Dreamy AI-generated geometric scenes mesmerize social media users

"This was the point where AI-generated art passed the Turing Test for me."

See full article...

 

[mknelson]

Who else sees Marge Simpson hair in that checkerboard village?

 

[Nowicki]

To all those who say generative AI cant do anything original. Derivative does not mean it can only regurgitate worse versions of the same content.

It does suck that its going to dilute and water down the overall content humans make, and that we likely wont be able to tell the difference between an M Night Shyamalan Film, and a generative piece of garbage, but im excited to see where this ride takes us.

 

[Firefool125]

Spiral Hair is the new Fall Fashion for all anime girls

 

[dwrd]

"It's nice, but there are lots of decisions a human wouldn't make," wrote a graphic designer named Trent. "A lot of the shadows aren't correct, and putting chimneys right above windows makes no sense. Zooming in there are also the tell-tale noise patterns of AI art."

Trent is the "this looks shopped" guy of the new generation.

 

[phat_tony]

Anybody have ControlNet working on an M-series Mac? I use Stable Diffusion via Automatic1111 on Mac, but I could never get ControlNet working due to some bug regarding the bit count some python math library is using... sorry, I'm not on the correct computer right now to look up the details of the error to add here. I've posted it on appropriate forums and only gotten added comments about others experiencing the same error, no solutions.

But I haven't looked at it for months, and this all changes so fast, I thought maybe somebody here might just chime in "just use this tool instead, it works."

 

[xoe]

Who else sees Marge Simpson hair in that checkerboard village?

They reused the asset to save memory, just like how clouds and bushes are the same asset in SMB3

 

[Dioptase]

If you squint, the Girl with a Pearl Earing details are easier to see. Wonderful optical effect.

 

[onychomys]

"goatse" (surprisingly safe for work),

You'll forgive me for not trusting you on that, I hope. I mean, just the name alone is probably enough to flag my work's network censors.

 

[vanderbeam]

To all those who say generative AI cant do anything original. Derivative does not mean it can only regurgitate worse versions of the same content.

The AI didn't instigate what makes these pieces original. That step came from a person choosing to use the software in a creative way with interesting inputs that hadn't been tried before. An machine-learning output being original isn't to the credit of the "AI"

 

[PuglyWont]

This is neat but kind of what I expect of AI-art, other kinds of art superimposed on geometric shapes... it just seems like a form of convolution.

 

[Emon]

This stuff is getting really impressive. I know many of us have been shitting on AI art for a while but honestly, ask yourself, if you sent these back in time 10 years, would people look at them and go "wow what crap who made that mess?"

No, they wouldn't, not remotely. They'd be seen as reasonably impressive works of art. Perhaps nothing rare but you'd say, yeah that was made by a great digital painter!

Especially the spiral village, it's impressively Escher-esque.

 

[orangpelupa]

Many moons ago, there was so someone who did something like that, but with different patterns.

Seems the spiral pattern is the one taking the social media

 

[unequivocal]

The AI didn't instigate what makes these pieces original. That step came from a person choosing to use the software in a creative way with interesting inputs that hadn't been tried before. An machine-learning output being original isn't to the credit of the "AI"

Yes, and because of the multi step process and configuration / design, these works are edging closer to what might be called human creative works.. I'll be interested to see when LoC decides that ai assisted art becomes something that can be copyrighted..

 

[Ozy]

The AI didn't instigate what makes these pieces original. That step came from a person choosing to use the software in a creative way with interesting inputs that hadn't been tried before. An machine-learning output being original isn't to the credit of the "AI"

Yeah but it's in direct contrast to people who claim that AI generated art has zero creative content, which is a good chunk of the audience here.

 

[bizard]

You'll forgive me for not trusting you on that, I hope. I mean, just the name alone is probably enough to flag my work's network censors.

I couldn’t help myself. It is the same effect as the Girl with the Pearl earring, so if you squint, then it is no longer safe for work anymore. Otherwise, it is just an innocuous village.

 

[bortholomew]

If you squint, the Girl with a Pearl Earing details are easier to see. Wonderful optical effect.

I couldn't see it in the main picture, but the Thumbnail just looks like a weirdly-shaded version of the Girl with a Pearl Earing.

 

[Pugnax555]

You'll forgive me for not trusting you on that, I hope. I mean, just the name alone is probably enough to flag my work's network censors.

If you do get a chance to click on it later, it really is surprisingly impressive. Though I still don't see the goats...

 

[encapsulated]

Am I the only one not overly impressed by this? I mean it's a cool effect, optical illusion, but what is everyone so excited about? I feel like I'm taking crazy pills over here. If an artist actually painted them, yeah, sure but..

 

[barktrees]

To all those who say generative AI cant do anything original. Derivative does not mean it can only regurgitate worse versions of the same content.

It does suck that its going to dilute and water down the overall content humans make, and that we likely wont be able to tell the difference between an M Night Shyamalan Film, and a generative piece of garbage, but im excited to see where this ride takes us.

I've never seen a person make art like this before. AI is an incredible tool.

 

[LesMilpool____]

The future is terrifying

 

[barktrees]

If you do get a chance to click on it later, it really is surprisingly impressive. Though I still don't see the goats...

I had to literally squint to see it. The smoke is a hand.

 

[Murry Wilson]

"This was the point where AI-generated art passed the Turing Test for me."

That just sounds dumb.

 

[Ozy]

The problem is computers don't do random. No true random number generator.

AI can process and combine a painting with 100,000 other paintings and 100,000 other inputs and the output is only the result of all those inputs. Even an input like "but make it sad" is constrained to paintings labeled as such with the AI having no understanding of it.

A human is wonderfully imperfect. You can tell an artist to use 10 paintings with 10 constraints and they cannot limit themselves to that. They'll also have random thoughts and distractions and will hear and see things that will affect their output. The end result is random and not repeatable.

If you can use the same inputs and get the same output it certainly isn't creativity.

I don't know what it is but I certainly know what it isn't

Randomness is not creativity.

 

[nononsense]

Am I the only one not overly impressed by this? I mean it's a cool effect, optical illusion, but what is everyone so excited about? I feel like I'm taking crazy pills over here. If an artist actually painted them, yeah, sure but..

Have you ever seen any of M.C. Escher's work? It's very hallucinatory and geometric and this reminds me a bit of his work. (Not just the staircases, he did a lot more than staircases.) It also reminds me of Magritte's surreal stuff that plays with perspective and subjects.

I am not at all surprised that this set social media on fire. There's something very compelling about it.

 

[symbolic-logician]

AI art is definitely spiraling out of control .

Hey, stop pushing. I'm getting my coat.

 

[LesMilpool____]

"This was the point where AI-generated art passed the Turing Test for me."

That just sounds dumb.

AI art is the equivalent of responding to a "how are you?" with a 3 paragraph response that sounds relevant - until you start picking words apart and realize that no sane person would respond that way.

 

[encapsulated]

I've never seen a person make art like this before. AI is an incredible tool.

Artists have been creating optical illusion paintings for centuries.

 

[barktrees]

Artists have been creating optical illusion paintings for centuries.

Ya, but I never saw any that look like this.

 

[Ozy]

AI art is the equivalent of responding to a "how are you?" with a 3 paragraph response that sounds relevant - until you start picking words apart and realize that no sane person would respond that way.

Yes, clearly the first thought when seeing the works of van Gogh, Edvard Munch, and Dali are: this must be a very sane person. I can't think of a single worse metric to judge art by than one of 'sanity'.

 

[Tarod]

Wow. Pretty original!

 

[noahmayer]

I've seen similar pictures before, though not quite the spiral one. The checkerboard type. Photos even.

 

[mgc8]

Anybody have ControlNet working on an M-series Mac? I use Stable Diffusion via Automatic1111 on Mac, but I could never get ControlNet working due to some bug regarding the bit count some python math library is using... sorry, I'm not on the correct computer right now to look up the details of the error to add here. I've posted it on appropriate forums and only gotten added comments about others experiencing the same error, no solutions.

But I haven't looked at it for months, and this all changes so fast, I thought maybe somebody here might just chime in "just use this tool instead, it works."

I use Diffusion Bee on the M1 Mac for the user-friendly UI and specific optimisations. The latest stable version 1.7.4, or the beta one 2.x both support CobtrolNet natively now.

 

[Defenestrar]

Randomness is not creativity.

So, we know what you think of Pollock, but how do you feel about those no-talent sloppy impressionists?

 

[encapsulated]

Have you ever seen any of M.C. Escher's work? It's very hallucinatory and geometric and this reminds me a bit of his work. (Not just the staircases, he did a lot more than staircases.) It also reminds me of Magritte's surreal stuff that plays with perspective and subjects.

I am not at all surprised that this set social media on fire. There's something very compelling about it.

Of course I have and far more (Octavio Ocampo, Oleg Shupliak). And they are far more beautiful and interesting to look at. This doesn't impress me. /shrug

 

[Aurich]

I've never seen a person make art like this before. AI is an incredible tool.

People have made art like this before. A good trick is to have two or more copies of David Wiesner's Free Fall, the whole book is one continuous geometrical illusion like these but with constant transitions. Here's some quick snapshots of my copies to illustrate:

(Pardon my messy desk, I swear I'm in the middle of cleaning it up.)