A new horizon for art

In a previous post on this blog, the theory of "Latentism" was described in details. Notably we investigated how it was rooted in Platonicism and what are the different theoretical details making it up. In this blog, I would like to discuss what is the best name for this work of art, what are some usual themes for the paintings and address various criticism.

First of all, we should remind that Many A.I. art pieces are created by using an algorithm called GAN (Generative Adversarial Network). A GAN is only one of the possible tools to create images and paintings and calling this process GANism, on top of using an atrocious acronym, is also a disrespect to the artistic profession. We do not call our trade brush-ism, chalk-ism or crayon-ism because we use a brush, chalk or a crayon to produce our work. Neither should we call it GANism. Such an idea could have only emerged in the mind of an engineer short on social skills.

Now that the question of how to call what we do has been addressed, I would like to proceed to the question of why we always get to see portraits made with A.I. At first sight it seems there is a love story going on between the A.I. and the portraits theme. The reason for this is a practical one. To train the algorithms, it is necessary to collect a (very) large amount of images of paintings and it is much easier to find those images of paintings than say images of ukiyo-e. Nevertheless, the same approach used to make portraits can be used to make marinescapes (like in the painting illustrating this post), lanscapes, still lives, abstract, nudes or even those ukiyo-e's. In the coming months we shall release new collections and bring a more diverse art to our collectors and customers. We shall see that A.I. can be as bright and astonishing in other themes as it can be for portraits.


La mer a Leucate


Some critics argued that they want artists to be humans. They claim that since machines do not have feelings they are not tormented enough, they do not struggle enough to translate their emotions into art. My view is that Latentism is a concentrate of human emotions. The machine is actually projecting emotions from one large dimensional space to a more compact space. The algorithms can then restore the emotions into the images without a problem. When Velasquez wanted to represent a member of the Spanish royal family in a less than positive light, he could definitely do it, and when the French painters of the XVIIIth Century wanted to represent the grandiosity of Louis XIV and his successors they could do it almost effortlessly. Almost identically, the portraits made by the A.I. have a soul and an inner light. They are all but dead. One can feel determination or malice or envy just as one can feel it from a person close to us. The A.I. can perfectly represent those feelings and postures and behaviors. The machine does not yet have feelings, but it can work with the feelings which painters have instilled into their subjects during the last centuries. 

D'Agostinoai is glad to bring you the very first offering of art made with Artificial Intelligence and that is a chance to be among the first to own such avant-guard and aesthetic works.