• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Artificial Intelligence (A.I.)

Mystery of Raphael masterpiece may have been solved by Bradford-made AI

1703162475453.png


Algorithm concludes most of Madonna della Rosa was by renaissance master – but not the face of Joseph

https://www.theguardian.com/artandd...rosa-may-have-been-solved-by-bradford-made-ai

---------------
Incidentally, why were babies so badly depicted in the art of this period?
 
Steven said:
Mystery of Raphael masterpiece may have been solved by Bradford-made AI

View attachment 72286

Algorithm concludes most of Madonna della Rosa was by renaissance master – but not the face of Joseph

https://www.theguardian.com/artandd...rosa-may-have-been-solved-by-bradford-made-ai

---------------
Incidentally, why were babies so badly depicted in the art of this period?
Click to expand...
Maybe AI has jumped to a ("conclusive") conclusion because of what it has been given to digest?
i.e. Is it an added feature which has been applied in thin colour, as a prep for working on but unfinished?
'Joseph' may have been someone whom he (Raphael), decided to fully complete at a later stage.
(*note: red line area clearly shows a see-through (thin wash) section, whereas the rest of the picture is not.)
I suppose it greatly depends on how Raphael went about building up his paintings = bearing in mind that Joseph is a background (therefore shadowy) figure included within this painting?
1703180886495.png
 
Last edited:
Steven said:
Mystery of Raphael masterpiece may have been solved by Bradford-made AI

Incidentally, why were babies so badly depicted in the art of this period?
Click to expand...
After a short search online, it seems that they tried to paint babies to look wise and powerful, i.e. more strongly characterful in their depicted expressions.
 
If you consider the light being used to accentuate the infants and Mary - the latter having built up a huge following as a force in of herself - it might be plausible that the Joseph figure was intended to give less prominence. Maybe he was sidelined in favour or Mary etc.
To my admittedly inexpert eye, the reduction of contrast, the softening of lines and colours, the reduced illumination really does look like an add-on rather than part of the completed work.
I'd be interested in seeing the complete work, including the (assumed) halo of St. Joseph.
 
Stormkhan said:
If you consider the light being used to accentuate the infants and Mary - the latter having built up a huge following as a force in of herself - it might be plausible that the Joseph figure was intended to give less prominence. Maybe he was sidelined in favour or Mary etc.
To my admittedly inexpert eye, the reduction of contrast, the softening of lines and colours, the reduced illumination really does look like an add-on rather than part of the completed work.
I'd be interested in seeing the complete work, including the (assumed) halo of St. Joseph.
Click to expand...
His bowed head perhaps suggests that he's showing deference to her and the others, as if he's aware of his relative insignificance.
 
Stormkhan said:
I'd be interested in seeing the complete work, including the (assumed) halo of St. Joseph.
Click to expand...
There's doesn't appear to be a halo in the full work. Maybe because he didn't officially become St Joseph 'til later centuries (I just looked this up).
 
His stance as presented is fine, I agree, but the lighting is like a spotlight on the main characters and he's shadowed.
As far as I know (which is limited) an artist doesn't include a major character unless they are a major character. The artist doesn't have to paint Joseph - a 'player' in the story - as background. If you want to represent Mary, Babby Jesus and his bruv babby John the Dunker then do it. Why involve Joseph at all? If you include Joe, then you place him front and center along with Mary.
 
Stormkhan said:
His stance as presented is fine, I agree, but the lighting is like a spotlight on the main characters and he's shadowed.
As far as I know (which is limited) an artist doesn't include a major character unless they are a major character. The artist doesn't have to paint Joseph - a 'player' in the story - as background. If you want to represent Mary, Babby Jesus and his bruv babby John the Dunker then do it. Why involve Joseph at all? If you include Joe, then you place him front and center along with Mary.
Click to expand...
Looking at the painting again, it does look to me as if Joseph was added later.
 
Stormkhan said:
His stance as presented is fine, I agree, but the lighting is like a spotlight on the main characters and he's shadowed.
As far as I know (which is limited) an artist doesn't include a major character unless they are a major character. The artist doesn't have to paint Joseph - a 'player' in the story - as background. If you want to represent Mary, Babby Jesus and his bruv babby John the Dunker then do it. Why involve Joseph at all? If you include Joe, then you place him front and center along with Mary.
Click to expand...
In this portrayal of the finished painting, it seems to show that the image of Joseph shows that he is depicted with far more realistic lighting when considering that he is in the background than the one shown at #1,261 (as above).
1703268142860.png
 
Good image ... but Joseph is still sidelined. His clothes are drab brown whereas Mary is draped in purple (Imperial purple?) and the whole light is projected by the artist on Mary and the two toddlers.
He remains sidelined.
 
All in the eye of the beholder, of course, but Joseph looks sullen to me (whereas previously I thought he merely looked appropriately humble). I don't think there are rumours that Raphael had unorthodox religious views - as Leonardo and others seemingly did - but I may be wrong. Then again, did Raphael even paint Joseph in this picture?
 
AI in normal life.

Before Christmas I was in Sainsbury’s and had to get some loose parsnips. I put them in the scales, instead of having to choose what it was I was weighing. It knew they were parsnips. On looking there was a tiny camera above the dish. So it seems AI is working to see what veg is which. There was a crowd of amazed shoppers lol.
 
There was a bit on tv about A.I. the gist being that by analysing the sound of speech A.I
can work out what is being said even without knowing the language, or words, Google
voice recognition was mentioned, but because it relies on sounds not words it may
allow us to understand and talk to animals.
Now I only got part of what was said and may not have put what I did get very well
but if it does work do you really want to know what your cat thinks.
 
MorningAngel said:
AI in normal life.

Before Christmas I was in Sainsbury’s and had to get some loose parsnips. I put them in the scales, instead of having to choose what it was I was weighing. It knew they were parsnips. On looking there was a tiny camera above the dish. So it seems AI is working to see what veg is which. There was a crowd of amazed shoppers lol.
Click to expand...
So I can't put avocados through as onions anymore? Damn.
 
RaM said:
There was a bit on tv about A.I. the gist being that by analysing the sound of speech A.I
can work out what is being said even without knowing the language, or words, Google
voice recognition was mentioned, but because it relies on sounds not words it may
allow us to understand and talk to animals.
Now I only got part of what was said and may not have put what I did get very well
but if it does work do you really want to know what your cat thinks.
Click to expand...
The Christmas lectures are all about AI this year and they did mention working out animals language.
 
Techy surprised me with an Alexa which I'm really enjoying. It tells me the time, the weather and so on and plays podcasts for me.

However, I notice how differently he and I see it. To me it's an object, helpful and intriguing but still a machine.
Techy calls it her and jokes about how she's 'sulking' when I forget to say Alexa before asking a question and get no reply.

When we both tried Chat GBT Techy was highly amused whereas I found it tedious. Could hardly bring myself to bother for more than a few minutes. It's a computer program, it's not intelligent or sentient. Might as well talk to the toilet cistern. :chuckle:

Anthropomorphism isn't my strong suit. :dunno:
 
This is our local Chemist,s new 24/7 assistant.
It stocks the shelves, makes up orders and if shelf space is getting full
will rearrange things can be quite worrying as it rushes towards you
but a tireless 24 hour worker.

 
RaM said:
This is our local Chemist,s new 24/7 assistant.
It stocks the shelves, makes up orders and if shelf space is getting full
will rearrange things can be quite worrying as it rushes towards you
but a tireless 24 hour worker.

Click to expand...
I saw one of these in the pharmacy of a big London hospital at least 20 years ago possibly more.
 
RaM said:
This is our local Chemist,s new 24/7 assistant.
It stocks the shelves, makes up orders and if shelf space is getting full
will rearrange things can be quite worrying as it rushes towards you
but a tireless 24 hour worker.

Click to expand...
We need one of those in our local Boots as they are flippin' useless there.
 
Floyd1 said:
She'll get on your nerves sooner or later believe me.
Click to expand...
Nah, it's not a she, it's a resource like Google. Can't possibly annoy me.

Techy had it making farting noises on the first day. I wasn't amused - I do the entertaining flatulence round'ere, thank you very much. :roll:
 
Mythopoeika said:
Be worried when it starts flirting with Techy.
Click to expand...
:rofl:

A former poster on'ere, Diamonddogs, once received a Facebook ad for Hot Singles! In YOUR area! which featured Techy's alluring fizzog.
We live nowhere near her and Techy was decidedly NOT single.
I laughed my socks off, the more so when she apologised as if it was her fault, the silly moo. :chuckle:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top