So fucking tired of retards who jerk off to photorealism and AI slop while hating on any art movement after Romanticism, even though the best avant-garde artists like Salvador Dalí had to study classical techniques meticulously before doing any kind of abstraction.
You're not sophisticated, you're just a mental child who thinks art has to be "pretty" or it has no value.
>>2444618>even though the best avant-garde artists like Salvador Dalí had to study classical techniques meticulously before doing any kind of abstraction.Well how many of these trad people can actually paint in a trad way. That shit isn't easy.
I'll tell you about my brother because I defer to him on this. He does oil-on-canvas landscapes using traditional techniques (his paintings look like this and I'm not kidding), and teaches it, and he can tell you all about French and Russian painters from the 1800s. He's way more trad in practice than these trad guys… and also voted for the PSL in the last election although really he's more of an anarchist. He has some tome of Marxist theory on art that I haven't looked at, I should next time I'm over at the space. Anyhow
>You're not sophisticated, you're just a mental child who thinks art has to be "pretty" or it has no value.The funny thing is that he does like "pretty paintings." He has said that, like "I just want to make pretty paintings." He thinks a lot of modern art (or at least the way it's taught in art programs) can be pretty goofy, but he's doesn't have any reactionary resentment towards it either, none whatsoever, and appreciates some of it. It's just his taste. I've helped him set up galleries that include abstract expressionism and he'll look at a piece and describe elements that I hadn't thought about, or something that it's trying to say. That seems to be his criteria for judging modern art, whether it's trying to say something. He has also dealt with a few awful and pretentious abstract artists.
I like going to museums with him.
He also got a kick out of some alt-right/trad book from an obscure right-wing publisher (it wasn't Arktos but it was like that) bitching about the decline of Western civilization through art/architecture that we found buried in the art history section of a used bookstore. But otherwise he's only vaguely aware that these trad people even exist (he doesn't use social media). I had to explain it to him and he seemed to find it rather baffling. I'd have to ask him more about it, but a lot of that stuff is deals in abstractions or some "essence" or "soul" or "spirit" of muh West, but he has an understanding of the economic side of the art industry. Like, all those trad painters were painting for
somebody back then. And I think that's where the influence of Marxism comes in for him, because there has been a whole shift in art history (due to the influence of Marx) towards the study of patronage systems, like how is art being funded and by who and why (because the underlying economics are in some sense driving this).
Also, in terms of architecture, there's a reason why art museums can be rather "brutalist." The walls are grey. Neutral colors. The focus is more on the paintings.
>>2444618AI art is also abstract is the thing. I know because 90% of artists jumping to use it officially I have seen or met do it
for abstract art.
Saying AI art is always going to be Kinkaide shit is weirdly reactionary in of itself, Luddite almost, AI itself is going to affect every field to cut costs thanks to the bourgeoisie not AI itself.
>>2444703>Well how many of these trad people can actually paint in a trad way. That shit isn't easy.Funny enough none.
At least none save for anyone looking to reach to 18th century atelier methods, but this is arguably modern and not traditional, traditional is 16th century, not 1800s+.
Ironically like you said
>I'll tell you about my brother because I defer to him on this. He does oil-on-canvas landscapes using traditional techniques (his paintings look like this and I'm not kidding), and teaches it, and he can tell you all about French and Russian painters from the 1800s.I don't even need to go into detail I think you know.
Anyway to answer you most classical realists are weird conservative but basic bitch conservative types.
And exceptionally jewish I must add, like, I'm not a "noticer" or anything but a real large chunk of the 2nd gen people responsible for spearheading things were jewish ethnically.
So most of them aren't Nazis or anything, but I doubt they're open to socialist realism, which strays even further because Russians like to copy Fechin.
Most reactionaries like art and the idea of preserving it or lamenting its loss but refuse to fund it as well.
They don't understand that the "buildings we cannot do anymore" we in fact can do, stone masonry and traditional sculpture are weirdly in tact and super traditional in comparison to painting, which has been evolving since the renaissance, gradually shifting styles.
In fact most apprentices rejected habits from the old masters such as reusing drawings and then that shifted to teachers allowing pupils to paint as they please Kenyon Cox once studied with Jean Leon Gerome and said that less than 2 people in his class bothered using his painting technique, the rest were just there to get a passing grade and leave like any modern school today.
Sorry for the tangent–
anyway those buildings cost an estimate $30 billion today so it isn't that we can't, it's that paying artists like me, your brother, and 3 million stone masons to all work on a 90 year project together filling rooms with big paintings and statues and 20 story tall stone buildings with complex columns would cost 30 times what the tallest sky scraper does.
No fucking bourgeoisie is paying that shit anymore, not one. They unironically lack the fear of God smiting them to hell for being rich so they can save their money nowadays with very very few "Big projects" all of which cost less than a billion.
Which, back to the old masters, is problematic, because I'm sure if many old masters knew how easily their pupils would just shrug off their habits as pointless as more and more material conditions changed and social norms went, they'd spent their time writing better more coherent instructions than just general tips in their manuscripts.
Anyway that's as serious and as passionate as I'll ever get here on /leftypol/ on a topic I foolishly chose to make my "career."
Take this post and fun fact dump as you will.
>>2444774>AI art is also abstract is the thing. I know because 90% of artists jumping to use it officially I have seen or met do it for abstract art.Abstract art isn't just "non-representational art", it's art that expresses an emotion or thought by distorting natural forms.
I've never seen any AI art that does this.
>>2444782Of course fractals and shit came even earlier than the realistic stuff in AI art, that's not the point lmao
I mean like expressionism where the artists would use unnatural colors or shapes to literally "express" something, instead of just painting what they saw
>>2444790You mean impressionism, expressionism, Fauvism, or cubism or what? Because what you just named is vague enough to describe 80% of modernist art movements at the time.
AI does that too by the way, early models a bit better apparently, but you can prompt it to simulate impasto, free brush strokes, a whole bunch of shit. Just trust me, any art style you can think of it can copy including, I'm pretty sure, the one you mean.
I know because I had a class drag us to a exhibit where we were shown a guy prompting an ai to make paintings in his style, and then he painted over, and it didn't work but boy that didn't stop him from making 16 of those big ass printed canvases and then somehow getting a gallery to show them anyway.
>>2444831It can certainly copy the style of modern artists but is there any meaning here? This is the point.
No Ai art has ever made me feel anything.
>>2444871you're referring to a technology as kitsch. there's nothing inherent to generative AI technology that mandates that it only be used to generate kitsch. there are two main reasons why kitsch is the defining aesthetic of AI so far:
1. the corpos have deliberately censored/restricted the mainstream AI models to limit their artistic capabilities. the purpose of this is to maintain a distinction between civilian grade AI and military PSYOP grade AI. people are being trained to believe that they can "just tell" when an image or video is AI-generated, to make it easier for the military-grade AI content (which is photorealistic or indistinguishable from handpainted art) to slip by unnoticed and shape public perception.
2. most people are very stupid and have no artistic taste, and if you let them generate whatever art they desire, they gravitate towards kitsch. you are seeing why Thomas Kinkade had such a grip on the burger psyche, because he was fulfilling the desires of the subhuman burger masses.
the negative reaction towards AI tech from the left largely originates in the left's terminal tech illiteracy and accepting corporatization and militarization of AI as given, instead of trying to seize this form of MOP and use it for the aims of the revolutionary international proletariat. if the western left wasn't controlled opposition set up to fail, the left would be using and developing free, open source/weights models for revolutionary ends.
>>2444857I don't think "modern art" is meaningfully defined and thus cannot have an ultimate example.
The least contentious definition of modern art is "new art," so the ultimate form of it would be the most recent art made, in which case I'd bresent oekakirel as the ultimate form of modern art, as for a milisecond it will be the most recent art made at post.
>>2444906You'd need to have a clear idea of what it means to have accomplished the same thing. And once you do the fact that you can then spit out thousands more and clog whatever venue you're hosting it on is part of what makes it slop, not some lack of "quality." Video essays take a monumentous amount of effort to make, yet can be considered slop because they exist for SEO purposes rather than being purely communicative.
Art is just a language for communicating. What I value in non-AI art is that it's direct communication without putting it through something that will add potentially unintended cliches that aren't even the cliches of the author. I want everything on screen to have been primarily purposefully put there, either manually or procedurally. I want to be able to tell what the author themself takes for granted. With AI stuff that usually amounts to a premise and medium / style, but no juicy finer details, all else is for granted and that's kinda boring.
That said, I'm curious what you'll get trying to match picrel2 and how you'd go about it. Could be a neat excercize in art interpretation. Character is Lappland from Arhnights if that context would help ya.
>>2444774>Funny enough none.They're rich kids – sons of the upper classes – who live completely vapid lives and feel spiritually empty because they're just going to parties out of a Bret Easton Ellis novel. It's like Club Dasha.
>At least none save for anyone looking to reach to 18th century atelier methods, but this is arguably modern and not traditional, traditional is 16th century, not 1800s+.The caveat here is that I don't know shit about art. So when I say traditional I more mean "realism" and pre-20th century even though that's inaccurate.
>Anyway to answer you most classical realists are weird conservative but basic bitch conservative types.What we've figured out is that the rich people (who are also basic bitch conservatives) in our region like cowboy art. This is probably the most common bourgeois taste around here, and some of these people have ranches and mansions where they go for a Western theme. There's a lot of this. There are people who can't get enough cowboys. What does that say about them or what they imagine themselves to be, one can only wonder. But these are people who can be worth some millions or tens of millions, and they do collect it, and apparently put up enough money to support local art centers at a level that – along with various other schemes to bring in money – also manage to support a full-time staff (of a few people) in some surprisingly rural places. He doesn't want to paint cowboys or fetishistic portrayals of Native Americans these people massacred though but there's always landscapes and wildlife.
>No fucking bourgeoisie is paying that shit anymore, not one. They unironically lack the fear of God smiting them to hell for being rich Different subject but if you go to /lit/ you'll see them complaining all the time about walking into a bookstore and seeing a bunch of erotic monster romance. For awhile they were prone to blame Big Woke but more and more they're figuring out that men just don't read, so they're now proposing the idea of having book clubs where they'll read, I dunno, Ernst Junger or something. ~Gaaaaaay~
>>2444926 (me)
wait here's a more complete version
>>2444926>>2444931>Lappland from Arhnightsspeaking of slop… well here's something. not sure if you want the red cloth specifically, you'll need to be more desciptive if you want more.
>>2444930the thing is, you're going to "fall for it" regardless.
>>2444946It’s pretty easy not to because even when it looks indistinguishable from “real” art, it never says anything.
AI can do a painting the style of Van Gogh, but it can never stir in you the same emotion of seeing Starry Night in a museum. Because it has no consciousness.
>>2444960it has no purpose, it has no idea, it is simply doing something "like" something else, but it never has any value to it because it isn't trying to say anything, some of the hyper-abstract paintings you see, some of which are in the thread
>>2444638, don't feel gaudy like these AI images, they look bad, because they are producing something that looks "nice" but says nothing, there's this
>>2444887 guy who is just larping, acting as if AI is some ultra-revolutionary thing we just don't get, no we don't get it because it cannot say anything, you are effectively just doing a modern version of socialist realism, you are creating nothing but an ideological germ, not something with meaning or value
>>2444949the model I used (noobai) is trained on booru images and tags, so it added those out of the box.
>>2444960>>2444963>it never says anything.it says whatever it's prompted to say, this should be obvious. you are just used to seeing AI content that was prompted by people who have nothing to say.
>just larping, acting as if AI is some ultra-revolutionary thing we just don't getno, it is just technology and not inherently revolutionary. in fact, at present, AI tech is overwhelmingly being used for reactionary purposes. my point is that serious revolutionaries will use any technology that can help them achieve their aims.
leave aside generative AI tech for a second, let's consider AI facial recognition for example. nobody can seriously deny the power and practical use of this tech, which is myriad. currently, it is mainly being used by imperialists to surveil and track workers and anti-regime forces, which is a reactionary use of the tech. but revolutionaries could turn that around if they wanted, and distribute AI models to the masses to help identify the faces of undercover ICE agents, bourgeoisie, etc. what I'm talking about is that criticism of AI tech being used for reactionary purposes is correct, but wholesale rejection of its use is just suicidal and no different than rejecting the use of modern weaponry like machine guns or FPV drones.
>>2444982>it says whatever it's prompted to say, this should be obvious.Well that's the thing: you're basically just writing alt text for an image the user could simply envision themself upon reading it. Maybe useful if you have aphantasia, but I'd worry that would
cause / worsen aphantasia from cognitive offloading.
>>2444989 (me)
>I'd worry that would cause / worsen aphantasia from cognitive offloading.I note this as an issue because aphantasia adversely effects your object permanence, thus your spatial awareness and spatial reasoning, and several other knock-on effects.
>>2444989>you're basically just writing alt text for an image the user could simply envision themself upon reading itall images potentially have descriptive alt text though.
Here's Pynchon on pic:
>In Mexico City they somehow wandered into an exhibition of paintings by the beautiful Spanish exile Remedios Varo: in the central painting of a triptych, titled “Bordando el Manto Terrestre,” were a number of frail girls with heart-shaped faces, huge eyes, spun-gold hair, prisoners in the top room of a circular tower, embroidering a kind of tapestry which spilled out the slit windows and into a void, seeking hopelessly tofill the void: for all the other buildings and creatures, all the waves, ships and forests of the earth were contained in this tapestry, and the tapestry was the world. Oedipa, perverse, had stood in front of the painting and cried. No one had noticed; she wore dark green bubble shades. For a moment she’d wondered if the seal around her sockets were tight enough to allow the tears simply to go on and fill up the entire lens space and never dry. She could carry the sadness of the moment with her that way forever, see the world refracted through those tears, those specific tears, as if indices as yet unfound varied in important ways from cry to cry. She had looked down at her feet and known, then, because of a painting, that what she stood on had only been woven together a couple thousand miles away in her own tower, was only by accident known as Mexico, and so Pierce had taken her away from nothing, there’d been no escape. What did she so desire escape from? Such a captive maiden, having plenty of time to think, soon realizes that her tower, its height and architecture, are like her ego only incidental: that what really keeps her where she is is magic, anonymous and malignant, visited on her from outside and for no reason at all. Having no apparatus except gut fear and female cunning to examine this formless magic, to understand how it works, how to measure its field strength, count its lines of force, she may fall back on superstition, or take up a useful hobby like embroidery, or go mad, or marry a disk jockey. If the tower is everywhere and the knight of deliverance no proof against its magic, what else?
Does the existence of this text render the painting redundant?
>>2444994>Does the existence of this text render the painting redundant?Nah, paintings / art in general are pretty much another language. Making alt text for an image is effectively transaating it, with the creativity that comes with localization being inherently transformative.
Being able to experience a peice in both the language of painting and in written work is a neat experience.
>>2444982>it says whatever it's prompted to say, this should be obvious. you are just used to seeing AI content that was prompted by people who have nothing to say.does it? you've created nothing but a nice little idea you can imagine, but the end result isn't your creation, what it is, though, is an ugly result of that
>my point is that serious revolutionaries will use any technology that can help them achieve their aims.that might be true, but you have to prove it rather than just assert it to be, another problem is what you've created is nothing but what i called the "ideological germ", something that is not created for the explicit goal of saying something, but your example is at least possibly true, but then the follow up to it is pointless, i do not reject AI (and i doubt others do either) simply because it is "horrific" to my senses, or any other child-like reasoning, but instead because it is useless for those goals, you can say "ai face detection is useful for identifying bourgeois agents of the state" and i may even agree, but saying "AI is revolutionary" is pointless, you can have your generative AI, but if you're trying to make a point with it, you have to show how it's a break from the past attempts at this sort of thing
>>2444997>Nah, paintings / art in general are pretty much another languageExactly. Generative imagery is not completely redundant to the prompt, as it is a translation to a different medium of communication using a distillation of humanity's collective cultural product. A prompt writer typically has to do many rewrites of their prompt (and even more manual interventions such as inpainting, image-to-image, GIMP, etc) to generate an image that adapts to the unique qualities of the AI model in use and communicates their intended message. As a result, prompt text does not stand on its own, but rather is specific to the dialectic between the prompt, the model, and the generated image.
here's an output from Dengist China's open source Qwen image model, using a lightly modified version of Pynchon's text as a prompt. The output is completely different from the original painting Pynchon described. If I intended to use Qwen to generate a painting that actually looked like Bordando el Manto Terrestre, it could theoretically be done, but I would need to re-engineer the prompt completely, testing it repeatedly to get closer to the intended output.
>>2445005>you can have your generative AI, but if you're trying to make a point with it, you have to show how it's a break from the past attempts at this sort of thingnovel media technologies aren't premised on a "break" from past media, but on their continuity in human consciousness and ability to evoke emotions and ideas in people, maybe in a slightly different way, maybe with less labor involved. photos and mass-produced acrylic paints are faster than artisanal oil paints, leading to completely new schools of art in photography, impressionism in painting, but don't have some magic essence that allows them to communicate concepts that oil paints can't.
>>2444618>people who hate current thing are idiotsyou types will be saying the same thing in 50 years when styles change. think for yourself. at least the realism enjoyer has an opinion and aesthetic intuition instead of mere conformity.
>>2444625maths and philosophy DO deal with the real world, dingus. and you are exposing yourself claiming that "abstract" implies "unreal", when abstractions precisely denote reality.
>>2444703>marxist theory of artlet me guess, it goes like this: something something superstructure. 😴
>doesn't have any reactionary resentment towards it eitherwhats reactionary about hating bad art?
>Like, all those trad painters were painting for somebody back then.art used to be sponsored by the state; now its bought up by money-laundering millionaires and we are supposed to have a circle jerk about it.
>>2444853>art is supposed to be meaningful>>2444926look up "death of the author" then come back to reality
>>2444960>>2444963>art has to have magic inside of it to be valuablegrow up 🤣
>>2445042>i have no opinion, only resentment >>2445160Anon, avant garde is not meant for the common person, thats literally what avant garde means. This is like buying Finnegan's Wake and thinking like "wow why is this not like Game of Thrones/the Handmaid's Tale"
There are times, places and genres for everyone. And although a lot of art critics are infact the most annoying types of hipsters you can see, the way the average "modern art haters" talk about modernist artists, like "wow these guys are evil jews who wants to kill beauty and replace it with degeneracy" is the equivalent of peasants doing witch hunting
>>2445165>modern art is elitist which is why the public hates ityes, so you admit that what underlies these sentiments is a form of class domination, where socialites shit on the masses as they congratulate their own mediocrity. i dont know why you are defending this system.
>>2445164you never quite explained how it made you feel
>>2445161That's not modern art, that's introspective romantic art that's related to the emphasis on subjectivity/your lived experience that boomed in the 60's and 70's. It is closer to postmodern art imo
Proper Modern art, where they have toilets in art exhibition or buildings that look like half melted pancakes, have nothing to do with the lived experience of the artist, and is infact an attempt to transced human experience altogether and find true beauty. Rightoids love to jerk off to futurist art but futurist art is modern art in the truest sense, there is nothing beautiful or soulful about futurism, it is obsessed with machines and transformation of humans into industrial equipments and cogs rather than any sort of retvrn art, and Futurism would directly result in "degenerate arts" like Dadaism that would take the futurist impulse to its logical conclusion
>>2445169Fair enough, in any case I have enjoyment of art and design that expresses something other than explicitly worldly views, scenes and values.
>an attempt to transcend human experience altogetherBasically this, I'm entertained by depictions of stuff that doesn't truly exist in the real world, I already live in the real world.
>>2445178picrel1: cat / dog / mammal of some sort. Could be a snout or titties.
picrel2: neighborhood / street of buildings / piles of dishes
picrel3: idk but it looks edible, probably fruit
Unique IPs: 25