Abstract
Technologies related to artificial intelligence (AI) have a strong impact on the changes of research and creative practices in visual arts. The growing number of research initiatives and creative applications that emerge in the intersection of AI and art motivates us to examine and discuss the creative and explorative potentials of AI technologies in the context of art. This article provides an integrated review of two facets of AI and art: (1) AI is used for art analysis and employed on digitized artwork collections, or (2) AI is used for creative purposes and generating novel artworks. In the context of AI-related research for art understanding, we present a comprehensive overview of artwork datasets and recent works that address a variety of tasks such as classification, object detection, similarity retrieval, multimodal representations, and computational aesthetics, among others. In relation to the role of AI in creating art, we address various practical and theoretical aspects of AI Art and consolidate related works that deal with those topics in detail. Finally, we provide a concise outlook on the future progression and potential impact of AI technologies on our understanding and creation of art.
- [1] . 2021. DALL\(\cdot\)E: Creating Images from Text. Retrieved January 25, 2021 from https://openai.com/blog/dall-e/.Google Scholar
- [2] . 2013. When Van Gogh meets Mandelbrot: Multifractal classification of painting’s texture. Signal Processing 93, 3 (2013), 554–572. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- [3] . 2021. ArtEmis: Affective language for visual art. arXiv preprint arXiv:2101.07396 (2021).Google Scholar
- [4] . 2015. Genre and style based painting classification. In Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision (WACV’15). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 588–594. https://doi.org/10.1109/WACV.2015.84 Google Scholar
Digital Library
- [5] . 2016. Recognizing emotions from abstract paintings using non-linear matrix completion. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. 5240–5248.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [6] . 2014. Jenaesthetics subjective dataset: Analyzing paintings by subjective scores. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer Vision. 3–19.Google Scholar
- [7] . 2014. Classification of artistic styles using binarized features derived from a deep neural network. In Computer Vision—ECCV 2014 Workshops. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 8925. Springer, 71–84. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16178-5_5Google Scholar
- [8] . 2018. Aligning text and document illustrations: Towards visually explainable digital humanities. In Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Pattern Recognition (ICPR’18). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 1097–1102.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [9] . 2019. Ikonographie und interaktion. Computergestützte analyse von posen in bildern der heilsgeschichte. Das Mittelalter 24, 1 (2019), 31–53.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [10] . 2019. Multitask painting categorization by deep multibranch neural network. Expert Systems with Applications 135 (2019), 90–101.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- [11] . 2010. Creativity and Art: Three Roads to Surprise. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- [12] . 2009. What is generative art?Digital Creativity 20, 1–2 (2009), 21–46.Google Scholar
- [13] . 2020. Visual question answering for cultural heritage. arXiv preprint arXiv:2003.09853 (2020).Google Scholar
- [14] . 2018. Large scale GAN training for high fidelity natural image synthesis. arXiv preprint arXiv:1809.11096 (2018).Google Scholar
- [15] . 2021. From Painting to Pixel: Understanding NFT Artworks. Retrieved June 15, 2021 from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/351346278_From_Painting_to_Pixel_Understanding_NFT_artworks.Google Scholar
- [16] . 2012. Artistic image classification: An analysis on the PRINTART database. In Computer Vision—ECCV 2012. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 7575. Springer, 143–157. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- [17] . 2021. Visual link retrieval and knowledge discovery in painting datasets. Multimedia Tools and Applications 80, 5 (2021), 6599–6616.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- [18] . 2020. Towards a tool for visual link retrieval and knowledge discovery in painting datasets. In Digital Libraries: The Era of Big Data and Data Science. Communications in Computer and Information Science, Vol. 1177. Springer, 105–110.Google Scholar
- [19] . 2020. Iconographic image captioning for artworks. In Pattern Recognition. ICPR International Workshops and Challenges. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 12663. Springer, 502–516.Google Scholar
- [20] . 2013. Automated painter recognition based on image feature extraction. In Proceedings of the 2013 55th International Symposium (ELMAR’13). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 19–22.Google Scholar
- [21] . 2016. Genre classification of paintings. In Proceedings of the 2016 International Symposium (ELMAR’16). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 201–204.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [22] . 2018. Fine-tuning convolutional neural networks for fine art classification. Expert Systems with Applications 114 (2018), 107–118.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [23] . 2019. A deep learning perspective on beauty, sentiment, and remembrance of art. IEEE Access 7 (2019), 73694–73710.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [24] . 2020. Learning the principles of art history with convolutional neural networks. Pattern Recognition Letters 129 (2020), 56–62.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [25] . 2018. Putting the art in artificial: Aesthetic responses to computer-generated art. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts 12, 2 (2018), 177.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [26] . 2019. Art by computing machinery: Is machine art acceptable in the artworld?ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications, and Applications 15, 2s (2019), 1–17. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- [27] . 2018. Is Artificial Intelligence Set to Become Art’s Next Medium? Retrieved December 2, 2020 from https://www.christies.com/features/A-collaboration-between-two-artists-one-human-one-a-machine-9332-1.aspx.Google Scholar
- [28] . 2021. Monumental Collage by Beeple Is First Purely Digital Artwork NFT to Come to Auction. Retrieved June 15, 2021 from https://www.christies.com/features/Monumental-collage-by-Beeple-is-first-purely-digital-artwork-NFT-to-come-to-auction-11510-7.aspx.Google Scholar
- [29] . 2017. Can machines create art?Philosophy & Technology 30, 3 (2017), 285–303.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [30] . 2012. The painting fool: Stories from building an automated painter. In Computers and Creativity. Springer, 3–38. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- [31] . 2018. Issues of authenticity in autonomously creative systems. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Computational Creativity.Google Scholar
- [32] . 2015. Face painting: Querying art with photos. In Proceedings of the 2015 British Machine Vision Conference (BMVC’15). 65.1–65.13.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [33] . 2014. In search of art. In Computer Vision—ECCV 2014 Workshops. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 8925. Springer, 54–70.Google Scholar
- [34] . 2014. The state of the art: Object retrieval in paintings using discriminative regions. In Proceedings of the 2014 British Machine Vision Conference (BMVC’14).Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [35] . 2016. The art of detection. In Computer Vision—ECCV 2016 Workshops. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 9913. Springer, 721–737.Google Scholar
- [36] . 2019. AI + art = human. In Proceedings of the 2019 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society (AIES’19). ACM, New York, NY, 155–161. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- [37] . 2016. DeepPainter: Painter classification using deep convolutional autoencoders. In Artificial Neural Networks and Machine Learning. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 9887. Springer, 20–28.Google Scholar
- [38] . 2009. ImageNet: A large-scale hierarchical image database. In Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR’09). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 248–255.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [39] . 2020. Exploring the representativity of art paintings. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia 23 (2020), 2794–2805.Google Scholar
- [40] . 2013. Chance and complexity: Stochastic and generative processes in art and creativity. In Proceedings of the 2013 International Virtual Reality Conference. ACM, New York, NY, Article 19, 8 pages. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- [41] . 2012. A framework for understanding generative art. Digital Creativity 23, 3–4 (2012), 239–259.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [42] . 2001. Image quilting for texture synthesis and transfer. In Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques (SIGGRAPH’01). ACM, New York, NY, 341–346. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- [43] . 2021. Graph neural networks for knowledge enhanced visual representation of paintings. arXiv preprint arXiv:2105.08190 (2021). Google Scholar
Digital Library
- [44] . 2019. AI is blurring the definition of artist: Advanced algorithms are using machine learning to create art autonomously. American Scientist 107, 1 (2019), 18–22.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [45] . 2017. CAN: Creative adversarial networks, generating “art” by learning about styles and deviating from style norms. arXiv preprint arXiv:1706.07068 (2017).Google Scholar
- [46] . 2018. The shape of art history in the eyes of the machine. In Proceedings of the 32nd AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI’18). 2183–2191. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- [47] . 2020. Who gets credit for AI-generated art?iScience 23, 9 (2020), 101515.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [48] . 2020. Human ownership of artificial creativity. Nature Machine Intelligence 2, 3 (2020), 157–160.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [49] . 2016. Pandora: Description of a painting database for art movement recognition with baselines and perspectives. In Proceedings of the 24th European Signal Processing Conference (EUSIPCO’16). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 918–922.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [50] . 2020. Crypto art: A decentralized view. Leonardo 54, 4 (2020), 1–8.Google Scholar
- [51] . 2003. What is generative art? Complexity theory as a context for art theory. In Proceedings of the 2003 6th Generative Art Conference (GA’03).Google Scholar
- [52] . 2018. How to read paintings: Semantic art understanding with multi-modal retrieval. In Computer Vision—ECCV 2018 Workshops. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 11130. Springer, 676–691.Google Scholar
- [53] . 2020. A dataset and baselines for visual question answering on art. In Computer Vision—ECCV 2020 Workshops. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 12536. Springer, 92–108.Google Scholar
- [54] . 2016. Image style transfer using convolutional neural networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. 2414–2423.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [55] . 2019. Copyright infringement in AI-generated artworks. UC Davis Law Review 53 (2019), 2655.Google Scholar
- [56] . 2014. Rich feature hierarchies for accurate object detection and semantic segmentation. In Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR’14). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 580–587. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- [57] . 2020. An analysis of the transfer learning of convolutional neural networks for artistic images. In Pattern Recognition. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 12663. Springer, 546–561.Google Scholar
- [58] . 2018. Weakly supervised object detection in artworks. In Computer Vision—ECCV 2018 Workshops. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 11130. Springer, 692–709.Google Scholar
- [59] . 2001. Non-Photorealistic Rendering. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [60] . 2014. Generative adversarial nets. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 27 (2014), 2672–2680. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- [61] . 2012. Statistics, vision, and the analysis of artistic style. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computational Statistics 4, 2 (2012), 115–123. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- [62] . 2017. Do Androids dream of electric copyright? Comparative analysis of originality in artificial intelligence generated works. Intellectual Property Quarterly. Open access, April 1, 2017.Google Scholar
- [63] . 2017. Subjective ratings of beauty and aesthetics: Correlations with statistical image properties in western oil paintings. i-Perception 8, 3 (2017), 2041669517715474.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [64] . 1998. Painterly rendering with curved brush strokes of multiple sizes. In Proceedings of the 25th Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques (SIGGRAPH’98). ACM, New York, NY, 453–460. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- [65] . 2018. Can computers create art? In Arts, Vol. 7. Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute, 18.Google Scholar
- [66] . 2020. Computers do not make art, people do. Communications of the ACM 63, 5 (2020), 45–48. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- [67] . 2020. Visual indeterminacy in GAN art. Leonardo 53, 4 (2020), 424–428. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- [68] . 2001. Image analogies. In Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques (SIGGRAPH’01). ACM, New York, NY, 327–340. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- [69] . 2018. Bias in perception of art produced by artificial intelligence. In Human-Computer Interaction. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 10902. Springer, 290–303.Google Scholar
- [70] . 2019. Artificial intelligence, artists, and art: Attitudes toward artwork produced by humans vs. artificial intelligence. ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications, and Applications 15, 2s (2019), 1–16. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- [71] . 2013. Stylometry of paintings using hidden Markov modelling of contourlet transforms. Signal Processing 93, 3 (2013), 579–591. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- [72] . 2019. Linking art through human poses. In Proceedings of the 2019 International Conference on Document Analysis and Recognition (ICDAR’19). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 1338–1345.Google Scholar
- [73] . 2019. Neural style transfer: A review. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26 (2019), 3365–3385.Google Scholar
- [74] . 2019. Understanding aesthetics and fitness measures in evolutionary art systems. Complexity 2019 (2019), 3495962.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- [75] . 2014. Recognizing image style. In Proceedings of the 2014 British Machine Vision Conference (BMVC’14).Google Scholar
- [76] . 2019. A style-based generator architecture for generative adversarial networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR’19). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 4401–4410.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [77] . 2002. Painter identification using local features and naive Bayes. In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Pattern Recognition (ICPR’02). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 474–477.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [78] . 2021. An information theory approach to aesthetic assessment of visual patterns. Entropy 23, 2 (2021), 153.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [79] . 2014. Painting-91: A large scale database for computational painting categorization. Machine Vision and Applications 25, 6 (2014), 1385–1397. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- [80] . 2018. Finding principal semantics of style in art. In Proceedings of the 12th IEEE International Conference on Semantic Computing (ICSC’18). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 156–163.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [81] . 2014. Large-scale quantitative analysis of painting arts. Scientific Reports 4 (2014), 7370.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [82] . 2019. Computational analysis of content in fine art paintings. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Computational Creativity (ICCC’19). 33–40.Google Scholar
- [83] . 2020. The digital transformation of art history. In The Routledge Companion to Digital Humanities and Art History. Routledge, 32–42.Google Scholar
- [84] . 2018. Attesting similarity: Supporting the organization and study of art image collections with computer vision. Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 33, 4 (2018), 845–856.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [85] . 2018. Reflecting on how artworks are processed and analyzed by computer vision. In Computer Vision—ECCV 2018 Workshops. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 11130. Springer, 647–652.Google Scholar
- [86] . 2017. Recognizing art style automatically in painting with deep learning. In Proceedings of the 9th Asian Conference on Machine Learning (ACML’17).327–342.Google Scholar
- [87] . 2020. Dissecting landscape art history with information theory. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 117, 43 (2020), 26580–26590.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [88] . 2020. Insights from a large-scale database of material depictions in paintings. In Pattern Recognition. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 12663. Springer, 531–545.Google Scholar
- [89] . 2020. Explainable computational creativity. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Computational Creativity (ICCC’20). 334–341.Google Scholar
- [90] . 2019. Recognizing characters in art history using deep learning. In Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Structuring and Understanding of Multimedia Heritage Contents ([email protected] Multmedia’19). ACM, New York, NY, 15–22. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- [91] . 2020. Understanding compositional structures in art historical images using pose and gaze priors. In Computer Vision—ECCV 2020 Workshops. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 12536. Springer, 109–125.Google Scholar
- [92] . 2017. DeepArt: Learning joint representations of visual arts. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM on Multimedia Conference (MM’17). ACM, New York, NY, 1183–1191. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- [93] . 2018. Visual image statistics in the history of western art. Art & Perception 6, 2–3 (2018), 97–115.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [94] . 2019. Art, creativity, and the potential of artificial intelligence. In Arts, Vol. 8. Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute, 26.Google Scholar
- [95] . 2014. Ten questions concerning generative computer art. Leonardo 47, 2 (2014), 135–141.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [96] . 2019. Autonomy, authenticity, authorship and intention in computer generated art. In Computational Intelligence in Music, Sound, Art and Design. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 11453. Springer, 35–50.Google Scholar
- [97] . 2021. A Guide to Ecofriendly CryptoArt (NFTs). Retrieved June 15, 2021 from https://github.com/memo/eco-nft.Google Scholar
- [98] . 2020. Deep ensemble art style recognition. In Proceedings of the 2020 International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN’20). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 1–8.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [99] . 2014. The Rijksmuseum Challenge: Museum-centered visual recognition. In International Conference on Multimedia Retrieval (ICMR’14). ACM, New York, NY, 451. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- [100] . 2020. Face detection on pre-modern Japanese artworks using R-CNN and image patching for semi-automatic annotation. In Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Structuring and Understanding of Multimedia Heritage Contents (SUMAC’20). ACM, New York, NY, 23–31. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- [101] . 2020. A data set and a convolutional model for iconography classification in paintings. arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.11697 (2020). Google Scholar
Digital Library
- [102] . 2018. Wikiart emotions: An annotated dataset of emotions evoked by art. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’18).Google Scholar
- [103] . 2015. Inceptionism: Going Deeper into Neural Networks. Retrieved 15 June 2021 from http://googleresearch.blogspot.com/2015/06/inceptionism-going-deeper-into-neural.html.Google Scholar
- [104] . 2018. Face detection in painting using deep convolutional neural networks. In Advanced Concepts for Intelligent Vision Systems. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 11182. Springer, 333–341.Google Scholar
- [105] . 2020. State-of-the-art: AI through the (artificial) artist’s eye. In Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Electronic Visualization and the Arts (EVA’20). 322–328.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [106] . 2020. Brill Iconclass AI Test Set. Retrieved 1 February 2021 from https://labs.brill.com/ictestset/.Google Scholar
- [107] . 2011. A new method for visual stylometry on impressionist paintings. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing (ICASSP’11). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 2036–2039.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [108] . 2021. Learning transferable visual models from natural language supervision. ArXiv abs/2103.00020 (2021).Google Scholar
- [109] . 2020. AI-generated vs. human artworks. A perception bias towards artificial intelligence? In Extended Abstracts of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’20). ACM, New York, NY, 1–10. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- [110] . 2018. Has Artificial Intelligence Brought Us the Next Great Art Movement? Here Are 9 Pioneering Artists Who Are Exploring AI’s Creative Potential. Retrieved December 3, 2020 from https://news.artnet.com/market/9-artists-artificial-intelligence-1384207.Google Scholar
- [111] . 2017. Statistical image properties in large subsets of traditional art, bad art, and abstract art. Frontiers in Neuroscience 11 (2017), 593.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [112] . 2016. Generative adversarial text to image synthesis. In Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML’16), Vol. 48. 1060–1069. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- [113] . 1982. Stochastic processes in music and art. In Stochastic Processes in Quantum Theory and Statistical Physics. Springer, 281–288.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [114] . 2018. Deep transfer learning for art classification problems. In Computer Vision—ECCV 2018 Workshops. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 11130. Springer, 631–646.Google Scholar
- [115] . 2019. Two-stage deep learning approach to the classification of fine-art paintings. IEEE Access 7 (2019), 41770–41781.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [116] . 2020. Aesthetical issues of Leonardo da Vinci’s and Pablo Picasso’s paintings with stochastic evaluation. Heritage 3, 2 (2020), 283–305.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [117] . 2016. Visual link retrieval in a database of paintings. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer Vision. 753–767.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [118] . 2010. Impressionism, expressionism, surrealism: Automated recognition of painters and schools of art. ACM Transactions on Applied Perception 7, 2 (2010), 8. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- [119] . 2012. Computer analysis of art. ACM Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage 5, 2 (2012), Article 7, 11 pages. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- [120] . 2019. Discovering visual patterns in art collections with spatially-consistent feature learning. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR’19). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 9278–9287.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [121] . 2019. Generating captions for images of ancient artworks. In Proceedings of the 27th ACM International Conference on Multimedia (MM’19). ACM, New York, NY, 2478–2486. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- [122] . 2019. The cyber turn of the contemporary art market. In Arts, Vol. 8. Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute, 84.Google Scholar
- [123] . 2018. History of art paintings through the lens of entropy and complexity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 115, 37 (2018), E8585–E8594.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [124] . 2021. Biases in generative art: A causal look from the lens of art history. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAccT’21). 41–51. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- [125] . 2019. Artpedia: A new visual-semantic dataset with visual and contextual sentences in the artistic domain. In Image Analysis and Processing. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 11752. Springer, 729–740.Google Scholar
- [126] . 2019. Towards a philosophy of post-creative practices? Reading obvious’ “Portrait of Edmond de Belamy.”Politics of the Machine Beirut 2019 2 (2019), 21–30.Google Scholar
- [127] . 2018. OmniArt: A large-scale artistic benchmark. ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications, and Applications 14, 4 (2018), 1–21. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- [128] . 2019. A game of dice: Machine learning and the question concerning art. arXiv preprint arXiv:1904.01957 (2019).Google Scholar
- [129] . 2017. Learning scale-variant and scale-invariant features for deep image classification. Pattern Recognition 61 (2017), 583–592.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [130] . 2017. Attention is all you need. arXiv preprint arXiv:1706.03762 (2017). Google Scholar
Digital Library
- [131] . 2021. Non-fungible token (NFT): Overview, evaluation, opportunities and challenges. arXiv preprint arXiv:2105.07447 (2021).Google Scholar
- [132] . 2019. Modern art challenges face detection. Pattern Recognition Letters 126 (2019), 3–10.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [133] . 2016. Detecting people in artwork with CNNs. In Computer Vision—ECCV 2016 Workshops. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 9931. Springer, 825–841.Google Scholar
- [134] . 2020. Investigating American and Chinese subjects’ explicit and implicit perceptions of AI-generated artistic work. Computers in Human Behavior 104 (2020), 106186.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [135] . 2018. AttnGAN: Fine-grained text to image generation with attentional generative adversarial networks. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR’18). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 1316–1324.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [136] . 2020. Classification of basic artistic media based on a deep convolutional approach. Visual Computer 36, 3 (2020), 559–578.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- [137] . 2018. Copyrightability of artworks produced by creative robots and originality: The formality-objective model. Minnesota Journal of Law, Science & Technology 19 (2018), 1.Google Scholar
- [138] . 2012. In the eye of the beholder: Employing statistical analysis and eye tracking for analyzing abstract paintings. In Proceedings of the 20th ACM Multimedia Conference (MM’12). ACM, Los Alamitos, CA, 349–358. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- [139] . 2021. A comprehensive survey on computational aesthetic evaluation of visual art images: Metrics and challenges. IEEE Access 9 (2021), 77164–77187. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- [140] . 2020. Representation learning of image composition for aesthetic prediction. Computer Vision and Image Understanding 199 (2020), 103024.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- [141] . 2017. Unpaired image-to-image translation using cycle-consistent adversarial networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV’17). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 2242–2251.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
Index Terms
Understanding and Creating Art with AI: Review and Outlook
Recommendations
AI + Art = Human
AIES '19: Proceedings of the 2019 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and SocietyOver the past few years, specialised online and offline press blossomed with articles about art made "with" Artificial Intelligence (AI) but the narrative is rapidly changing. In fact, in October 2018, the auction house Christie's sold an art piece ...
Does human–AI collaboration lead to more creative art? Aesthetic evaluation of human-made and AI-generated haiku poetry
AbstractWith the development of technology, the quality of AI-generated text has improved. This is relevant in the AI art field, where AI generates literature or poetry that is appreciated. This study compared human-made and AI-generated haiku ...
Highlights- Human-made and AI-generated poetry were examined using haiku poetry.
- The beauty ...
Ant-and ant-colony-inspired alife visual art
Ant-and ant-colony-inspired ALife art is characterized by the artistic exploration of the emerging collective behavior of computational agents, developed using ants as a metaphor. We present a chronology that documents the emergence and history of such ...






Comments