Thanks Ralph, very funny pictures. I guess this is clever photoshop work,
perhaps even with the assistance of a new AI picture generator.
More of such fantasy work will be our future.
Henk

Op za 21 jan. 2023 om 20:32 schreef Ralf R Radermacher fotoralf@gmx.de:

Am 21.01.23 um 22:55 schrieb Henk Terhell:

Really? The idea of living in a world where you have to keep wondering
if art is genuine or AI generated gives me the creeps.

Ralf

--
Ralf R. Radermacher  -  Köln/Cologne, Germany
Blog  : http://the-real-fotoralf.blogspot.com
Audio : http://aporee.org/maps/projects/fotoralf
Fotos : https://www.fotocommunity.de/user_photos/770012

I'm with you all th way on that , Ralf.

ann

On 1/21/2023 5:47 PM, Ralf R Radermacher wrote:

--
ann sanfedele photography
https://annsan.smugmug.com
https://www.cafepress.com/+ann-sanfedele+gifts
https://www.lulu.com/spotlight/annsan
https://www.createphotocalendars.com/Shop/annsanfedelecalendarsandbooks

But it’s happening. AI is now writing as well. Might as well make the best of it. However, I’m glad I’ve reached an age where I probably won’t have to compete with a robot for my job.

Paul

I dunno. Art remains art. An "AI" is just another constructed thing by which humans have extended their abilities to influence and manipulate the world we live in. We already use automatons to assemble our cars, our toys, our cameras, and run a lot of our essential infrastructure. There's really little difference between what is Art directly created by human hands and Art that is indirectly created by the minds that humans embue their machines with.

Until a definitive test of what constitutes machine intelligence exists, and until machines can reliably and consistently pass that test, any Art is the result of human artiface and mind regardless of whether it is directly or indirectly created.

If you want to put a simple limitation on "what is art" to say that it must be made by human hands, well, that is just fine … but most photographs will then be marginally not-art since we already rely upon a whole range of machines, of varying levels of "intelligence", to produce our photographs.

G
—
Godfrey DiGiorgi - godfreydigiorgi@me.com - 408.431.4601

"You can't depend on your eyes when your imagination is out of focus."
--Mark Twain

It's too bad the artist didn't put his best foot forward.

Dan Matyola
https://tinyurl.com/DJM-Pentax-Gallery
https://tinyurl.com/DJM-Pentax-Gallery

On Sat, Jan 21, 2023 at 2:32 PM Ralf R Radermacher fotoralf@gmx.de wrote:

Well said, Godfrey.

I well remember a heated argument I had with a fellow teacher along
those lines many years ago. He was adamant that photography could never
be art. One could even argue about the type of brush & paint used! And
what if the "artist" had to wear glasses?

Alan C

On 22-Jan-23 04:56 AM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:

Well said, Godfrey.

I well remember a heated argument I had with a fellow teacher along
those lines many years ago. He was adamant that photography could never
be art. One could even argue about the type of brush & paint used! And
what if the "artist" had to wear glasses?

Alan C

On 22-Jan-23 04:56 AM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:

Well said, Godfrey.

I well remember a heated argument I had with a fellow teacher along
those lines many years ago. He was adamant that photography could never
be art. One could even argue about the type of brush & paint used! And
what if the "artist" had to wear glasses?

Alan C

On 22-Jan-23 04:56 AM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: