The recent wave of pope-related AI images, and the accompanying hot takes about whether or not we've now finally left an era of »visual truth« made me think about the relationship between two modes of online image interpretation: #WildForensis and #InstantMemeification 1/9
Popular versions of image forensics have been a staple of social media for some time: People just love to speculate about whether or not a widely shared image has been manipulated, and to look for hidden clues of tampering. That’s what I call #WildForensis
2/9
AI images in their current form are a perfect object of such #WildForensis: Clues that an image was generated are now often so subtle that they're only visible at second glance. But you still don't need any technical skills to find them, they are usually hidden in plain sight
3/9
At the same time, AI image generation seems to be the perfect tool for #InstantMemeification: The way it transforms written concepts, e.g. »The Pope wearing a Balenciaga puffer coat«, into memorable images already largely corresponds to the combinatorial logic of memes
4/9
What’s more, AI makes it extremely easy to produce endless variations of an already mass-circulated image based on the recombination of visual and textual concepts, effectively combining recognizability and unpredictability: Image generation is essentially a meme machine
5/9
As social media phenomena, both #WildForensis and #InstantMemeification are part of an online reaction economy, ways of responding to images by reinterpretation, albeit in almost opposite ways: Either by focusing on meaningless details or by rearranging semantic content
6/9
Nevertheless, in many cases #WildForensis and #InstantMemeification seem related, almost intertwined, as mutually reinforcing collective modes of reacting to widely circulated visual content, resulting together in what might be called #ImageReactionChains.
7/9
So if you were to ask me what these pope-related AI images tell us about our cultural moment, it has nothing to do with »visual truth«, which has always been little more than a myth and was already abandoned for good with Photoshop more than 30 years ago
8/9
Rather, we are now clearly witnessing how #ImageReactionChains dominate social media, how they are driven by both the collective desire to discover forensic clues and the joy of reinterpreting semantic content, and how they are now being transformed by AI image generation 9/9
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Giovanni Battista Piranesi, aus dem Zyklus: »Proposta del Ministero della Ricerca tedesco per riformare la legge sui contratti di lavoro a tempo determinato in ambito accademico«, 1753
Aus demselben Zyklus, ebenfalls 1753
Und hier noch ein weiteres Blatt, rückwärtig bezeichnet als »Assemblea delle parti interessate presso il ministero«
Mainly for the sake of my own future reference, I am collecting my longer threads on AI image generation here, starting with this one from last year (which, unlike the others, is still in German) 1/
This is truly remarkable and makes me think again about the relationship between AI and photography. What interests me about these generative models is that they simulate a photographic visuality without simulating anything of photography as a lens-based, optical medium 1/6
This sets them apart from a whole tradition of computer-generated images: In what @bernardionysius calls the »scopic regime of computation,« computers were used to simulate three-dimensional worlds made of points, lines, and vectors that could be captured by virtual cameras
2/6
In contrast, AI image generation doesn't use a model of spatial constellations computed in accordance with the laws of optics and the rules of perspective. Rather, by interpolating the visual qualities of masses of digital photographs, it simulates a photographic ›look‹
3/6
Now that the DALL-E has been successfully midjourneyfied, it is becoming apparent that instead of simulating all possible ›styles‹, AI is fostering the emergence of a distinct visual style, born out of popular aesthetic preferences dominating platforms like DeviantArt 1/6
One main characteristic of this AI style seems to be what @pookerman has aptly called »fluffy glamour glow«: The default mode of these images is to shine and sparkle, as if illuminated from within. These are images that radiate 2/6
This effect seems to be due in no small part to a particular color scheme, a striking preference for contrasting warm earth tones with blue-greenish metallic colors, reconciling intense lighting and high dynamic range with overall chromatic harmony 3/6
It seems that the new version of Dall-E, probably for legal reasons, ignores the names of artists whose work is still copyrighted. Instead of imitating their individual style, it only produces very generic images, at best vaguely according to styles like »Pop« or »Expressionism«
Interestingly enough, #Midjourney is quite competent in imitating the style of contemporary artists maybe lesser known to a general public, e.g. here Peter Doig ...
Playing around with AI-generated, non-existent movies and the idea of #ArtificialNostalgia, I started thinking about the notion of ›vibe,‹ how it might describe what I'm looking for in these images and what distinguishes it from concepts like ›style‹ or ›mood‹
1/16
Much of the discussion around AI-generated images has involved questions of style, and for good reason. »In the style of ...« is maybe the most common phrases used in prompts, as #DallE, #Midjourney, and #StableDiffusion promise to produce images in any possible style
2/16
This category of style transcends cultural hierarchies: Style can mean the brushstroke of a painter, the visual qualities of historical technical media, or the look of certain games & TV shows: Van Gogh, Polaroid, Unreal Engine, or Southpark – everything becomes a ›style‹
3/16