toyosawa@nttvdt.NTT.JP (Satoshi Toyosawa) (04/09/91)
Hi, this is my first attemp to post this newsgroup. In article <1991Apr7.184708.22888@colorado.edu> ralex@tigger.Colorado.EDU (Repenning Alexander) writes: >>Maybe part of the problem with picture-oriented representations is >>that, in contrast to English, picture-oriented representations do not >>have any defined syntax. You can of course make up a syntax using >>color, spatial features, explicit relationships (e.g., arcs), etc. That is partially true, and maybe too naive, because film-makers or artists have some kind of techniques to display their feelings and statements in their pictures, drawings, or motion-pictures. For instance, there is a certain movie tech. to show a girl in mental shock. Paintings, too, does have its own grammer, like certain shadowing on a figure developes some kind of effect (depresion, darkness, etc). Oh, BTW, honestly speaking, I don't often understand what a picture trying to state, and don't have skills to tell what technique developes what emotions :-) The thing is that those who have not been trained to appreciate arts have difficulty in describing pictures in definitive way; on the other hand, most of the arts-critics conduct it, and that is the reason of their existence. Maybe one way to introduce syntax or grammer of pictures is to build an expert-system on arts. But if we go so much into generalizing the essence of arts, many of good information such as indescriable feeling and emotion will be lost, however, that maybe the good starting point, I think. Well, the above is my impression. Anyone who has a good taste on arts, please make commonts. -- ---- Satoshi Toyosawa Visual Media Lab., NTT Human Interface Labs. Take 1-2356, Yokosuka, Kanagawa 238-03, Japan e-mail: toyosawa%nttvdt.ntt.jp@relay.cs.net
thom@garnet.berkeley.edu (Thom Gillespie) (04/09/91)
In article <1292@nttvdt.ntt.jp> toyosawa@nttvdt.NTT.JP (Satoshi Toyosawa) writes: >Maybe one way to introduce syntax or grammer of pictures is to build >an expert-system on arts. But if we go so much into generalizing the >essence of arts, many of good information such as indescriable feeling >and emotion will be lost, however, that maybe the good starting point, >-- >---- Satoshi Toyosawa This is an aside but Pam McCorducks new book, Aaron's Code is a must read for anyone remotely interested in AI or expert systems and Art. It deals with the work of harold Cohen, a painter who was world famous in the late 60's, who decided to try to embody in art in a program. He was thedomain expert, and became the ultimate knowledge engineer and programmer to produce Aaron, an amazing program which draws 'like' Howard would except that there is a fair degree of randomness built into the program. This program does not produce 'computer art' it produces art. This is agigantic step past a mere expert system of art. The book is well written and raises all 'the ai questions' to a new level of discussion. \ --Thom Gillespie .
oppizzi@butterfly.inria.fr (Olivier Oppizzi) (04/16/91)
--------------------------------------------------
I have much more taste on arts than knowing.
I have all the same worked on it, especially about "art and science
in the early of our century".
I practice a little too.
And my opinion is that art is an interpretation of the reality of both our mind and our body. Feelings flash through cognitive and sensitive filters; and afterwards
you sometimes need represent them.
I don't think emotion for instance is art.
I think art arises from mind and senses.
In what way ? I have no ansmer. Let's have a little talk anyway...
Human mental approach is conceptual and may be formalized by rules.
Or may be not.
To know, we have to think of it.
Picasso painted what he knew of a face, all sides on the same picture at the same position.
Cognitive psychologist can help to understand artists.
Semiotic for example afforded to build such rules. A result is true if it fits with enough rules. If we reverse semiotic, our thinking items become signs.
Is that much more difficult for our senses ?
A certain music, so a certain formalism, brings fear, another brings joy...
But whatever they bring, those musics mean. And once they have been detect, our
reversed semiotic is able to produce the matching sign !!!
In an effort to built sets of rules, I believe structure does matter above all.
What we should put in it depends on centuries, cultures, ourselves...
"Move" means a lot for an artist.
It must mean something for rules...
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
********************************************* * *
* * *
Olivier OPPIZZI * * *
Projet SECOIA * * *
2004, route des Lucioles * * *
06561 Valbonne - France * * *
Tel: 93.65.77.48 * * *
e-mail: oppizzi@mirsa.inria.fr * * *
* * *
* *
*********************************************