Before posting that perfect picture, take a close look at it.
Category: Fake art
Administrative note
I’ve added the category “Fake art” for posts that include machine-made pictures I’ve concocted. While writing prompts is a tricky art, I can’t claim credit for the execution of those prompts.
Blackbirds
It’s the second day of February, when I and perhaps a few other bloggers post a favorite poem. Here’s some easy Wallace Stevens.
Thirteen Ways of Looking at a Blackbird
I
Among twenty snowy mountains,
The only moving thing
Was the eye of the blackbird.
II
I was of three minds,
Like a tree
In which there are three blackbirds.
III
The blackbird whirled in the autumn winds.
It was a small part of the pantomime.
IV
A man and a woman
Are one.
A man and a woman and a blackbird
Are one.
V
I do not know which to prefer,
The beauty of inflections
Or the beauty of innuendoes,
The blackbird whistling
Or just after.
VI
Icicles filled the long window
With barbaric glass.
The shadow of the blackbird
Crossed it, to and fro.
The mood
Traced in the shadow
An indecipherable cause.
VII
O thin men of Haddam,
Why do you imagine golden birds?
Do you not see how the blackbird
Walks around the feet
Of the women about you?
VIII
I know noble accents
And lucid, inescapable rhythms;
But I know, too,
That the blackbird is involved
In what I know.
IX
When the blackbird flew out of sight,
It marked the edge
Of one of many circles.
X
At the sight of blackbirds
Flying in a green light,
Even the bawds of euphony
Would cry out sharply.
XI
He rode over Connecticut
In a glass coach.
Once, a fear pierced him,
In that he mistook
The shadow of his equipage
For blackbirds.
XII
The river is moving.
The blackbird must be flying.
XIII
It was evening all afternoon.
It was snowing
And it was going to snow.
The blackbird sat
In the cedar-limbs.
Fourteen in twenty-eight
If you’re musically-inclined and have wondered if there is a challenge like the (defunct) NaNoWriMo for musicians, there is February Album Writing Month, or “FAWM.” The goal is to write fourteen songs in four weeks. “Song” is broadly defined; it can be anything from an abrupt miniature like Melt-Banana to an inflated prog rock epic. Expertise doesn’t matter — much — and it is possible to get by with just your pocket moloch. How to do it and what to use are discussed here.
I haven’t decided yet if I will join in myself this year. I’ve been trying to get the hang of yet another DAW, Presonus Studio One Fender Studio Pro. While all digital audio workstations do essentially the same thing, each is just different enough that skill with one doesn’t transfer to another.1 If I by the end of January I spend more time writing music than yelling at the computer, I might give it a shot.
Further fun with the art machine
Working with AI image generators is both addictive and frustrating. You can get pretty pictures, but it takes persistence. It’s like working with an idiot savant, emphasis on “idiot.” If a model can misinterpret your prompt, it will. It generally takes between six and twelve tries to get a satisfactory image, and the final result is always a compromise.
I mostly play at NightCafé. Sometimes I take part in the “challenges,” in which participants submit pictures they “made” and vote on the entrants. Consequently, I need to quickly evaluate a lot of pictures, too many of which look exactly like other pictures. I’ve developed some criteria for scoring:
Catches my attention: +1
Holds my attention: +2
Is a generic headshot: -1
Includes a kitten: -1
Includes a fox: -1
Includes a dragon: -1
Includes fairies: -1
Includes pointy ears: -1
Includes angels: -1
Includes Batman: -1
Includes Wonder Woman: -1
Includes Catwoman: +1
Is a generic landscape: -1
Is a generic cityscape: -1
Is a generic dystopian cityscape: -10
Features a knight in armor standing on a precipice looking out over a vast wilderness under a dramatic sky: -1
Includes islands floating in the sky: -1
Includes women in boob-plate armor: -1
Is imitation Klimt: -1
Is imitation Art Nouveau: -1
Is imitation Thomas Kinkade: -10
Relies on vulgar humor: -10
Is intentionally grotesque: -10
Includes Donald Trump: -10
Has a message: -10
Has a political message: -100
The astute will notice that many of my own pictures would be down-voted by these criteria. Don’t ever accuse me of consistency.
More phony art
Recent results from my struggles with AI image generators. Most of these were assembled by Nano Banana, Seedream or Flux. Click to see them larger and spot the errors.
But is it art?
Here Dr. Boli’s long memory gives him a different point of view from that of the average Internet blitherer. Dr. Boli’s own blithering is informed by a better acquaintance with the past two centuries or so, and in this case he remembers that we have faced exactly this question before. It took us more than a century to answer it, and it was never answered definitively. But the consensus of opinion has been that, yes, a machine can produce art, when that machine is a camera.
To anyone who has lived through both revolutions, the resemblance is hard to miss.
Previously, making a picture had been a skill learned with long and laborious practice. Then along came the machine, and the skill was irrelevant. Why learn to draw when the machine can make perfect images for you? There was much grumbling about whether such laziness ought even to be allowed, and much hand-wringing about the future of Art.
With no alteration at all, the paragraph above can be made to apply to the coming of photography in the early nineteenth century or the coming of artificial intelligence two centuries later.
Machine-made art
Intrigued by J Greely’s work with pinups, I’ve been experimenting with AI art generators. Rather than struggle with SwarmUI, I tried some of the many free online toys. The results were interesting enough to warrant further exploration, and I eventually ended up at NightCafé. I’ve been seeing what the various models can do and what their limitations are.
As far as capabilities go, they can imitate almost any style to some degree. AI “photographs” are convincing as long as you don’t count the fingers, and sometimes the models get those right, too — one more reason not to believe anything you see online.
