🤔Some thoughts on AI and how it challenges our beliefs as artists: I don’t think we can look at this purely from a technical or mathematical perspective, unless we see human beings as little more than machines and have no empathy for what actually moves the people around us. The real question isn’t whether AI will technically be able to make films, paintings or music. It’s whether we still WANT humans to make them. Art is ultimately an expression of human existence, drawn from the experience of actually being alive. An AI may eventually simulate that convincingly, with or without consciousness, but simulation is still simulation. It can imitate love without ever having loved, grief without grieving, desire without wanting anything. And I think audiences understand this instinctively. We don’t read books, watch films or visit exhibitions merely to consume “content.” Part of the experience is knowing that another person stood behind the work, someone who can feel as we do, who cares about the medium, the culture around it and the audience receiving it. It’s an exchange between human beings, not just one-way consumption. And the same is true for artists. We don’t write, paint, compose or make films purely for money or to satisfy an algorithm. We make something because we want another person to EXPERIENCE IT. That’s why people care so much about what is still human-made: the story, the designs, the decisions, the performances, as opposed to what has simply been automated away. “AI slop” isn’t only an aesthetic category. It also describes the potentially destructive logic behind replacing the artist altogether. That’s why I keep arguing for AI primarily as a tool, not as some technological cure-all that, in the name of optimization, gradually replaces everything we actually valued in the first place. (🖼️: 𝘎𝘰𝘰𝘥𝘣𝘺𝘦 𝘏𝘰𝘳𝘴𝘦𝘴, digital, 2023)

🤔Some thoughts on AI and how it challenges our beliefs as artists: I don’t think we can look at this purely from a technical or mathematical perspective, unless we see human beings as little more than machines and have no empathy for what actually moves the people around us. The real question isn’t whether AI will technically be able to make films, paintings or music. It’s whether we still WANT humans to make them. Art is ultimately an expression of human existence, drawn from the experience of actually being alive. An AI may eventually simulate that convincingly, with or without consciousness, but simulation is still simulation. It can imitate love without ever having loved, grief without grieving, desire without wanting anything. And I think audiences understand this instinctively. We don’t read books, watch films or visit exhibitions merely to consume “content.” Part of the experience is knowing that another person stood behind the work, someone who can feel as we do, who cares about the medium, the culture around it and the audience receiving it. It’s an exchange between human beings, not just one-way consumption. And the same is true for artists. We don’t write, paint, compose or make films purely for money or to satisfy an algorithm. We make something because we want another person to EXPERIENCE IT. That’s why people care so much about what is still human-made: the story, the designs, the decisions, the performances, as opposed to what has simply been automated away. “AI slop” isn’t only an aesthetic category. It also describes the potentially destructive logic behind replacing the artist altogether. That’s why I keep arguing for AI primarily as a tool, not as some technological cure-all that, in the name of optimization, gradually replaces everything we actually valued in the first place. (🖼️: 𝘎𝘰𝘰𝘥𝘣𝘺𝘦 𝘏𝘰𝘳𝘴𝘦𝘴, digital, 2023)

I’m happy to announce that “Borrowed Time” from my “Second Nature” series on @Ninfa_io has been acquired for the @fndzionaversano collection! 🙌 I have lots of respect for what @justinaversano is building in an effort to support other artists. My heart is full! ❤️‍🔥 🔗 ↴

It's what I've been suspecting all along. Most hate toward AI film stems from the fact that the vast majority of it (admittedly) looks like dogshit, has nothing to say, and feels shallow. And when you look at the works of art legendary directors and their crews have given us, the critics have a point: Why should anyone settle for less? But once someone skilled puts their heart into it, even in the questionable context of using an actor’s likeness without permission, the wailing stops, and the audience listens.

"Welcome to the age of the slop-machine!" As you may have noticed, I'm for a meaningful integration of AI tools in production workflows, piloted by professionals and folks who are serious about filmmaking. But this is not it, man. What we see in this video is more akin to a basement dweller's wet dream. The lil guy getting all worked up and excited in his fancy death star computer terminal setup is more comedy than anything else and doesn't help the debate around AI tools in film production AT ALL. If it's all on auto-pilot, what's the point of even making it in the first place? And you can see it in the results of the Higgsfield shorts: Generic story (omitting the screenwriter), generic characters and performance (omitting the character designer, actors), generic world (omitting the set designer) and it's ultimately just an unimaginative graphics demo of an otherwise quite useful and AI video tool. What's impressive here is only the tech, not the "art' being created with it. This is not to say that dedicated and passionate creators aren't able to create remarkable work, if they put in the time. Solo creators like Kane Pixels and Gints Zilbalodis have proven what can be done even without AI, armed with just open source 3d software. This holds true even when working with these new tools, provided it is being done with the right mindset. My advice to budding filmmakers: Don't skip on picking up the skills and gather extensively knowledge of each aspect and component of filmmaking. If you have to rely on AI for all of these important creative decisions, as tempting as it may be, you won't be able to create anything of value or something that is even watchable. Moreover, you will miss one of the most important components of all: The feeling of accomplishment.

💡Question for the AI skeptics who tell every filmmaker using AI tools to “learn to hold a pencil” or “learn Blender”: What do Spielberg, Lucas, Scorsese, Nolan, Fincher and Kubrick have in common? None of them are celebrated as visionary filmmakers because they could model and rig a 3D character, animate a walk cycle, sew a costume or build a film set themselves. They’re celebrated because filmmaking has never required the director to personally master every craft. It requires vision, taste, judgment, and the ability to orchestrate many different crafts into a coherent film. That’s literally the director’s job. Funny how that principle suddenly becomes controversial when some of the tools are AI.

💡Question for the AI skeptics who tell every filmmaker using AI tools to “learn to hold a pencil” or “learn Blender”: What do Spielberg, Lucas, Scorsese, Nolan, Fincher and Kubrick have in common? None of them are celebrated as visionary filmmakers because they could model and rig a 3D character, animate a walk cycle, sew a costume or build a film set themselves. They’re celebrated because filmmaking has never required the director to personally master every craft. It requires vision, taste, judgment, and the ability to orchestrate many different crafts into a coherent film. That’s literally the director’s job. Funny how that principle suddenly becomes controversial when some of the tools are AI.

so amazing to take my JELLO studio set up/ contraption into the gallery 🫨 and be interviewed live as i make my work, we shook em’ ty @TimeToBeHappyGY !! 2 Jellos listed @SuperRare .5 Eth Resrv LFG!!

NEW ACQUISITION🫂 The Getty Museum in LA has acquired: Daughter on the USA-Mexico Border Wall, at Friendship Park, California. 2017 Mother on the Mexico-USA Border Wall, Friendship Park, Playas de Tijuana, Mexico. 2017 The acquisition was made possible by generous support of the collectors Paula Ely and Cesar Rueda. The acquisition was done via Kopeikin gallery with whom i’ve worked with the past 14 years. I’m forever grateful for their continued support to make this happen. These acquisitions help me pursue the creation of new work and protects the future appreciation of these art pieces and themes that are so very present in the bilateral relationship between Mexico and the USA. The works are currently exhibited in Madrid at Fundacion MAPFRE until this Sunday⤵️

💯And rendering cost with state-of-the-art models like Seedance only adds to this. You need to have some sort of conviction that what you're doing has a chance of survival in an ocean of content competing for attention. If not, why spend a couple hundred $ on generation costs alone, just to create a 5 minute short? Tens of thousands to render a full feature and the massive amount of work involved to make it even watchable is a good thing I believe. It's like a conviction filter. It won't filter out all the crap, but most of it. At least it will shake out those who thought the reason they never became a filmmaker is because learning the craft was "too complicated", and now they can have a cluster of AI agents on some platform write their script and direct the whole film, based solely on their bland, half-assed "genius" logline. They will soon find out that AI won't change the fact that they just aren't filmmakers.

It feels surreal to finally share this news: The world premiere of Human Unreadable Act III will take place in November at The Whitney Museum of American Art @whitneymuseum curated by Christiane Paul @ChristianePaul2. This live multimedia performance is the final act and culmination of Human Unreadable, our generative choreography work unfolding in three acts since 2023. Act III is an autobiographical evening-length work examining negotiations between the body, ambition, technology, and our relationship. The performances will take place in the Whitney's Susan and John Hess Family Theater on November 19, 21, and 22. Holders of Human Unreadable #2-##101#, your choreographic scores will be performed within this show.

👇Well written observation of the upper echelons of this "art movement", which is akin to a circle-jerk of Porsche owners, only that it is Fidenzas and Punks instead of luxury cars. Certain collectors here (with few exceptions of course) may think of themselves as patrons of the arts, while in reality they are just luxury shoppers flaunting wealth for notoriety. They turned what initially started as a promising endeavor into a self-aggrandizing borefest, unattractive for any serious art collector and artist alike to participate in.

So you can’t click link ? Here a thread with all you need to know about -Koi No Yokan- the latest exibition I’ve curated and produce. It’s a soloshow of @Polygon1993 presented at Artverse in Paris until the 31th of July. In the exibition you’ll find over 20 works small to large scale, digital and physical. though them the exibition present the analog and digital practice of the famous French glitch artist. Using medium and technique rarely seen anywhere else. The show has also a TCG section of the artist own game, with exclusive collectible cards and final chance to participate to the beta of his playable game featuring 30 licensed artists. More about the work below 👇 🧵