None
EN
Everyone in this AI art row has a point, and that's what worries me
['Tom May', 'Freelance Journalist', 'Layer Van-Ds .Vds-Author Font-Size Var --Text-Base', 'Font-Size Var --Vds-Author-Font-Size', 'Var --Text-Base', 'Line-Height Var --Text-Base--Line-Height', 'Line-Height Var --Vds-Author-Line-Height', 'Var --Text-Base--Line-Height', 'Letter-Spacing Var --Tracking-Normal', 'Letter-Spacing Var --Vds-Author-Letter-Spacing']
Creative Bloq
Galatea reworks this tradition through AI generated imagery to critique AI itself.
Can a gallery show AI-generated art without betraying art itself?
In the gallery's own words: "His work, Galatea is an AI based photographic work depicting a failed near future romance between a man and his robotic AI girlfriend.
Last year, I visited Refik Anadol's Living Architecture: Gehry at the Guggenheim Bilbao; his new show Machine Dreams: Rainforest is appearing at DATALAND, the world's first museum dedicated to AI art.
Both sides in the Belfast row are arguing from principle, not bad faith.