Gregartmind

As the AI revolution continues, our relationship to AI and art evolves alongside it. Here on deviantArt, many of our feeds are inundated with AI-produced artwork. How should we relate to this? Do we embrace its compelling power and dive in? Do we push back and support the many artists whose livelihoods are impacted by the lack of regulations?

I can sympathize with both sides. My work on deviantArt does NOT use AI, yet I am sympathetic to many AI artists and have used AI myself to help create my own award-winning film on Youtube. Here, I would like to offer a suggestion to AI artists who are relying largely or completely on AI to render their artwork. The suggestion is this: TELL YOUR STORY.

As with many beloved artists throughout history, the story of their work is part of what earns our love and admiration. Consider for example how impactful the life story of Vincent Van Gogh has been - his personal struggles, his letters to Theo, his psychological challenges. These stories help us to see the power of many of his paintings and find love and sympathy with them. Consider too, even the Mona Lisa - part of its fame has evolved from the many stories of its theft and return, the attempts to destroy it, and its survival.

As a new and emerging art form, AI artists MUST tell your story. This will help audiences gain an essential window into the real creative and artistic skill involved in the process. Without a glimpse into the thinking, feeling, and explorations behind the artwork, AI artists will lack the leverage to gain admiration and understanding in a wider audience. There will remain an opaque wall, and experienced audiences will be left with a sense that your work either has taken little or no creative input, relying solely on technology, or that you are not courageous and mature enough in your thinking to make it worthy of sharing.

What do I mean by telling your story? I mean, for example, writing a thoughtful description to your posts. Tell (or show!) the evolution of your images. Did you prompt fifty images and then finally select this one? How did this particular render stand out to you? Did you try exploring dozens of apps before you found the one that truly expresses your mind?

Of course, as artists we would love for our work to completely speak for itself. And it may have that power sometimes, especially when our audiences are already familiar with us and our art. But when introducing our work to new and wider audiences, a few sentences expressing the thoughts and feelings of our art can be the key to connection and appreciation that we want to find by sharing our work.

I would suggest not to be intimidated at the thought of writing (as many artists are!). Do your best to explain some of your thinking, some of the technical steps, that went into the production of your work. This practice can only serve to clarify your own thinking, build bridges to a wider audience, and gain credibility for this brave new world of creativity.

What do you think? Please do share your thoughts in the comments!

My Art and Psychedelics

For many artists, psychedelics have played a central role in creativity. The influence of psychedelics on art goes back perhaps to the earliest beginnings of human artistic activity itself, as archaeological evidence strongly suggests altered states were involved in the creation of the oldest known paintings in the world.

For me personally, the role of psychedelics has been profound ever since the formative years of my early adult life. The singularly most inspiring artist for me at that period was Alex Grey. I first encountered his work in his book Sacred Mirrors when I was about nineteen years old, a year in which psilocybin mushrooms and LSD were generally a bimonthly event in my life. Looking back at that time, these psychedelics created an ambience of open-mindedness, connection to nature, a felt relevance to philosophy, and a desire to explore and push the limits of authentic experience within a spiritual framework. Though I did not recognize psychedelics’ influence on Grey’s work at first, the themes in his paintings clearly proclaim psychedelic insights – insights like the multivalent, multidimensional nature of existence, and the unity of the cosmos in a core consciousness of awesome perfection and infinitude. These orientations came to me, and were reflected back in visionary art, through exploring psychedelics. As Terence McKenna often discussed, the psychedelics take us to the beginning of the path. They open the doors to an unimaginable vastness of possibility in the heart, the mind, and the imagination, and can unleash titanic creative powers within us that we must learn to navigate if we are to express them clearly and do justice to their initial force.

How do psychedelics stimulate creativity and art? There is an accelerating increase in content written and discussed about this, as the steady decriminalization, legalization, and fruition of the work of leading elders in the field has created the platform for open discourse. Here I will simply state that the force of psychedelics seems threefold: they occasion visions - clear and unabashed visual experiences of previously unimaginable vistas. They also allow or activate higher cognitive functioning to perceive and explore patterns and connectivity, how different aspects of nature and experience interact and are connected with one another. Finally, they intensify and open us to the intimate and authentic felt experience of being, and thus of the emotional and spiritual relevance of the visions and perceptions experienced. Vision, pattern recognition, and intimate connection to meaning – these three qualities are empowered and heightened through the psychedelic experience as a radical force and inspiration for the creation of art.

To delve in deep and explore in depth psychedelics and art, I highly recommend further reading:

The Psilocybin Connection by Jahan Khamsehzadeh

The Archaic Revival by Terence McKenna

The Mind in the Cave by David Lewis-Williams (archeological approach)

Visionary by Graham Hancock

Visionary Art: Part I: An Introduction and Paleolithic Origins - an article I wrote on this subject.

...feel free to reach out with comments or questions!

AI images change the equation of how we perceive art. The equation without AI art is essentially this: a compelling image = a creative, skilled artist. This has always been to a degree an unquestioned aspect of experiencing art. We see, lets say, an "amazing" image, which inherently implies an "amazing" artist behind it. Yes, many artists have always found tricks of the trade to make their work appear more rigorous or demanding than it may actually be (thus the magic of Bob Ross). Nonetheless this too was a mark of intelligence and skill on the part of an artist.

Now we must cognitively break this link. We may see a highly compelling, detailed, "amazing" image, and yet we must train our perception to recognize the fact that this no longer necessitates any level of skill intelligence, or creativity of an "amazing" artist. Little more than basic spelling on the part of a human is required. We are seeing the processes of AI, not of the "artist" or rather the "input-er of prompts" into the AI software. So when we see AI-generated images, we are seeing the product of a computer algorithm, nothing more or less than such.

The important point here is not whether AI images are "art", or "good" or "bad," but the point is to see and experience them as they actually are ontologically: the product of an algorithm. I find it necessary to remind myself while seeing these images, as a kind of perceptual exercise, to recognize that no human skill or vision or creativity of any significance is generating these images. These are of a different substance fundamentally than art as we have previously known it.

We may praise or denounce AI images, but this must be done with the recognition and clarity of what in fact does and does not go into their production.

This addresses a certain subconscious or unconscious assumption that has previously not required such attention: the unquestioned assumption that behind every "amazing" work of art is an "amazing" artist. Break this link in the equation, and begin to study AI art with the fresh perspectives that this unlocks.

What this unlocks initially for me is a compellingly sensual view of AI processes. The human element is marginal at best; ultimately it may be irrelevant. Important here is that a person (not an "artist") standing beside their AI-generated work demanding any level of praise is generally absurd. This would be like a person turning their car on and proclaiming "look what I have built (because I turned it on)!" No matter how exotic the car (or the input into the AI) it is absurd to equate the creation of the car with that person. They may have good taste in cars (or in AI inputs) but they did not make it.

The AI images however present us with an exciting experience of AI processing. It is far from a conscious process on the part of the AI, from what I can perceive, but it does give an artistic rendering of the computer activity, and thus can help us to understand these processes not on intellectual terms but on sensual terms, just as art helps us to communicate not just intellectually but through the sensual or aesthetic experience of the colors, lines, forms, and subject of the artwork itself.

The point I hope to convey here is that we are challenged to develop a sober and clear gaze at what we are actually seeing when looking at AI images. I would recommend taking a sort of meditative practice of examining AI images. When we put aside for a moment the controversial aspects (legality, creative rights, etc.) and spend some thoughtful moments experiencing these images, we do enter into an interesting and potentially illuminating experience of AI processes manifesting as the sensual and aesthetic languages of an Image. The human involvement is marginal (thus the ridiculous asertion of people demanding and expecting credit for their AI prompts), and yet the AI element is magnified to exciting new levels for us to experience.

AI art is asserting an increasing presence in art, media, and culture. Software such as Starryai, Midjourney, and NightCafe are getting easier to use and increasingly popular. How can we, as artists and art lovers, relate to it? Is it a destructive influence on traditional art? Does it overstep its bounds into our craft that many of us labored to cultivate over a lifetime? This article has been inspired by my own reflections on these questions, and by a personal concern for the impact that AI art will have on me as an artist and a professional. Let's investigate a bit of this phenomenon in search of a fresh and inspired perspective.

To be honest, I was quite impressed when I first saw Midjourney work several months ago. As a traditional and digital artist myself, I felt a strong "whoa!" factor when first encountering its work. The first images I saw were extremely detailed, highly rendered and finished works that seemed to simulate a mastery of ambiguity where no point in the image was fully fixed, thus inspiring my eyes to continually explore the textures, rhythms, and detail.

Yet, after researching for a few hours Midjourney and other AI content, it soon became clear that there was a giveaway aesthetic quality. I could train my eyes to discern what is AI art and what is not with, I'd say, about 90 percent accuracy. Once this clarified in my vision, the impressiveness of AI art diminished almost immediately.

I think this is the first challenge and step as artists that we can take to relate to AI content. Can we identify it? Can we pick up visual cues that give away its AI origins?

Here, I think, we should expect an ongoing challenge. As the AI software continues to evolve, its capacities and tendencies will surely shift as well, and we may have to stay alert to cutting-edge advancements to keep a discerning eye. We can take this up as a healthy challenge. It challenges us to refine our discernment of the source of the artwork, i.e. the consciousness behind it. Is it human, is it AI? What an incredible question to explore! No doubt this will require ongoing courage and perceptivity, though it can be tremendously fruitful to refine our discerning eye at profound levels.

Many artists and art lovers will likely assert black-and-white opinions. "All AI art is cheating" (anti-AI) or "Digital art is already computer generated anyway..." (pro-AI)...these examples quickly come to mind, and it is easy to formulate similar assertions. Furthermore, many artists will be deceptive about their AI use. How could we expect otherwise? While some artists will be transparent about their use of AI, others will leave us to guess, while others more will surely lie about it. I think we would do well to expect these stances arising (as they are already) and not become frustrated with them.

There will surely be legal dimensions as well. As many of us may or may not know, some of these programs resource images from the internet to "understand" the input prompts for the image generation. Thus, they are relying on art already created and published throughout the internet. This raises legal questions which we should anticipate to gain prominence in the cultural spotlight as to the authenticity of images generated by AI.

Some art professions in particular will also feel a financial competition more acutely than others. Many llustrators, for example, will surely see their commissions diminish as "non-artists" who might otherwise hire them could lean on AI to render their ideas. Other art professions, such as traditional artists creating work for galleries, may feel AI's effects far less.

An initial (and I would say mature) step for us as artists would be to accept these realities and find a way forward. AI artwork will continue to grow in popularity and influence despite resistance (as did photography), and those of us dedicating a lifetime to our craft will have to find a way through this landscape. I can relate to what others are expressing in Deviant Art and social media, for example, about their frustration in the face of posts that seem clearly AI-generated but where AI is not mentioned in the comments. Many viewers will be unable to or unconcerned with discerning the difference. Again, I think we would do well to accept this ambience of ambiguity as part of the landscape and focus more on our own personal development in the face of it.

What about our own work is totally unique? This may be the most profound and empowering question to ask ourselves. AI in our creative landscape challenges us to further let go of the endeavor to simulate styles, motifs, and themes in artistic culture and refine our focus on what truly drives our creativity. It challenges us to unearth our own creative insights and reveal them through our artwork, and pursue the new and unknown with greater intensity.

Can we have a creative dialogue with AI in our own workflow? This I think is fertile ground for creativity. Instead of avoiding AI altogether (as no doubt many artists will), we can at the least explore what AI art software can do to inspire our workflow. It may or may not contribute to our art (on an individual level), yet we can each at least try one of these digital engines and get some direct experience with it. (Allow me to mention in passing that my own initial experiments with Midjourney have been quite mild. It was fun but not particularly inspiring, at least so far.) This, at least, can help us understand how non-trained artists can be greatly rewarded by using such software, even if we personally choose not to engage it further as trained artists.

I hope it is clear from this article that I believe we should be asking big questions rather than expecting definitive answers about AI art. Fundamentally, I think we (as artists and art admirers) will continue to experience increasing pressure from AI art, a pressure that we can use to our advantage if we take a clear and mature approach. Through its pressure, we can refine our craft and unique vision further, honing in on what makes our own art and creative practice truly unique. This will likely lead to the professional value of creating demand for our work that is vividly individual and distinctive. At an equally profound level, we can find inspiration to perceive in completely new ways by exercising a discernment of the difference between human and AI art, and we can explore the relationships between the two. No doubt, AI art will exert an ongoing force of evolution on human creativity, and we can take this up as an inspiration to sharpen our vision and unlock novel revelations of our collective and individual artistic identity.