Видео

Please read my comment about Goya and the Saturn painting.

It's based off of the Roman/Greek myth in which Jupiter/Zeus 'killed and took over his father's (Saturn/Kronos) place as the King of everything because he was prompted by his mother to do so after Saturn/Kronos ate all her previous children (Juno/Hera, Vesta/Hestia, Pluto/Hades, Ceres/Demeter and Neptune/Poseidon)

@@Miguel-Lima-M2thats what art experts assumed. its important to know that none of the black paintings were actually named

@@worldfuturestarkey Ooh, oki

Looking at your previous comments, I understand your disgust for this channel and accept it as your personal opinion. But your comments may mislead other viewers. Please give an example of at what second of the video the AI ​​reproduction is used instead of the original painting to prove that your words can be trusted.

And why would the channel's author waste time reproducing a painting using AI if the original can easily be found on the Internet?

​@@LivingMotionPaintings 6:13. 1868 Storm. By simply looking at the ropes on the ship it's just so painfully visible. A disconnected mess of torn lines for ship ropes. Or are you saying that Aivazovsky couldn't paint lines to save his life? A 10-second Google search will show anybody what the actual painting looked like, unsurprisingly with all the ropes intact. So, while it's a real painting, this video has examples of AI-upscaled versions of the originals. And and I think you know it. So the person's opinion is 100% justified. And it's not just "a personal opinion". You are doing a disservice to the original painter by treating the original works like that. And the reason why it's done like this is that it's difficult to find high rez versions of these works on the net, so you or the one you downloaded it from, decided to use AI. Some can be found in high resolutions with no hassle, but others - no chance. So, you are being disingenuous by saying "the original can be easily found". Found - yes. In high resolution - no. At least far from all of them.

Thank you for taking the time to comment. I truly appreciate it. Your comment shows that you are very attentive to details, so I'll do my best to pay attention to them as well and respond with as much honesty and objectivity as possible. The image processing technique you're referring to is called "upscaling." The commenter I was responding to was talking about "reproductions." My reply was directly related to that. I don't make reproductions of paintings. There's no point in making a reproduction when the original is available online, no matter the resolution. That was the essence of my response. Yes, I do use upscaling to increase the resolution of paintings. Without it, the image of the painting on a 4K screen would look disappointing. Upscaling images was widely used even before the rise of artificial intelligence. For instance, it was possible to do it in Photoshop five years ago. I’m not deeply familiar with the technical details behind upscaling, but I assume it's an algorithm that tries to remove digital noise, which inevitably appears when images are compressed. Personally, I use software where the processing algorithm can be selected. I agree with you that in the very first video on the channel, featuring Aivazovsky’s paintings, I chose an algorithm that was less suitable for paintings because it removed digital noise better but could alter subtle original details of the composition. In my latest video, I used a different algorithm, and the results are significantly better in terms of detail, though some digital noise remains. I encourage you to compare the two, if you have the time. In my opinion, there’s nothing wrong with applying the algorithm in this particular case because the goal of this channel is not to present paintings in their original form, as that’s impossible to do with a digital copy. Critics of upscaling should be honest with themselves when they claim that it introduces something awful. Why aren’t critics concerned about color? You can only see the original colors of a painting in a museum, looking at them with your own eyes. And when a painting is photographed, it’s important to remember that different cameras render colors differently. So do photographers, who may use the same camera model but with different settings for aperture, white balance, and exposure. Furthermore, the lighting conditions in the room where the painting is displayed also affect the colors in the photograph. So, if we are being precise and attentive to details, art lovers viewing paintings online must keep in mind that they are looking at a photograph of the painting, taken under certain conditions with a specific camera. A different camera would produce a different result. The goal of this channel is inspiration. And it fulfills that goal if you look at the comments. Even if just one person felt positive emotions from the video, then the video achieved its purpose. Paintings are silent by nature. But on this channel, you can see and hear at the same time. Image + music. That’s the essence of the channel. Perhaps in future videos, I will mention this essence at the beginning, as well as the fact that the images may have undergone digital processing. Although, they have already undergone digital processing once they entered a camera in the gallery as a digital file.