I'm just very glad that you're not running your collages through some sort of chat/art GPT in order to "improve" it. Your art is stunning, cool, and has your soul embedded in it.
Perhaps it's just a personal preference. I can't compare but if I trust that art is made by the artist him/herself with no help from AI, I will accept it, react to it from an emotional place, love it or not, but know that it came from what you call, "Intuitive Intelligence" and not some robot computer. I'll take the human mind/soul/heart and hand rather than something not part of the human. This excludes a bionic hand that had to replace a flesh & bone one due to illness. But then.....replaced by bionics is an entirely other subject one can debate about.
But you know, thinking about it a little more, I work pretty hard at removing me from the process anyway. I depend a lot on chance operations. In this poem I did collect all of the material used in the poem from my own writing. Using the AI in the case of text such as this poem remain pretty much in my wheel house as far as how I normally work and I did remove things and add things (everything that is in brackets) so that it captures the meanings that I wanted and not the ones I didn't want. So in this case there was still a lot of intervention.
I have made a lot of poems over the years using a Markov chain text generator like this one https://projects.haykranen.nl/markov/demo/ and had a lot of fun with that for generating text material to make poems from.
So, my conclusion at this moment is that I am not going to discount the result just because I am using the AI tool to show me some things I might be willing to use, manipulate and then call my own.
My entire body of poetry which is probably about 2000 pages worth by now is all built around using keyboards, computers, the internet and email and collecting things and doing weird searches to find material that ends up being uniquely my own by the end of it. I have been a kid in a technological candy store for the last 25 years through all of these technological developments we have witnessed. Heck I am seeing the makings of an article!
Yes, I understand your logic in using the technology and making it yours. In the end, it's all considered "Tools" as much as just about anything can be. I know artists that just conceive their ideas but have someone else or a machine make it yet it's still considered their own work. And as I stated in my first sentence, it's a personal preference. I'd like for you to explain the 'removal of you from the process'. I don't think that can happen completely as you are still The Creator of the piece. It's no one's else's unless you plagiarize it which I know you wouldn't. Anyway, most of what I was saying was not about the written word/poems but about the physical art pieces.
I'm just very glad that you're not running your collages through some sort of chat/art GPT in order to "improve" it. Your art is stunning, cool, and has your soul embedded in it.
My collages are made with 'II' (Intuitive Intelligence) instead of AI.
Both a mystery.
But I suppose they can be combined together.
Just fumbling along...
It's all about 'Keep Going'.
But the AI has a big advantage because
it can process things a million times faster
but how do we know that out of a million options
it knows which is the best one for the human heart?
Probably nothing to put faith into.
What can be trusted?
What can satisfy?
Hum...
Can we tell the difference when comparing?
Perhaps it's just a personal preference. I can't compare but if I trust that art is made by the artist him/herself with no help from AI, I will accept it, react to it from an emotional place, love it or not, but know that it came from what you call, "Intuitive Intelligence" and not some robot computer. I'll take the human mind/soul/heart and hand rather than something not part of the human. This excludes a bionic hand that had to replace a flesh & bone one due to illness. But then.....replaced by bionics is an entirely other subject one can debate about.
But you know, thinking about it a little more, I work pretty hard at removing me from the process anyway. I depend a lot on chance operations. In this poem I did collect all of the material used in the poem from my own writing. Using the AI in the case of text such as this poem remain pretty much in my wheel house as far as how I normally work and I did remove things and add things (everything that is in brackets) so that it captures the meanings that I wanted and not the ones I didn't want. So in this case there was still a lot of intervention.
I have made a lot of poems over the years using a Markov chain text generator like this one https://projects.haykranen.nl/markov/demo/ and had a lot of fun with that for generating text material to make poems from.
So, my conclusion at this moment is that I am not going to discount the result just because I am using the AI tool to show me some things I might be willing to use, manipulate and then call my own.
My entire body of poetry which is probably about 2000 pages worth by now is all built around using keyboards, computers, the internet and email and collecting things and doing weird searches to find material that ends up being uniquely my own by the end of it. I have been a kid in a technological candy store for the last 25 years through all of these technological developments we have witnessed. Heck I am seeing the makings of an article!
Yes, I understand your logic in using the technology and making it yours. In the end, it's all considered "Tools" as much as just about anything can be. I know artists that just conceive their ideas but have someone else or a machine make it yet it's still considered their own work. And as I stated in my first sentence, it's a personal preference. I'd like for you to explain the 'removal of you from the process'. I don't think that can happen completely as you are still The Creator of the piece. It's no one's else's unless you plagiarize it which I know you wouldn't. Anyway, most of what I was saying was not about the written word/poems but about the physical art pieces.
I get it.