Yet it happened we would say: art can be transformed into a "work of art" with the application of artificial intelligence.
For some time now we have been witnessing, somewhat incredulous and somewhat curious, examples of art reinterpreted with the application of algorithms, or rather works of art without the intervention of a real painter. Or better yet, works of art that are so technologically sophisticated that they seem to have been built ad hoc for a new generation collectors' market.
So these days we are witnessing the baptism of the first work created precisely by an algorithm, a painting, if we still want to call it that, but perhaps it is better to immediately give it a precise name to identify its current "Obvious", given that it is the name of the three young graduates under 30, an entrepreneur, an engineer and an aspiring painter, who came together to apply an algorithm to create the canvas “Portrait d'Edmond Belamy”, a title almost more suitable for impressionism which has an algorithmic canvas; yet at the auction held by Christie's it was sold for a good 432 thousand dollars and much sought after by aspiring collectors, in the hall and on the telephone.
The work, even if it is not the first to have been created using algorithms, has managed to enter the art market predominantly, competing directly with the greats such as Andy Warhol and Pablo Picasso.
The painting placed inside a preciously gilded frame, may seem like a sort of blurry interpretation of an eighteenth-century portrait of a slightly awkward gentleman in a black jacket and crumpled white collar, a slightly deformed face that can also remind us of something more recent as the works of Bacon and a signature in the lower right corner which could only be a mathematical formula. To create the portrait, the software intersected and interpreted as many as 15 ancient portraits and from there it then built the definitive image, all in a true duel between algorithms, a "generator" that creates the image and a "discriminator" that he must think that the new image is a real portrait.
We can say that artificial intelligence has succeeded in its intent and now we have to ask ourselves the future of this technique, will it be able to enter the art market as an author's work or rather as a work of authentic technology?
The art market is regulated by various factors, all linked to each other, where the work competes to be accredited by the same market and once it has actually entered and if it satisfies the demand, the objective is achieved. Therefore the rule could also apply to works created with artificial intelligence, as long as there is demand.
One thing, however, must not be forgotten, all of this is the result of technological systems that examine thousands of images of real ancient paintings and then translate them into something different, but without the images of Caravaggio, Tiziano, Hayez, Rembrant, Munch, Warhol and so many others no algorithm would have been able to produce a work? In this regard, I am more than ever convinced that the subject of "art history" is still very useful and perhaps more than before, because it is not just about knowledge, but an indispensable tool for creating new and more competitive economic models.
And with this deliberately unfinished portrait that seems much more recognizable, I don't exclude the possibility that real collecting may arise, indeed, because today art is above all fashion, trend, contemporaneity and the unbridled desire to collect the impossible.
In short, we are witnessing the market entry of a model of artificial art but still created by man, at least for now.
