Jump to content

Talk:Artificial intelligence visual art

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

More female artists needed in ‘1950s to 2000s: Early Implementations’

[edit]

The section ‘1950s to 2000s: Early Implementations’ could benefit from more female artists examples. Electric Dreams at Tate Modern has some good female artists from this period for a reference to add diversity to the representation. Thoughts on adding more women in this context? Zcwajel (talk) 09:56, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That is definitely a good idea. Is there an artist you are suggesting? It has to be an artist working with artificial intelligence art, not just more typical 1950-2000s electronic/computer art. Asparagusstar (talk) 16:13, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Lynn Hershman Leeson, Lillian Schwartz and Rebecca Allen are good historic examples. More recently Holly Herndon, Stephanie Dinkins, Hito Steyerl & Sofia Crespo could be added. I also added Jake Elwes for more queer/gender non conforming representation although it's been removed (their work has been widely exhibited and was one of the early artists working with machine learning from 2015). Glad to see Sougwen Chung there but feel it could be expanded. Zcwajel (talk) 10:12, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like you may have a conflict of interest, which I have left you a message about on your talk page. Asparagusstar (talk) 05:30, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Intro to Technical Writing

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 10 February 2025 and 10 March 2025. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Itsdannycheng (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Prmurthy98a8 (talk) 21:46, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - SP25 - Sect 202 - Thu

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 22 January 2025 and 30 April 2025. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Nz25 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Nz25 (talk) 03:36, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not art.

[edit]

AI-generated images can't be called "art" because for something to be art it must evoke and represent an emotion, and a machine cannot represent something that it doesn't have. I get it's the common name, but it's a misnomer. And if this isn't enough of a reason why the title should be changed, then I will evoke WP:NPOV and say that having a title that creates polemic clearly breaks that rule. 31.4.238.190 (talk) 21:08, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

to be simultaneously fair and unfair, the question of whether or not ai art can be counted as art beyond its name isn't something wikipedia should or can answer. see wp:scope for more info on that, or wp:wiae if you're feeling spicy consarn (grave) (obituary) 19:40, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is no definition of art prior to this whole AI debacle that mentions “representing feelings” as a requirement User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 00:26, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree that it is exactly art

[edit]

The point of these AI pictures is to create an imitation of a real subject. It's not real art because it doesn't have a basis in reality, the same way that an AI image of a photo isn't a real photo. I think that the article title should be "AI-created media" or something like that. 2600:387:3:803:0:0:0:2D (talk) 03:51, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]