AMAZING MIT COMPUTER that can Function as Art Historian Authenticator Comments

MIT COMPUTER MATCHED art history authentications

FROM THE MIT TECHNOLOGY REVIEW

AS AN ADDENDUM TO THE ORIGINAL PUBLICATION about how inventive these MIT professors were in tackling art history authentication, I thought the comments left about this amazing activity should also be aired.

FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO WOULD LIKE TO READ THE ENTIRE ARTICLE PUBLICATION, HERE’S THE LINK:

http://arxiv.org/pdf/1505.00855v1.pdf

0.700753434538

 

The machines can’t see the difference between subjective categories that human’s created. If an art historian’s ‘game’ is to put artworks and artists into categories, then the machines are certainly not beating them. If this article is to be believed, the only potential benefit of this project will be lost when the machine’s start getting better at differentiating between artists and styles. But further, categorizing artists and artworks is simply not all an art historian does. Had the author consulted one, he or she may have told them when Mannerism happened, for instance.

Richard H

 

“It links the mannerist and Renaissance styles, which clearly reflects that fact that mannerism is a form of early Renaissance painting.”

EARLY Renaissance? The Mannerism I’m aware of is a form of LATE Renaissance art.

THIS GUY IS CORRECT, MANNERISM FOLLOWED THE RENAISSANCE. MAYBE IT WAS A TYPO IN THE PUBLISHED PAPER?

UncleAl

 

Say anything you want about the fine arts.  If you can keep a straight face while babbling syllogisms in haughty prose, you’re in.  One is disappointed if a modern thesis does not contain “nanoparticles” or “correlation function.”

Forests were slaughtered to publish centuries of scholarly analysis of the Sistine Chapel ceiling (1508 – 1512) pre-cleaning (before 1980).  Astounding tales of its sepia subtleties are rife.  Deep analyses of subsidiary figures’ meanings are delicately nuanced.  After the soot was removed, everything was comic book bright.  Post-cleaning added loincloths’ removal (the One True Church painted over the naughty bits) revealed “scholarly analysis” was a bunch of hooey.

C’MON, FORESTS WERE SLAUGHTERED?  IT’S CALLED BOOKS AND PRINTING WHICH WERE THE FIRST INTERNET.  IT’S NOW THE FORESTS ARE BEING SLAUGHTERED, INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION AND WORLDWIDE POLITICAL COLONIZATION.

HOWEVER HIS POINT ABOUT THE FACT THE ART HISTORIANS GO OUT OF THEIR WAY TO IGNORE NAKEDNESS AS PORN AND  IT’S NOT SOME GREAT REVIVALIST MOVEMENT SUCH AS NEO CLASSICISM OR GREEK REVIVAL OR ANALYZE EVERYTHING WITHOUT TAKING SEX INTO CONSIDERATION IS WELL MADE

We have science because a civilization cannot afford to be wrong all the time.  Science is offset by social activism, the charitably funded pursuit of intent.  Their interface is called “ethics,” the neutralization of success by vended fear.

I LOVE THIS OBSERVATION!

For more details please visit here.