Hey everyone and welcome to this deep dive.
We're gonna be talking about artificial intelligence and art.
Yeah, sounds like fun.
You bet it is.
You've given us some really interesting research articles
to dive into and looks like things could get a little,
well, controversial.
Definitely, we've got articles covering film,
television, theater, even dance.
And you know, the central question seems to be,
will AI be a tool for amazing new art
or is it gonna like completely replace human creativity?
You know, I think that's a really good question to start with.
To kick things off, maybe we should talk about
what generative AI is.
Justine Bateman, the actress and tech expert
in one of our sources.
She uses a really cool analogy, I thought.
Oh yeah.
She compares generative AI to a blender.
Oh right, I remember that.
That's a really good way to think about it.
You're essentially like feeding all this data to the AI,
like maybe like a centuries worth of movies
and then you ask it to blend it all up
based on whatever you're trying to create.
But Bateman, she doesn't see that as true creativity.
She calls it theft because the AI is just taking
what's already out there and spitting it back out.
Right, and so that brings up a really interesting question.
Can AI actually be creative
or is it just a really good imitator?
You know, some experts, they believe that AI
could achieve something called novel synthesis
where it takes these existing elements
and combines them in a way that humans never would.
I see what you mean.
So like even if the raw ingredients are the same,
the AI could maybe come up with a totally new recipe.
Yeah, exactly.
But then even with that,
some argue that AI is limited by what's called mixed style.
So it can only blend styles that already exist.
So you know, maybe it could make a movie
that combines the style of Hitchcock with Spielberg,
but it couldn't create like a totally brand new style
that we've never seen before.
That is really interesting.
I hadn't thought about it like that.
But let's shift gears a little bit
and talk about an artist who's actually using AI in her work.
Heidi Boisert.
She's a computer scientist and an artist
and her project, Radical Signs of Life,
really caught my eye in these sources.
Yeah, her work is a great example
of how AI can be used collaboratively
in the performing arts.
I was really interested in that.
Imagine like a dance performance
where the dancers' movements are being captured by sensors
and then used to create visuals and music in real time.
So the dancers are like co-creating with the AI.
That's so cool. Yeah.
Yeah, their bodies are like actually shaping
the whole experience.
And what's really cool is that Boisert
uses technology to actually critique technology itself.
She's really interested in that line between human and machine.
It makes you wonder, right?
What would it be like to go to a show
where AI is like a partner on the stage?
Would it enhance the experience or would it be,
I don't know, maybe a little unsettling?
Yeah, yeah.
It's like those deepfakes we see online.
Sometimes they're amazing,
but other times they just feel a little off.
Yeah, definitely.
But speaking of unsettling,
let's go back to Justine Bateman for a second.
She has some pretty big concerns
about AI's impact on filmmaking.
And it's not just about the creative side of things.
Right, she's worried about jobs.
And I think rightfully so.
I mean, if AI can write scripts, generate performances,
and even edit movies,
what's gonna happen to all the people who do those jobs?
Exactly.
Bateman argues that we're headed toward this world
of volume content where studios are just pumping out tons
of movies and shows with no real heart or soul
because it's just cheaper and faster to do it that way.
Right, and that really leads to a bigger question.
Will this focus on efficiency and profit
mean that we lose something special about art itself?
That's a good question.
I mean, new technologies have always disrupted the arts.
Photography changed, painting, film changed, theater.
But is AI different somehow?
It really makes you think,
is this just another chapter in how art evolves
or are we heading into some uncharted territory?
What do you think?
Would you be excited to watch a movie
that was completely generated by AI?
Honestly, I'm not sure yet.
But I think that's what makes this whole topic so interesting.
Yeah, it's interesting.
This whole idea of AI,
maybe prioritizing profit over artistic integrity,
that really resonated with me.
It seems like that's something
that pops up a lot in these discussions.
Right, it makes me think about what Bateman said
about volume content.
If we're just focused on churning out
as much stuff as possible,
are we gonna lose something special about art?
Like, will those really unique voices and visions
just get kind of drowned out?
Yeah, that's a really good point.
And that actually connects to something else
we were talking about earlier with Heidi Boyceford's work.
She's done some really interesting research
on what's called bio-adaptive media.
Bio-adaptive media.
Yeah, it's a pretty crazy concept.
Imagine watching a movie that actually changes
based on how you're reacting to it.
Wait, is that even possible?
That sounds like something out of a sci-fi movie.
It is pretty cutting edge,
but the idea is based on using biofeedback,
like your heart rate or even brainwaves,
to kind of personalize the experience.
And Boyceford's research was focused
on how we could use this technology
to create a deeper connection between the viewer
and the art.
Okay, so if I'm watching a scary movie
and my heart rate starts to go up,
the movie would get even scarier.
Exactly, or if you're watching a comedy
and you're not laughing,
it could adjust to try and make you laugh.
But here's where it gets really interesting.
Bateman actually sees this kind of personalization
as a potential problem.
Oh, really? Why?
Yeah, she worries that it could actually lead
to a loss of shared experiences around art.
I could see that.
Like if we're all watching these customized versions
of the same movie, how can we even talk about it afterwards?
Will we still have those water cooler moments?
You know, where we bond over something
that we've all seen?
Exactly, that's exactly her concern.
She thinks these AI-driven experiences
could create these little bubbles
where we're all just consuming content
that's tailored specifically to us,
and then we lose that common ground that connects us,
you know, as a society.
It's kind of like what's already happening
with social media, right?
Those algorithms are always trying to show us
what they think we want to see,
which can be helpful sometimes,
but it also creates these echo chambers
where we're only exposed to certain viewpoints.
You're so right.
It makes you think if that kind of personalization
starts to affect all forms of art,
is it gonna make it harder
to connect with people who maybe see things differently?
Are we gonna lose that kind of shared understanding
of what art can be and what it can mean?
It is a little bit scary, honestly.
But it's not all doom and gloom, right?
I mean, Boyzvert seems to be pretty optimistic
about the potential of AI,
even though she acknowledges the risks.
Oh, absolutely.
She's not just sitting back and watching all this unfold.
She's actually doing something about it.
She's developing what's going to be
the nation's first AI and the arts curriculum
at the University of Florida.
Way to whole curriculum on AI and the arts.
That's amazing.
What will they be teaching?
Well, it's all about giving students the tools
and knowledge to navigate this new landscape.
They'll learn about the technical side of AI, of course,
but they'll also be encouraged to really think critically
about the ethical implications
of using AI in creative fields.
So it's not just about learning how to use the tools.
It's about understanding the bigger picture
and making responsible choices.
Exactly.
Boyzvert wants to empower these next generation of artists
to really use AI in a way that benefits
both the individual and society as a whole.
That's so important,
especially with all the concerns
that we've been talking about.
It's almost like she's saying,
look, this technology is powerful
and it can be used for good or bad.
So let's make sure that we're using it wisely.
I love that.
It's such a hopeful perspective
in the midst of all this uncertainty.
But it also makes me wonder, what about you?
If you were using AI tools in your own creative work,
what kind of ethical boundaries would you set for yourself?
Where would you draw the line?
Hmm.
That's a really good question.
I think for me, you would all come down to intention.
Am I using this tool to enhance my own creativity
and expression or am I letting it kind of take over?
You know, it's a balance for sure.
Yeah, it is a balance.
And I don't think there are any easy answers.
But that's why these conversations are so important.
We have to start asking these tough questions now
so we can shape the future of art
in a way that feels right, you know?
Absolutely.
So it sounds like we have these two contrasted perspectives,
right?
On the one hand, there's this huge potential for AI
to push the boundaries of art
and maybe even create entirely new forms of expression
that we can't even imagine yet.
And on the other hand, there are these very real feels
about what AI could mean for human creativity jobs
and our ability to even connect with each other through art.
It's almost like we're standing at a crossroads.
And we have to decide which path we want to take.
And there's no guarantee that we're going to get it right.
But you know, the choices we make now
are going to have a huge impact on the future of art
and the role that it plays in our lives.
So what does this all mean for us, the audience,
the people who actually experience and engage with art?
Well, I think the most important thing is to stay informed,
be critical, and keep asking questions.
Don't just passively consume whatever is being created.
Think about where it came from, how it was made,
and what kind of impact it might be having
on the world around you.
So it's not just about appreciating the art itself,
but understanding the context in which it was created.
Exactly.
And that context is becoming more and more complex
as AI plays a larger role.
We have to be aware of the potential downsides,
but we also have to be open to the possibilities.
It's like we're all part of this big experiment,
and we're kind of figuring it out as we go.
Yeah.
And that's exciting in a way, right?
I mean, who knows what the future holds for art?
Maybe AI will help us create things
that we can't even imagine right now.
Or maybe it'll lead us down a path that we end up
regretting.
It's really up to us to decide.
This has been such a thought-provoking deep dive.
We've covered so much from trying
to define what generative AI is to thinking about how it might
impact film, music, dance even.
Yeah.
And we've really gotten into some pretty deep questions.
Like, is AI going to be this awesome creative partner,
or will it push human artists out completely?
And can it even really be creative,
or is it always going to be limited by the data it learns
from?
That's a lot to think about.
I think what really stays with me is this idea
that AI might end up putting profits ahead of artistic vision.
Like, are we just going to see studios churning out
endless sequels and remakes because it's cheaper and faster?
I think it's a valid concern.
But on the other hand, AI could also give more people
a chance to create art.
People who might not have had the resources or the training
before.
Imagine if anyone could make their own music or direct
a movie using AI tools.
That could be pretty amazing.
I know, right?
But then we have this whole other question
about bio-adaptive media.
And if it's going to isolate us in these personalized
bubbles of content, are we even going
to be able to talk about art anymore
if everyone's experiencing it in their own little world?
It really makes you think.
And it's so interesting to compare that with Bayman's point
about losing shared experiences.
And maybe the key is finding that balance between personalization
and those things, those universal themes that connect us all
as humans.
I think that's it.
It's all about finding that sweet spot where AI can help us
be more creative and expand what's possible without losing
that human element that makes art so special.
Absolutely.
And that actually brings us to our final thought, something
we want to leave you with as you keep exploring this topic.
OK, let's hear it.
Imagine that AI gets so advanced that it can perfectly
copy the style of any artist.
Like, let's say your favorite musician or painter
could be basically cloned by AI.
OK, I'm following you.
Yeah.
And now imagine this AI makes a brand new piece of art.
And it's impossible to tell the difference between that
and something the artist made themself.
Would you value it the same way?
Would it make you feel the same way?
Would it feel like you were really experiencing the artist's
vision, or would it feel like something was missing?
That is a really tough question.
And you know there's no right or wrong answer,
but it makes you stop and think about what really
matters to us when we experience art.
Right.
Is it just the technical skill or the style?
Or is it something deeper, something
that connects us to the artist as a human being?
Their experiences, their struggles, their everything.
And if that human element is missing,
does the art lose something really important?
Does it become more like a product
than a real expression of the human spirit?
I don't know.
Those are some big questions that we're all
going to have to figure out as AI becomes a bigger part
of the art we make and experience.
There's no easy answers, and no one
knows what the future holds.
But one thing is for sure the future of art
is being shaped right now.
And the choices we make, the questions we ask,
the conversations we have, they all matter.
So stay curious, stay engaged, and keep thinking critically.
Thanks for joining us on this deep dive.
We'll see you next time.