Hello list, Finally finished the third part of my take on the tatedata release.
In short, the application 'As Mutated' generates descriptive artworks based on data from Tate Modern artworks, then uses these descriptions to generate new, mutated artworks, often displaying the process of mutation in the artworks themselves, based on searching internet images (tatedata, Google images). If the user saves the generated -and possibly user-modified- artwork the application will mutate its algorithm, strengthening the parameters that went into making the work, so that it will gradually learn to generate better artworks (whatever this means... with a higher probability of being saved, based on previous savings). The 'mutation' process then takes place in several stages, 1) how the purely descriptive artworks are mutations of the original dataset, 2) how the new images are mutations of the originals from where their descriptions were taken, 3) how these new images are processed and often displayed as mutation processes, 4) how the user can transform further the generated image by drawing directly on it, and 5) how the application mutates itself based on positive user feedback (by saving the image). http://noemata.net/as/mutated/ - generation (it uses a few second...) http://noemata.net/as/mutated/thumbs.php - exhibition I'm defending the application's use of images (from tate and google searches) as within the 'fair use' clause, based primarily on the transformative purpose and output of the application. Read more about this in http://noemata.net/as/mutated/about.html I'd be especially interested in what you people think about this appropriation of images - When is it homage and when is it plagiarism? Best regards, Bjørn
_______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list [email protected] http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
