“Stay hungry. Stay foolish.”
The Rise of AI as Palette
One of the first color images of Earth was released by NASA at the prompting of a campaign started by Stewart Brand. Brand used that image as the cover of a new type of magazine — one he titled, Whole Earth Catalog. By using that picture on the cover of a publication dedicated to unusual culture, to environment and technology; Brand put himself in a curious position. More importantly, Brand identified that we were all in a curious position; one created by the new and godlike powers of industrialization.
That photo of Earth was taken by NASA in 1967, and Whole Earth Catalog was first published in 1968. It seems like a long time ago, and yet it is also not that long ago at all. In 1967 the photo, actually a photo mosaic, was taken by the ATS-3 satellite. It was a digital photo and a digital collage, a photo made over time, in layers and in pieces. It was not the first time a photo had been made of pieces, but it was one of the first times a photo of its sort showed us our place, our wholeness, as a unified system.
Now in the age of AI we are being shown something very similar, but from a different side of the image making vortex. Gone are the days when the great big picture of Earth feels revolutionary. Now it is the image of the small pieces, slivers of Earth, that feel new. The big picture is established to some degree and so now we uncover the individuals, the slivers, so as to better understand our wholeness. We see this deepened understanding of wholeness in all the micro and nano studies of science and we see it in a way in the tiniest slivers of human and technology interactions that fall under the taxonomy of poetry and art.
I was trained as a film photographer, and I was obsessed with it. Capturing natural light was my goal, and I pursued it with respect and reward, and often with bouts of frustration. Yet by the time I was seriously training in film in the 1990s, people like Brand had labeled the photograph as unreliable proof. I had no idea.
The digital era and its ability to composite reality, to spin it up faster and better than a mere human could had already, almost secretly made documentation, as it had been practiced, somewhat impossible. With manipulation at the center of the digital compositing process, truth in photography was at best a collage of the truth, and at its worst it was a fabrication of the truth. But the film photograph, and the digital one — they could be unabashedly beautiful, moving and therefore, inspirational and in some ways truthful. The truth simply became more complex.
Without getting too crazy into the details, I want to remind us that the new AI art is arguably a form akin to painting, and also akin to photography. The reason this is important is that AI is new and in a way, nothing new. Painterly art was manipulated by the influence of the patron. Photographic film was manipulated by the focus of the photographer and often, the publisher. The AI art that is emerging now, is a window into the mosaic of relationship that is at the heart of all art forms and all documentation.
These AI mosaics are representative of internal worlds, of canons of art history and they ask us to question everything. If anything, the god-like qualities of industry now become accessible to the individual. What was once reserved for expensive productions is now possible on a phone. With AI you can place a heroic version of yourself into a rendering of your choice. You can also do this for others, and for stories you imagine. The manipulation of imagery is now a debate that is up for a fresh discussion and a deepend, more complex intimacy.
We are post-truth, and we are post-modern and have been for a long time. We are posted online and posting across platforms. We are in a new age of territory; one that challenges the old truths to break and reshape into new truths. The post-truth era is in fact an opening onto new modes of locating the context, the process of identifying truth across multiple formats and presentation. The AI era asks us to inquire harder into the truth.
When we look at it from macro to micro and back again, we see the same repeating patterns in chemistry and in biology, and we see those universal patterns in methods of self-expression. We see patterns in shapes and simple forms of geometry and we see patterning in complex systems which we can not fully know. We hold tidbits. We prove tiny portions of things we suppose to be true. From the hard sciences to the art world, we string together stories of truth and in using new technologies we find ways to uncover nuance — the things we think of as shade, or form and angles.
When film photography was moved to the margins I was very upset. I imagine I could be upset now as someone who also makes digital art. I could be concerned that the advent of AI art means I will not know what to make of myself, or that I will somehow be rendered useless. In fact many people are worried that real artists will disappear, only to be replaced by machines. I understand the worry, and still I don’t recommend getting lost in it. There is always a play between machine and human, just as there is with any medium.
Photography as a reliable document may have died decades ago but that power was transferred to a deepening relationship to context. The photograph as document also went from presenting the power of a single image, to somehow providing us the power of multiple images. Now those images also come from multiple makers.
Imagine a street incident where multiple parties have their footage. Imagine those parties as two sides; now imagine tens, or hundreds or even thousands of images all recording, processing and presenting their version of the incident and its truth. We have already seen the power of decentralized image making in cases of human rights violations. We understand the power of the masses to capture an image and to challenge the narrative of truth as set out by the governing system. And when I say governing, it can be government, or it can be any large system of media making and spreading. “Governing system” can be the existing arts system.
Can manipulation be minimized this way? Can it be amplified? The only way to know the truth of this is to follow the path. The more involved we are, the faster we will start to know the path. The more aware we are, the more we won’t fear the path of our collective advancement.
What we get from an image is vision and sometimes that corresponds with our version of the truth and sometimes it doesn’t. But vision is what AI brings, just as photography did, and painting before it did.
Vision is the burden and the pleasure of the artist.
Vision is that which pierces the spirit and creates the knowing, the self-recognition that is somehow the essence of all art, all storytelling. In fact, AI image-making is less about making art or portraits that are somehow superior or different than human vision, and much more about making pieces that illustrate the extension of our vision.
Through daily use of computers we have been changing. AI art is a tool for illustrating this evolution of consciousness, of thoughts brought on by our times. AI art is our evolution of vision. “It” is not out to get us any more than paint or cameras. AI may push some forms of art to the margins, just as digital photography pushed film to the margins, but it will also empower us in ways we can not know just yet. AI art will make it possible for us to imagine ourselves differently, and to maybe behave differently as we absorb those visions into our psyches, and into our culture.
Maybe it’s time to quote Steve Jobs, quoting Stewart Brand: “Stay hungry. Stay foolish.” Maybe it’s time to re-contextualize that statement a bit: Truth is hungry. Truth is foolish. New modes of seeing are inevitable; we must allow for this evolution of creativity or we as communities will stagnate and cease to be fully alive. More so, we need to be a little trusting, a little willing to play the fool, or simply to play so that each innovation can flourish. If we don’t connect with the innovation; it won’t most likely take us over. If we do connect with it, we will have to deal with all the good and the bad that seems to be both timeless and defined by the flavors of the times. We will always deal with fraud and abuse. AI is a broadening of the artistic palette, not the sole future of truth.
When Stewart Brand asked for NASA to release the image of Earth he wanted to provide humans with greater appreciation through context, through a type of unprecedented visual intimacy. Today we have to ask ourselves if the intimate act of creating with an AI tool isn’t exactly the context we have been craving in a world shaped by media and information. Now is the perfect time to place ourselves into the AI apps, and to see what beauty and what expanded awareness comes out. Now is also the time to use these innovations to understand that this is Earth. We are Earth, expressed in innumerable slivers of vision. Stay hungry. Stay foolish. — the truth is somewhere within the process of growth.
