Critics are speaking out against an AI-generated expansion of Leonardo da Vinci’s painting of Mona Lisa, among others, that fills in the gaps previously left to the imagination. An image of the recreated painting shows an expansive background to the original painting which shows a canvas filled with images of the Mona Lisa backdrop.
Recess uses the Adobe Firefly application that provides generative fill functionality which is vastly improved over previous versions and replaces so-called image clutter with images that are more pleasing to the viewer or creator. It is now used to “enhance” Leonardo da Vinci’s masterpiece and has been shared on social media, especially Twitterin the sight of all.
Jill Murray, a narrative director for game design responded to the new Mona Lisa creation on Twitter, in writing“The main problem with the current AI pitch is the assumption that we should always need or want more, when choosing exactly what we want to say and show is at the heart of art and communication What lies beyond the frame was not chosen, that was the goal.
Artificial intelligence has received backlash in recent months as it enters creative spheres, including stepping on the toes of writers and artists. AI triggered lawsuits And won art competitionssometimes editing the work of a former artist without compensation or consent.
“All of this art is being taken without the consent of these artists and the laws that exist don’t really protect them,” said Ron Cheng, board member of Yale Visual Arts Collective. Yale Daily News. “I think there are enough artists out there that it shouldn’t really be necessary to have the AI do this.”
An image from the popular movie Reservoir Dogs was also recreated with generative fillers used to fill the space beyond the frame, and another used the feature to zoom out images featuring close-ups from the movie The Good. , the Bad and the Ugly . Both received intense backlash, and movie connoisseurs criticized the zoom-out change, saying these scenes were created deliberately and with great skill.
“Oh my god you picked the movie where a fundamental part of its style is that reality doesn’t exist outside of the frame,” one person writing on Twitter. “Ebert wrote a whole article about it. You literally couldn’t have picked a more anti-art use case.
Others have used the Adobe Firefly feature to use generative fill on Vincent van Gogh’s “The Starry Night”, Michelangelo’s “The Creation of Adam”, and Sandro Botticelli’s “The Birth of Venus”. These paintings aren’t the first to be affected by the AI ”art” trend, albeit in a different way. It comes just months after the Mauritshuis museum in the Netherlands was criticized for choosing a AI-generated replica of the Girl with a Pearl Earring painting by Johannes Vermeer in a global competition.
One person commented on the museum’s Instagram job announcing the winner, “AI blowers are not artists and their AI-generated shell images should not be praised by the art community. Doesn’t anyone at the museum understand how AI images are created? How does the AI learn to create them? ***AI images are plagiarism***, how can you knowingly participate in this? So disappointing.
