[HN Gopher] Show HN: I built an AI art installation at home gene...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Show HN: I built an AI art installation at home generating new
       pieces on the fly
        
       Author : mfi
       Score  : 305 points
       Date   : 2021-08-18 14:56 UTC (8 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (github.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (github.com)
        
       | LegitShady wrote:
       | Personally believe that art requires intention and some attempt
       | at communication but it's an interesting project.
        
         | jazzyjackson wrote:
         | In this case I suppose the real artwork is the space of all
         | artworks that the machine is sampling from.
        
           | LegitShady wrote:
           | I'm not sure that makes this installation art in and of
           | itself.
        
         | cryptoz wrote:
         | Who's to say that the AI doesn't have intent, and makes no
         | attempt at communication? These are certainly very
         | philosophical questions and I would be ready to stand by the
         | idea that first, there is possibly intent and communication
         | here, and second, I've never heard of this narrow definition of
         | art before. Art is art, defining it so narrowly seems strange
         | to me.
        
           | LegitShady wrote:
           | It's ok to disagree with me - everyone is allowed a different
           | opinion on art. I'll explain a bit more about my opinion,
           | which you are free to disagree with.
           | 
           | Personally I don't think a machine generating pixels from
           | neural networks trained on intentional art can create art -
           | it can create something that seems very similar because it
           | seems to generate the same or similar output but its missing
           | the process and intention of art. If an artist draws random
           | shapes with no intention or intent to communicate or evoke
           | thought/emotion, all they're doing is making shapes, unless
           | the random shapes themselves are an intent to communicate
           | something (which is difficult if they're actually random).
           | 
           | 'art is art' is a tautology with no meaning, and defining art
           | in a way that makes some things not art is the only way you
           | can have a useful definition of art.
           | 
           | Change my tire? Art. Spill chocolate milk on the table? art.
           | vomit after drinking too much? art. because art is art,
           | right?
           | 
           | I guess the question is why you think everything, including
           | things done without intention or intent to communicate, is
           | art?
        
             | ozzmotik wrote:
             | in the semiotic tradition of Peirce, everything is a sign,
             | signaling some sort of message or meaning. even if there is
             | no evident or inherent intent being encompassed in some
             | chunk of reality, there is still something being signified,
             | and therefore something being communicated. in cases like
             | this, the art is the interpretant formulated by the
             | interpreter, a personal value judgment, rather than some
             | intended value encoded by some given creator of art.
             | 
             | just my take on it, maybe it might provide a framework for
             | seeing how even unintentional, stochastic processes can be
             | conceived of as art. :)
        
               | LegitShady wrote:
               | >in the semiotic tradition of Peirce, everything is a
               | sign
               | 
               | Again, if you interpret changing a tire, spilling milk,
               | or the vomiting after drinking too heavily as art, I
               | disagree with you. Are traffic signs art, in and of
               | themselves? are all signs art?
               | 
               | I don't think I agree with you. I've never read peirce
               | and I don't do that 'argument from authority' thing, but
               | given your wording here I don't think I agree with what
               | you're saying.
               | 
               | >the art is the interpretant formulated by the
               | interpreter,
               | 
               | So according to pierce, my interpretation of this as not
               | as art is as valid as you thinking its art, since that's
               | how im interpreting it? It doesn't seem like a very self
               | consistent idea.
        
         | xaedes wrote:
         | I think the generated pixels are not the art. The whole piece
         | is the art, made by the artist, i.e. the OP.
        
           | LegitShady wrote:
           | perhaps the whole installation is art, if as a whole there's
           | some kind of overall intention, message, or communication.
           | Personally having trouble seeing that here. It's more a tech
           | demo. It's a digital picture frame that generates its
           | pictures procedurally from a neural network.
        
             | mfi wrote:
             | I'm glad that you're bringing this up, because it's an
             | interesting (almost philosophical question) around what art
             | is.
             | 
             | In my mind, the interesting part in this installation is
             | not necessarily the generated artworks, but rather the fact
             | that they are one push of a button away from being deleted
             | forever. It adds a consumable aspect to the installation,
             | which I think is interesting. Can that evoke emotions and
             | be art in itself?
             | 
             | But that being said, I don't look at myself as an artist.
             | I'm a simple Data Scientist enjoying building projects at
             | the intersection of technology, woodwork and art (whatever
             | that is).
        
               | LegitShady wrote:
               | >but rather the fact that they are one push of a button
               | away from being deleted forever
               | 
               | but how is that expressed or communicated through the
               | installation? Why should anyone value random patterns
               | generated by a machine that had no intention?
               | 
               | I find andy goldsworthy's art incredible, and he bases
               | his work almost entirely on this idea of impermanent art
               | (although his is usually found materials). I'm not sure
               | its communicated by what you've presented.
               | 
               | I think the impermanence of random patterns that don't
               | communicate anything is something you can find
               | interesting rather than something thats communicated by
               | the video screen, or the intention of the installation.
               | 
               | It's a cool project, but ya, still not sold on this being
               | art per se.
        
       | lucidrains wrote:
       | use CLIP to generate a title for each piece of art, followed by a
       | description with GPT, and it is ready for exhibition
        
       | reacharavindh wrote:
       | As cool as this is, I have been struggling to find a good non-AI
       | digital photo display for my house.
       | 
       | The common ones you can buy as "digital photo frame" on Amazon
       | sucks in image quality. I would like a minimalistic digital photo
       | display that is colour accurate, hidpi, preferably have a way to
       | store a handful of hi res images(if not, Adding a Pi-zero for
       | this is still okay). Oh I am not so rich or hosting an art
       | gallery or anything, so, it must be less than 700 bucks(the cost
       | of an iPad). I don't understand why such a thing doesn't exist
       | already.
        
         | quickthrower2 wrote:
         | What about an android tablet?
        
         | slobot wrote:
         | I did something like this for an install using cheap 10"
         | android tablets and kiosk software I found on the app store.
         | Worked like a charm.
         | 
         | ** https://slobots.com/2019/01/gallery-view-i-love-my-robot-
         | at-...
        
       | artur_makly wrote:
       | a possible next step > add a motion sensor to *swipe fwd/back the
       | artworks. _using a smooth pixel morphing blended transition.
       | 
       | *or when toilet flushes ;-)_
        
       | itronitron wrote:
       | Worth considering that you could purchase a very good painting
       | from a local artist or gallery for much less than the money and
       | time that was spent on this project. While I get that this is a
       | fun project, an actual work of art will provide much more
       | enrichment over the many years that it will outlive an AI art
       | installation.
        
         | Kiro wrote:
         | I prefer this over any static art.
        
         | fksadfji12 wrote:
         | lol
        
         | mdoms wrote:
         | I build my own furniture. It costs me more than something I
         | could buy of equivalent or better quality. That's not the
         | point.
        
         | dvtrn wrote:
         | Incredible thing about art is that people value it differently
         | and for different reasons, so maybe the idea of "enrichment"
         | isn't something universal?
        
       | raman162 wrote:
       | Very cool. I now have a reason to get my hands on a Jetson. Also
       | great work on the detailed readme.
        
         | mfi wrote:
         | Thanks! Yeah, the Xavier NX was way more powerful than what I
         | expected!
        
       | linguistbreaker wrote:
       | Check out 77 Million Paintings by Brain Eno
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/77_Million_Paintings
        
       | didntknowya wrote:
       | great write up.
        
       | mholm wrote:
       | I was thinking the Frame TV had better color grading for the
       | color temperature of the room. Does your video output not take
       | advantage of this?
        
       | hwayne wrote:
       | This is amazingly cool.
        
         | mfi wrote:
         | Thanks!
        
       | dr-detroit wrote:
       | Taking things my kid could do into the next generation. Awesome.
        
       | mirroregami wrote:
       | Really cool. One piece of feedback: Try to get the white balance
       | to better match the warm wight light of the room. The tv will
       | blend in much much better.
        
         | mfi wrote:
         | Thanks, I'll try to improve the balance :)
        
           | jnwatson wrote:
           | See 1 for an innovative example of auto-calibrating
           | brightness and white balance.
           | 
           | 1. https://www.claybavor.com/blog/a-canvas-made-of-pixels
        
       | ggggtez wrote:
       | I like the idea, but the art is meh.
        
       | snarfmachine wrote:
       | Very cool. But have you put it up against the AI Turing test? :)
       | https://gumgum.com/guides/artificial
        
       | dekhn wrote:
       | The creator of ElectricSheep installs large installations like
       | this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Draves it uses
       | crowdsourced human preference functions to drive the art
       | evolution
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | wyldfire wrote:
       | Max Fischer? By any chance did you petition to keep a Latin class
       | at your private high school? ;)
        
         | mfi wrote:
         | Haha no, but it has definitely help me to hide embarrassing
         | images from my youth on Google ;) It only show images from
         | Rushmore
        
       | A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote:
       | First, I would like to say well done. Not just the project -- it
       | is neat. I particularly appreciate the fact that it includes all
       | the less obvious, to me, pieces like building appropriate box,
       | sanding and so on.
       | 
       | I wish more projects were like this ( as in, showed most of the
       | steps ).
        
         | mfi wrote:
         | Thanks, I appreciate it!
         | 
         | I really enjoy writing these guides for others to learn, it
         | forces me to think more about the process :)
         | 
         | If you liked this one, I've also written another guide where I
         | built a full-size arcade machine from scratch:
         | https://github.com/maxvfischer/DIY-arcade
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | MikeDelta wrote:
       | Nice! Art being lost forever is art in itself.
        
         | mfi wrote:
         | That's what I think as well, it adds an interesting dimension
         | to the installation
        
       | Animats wrote:
       | Now have it automatically issue one NFT every few minutes.
       | Profit!
        
       | nelsnelson wrote:
       | https://i.imgur.com/vpBRAjJ.png
        
       | amirGi wrote:
       | This is so freakin cool
        
         | mfi wrote:
         | Glad you liked it!
        
       | slobot wrote:
       | As an artist and an avid reader of HN, I find this both
       | fascinating and terrifying (!) at the same time. Before I started
       | painting robots, I painted abstracts and was heavily influenced
       | by Abstract Expressionism. The images that your AI are generating
       | (creating?!) are really cool. Equally as cool is that the images
       | are deleted once a new one is generated, because a lot of the
       | famous artists destroyed or painted over old works.
        
       | shadowgovt wrote:
       | That's extremely cool. Well done. :)
        
         | mfi wrote:
         | Thanks, it was a fun project!
        
       | landgenoot wrote:
       | Cool! Could also be nice with a A3 color printer and paper
       | shredder. Banksy-style.
       | 
       | This would make it less tv-isih
        
       | sova wrote:
       | Very beautiful. If I trained the network on say, just drawings
       | and painting Mondrian did, do you think they'd converge
       | stylistically?
       | 
       | Is a huge (5,000+ items) dataset required to get decent results?
        
         | mfi wrote:
         | Thanks!
         | 
         | I think it's quite likely that you will heavily overfit the
         | network if you only use a handful of images, where it might end
         | up reconstructing the exact paintings. I only have experience
         | using 5,000+ images.
        
       | artur_makly wrote:
       | This reminds me a lot of this Japanese Product/Service:
       | https://frm.fm/overview
        
       | lurker619 wrote:
       | Would it have been easier to generate these images on some cloud
       | gpu and stream/send the images to a smart tv? To avoid building
       | and fabricating all the hardware components?
        
         | SwiftyBug wrote:
         | But then OP would have skipped a lot of the fun
        
           | mfi wrote:
           | Exactly, a big part of the project was to learn about edge-
           | computing and integrating sensors with the GPIOs. But sure,
           | that would've been possible to do.
        
       | mrtweetyhack wrote:
       | this is just proof that any splash of shit is abstract art
        
       | orangegreen wrote:
       | I wonder if using a color e-ink display would make the art look
       | more appealing on a wall.
        
         | spywaregorilla wrote:
         | I've had the same thought, but alas. Prices are terrible.
        
         | arsome wrote:
         | A little white balance work would go a long way I suspect. An
         | OLED panel would really make things pop, but the burn-in issue
         | might be a problem unless you had it rotating very regularly.
        
         | mfi wrote:
         | It probably will! I actually looked into buying a color e-ink
         | display, but ended up using a The Frame instead for a couple of
         | reasons:
         | 
         | * They are incredibly expensive if you want ~32"
         | 
         | * I wasn't sure that it would've worked together with the
         | Nvidia Xavier NX.
        
           | artur_makly wrote:
           | wow first time I heard of this beast.
           | https://www.samsung.com/us/tvs/the-frame/highlights/ looks
           | incredible thanks for sharing.
        
           | sjg007 wrote:
           | How is the samsung frame? I am thinking of getting one..
        
             | mfi wrote:
             | I think you're trading of the design for a bit of quality,
             | you'll probably get more bang for the buck if you buy a
             | non-designer smart TV. That being said, it's still a good
             | TV!
        
       | gidam wrote:
       | it's funny what tech people consider Art. LOL
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | qq4 wrote:
       | do you find any of the generated images interesting? there is no
       | thought behind any of them which leads me curious to how
       | captivating they might be.
        
         | mfi wrote:
         | Some of them are nice, but a lot of them are trash as well. So
         | you need to click a few times before you find something you (I)
         | like
        
           | chorsestudios wrote:
           | Any chance you have a gallery somewhere with some of the
           | nicer images?
        
       | henearkr wrote:
       | Maybe a stupid question, but why the Samsung connect box if the
       | Jetson already has a HDMI output?
        
         | mfi wrote:
         | If I remember correctly, The Frame 32" only has a One Connect
         | cable connection on the back. The reason is that you won't get
         | the flat TV-to-wall surface otherwise.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | Sn0wCoder wrote:
       | Very cool. I work from home in my basement and would enjoy such a
       | device. Any plans to sell them? Or know of similar devices? I
       | could probably build one, but most likely would end up in pieces
       | next to my other random projects...
        
         | mfi wrote:
         | No, I currently have no plan to sell it. There's a lot of
         | overhead involved when selling stuff, and I mostly enjoy
         | building stuff like this :)
        
           | Sn0wCoder wrote:
           | Sounds good. Like others have said an API around the
           | generator would be cool too, then all I need is a webpage and
           | a monitor.
        
       | huntercross wrote:
       | Art shouldn't be unlimited. Its ok to call things screensavers,
       | because screensavers are also cool, its just that it isnt art in
       | the sense of "art" the word, if an AI is doing it, its something
       | else, and making it unlimited is not interesting, it is
       | irresponsible. Its the constraints that make art what it is, not
       | simply the definition of an infinite possibility space
        
         | fobdkbfjh wrote:
         | If you're going to gatekeep what art can be, you better have
         | some pretty impressive creative credentials of your own. Some
         | people say "an unlimited edition is meaningless, has no value"
         | and all they really mean is "I'm conservative, I don't see the
         | point of change, and I can't think of any way an unlimited
         | edition could be interesting"
        
           | LegitShady wrote:
           | Having a different opinion isn't gatekeeping, it's
           | disagreeing. No one is stopping this person from doing what
           | they want.
           | 
           | Second, if your definition of art is unlimited, it's hardly
           | useful, so I don't think it matters.
        
         | mrits wrote:
         | It certainly isn't unlimited. It is confined by resolution and
         | color depth.
        
         | swayvil wrote:
         | We could call art, "made-objects that get you high with beauty"
         | 
         | We could also call art, "byproducts of artistic (beauty-guided)
         | action"
        
       | xrd wrote:
       | This is awesome. Is the StyleGAN code removed (to keep it
       | private)? I see this commit message: "Remove my ML stuff." I'm
       | interested in understanding the StyleGAN if you are open to
       | sharing it.
        
         | mfi wrote:
         | Thanks! Yeah, I removed it as I want people to use their own
         | generative art in their own build. But if you're interested,
         | here's the implementation I used:
         | https://github.com/taki0112/StyleGAN-Tensorflow
        
           | xrd wrote:
           | I'm struggling a little bit with using StyleGANs so far. Are
           | you available for a (paid if you prefer) call where I ask you
           | a few questions about it? If so, xrdawson@gmail.com.
           | 
           | (I have a connection to Sweden, by the way. My brother lived
           | in Eskilstuna in high school. So, I learned a little bit of
           | Swedish when I visited him. His host brother thought it was
           | really weird I met him and said "jag heter Chris, jag alska
           | naturen!"). But, I would not feel comfortable talking to you
           | in Swedish about StyleGAN. :) ).
        
             | mfi wrote:
             | I've sent you an email :)
        
       | spoonjim wrote:
       | The installation is impressive but the output is underwhelming.
       | Then again, I feel the same about the pieces in most contemporary
       | art museums.
        
         | ghostbrainalpha wrote:
         | He just needs a higher resolution screen, a screen that is much
         | bigger, and placed inside of very nice frame. With the cables
         | hidden.
         | 
         | Then it's ready for the gallery.
         | 
         | Especially if you could come up with a way to filter out some
         | of the images that look too much like how a random broken
         | monitor will output.
         | 
         | This image in particular feels like "real" art to me.
         | https://imgur.com/gaJVSs3
        
           | artiszt wrote:
           | it's okay as it is -- IF, and only IF, the artist says so !
           | 
           | Rauschenberg too, as well as Lichtenstein and many others,
           | wouldn't have liked it a bit being turned into some hotair
           | egomaniac 0-creative wraped in plastic in some fin-groupies
           | Schnabel'oesque or Koons'ian gallery spot
        
             | guipsp wrote:
             | Taking existing art and twisting it is art too. In fact
             | there was a movement I can't recall the name of dedicated
             | to this?
        
             | pessimizer wrote:
             | If they're dead we shouldn't worry about what they would
             | think about what we do; we have enough to worry about.
        
         | turtlebits wrote:
         | Agreed, but I think the animated GIF and small, extremely
         | compressed JPGs in the repo don't help. Maybe a youtube video?
        
         | scollet wrote:
         | The art is the installation.
        
       | jcun4128 wrote:
       | I wonder if you have to push the button or if it could auto-cycle
       | at some interval. Powering is always interesting do usually need
       | a dedicated power source like a wall plug less you had some other
       | means to get power. Low energy/battery/harvesting maybe (I saw
       | this runs on a Jetson).
        
         | mfi wrote:
         | I actually implemented it so that you have to push the button.
         | By adding a dimension where an artwork you like is just a
         | button-push away from being deleted, it actually makes you
         | enjoy it more.
        
           | jcun4128 wrote:
           | This is just a thought. I don't know if you're aware of
           | Github pages (probably) but regarding docs/hosting a basic UI
           | with tabbed sections to present a chunked form of the README.
        
       | swayvil wrote:
       | Nice.
       | 
       | What do you think of this? : https://vimeo.com/241051006
       | 
       | Also, here's a generative art discord :
       | https://discord.gg/gVna7Utm
        
       | nine_k wrote:
       | This says a lot about building MDF housing for a Jetson (BTW why
       | not plywood?), and devotes literally half a dozen pretty generic
       | lines to the actual art generation code. The algorithm is not
       | discussed, and even art examples are not shown.
       | 
       | This is sad, because wooden box building guides are abundant, but
       | art generation guides are less so,
        
       | mrits wrote:
       | I hope you aren't syncing these random images to your iCloud
       | account!
        
       | oxinabox wrote:
       | I love how this read me is as much about woodwork as it is about
       | software
        
         | mfi wrote:
         | I truly enjoy working on projects that includes both areas,
         | interesting tech and woodwork :)
        
       | mfi wrote:
       | I just finished my latest project, building an AI art
       | installation at home, generating 100 % unique artworks on the
       | fly. Just push the button below the screen and another one will
       | be displayed. When the button has been pushed, the old artwork is
       | deleted and can't be retrieved again.
       | 
       | Setup:
       | 
       | * An Nvidia Jetson Xavier NX was used for all logic, machine
       | learning inference, art kiosk GUI etc.
       | 
       | * A StyleGAN was used to generate the artworks, trained on ~5k
       | images of abstract art.
       | 
       | * A passive infrared sensor (SR602) was integrated with the
       | Jetson to reduce screen burn-in. When no movement has been
       | detected around the installation within a pre-defined threshold,
       | the screen shuts off until movement is detected.
       | 
       | * A custom control box was built, encapsulating most of the
       | electronics.
        
         | jonbraun wrote:
         | Cool installation! What was the process of obtaining the 5k
         | abstract art images?
        
           | mfi wrote:
           | I scraped them from various art websites.
        
         | TuringNYC wrote:
         | >> Nvidia Jetson Xavier NX
         | 
         | Curious -- since you're only doing the inference/generation on
         | the frame, and since you're not doing it all the time, did you
         | need a Jetson or would an RPI have sufficed? Did you test
         | inference speeds across different edge compute options?
        
           | dheera wrote:
           | Yeah I think the way I'd do it (personally) is have an RPi
           | constantly generate new images in the background and cache
           | them until storage is maxed out, then when you hit the button
           | it just fetches the next image from cache.
           | 
           | That would allow the frame to be somewhat lower power and
           | also decrease ventilation requirements -- no fan needed.
        
             | raisedbyninjas wrote:
             | Is it me or is this more of a woodworking guide than an AI
             | art guide? I only see a small blurb to _put AI art code
             | here_. Presumably the button /replenish image dir. is a
             | seed component to the AI. I suppose that further removing
             | the art generation from the installation diminishes the
             | magic of art. The engineer in me would further trim this
             | down by pre-generating art on a PC and slap it on an SD
             | card plugged into basic picture digital frame. Or dispense
             | with storage and connect it to Wifi to poll
             | AIArtAsAService.com.
        
               | bluerival wrote:
               | The difference between this project and a digital photo
               | frame is as you've described - The AI generation. I think
               | the destruction makes it special too, if every unique
               | image disappears forever at the click of a button.
        
         | binarymax wrote:
         | Really beautifully done. Thank you for sharing it with us!
         | 
         | Quick question: can you use the Nvidia Jetson Xavier NX to
         | train a model? Or can it only be used for inference?
        
         | Quarrel wrote:
         | Ok, so this is cool as fuck.
         | 
         | I don't think much of the actually produced art, but the fact
         | that you laid out your whole process makes this drool-worthy.
         | Now it is just a challenge as to- can I do better?
         | 
         | Great job.
        
           | wombatmobile wrote:
           | Nobody could include more individual photos in the how to.
           | 
           | This one has how many gazillion photos?
        
             | PebblesRox wrote:
             | Oooh, next step is to create an AI picture frame that
             | generates images based on the photo documentation of its
             | own creation.
        
           | mfi wrote:
           | Glad you like it!
           | 
           | Of course you can! Give it a try and share it afterwards ;)
        
         | throwaway158497 wrote:
         | Cool project. How much does this setup cost you?
        
           | mfi wrote:
           | Hmm, I think The Frame 32" was about $500 and the Nvidia
           | Xavier NX costed as much (including import taxes etc). The
           | other stuff (cable channels, screws, MDF etc) was probably
           | around $50. So a total of around ~$1050.
        
         | dheera wrote:
         | Interesting! I built a generative art frame based on "{Shan,
         | Shui}" by Lingdong Huang
         | 
         | https://dheera.net/projects/einkframe/
         | 
         | but also planning to use it for neural-net based generative
         | art. I wasn't planning on putting a NX in it though, I was
         | thinking of just keeping the Pi Zero in there and have it do
         | all computations in "the cloud" or on a Nano/Xavier box sitting
         | elsewhere on the same network.
         | 
         | I'm currently working on a 3-panel version of the above:
         | 
         | https://imgur.com/a/3IfKpb3
         | 
         | I didn't make my own frame though, I designed the dimensions
         | and had it custom-built by a frame company, which was
         | surprisingly affordable.
        
           | mfi wrote:
           | That is amazing!! I actually looked into buying an E-ink
           | screen for this project, but decided not to due to the cost
           | and the lack of compatibility.
           | 
           | Was the E-ink screen simple to work with?
        
             | dheera wrote:
             | As long as you get the HAT, yes. I had to desolder the
             | header and solder on a 90-degree header to get my low-
             | profile layout, that was a pain. They weren't able to ship
             | me a HAT without pins soldered :(
             | 
             | The documentation is sparse but they do have one C++ demo
             | example and that's pretty much good enough as a reference
             | to do whatever you want.
             | 
             | One thing I will caution is to NEVER unplug or plug the
             | display while the board is powered on, I fried one display
             | by doing that, but Waveshare was nice enough to replace it
             | for free one I got a hold of some employee's WeChat.
        
           | tyingq wrote:
           | This is more interesting to me as I'd never suspect it was
           | generated art.
        
             | dheera wrote:
             | Yeah that was what I was going for, guests who come would
             | not even know that there are electronics in the frame, and
             | suddenly the art would change every now and then.
             | 
             | Requires drilling a fat hole in the wall to send the USB
             | cable down behind the drywall but meh, needing to patch
             | drywall when moving out isn't the end of the world, usually
             | if you chat up the maintainence folk you can get some extra
             | paint of exactly the right color and spackle/paint it
             | yourself.
        
               | at_a_remove wrote:
               | What would be amusing is gaze detection such that the art
               | would change only when someone wasn't looking for a
               | while, and then maybe only "advance the scroll" an inch
               | or two.
        
         | spoonjim wrote:
         | What country uses those round black outlets?
        
           | mfi wrote:
           | I'm from Sweden :)
        
           | Guillaume86 wrote:
           | Red countries on this map: https://world-power-
           | plugs.com/plugs-outlets-types
        
         | Justin_K wrote:
         | Awesome! I'd recommend running your cables behind the drywall,
         | the look is very clean!
        
           | mfi wrote:
           | Yeah, that would've been optimal, but it's also a lot more
           | work, so I decided to use cable channels in the end.
        
         | prions wrote:
         | This is really cool! I'd love to seed the GAN with my own
         | artwork and generate new pieces in my style
        
           | kamilszybalski wrote:
           | this comment seeded an interesting idea! Many artists and
           | photographers want to get into the NFT space but they don't
           | necessarily have experience in digital art creation.
           | 
           | If you could leverage AI to generate digital art based on
           | real artist/photographer inputs, perhaps you could create a
           | nice little marketplace business.. or maybe just a simple AI
           | generator plugin for an existing marketplace..
        
             | didntknowya wrote:
             | i don't know any real artists who actually want to get into
             | the NFT space, only con-artists.
        
             | tartoran wrote:
             | Most artists (with some exceptions) want to have nothing to
             | do with AI generative art. They will simply continue to
             | produce art the way they do with older technologies such as
             | paints and brushes, musical instruments, film equipment,
             | writing tools, and so on. Art making involves a process, a
             | state of mind and there's always a human behind it who
             | digests everything around them and spit something out. All
             | these imitative AI art are beautiful in their own way but
             | really have no substance; once the wow factor weans out
             | they won't have much of a leg to stand on in my opinion.
             | Art making is a self discovering journey at the same time.
             | 
             | Having said that, I'm curious and somewhat excited to see
             | how these will evolve. As I said, I find them beautiful. As
             | a painter myself there is nothing out there that will make
             | me not paint. Sure, I sometimes use tools but there's
             | always the me in there who is in control or driven by my
             | human instinct.
        
               | artur_makly wrote:
               | Everything is a remix.
               | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zd-dqUuvLk4
        
               | kamilszybalski wrote:
               | That's good insight. I am not an artist but I've also run
               | this idea by a friend who is. He loves the idea and is
               | curious what a technological interpretation of his work
               | might look like. He's also interested in how we might use
               | those interpretations to create a new segment of
               | collections for this brand.
        
           | mfi wrote:
           | Thanks! Depending on how many artworks you've created, it
           | might be difficult to train a GAN network on them (due to
           | overfitting). What you might try is to train one network with
           | a lot of random artworks, then use a Style-transfer network
           | to convert the generated pieces into your style.
        
             | aketchum wrote:
             | couldn't you use something like style transfer to take your
             | own artwork's style and apply it to the generated art?
        
               | mfi wrote:
               | Yeah exactly, that's what I meant!
        
             | sandGorgon wrote:
             | do you have the code for training ? i wasnt able to find it
             | in your repo. That would be so cool!
        
               | mfi wrote:
               | I left it out as I wanted people to use their own
               | generative art. Here's the implementation I used:
               | https://github.com/taki0112/StyleGAN-Tensorflow
        
               | bravura wrote:
               | Do you actually want to disseminate your work and have
               | many other people try it? Or is that not actually a goal.
               | 
               | Right now it really feels like this isn't a priority.
               | Which is fine.
               | 
               | But if it is a priority that other people replicate your
               | work, I'm not sure you're making this as easy for people
               | as possible.
        
               | mfi wrote:
               | My intension is not for people to replicate my work (the
               | trained GAN-network), but rather supply a tutorial over
               | how to build the installation. Then people can add their
               | own generative art/code. It could be ML-generated, or
               | traditional "code-art".
        
           | phkahler wrote:
           | Or seed it with XKCD.
        
           | KingFelix wrote:
           | Thats what I am thinking about, what kind of images to train
           | on
        
       | dukeofdoom wrote:
       | Samsung phones come with an adapter that can output to HDMI. Is
       | there a phone app that could do something like this on a TV?
        
         | dogma1138 wrote:
         | You can probably run it on a SmartTV directly...
        
       | lazlee wrote:
       | I'm curious about, beyond time and labor, how much $$$ the
       | project ran you.
        
         | mfi wrote:
         | The Frame 32" and Nvidia Xavier NX cost ~$500 each (including
         | import taxes etc), the rest (cable channels, screws etc) ~$50.
         | So a total of around $1050
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-08-18 23:00 UTC)