HOME | DD

Description

Directions, there are so many.

With the advent of generative AI the possible directions in the production of "artistic" images have expanded so drastically and dramatically that it is difficult to imagine what the limit is. I myself in my study of this "artistic" production methodology have embraced so many directions that it is difficult for me to even remember them all.
I have "made" land art made of snow and tar, I have covered beautiful women in color and bitumen, in ice, and many other "things" that would be simply unthinkable to actually realize. Things that were destined to remain in the realm of hypotheses with AI it is possible if not making them, at least visualize them.
This is the point, perhaps, with so many possibilities made available the difficulty lies in choosing a precise direction.
But is it necessary to choose? This is also a good question, the "natural" answer to which could easily be no, it is not necessary to choose, you can go in all possible directions.
But at a crossroads of possibilities where the directions are almost infinite, the risk is that of finding ourselves being the proverbial "jack of all trades, master of none", which due to its intrinsic nature is unable to offer substantial contributions to research , supporting the thesis of those who see generative AI as just a game, a recreational activity.
I don't see it this way, but at this crossroads there are so many directions that this point of view is also perfectly sustainable and valid.
So many directions, too many.

Description

Directions, there are so many.

With the advent of generative AI the possible directions in the production of "artistic" images have expanded so drastically and dramatically that it is difficult to imagine what the limit is. I myself in my study of this "artistic" production methodology have embraced so many directions that it is difficult for me to even remember them all.
I have "made" land art made of snow and tar, I have covered beautiful women in color and bitumen, in ice, and many other "things" that would be simply unthinkable to actually realize. Things that were destined to remain in the realm of hypotheses with AI it is possible if not making them, at least visualize them.
This is the point, perhaps, with so many possibilities made available the difficulty lies in choosing a precise direction.
But is it necessary to choose? This is also a good question, the "natural" answer to which could easily be no, it is not necessary to choose, you can go in all possible directions.
But at a crossroads of possibilities where the directions are almost infinite, the risk is that of finding ourselves being the proverbial "jack of all trades, master of none", which due to its intrinsic nature is unable to offer substantial contributions to research , supporting the thesis of those who see generative AI as just a game, a recreational activity.
I don't see it this way, but at this crossroads there are so many directions that this point of view is also perfectly sustainable and valid.
So many directions, too many.