguishes between good and bad visual effects.
On the flip side, we have CGI, or computer generated graphics. At one point, CGI struggled to fully generate believable worlds. There was a term that was described this challenge for a long time- the uncanny valley. As recently as 2019, we had debated on the subject with the lion king remake garnering much criticism for its depiction of photorealistic animals juxtaposed with human speech and mouth movement. But there have been examples of pushing past this with movies such as Alita: Battle Angel’s protagonist and Gollum from Peter Jackson’s Lord of the rings being complete CGI characters created through motion capture to great acclaim.
Photoshop:
I found many articles and disclaimers dated back to 2011 with a very similar tone (as being used for AI images today) towards photoshopped images. Allow me to attach two such below- one from the guardian on their policy and the second, a student project (by Stephanie Coffaney) at the California Polytechnic state University. This can be taken as evidence that this was a relevant and serious discussion around the late 2000’s and early 2010’s.
Currently, AI struggles to generate believable outputs for individual people. My work on recreating past memories of artists (as a form of curating Identity) points to this shortcoming. Outside of famous celebrities and world leaders, it is very hard for AI to easily produce a specific person. The training data is also very limited for spaces and concepts that may be nuanced or regional to the individual. What is easy to produce for AI, are images of generic with well documented concepts. The details are what it really struggles with. Despite this, generative AI is producing photorealistic images of the past, and this is made easier due to the nature of old photographs. The images being in black and white, blurred in areas and having damage accumulated over time can make it incredibly difficult for a common person to distinguish them. Here, the nature of what is expected is being used in the favour of AI’s limitations. It would be a lot harder for AI to generate a believable image in colour with realistic detail from today’s era. But if asked to generate a picture in an old and damaged style of a past time, it plays to the strength of AI’s randomisation.
The problem with historical images is that they can also be difficult to fact check. Many stories and their related images are lost to time, or buried so deep in the archives that it would be a difficult and time consuming task to resurrect it. Many images have never been published and put away in boxes and corners, yet to discovered. Authenticating such images would be hard if only a digital copy is available. This make the possibility of historical images’ authentication lie in a grey area. Some AI generated images may be falsely flagged as real due to close similarities with other archived images, while some genuine images may be flagged as fake if there is no other evidence to corroborate its authenticity.
Refelctions of digital colourist, Marina Amaral on AI images:
On August 6th, I was introduced to Marta Abba, an Italian researcher and journalist. She is an environmental physicist investigating how scientific research, technologies and human decisions impact biodiversity and human rights. She has written articles for publications such as Wired Italia, Soiel International and Seed science amongst many more.
This meeting came about through my project on “The future of Memory” proposal for the European Press Prize. Following a week long correspondence, we decided to have a video meeting on the 16th of august and I was offered an opportunity to incorporate my research into AI as a tool for visual artists, used to curate their personal identity and recreate images from their past and future into a larger project; AI photos and people: past and future. We have begun to share noted and ideas on the subject. I shared my blog and my approach towards the subject through action research. Moving forward, we will be setting up a system to collaborate overseas and incorporate other experts and creatives working on the subject. This includes AI photographers who are looking at the future of image, new art styles developed through the use of machine learning technologies and those who are participating in my intervention. Our hope is that this research culminates in some form of publishing to add new knowledge to the world of creativity, human experience and technology.
My journey to the Tate Modern in London was dedicated to see Yoko Ono’s exhibition: Music of the Mind. I often find museums and exhibition centres to be places of inspiration. My mum had had a chance to visit this exhibition and was moved by it. Aspects of the showcased works intrigued me to check it out for myself. What I realised was that Yoko Ono had a fairly interventionist approach to her art. But then again, one can argue that all art is interventionist in nature.
One of the works that inspired me was ADD COLOUR (REFUGEE BOAT). In an all white room lies and all white boat. Visitors are asked to take the blue, white or purple markers provided and write messages of hope on the white space. Visitors have slowly filled up the space turning it into shades of blue. It is meant for the participant to reflect on the plights of refugees braving the ocean to arrive into Europe, the urgent crisis of stateless people and the impact of collective action. I feel there is something poetic albeit sad about this. I couldn’t help but feel it was a metaphor for the many who are claimed by the sea when attempting this perilous journey, similar to the blue that claims the white space. Our writing and drawings, a prayer of hope to those that have failed to cross the vast waters.
On observing the piece, I could see that the most dense area of colours were those at hand and eye level, slowly tapering up and down. There was almost no marks above a certain height where no one could reach. The floor and boat also covered in ink. There was ink on top of ink as large spaces wore away. There were also spaces that no one could reach on the underside of the boat. Upon exiting, I could also observe the ink that has managed to escape the room through the shoes of some participants, in someways it is a metaphor for the art spilling out of its designated space and into the outside world.
The second large piece of work was – The personal is political: My mom is beautiful. Participants were asked to write messages and notes about the memory of their mothers, while a video played of Ono doing a hauntingly beautiful musical performance. This room too was filled to the brim with varied text in unique handwritings. Notes placed one on top of the others, high and low. I wonder what it would’ve looked like at the starting moments and how the very first notes have long been covered up.
I find the approach of these works to be extremely inspiring on how to approach the idea of imagination and engage audiences. My aim to utilise Yoko Ono’s work to inspire my approach towards intervention techniques as well, or at least give it a start point to diverge from.
The following Interview was conducted through “Ask me a question” feature on Instagram. Due to the nature of their work, the Artist preferred to be kept anonymous. Based out of Mexico, they work on a regular schedule of uploading fan art created through generative AI and have been actively engaging with their practice for over a year. After attempts to contact them through direct messaging and comments, the Artist agreed to host a public Q&A. The questions were open to all of their followers, as such a few fun trivia is also part of this transcript.
Questions and Answers are transcribed without alteration. [original screenshots available]
Some questions have been omitted due to their nature.
Are you a boy?
I’m a boy. In fact this is too close to what I really look like. Even the haircut.
How old are you?
20 something.
What is your sexuality?
I don’t like using labels, I feel like they limit me. That makes sense?
What is your favourite food?
Sandwiches, Tacos de carnitas, Chilaquiles verdes
Favourite Anime?
MHA
Your favourite TV show?
Friends, How I met your mother, Glee
How did you get the passion for generating AI art?
I was on X, and I found several users uploading material. I started practicing on bing and one thing led to another.
Which site do you use to create your work?
I started with bing and mid journey. Now I am using Tensor.AI
Have you always been drawn to art?
Since I was a child, I have loved all kinds of artistic manifestations, from poorly done graffiti to a plate of food. I think it’s because I always look at the beauty in life.
Why did you choose AI art as a medium?
I was curious because I missed the bus on digital art. This was a way to create images I liked and share my ideas with others.
What do you think is the future of get AI in the art world?
It will be extremely regulated by agencies, but I also believe that it will give rise to a new artistic genre, a new form of expression.
How hard/easy is it to use tensor? Was it difficult to learn?
Super intuitive and easy to use.
Please tell us about your personal journey as an artist?
I don’t consider myself an artist, I’m more of an amateur, and in any case, although I know how to draw fairly well, I’m more of a pencil and paper sketch guy.
Do you think current criticism of AI art are valid or is this the future?
Of course they are valid, when I help SMEs many times they prefer to create a logo with AI, instead of an original one, but I also understand that this is here to stay and we just react to manoeuvre and know how to use them to our benefit.
How do you get your promos looking so good?
Try to be as specific as possible and use more that two LoRa
The overall feedback from the dragons was positive. They affirmed this topic to be relevant and contemporary. The questions that arose were around the specific field that I was looking at. Initially I had intended to look at this subject from a legal and technology point of view, but upon reflection I believe that pivoting to the cultural impact of this technology would be far more productive for me. Understanding the impact of this technology and its surrounding legal debate would paint a clearer picture the direction in which creative society would head.
My reasons for selecting the cultural application is not arbitrary, it stems from my work and expertise in the field. Without a technology or legal background, I would not do those fields justice. Of course, all these fields intersect at points and influence one another, which is why in the larger story it is important to look at different aspects deeper. My intention moving forward is to pivot my research to understand the technology, it’s applications and limitations; possibly even it’s potential for the times to come. New technologies have been coming into existence since the prehistoric era, often facing initial backlash from those it seeks to assist or replace. More often than not it has been seen that over time, they are embraced through a changing social mindset. An example that comes to mind is the cotton Jenny, which in the late 18th century created fear amongst yarn spinners of increasing competition. In 1768, spinners also broke into the inventor’s house to destroy his machines to prevent what they perceived as the taking away of their work. Over time however, the Jenny created new avenues of work and expression as the increased productivity led to the drop in price of threads and yarn and allowing people to diversify their work. The invention took a long time to replace the truly “artisanal” spinners as quality continued to be an issue. This is just one story amongst many about emerging technologies, the threat they pose, the opportunities they bring and the cultural impact they create. The work on development of machine learning (Artificial intelligence systems) is unlikely to stop and it’s true impacts still far from certain at this point.
The dragon’s den happened at a very precarious time for me. It was the same day that the election results of India was to be announced. No one would be surprised if I said that it was hard for me to push through.
My presentation included speaking about my background as a visual artist- trained in fashion, later moving into marketing and eventually a calling towards my childhood pursuit of fine arts. It can seem trivial for someone who stands outside to understand the complex nature of the calling towards the visual mediums and the interconnectedness of it all. A designer who learns fashion can essentially design everything with the tints of fashion; an artist can expand their practice to learn all forms of mediums that connect with the creative arts, or so I’d like to believe. A bag is a bag; if a fashion student makes it, it is a fashionable bag; if an art student makes it, it’s an artistic bag. A bag is a bag. But one must learn to make a bag. I was surprised to learn how many of my cohort couldn’t make a bag, even though at it’s simplest, it’s a rectangle.
Does this make me special?
Absolutely not.
If anything it is a showcase of the process through which humans gain skills and foster a life long pursuit to hone, perfect and protect it.
As a fashion student, I will never not know how to make clothing. As an artist in traditional paint media, I will never not know how to put brush to canvas. As a writer, I will never not know how to put pen to paper; but every time is a challenge almost akin to the first time. This is the ideology AI challenges right now. The idea that one never needs to put pen to paper to write a masterpiece. One never needs to put brush to canvas to produce a work of art. My worries is that it’s not that people have access to such a tool, but rather than the efforts of skilled people is used to empower this technology, only to make the same people obsolete.
My intervention on asking people to read the terms and conditions fell short in many ways, foremost of which was that assumed that writing it down for them would make a difference. There are few alternatives today and despite having a simplified version of a contract, it is still a long read that most participants were unwilling to do. Perhaps my approach should be different? Find a way of communicating that visual artists respond to better?
