no. 03
SERIAL EXPERIMENT

Category: reflection

Categories
reflection Unit 4

Final Reflections

The past 8 months, I have spent trying to understand the relationship between visual artists and generative AI technology. The journey that started from a place of uncertainty has been transformed through my interactions into a world rick in visions and potential. Having met so many talented artists working with generative AI to create past, present and future, I have realised the creative spirit of humanity is far from extinguished. This journey has taught me that in the face of new and scary futures, the human spirit shines brighter, transforming it into new and unique expressions. This metamorphosis of reality is akin to magic, and while generative AI is still being developed, artists have already started the work of realising potentials that could not even be imagined at the current moment. Where this technology takes us, in part lies with the technocrats who make it, but a large part lies in the hands of those who can recognise the unexpected – the artist. As we move forward, I see this tool becoming its own specialised field of art, at least in the realm of the digital and a powerful next chapter in the history of Art. Hundreds of years from today, when art history is written, generative AI may only be a small footnote, but it will open doors to whatever comes next. I am excited to see the story of human creativity move forward.

Categories
Intervention reflection Unit 4

Artists & AI | Feedback

During this past week I had a chance to collect verbal feedback from my participants. The following are the developments each participant is making.

Teya: Teya came into this workshop with no experience of AI. While initially facing trouble with learning to use gen AI, she explored different platforms till she found one that she liked. She is now working with here Dungeons and dragons team to develop character art to use for their D&D sessions.

Iris: Iris did not believe that gen AI worked well with her practice. She found the second part of the workshop useful in thinking about applications in a new way. She has found a way to marry her own project with the workshop and is developing a conceptual food menu based of people’s personality type with the use of gen AI.

David: David has had prior experience with gen AI at his workplace. He struggled with the “AI style” but has shown interest in exploring this style for new applications. His work currently is still exploring themes that work best for him.

Nagma: Nagma also came in with prior experience of using gen AI for her work. She found the workshop useful in expanding her understanding of the technology. She is interested in finding inspiration for her art through exploration of human bodies through gen AI.

Yunni: Yunni had previously played with gen AI for personal use. She has been thinking about spaces and houses she’s lived in after graduating school and is working on recreating these spaces through her memory and utilisation of gen AI. She also is exploring 3D image generation.

These projects will be displayed by me at the MA applied imagination festival along with the stories of these 5 artists. This workshop shows that with the right communication and encouragement, Visual artists can indeed find good use of AI tools. Language that is easy to understand and peer to peer sharing of experience play a critical role in this development.

Categories
Intervention reflection Unit 4

Artists & AI | Creation document

I decided to take an extra week to prepare the document to present my participants. I wanted to address some of the concerns and feedback I received, after giving myself time to reflect. I also wanted my participants to marinate in their experience and indulge in a hybrid period between discovery and creation. It was not something I had planned but found it to be useful. During this week, I received some extra feedback that showed an increase in interest by my participants. The session involving peer to peer learning seems to have gotten every one excited to progress further in this intervention.

Below is the second document sent out.

Categories
Intervention reflection Unit 4

Ethical consideration when working with Artists & AI

Following are some key ethical considerations I have followed during this intervention:

  1. Accounting for a diverse population in participation.
  2. A respect for participants time, agency and backgrounds.
  3. Creating an environment of inclusion and acceptance.
  4. Freedom to explore without facilitator’s bias.
  5. Space for sharing feedback and concerns.
  6. Providing enough basic knowledge for those unfamiliar with the technology.
  7. Providing ample free resources to suit diverse needs.
  8. Ensuring that all participants can share openly and to the extent possible, equally.
  9. Encouraging participants to concentrate more on the process.
  10. Ensuring participants feel validated in their contributions.
  11. Following up at key moments to ensure participants are up to date.
  12. Allow the expression of ideas to flow freely and not engage in moral policing.
  13. Addressing concerns around privacy and security.
  14. Confirming consent at every stage of the intervention.
  15. Encouraging collaboration and peer to peer learning.
Categories
reflection Secondary Research Unit 4

Reflecting on my Goals | Artists & AI

Originally written on 13th Oct. 2024

As the year draws to a close and a chill enters the air, I sit down with some hard questions about the goals I hope to achieve with my project. The name, ‘serial experiment no.3’ is symbolic of my third iteration in life. My first experiment was my BA when I pursued fashion design and this was almost 15 years ago. My second experiment was when I decided to pursue my own creator business in India and my MA here at CSM is my third. As the end of my MA gets closer, I wanted to reflect on the impact I’d like to make. My research into Artists and AI has always been to look at the cultural impact of the technology. When envisioning the end use of generative neural netrwork technology as a commercial tool (as it has been intended by its makers) we can see it’s use by companies in the not so far future. As my research as indicated, this is not a magic box and requires human input and expertise to use effectively. Who will be sitting at this system when it is widely adopted? It will probably be an artist or designer. Companies shifting someone from accounting or development to this space is highly unlikely. I spoke to an employee of the company Acer and they confirmed that training has been extended to this who already fulfil creative roles in marketing. Upon application, it is still an artists or designer, or content writer who is expected to fulfil this role. This technology has not replaced the need of such expertise in creative segments of corporations. 

When the end user continues to be visual artists, it is more important than ever that they explore the technology and have a say in its future direction. As stakeholders, the voice of the creative community has largely been overshadowed by those of developers and governments. My goal is to highlight the importance of including creative voices moving forward. The casual user of text-to-image or image-to-video are also people who enjoy the creative aspect of the technology. Many casual users have not been artists before, but with this new tool have become one. What I have noticed through the many interviews I have conducted, is that these artists have something to say. There is a niche to their approach towards generative technology. What is art if not that? What is an artists if not someone who engages in it? The aim of my project thus, is to demystify parts of this discourse and encourage artists to engage in the wider conversation. As primary stakeholders, it is important for me that that their voices are highlighted.

Categories
reflection Unit 4

Reflections | 6th October

Originally written on 06th Oct. 2024

This week has been rather hectic for me. I am learning a lot about how to have patience and prioritise my personal well being. Following disagreements with a fellow student, I have decided to concentrate on my project. With two months left in this course, I believe that petty quarrels are not worth pursuing, rather the most I can take away from this experience is what will be important in the end. As I look back at my time here, there is much I have achieved and a few pursuits that fell into the background. As I move forward I would like to use this month of October to revive some of these side project for myself (in addition to my main project).

My research on generative AI as a tool for artists is also bearing fruit and has taken on two distinct sides. On one side, I am looking at the past – Utilising generative AI to resurrect memories that make us who we are. On the other hand, is the utilisation of AI for artist development. What I need to do, I believe is to choose a direction to move forward in for the next two months. To achieve this, I will look back at my journey over the last year and try to decipher the natural direction the research is moving in. Similar to my project hypothesis, it can be hard to see where you are going unless you look back at where you have come from. Often new discoveries can lead to unexpected avenues. While this might be helpful to grow in the long run, I would like to first consider the short time period ahead of me. Beyond December, there is always the potential to follow other new and exciting directions.

Categories
reflection Unit 4

Unit 4 | Update

Originally written on 14th September 2024

Unit 4 started one day before my 32nd birthday. I am looking forward to the in campus tutorials up ahead. Currently my research has looked into the past and how it influences us. If generative AI can be used to revive and refresh the memories buried in the minds of artists that influence them. My collaboration is currently on hold, so I am taking this time to look into some reading on the subject and familiarising myself with the work of artists who are using AI as a medium. I will be posting more on those subject in the future and I have had time to absorb, reflect and interpret the research. Next week, I will be looking to iterate my intervention and see how I can make it more impactful for my stakeholders.

Categories
reflection unit 3

A workshop in London

9th September 2024

Traditional Indigo tie-n-dye workshop practiced by the Bai minority of china.

Workshop at Yi Craft, London with Yiran, for Chengyi Lin.

I was invited to participate in an interactive workshop by Lin on the 9th of September. The workshop was organised by Yiran of YiCraft in NW London and consisted of a brief history of the traditional indigo tie-dye craft of the Bai minority followed by a practical demonstration. Yiran explained that she was a part of this ethnic minority in China. The workshop was set in her beautiful studio, adorned with many examples of Chinese ethnic crafts and prominently featured indigo dyed textiles using multiple traditional techniques including batik and screen print. Large panels of indigo dyed textile floated above our heads and draped the walls. Traditional costumes of the Bai tribe decorated the mannequins scattered around the periphery of the room and soft Tibetan chant music played at an ambient volume. We sipped some freshly brewed tea as Yiran told us the history and relevance of the Bai tribe traditions and how it was related to other textile traditions ranging from Japan, South-east and South Asia and into parts of Africa. These regions shared some practices but had their own history and traditions when it came to colour and design. It was a fascinating peek into an ancient tradition that we were today going to participate in. The history and story telling was a large part of appreciating the workshop. As we sipped our tea, it was evident that this was not going to be a simple tie-dye workshop, but one where we intimately connected with Yiran’s culture. It was clear that she had a deep connection and love for where she came from. Her understanding of the history made us look at the humble blue dye with fresh eyes. She had succeeded in not just sharing her heritage with us, but inviting us into the region of China that the Bai tribe inhabited. To me, I felt a profound connection with the people who lived across the border of my country of India. We had been divided politically for over 70 years, by the borders of the modern nation states of India and China, but we shared a unique link for thousands of years before that. A link that was as ancient as human trade in textile knowledge and as deep blue as the stains of indigo that we were about to oppress on our pieces of cloth.

As we sat and meticulously put needle to thread, to squeeze, scrunch and tie our plain white pieces of fabric together into distorted yet promising forms, the Tibetan chants played in the background. The Tibetan plateau lay to her west, and to my north. A sense of meditative calm had overcome us all. With this practice of sharing of tradition, I felt a bond that on a casual day would have gone completely unseen. Here, ten thousand miles away from our home countries, on a small island off the coast of a different continent, neighbours found themselves. I felt a deep appreciation for the preservation work Yiran is doing here in London. The stories of a people, the land they come from and the beauty that inspires them, their hopes and dreams from centuries ago, preserved and shared so graciously with me. As we sat there, Yiran shared pictures of the mountains in her village, the water that reflected the gentle blue sky in the early morning, a picture that almost seemed dyed by indigo itself. To say this experience was anything less than spiritual, would be an understatement. 

Categories
Expert reflection Secondary Research unit 3

Further correspondence | Experts

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.

Article documenting the 1938 incident:

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/infamous-war-worlds-radio-broadcast-was-magnificent-fluke-180955180/

VFX and CGI:

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.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/sep/04/picture-manipulation-news-imagery-photoshop

https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/19153916.pdf

Specificity and Historical images:

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:

https://marinaamaral.substack.com/p/ai-is-creating-fake-historical-photos#:~:text=And%20trust%20me%2C%20these%20generated,indistinguishable%20from%20the%20real%20ones.

Categories
Intervention reflection unit 3

Wall of Memories | Reflections

How was the experience for participants remembering a fond memory?

All the participants of my intervention respond with a sense of nostalgia. The process of remembering a “fond” memory seemed challenging for them. The responses show that it was a challenging task that took time for them to complete. This shows that perhaps the real challenge for visual artists curating their personal identities is digging deep and finding pivotal points that shaped their lives and practice. This is a new aspect I had not considered completely. I hope to find a way to prompt a better way of finding what defines each individual and if there can be a process that can help better develop this “recall”.

How did participants feel seeing their individual memories as images?

The participants seemed divided on the enhancing effects I had expected this process to have. Which each of them rightly pointed out that the image was not a perfect replica of their memories, there was some understanding that when working with generative AI, it is more about providing physical descriptions rather than the mood a memory may evoke. While this was something I had explained to the participants, it is a learning that emotions cannot be infused in an AI image.

The image wall had me using LoRas that matched the participants as I tried to enhance their original memories as prompts. The wall included two images – an initial image and a final image. While two participant responses show their disappointment with the final images, i.e. not close enough or below expectations, there were others that stated that aspects of their memories became more vivid in their mind as they saw the generated image. There is evidence from these interactions that some people can build up an old memory using iterated images over time. In some sense, this also lets me think that there may be a possibility to bring forth the past and look at it again.

How did participants feel about their memories being one amongst many?

From the feedback, it appears that seeing other people’s memories along side their own, the participants were drawn into a community mindset. One participant attests to going back and reading other people’s notes. Despite a variety of emotions reported- overwhelming, joy, nostalgia, connection, surprise, etc. the common theme is can gather is that doing such an exercise with more people has a positive impact on the participants. This may be because they are on in the centre of the stage, but sharing it with others. Connection between all these different age groups and media users is also an unexpected outcome. Participants aged 39 and 24 feeling connected over a wall of AI generated images is a unique outcome and demonstrates a unique ability of this technology to bring together different generations.

Did AI images change the way any of the participants remembered their life?

All participants reported no change in the way they remembered their individual memories. These are clearly important parts of their lives and so are remembered strongly. I would like to be able to do justice and help a few of the participants develop more on the possibility of truly bringing the image closer to what is being seen in the eye of their minds.

Did any participants change the way they view AI application?

Participants did not find the outcome convincing enough to instigate a change in their already held views on generative AI. This is due to many factors, some of which include the participants already being supportive of generative AI technology, and other participants viewing it as a tool. For those who had negative associations of generative AI, the outcome may have reinforced their views.

Reflections from participants and possible changes moving forward.

The feedback strongly indicates that the participants were engaged with the idea of generative AI recreating memory. The feedback evidenced there to exist genuine curiosity and thinking on the part of different participants on the defining of themselves and the future role of this technology. I was certain that this would be far from a perfect intervention when working with such a difficult topic. I was however, hoping to gauge the interest and curiosity artists would feel when interacting with my intervention. In this case, while much was lacking in terms of presenting the “perfect” replica of the participant’s memories or identity, there was success in garnering genuine curiosity and expectation from a technology that until a few months ago, I thought was the enemy of visual artists.

Moving forward, I would like to expand this into a process rather than a simple installation. The back and forth on feedback and recollection, I find, is an important part of curating one’s personal identity. The task is not as simple as putting in text prompts into a magic machine, but is learning how to utilise a new tool for reflecting the personal. Understanding, what is the personal and how memories, artefacts and other aspects play into shaping it. Through the last few months, I have unlearnt many biases, uncovered many questions and reflected on many possibilities for my project. I feel the answers lie beyond the horizon, and may never be truly absolute, but a framework is beginning to appear close.