CGI stands for "computer generated imagery". It uses computers to create pictures, including moving pictures, but the artist is still in full detailed control of the result. The artist uses the computer program as a tool, the same way a traditional artist uses a paintbrush or a stop-motion animator uses poseable models. The human creator does all the work of determining what the imagery will look like, and the quality of the result depends on that creator's talent. Most movie special effects for several decades have been done with CGI. Jurassic Park is an example of high-quality CGI effects.
"AI" or "artificial intelligence" (though there is no actual intelligence involved) creates text or imagery from brief written prompts. The person who wrote the prompt has no control over the details of what the machine produces, and the appearance of the result is unrelated to any talent the prompt writer has. The machine is just putting words or pixels together in patterns based on the vast amount of text and imagery that was plagiarized to "train" it. This is why, at least in the US, "AI"-generated text and images cannot be copyrighted. Copyright law exists to protect the rights of a person over what he created, but "AI"-generated material was not created by anyone, it's just a mish-mash of bits and pieces from earlier works which can't be identified from the final result.
They really are completely different. A CGI image of a person would not have a six-fingered hand unless the person who made it consciously intended it to have that -- just as with a drawing. "AI" images constantly include those kinds of errors because they're created by a machine that doesn't know what it's doing (only a conscious entity can "know" things), not by a person.
Agree with the first comment. As a former Architect I'm familiar with "architectural renderings" - pretty sure the first two are renderings because because of the car and the repetitive landscape elements. and the lack if discordant elements you find in the second two. In the old days you drew the renderings my hand using inks. Eventually you could draw plans and have a computer generate the renderings.
Having a linear design aesthetic if love Art Deco but Art Nouveau is a close second. My search results do indeed sat the 1st home is a 3D rendering of a home int the Nouveau style(AI), the 2nd is an illustration also in the ornate Nouveau style, but created by CGI, the 3rd is the Maison Barillet, an historic Art Nouveau villa located in Orleans, France. the las home is an authentic Art Nouveau mansion located near Beauvais, France. Once a month, vellohomo-francowho blogs from Argentina, and features a Graphic Miscellany of 350 to over 500 pictures of a wide array of subject matter, both Art Nouveau and Deco buildings included, that are fantastic to view and mostly located in Europe, the real McCoy so to speak. I should mention that with the scenery, buildings, interiors and historical pictures of people, there is a nice smattering of naked male anatomy to view.
I won't jump into the debate of AI vs CGI or real vs. renderings for the first two images; it's obvious that regardless of how they were created, they aren't existing buildings.
The third is classical Art Nouveau; I wish we had more examples of the style here in the US, but it seems the style only really became predominant on this side of the Atlantic in visual arts (prints, paintings, etc.); while some characteristics were included in buildings in the US, it's super rare to find an entire building or residence that has a pure Art Nouveau aesthetic from top to bottom.
Although technically Art Nouveau, the last image is more a collage of Art Nouveau and Chateauesque, then is tossed like a salad with several Victorian elements thrown in for good measure. The house has no establishment date on it, so maybe it was early in the Art Nouveau movement and the style hadn't found it's signature footings yet. I don't dislike it per se, but going out to the realtor's website (its no longer for sale, but the pics are still there!) and looking at the plan, interior, and exterior pictures that focus on the characteristics of the house, it's a bit confusing (see: https://www.leforestier-immobilier.com/en/property/maison-de-maitre/authentic-art-nouveau-house-located-near-beauvais). I don't blame the owners for "renovating" (as opposed to "restoration") as they did an amazing job of leaving most - if not all - original features; it was just the way the house was designed.
I'm certainly not opposed to mixing architectural styles and adore Art Nouveau; as the early lead in the nascent Arts & Crafts movement of Europe and predecessor to Art Deco and Streamline Moderne, the curves and arabesques that characterize the style are the pinnacle of blending organic, natural shapes and themes into architecture. However, in this case, it appears the house was designed specifically to equally feature characteristics of each of it's three distinct styles, making it a bit of a confusing mish-mash of everything - like making a dinner of leftovers and calling it a "smorgasbord."
I guess I'm just one of those old farts that (when it comes to architectural styles) I just wanna yell, "pick a lane!" 😁
In looking at the im. ages, not being fully-versed in the architectural styles, I would suspect the image is "an image". The second image, a "rendering". The details are very good, but the placement and types of trees in relation to the dwelling do not seem doable in a normal construction aspect of things, to me.
The third is obviously AI-generated. Reason? The lighting of the building does not look accurate and like those of many AI-generated images I have seen. Very similar to the AI-generated videos of "Mid-Century Modern Life" (with year-approppriate upscale music in the background) on YouTube. The OTHER thing is "lack of fine detail", as if everything is in a more soft-focus realm of things.
The last two images, I'm not sure, but suspect they are not AI-generated. Maybe CGI or real photographs taken at specific times of day to get the lighting correct.
In more recent times, it appears that the "renderings" I have seen are more "ideas" than not. No real indication of how things will end up looking when finished, just "a dream" of what will come. What seems to me, to be more "impressionistic" than high-definition art. In one specific case of a new home for a high-level car dealership complex, when I started looking at the published site plan, there were NO wide streets to allow the large freight trucks to drive on or the warehouses they would serve for the dealership to operate. Much less easy-to-navigate streets for the customers to get to the service areas! As if the architects had NO idea of these things or their necessity! ALL they were doing is drawing lines that looked good to THEM, on paper, and any investors. Period. But after being around car dealerships for decades, I KNEW about these things, but apparently the architects (many building upgrades, expansions, and new construction) did not. Just MY observations.
+ A Torino abbiamo molti edifici in Stile Liberty, art nouveau italiano. I suoi fautori e Torino furono: Bernazzo, D’Aronco, Fenoglio, Gussoni, Mazzucoteilli, Sommaruga, Vivarelli e Carlo Bugatti (padre del carrozziere Ettore e dell’ebanista Rembrandt) 1902 Prima Exposizione Internationale d’Arte Decrotiva Moderna e 1911 Exposizione Internationale dell’Industria e del Lavoro erano luoghi importanti per espore lo Stile Liberty.
What's the basic difference?
ReplyDeleteCGI stands for "computer generated imagery". It uses computers to create pictures, including moving pictures, but the artist is still in full detailed control of the result. The artist uses the computer program as a tool, the same way a traditional artist uses a paintbrush or a stop-motion animator uses poseable models. The human creator does all the work of determining what the imagery will look like, and the quality of the result depends on that creator's talent. Most movie special effects for several decades have been done with CGI. Jurassic Park is an example of high-quality CGI effects.
"AI" or "artificial intelligence" (though there is no actual intelligence involved) creates text or imagery from brief written prompts. The person who wrote the prompt has no control over the details of what the machine produces, and the appearance of the result is unrelated to any talent the prompt writer has. The machine is just putting words or pixels together in patterns based on the vast amount of text and imagery that was plagiarized to "train" it. This is why, at least in the US, "AI"-generated text and images cannot be copyrighted. Copyright law exists to protect the rights of a person over what he created, but "AI"-generated material was not created by anyone, it's just a mish-mash of bits and pieces from earlier works which can't be identified from the final result.
They really are completely different. A CGI image of a person would not have a six-fingered hand unless the person who made it consciously intended it to have that -- just as with a drawing. "AI" images constantly include those kinds of errors because they're created by a machine that doesn't know what it's doing (only a conscious entity can "know" things), not by a person.
Infidel - Thank you for the clarification.
DeleteAgree with the first comment. As a former Architect I'm familiar with "architectural renderings" - pretty sure the first two are renderings because because of the car and the repetitive landscape elements. and the lack if discordant elements you find in the second two. In the old days you drew the renderings my hand using inks. Eventually you could draw plans and have a computer generate the renderings.
ReplyDeleteHaving a linear design aesthetic if love Art Deco but Art Nouveau is a close second. My search results do indeed sat the 1st home is a 3D rendering of a home int the Nouveau style(AI), the 2nd is an illustration also in the ornate Nouveau style, but created by CGI, the 3rd is the Maison Barillet, an historic Art Nouveau villa located in Orleans, France. the las home is an authentic Art Nouveau mansion located near Beauvais, France.
ReplyDeleteOnce a month, vellohomo-francowho blogs from Argentina, and features a Graphic Miscellany of 350 to over 500 pictures of a wide array of subject matter, both Art Nouveau and Deco buildings included, that are fantastic to view and mostly located in Europe, the real McCoy so to speak. I should mention that with the scenery, buildings, interiors and historical pictures of people, there is a nice smattering of naked male anatomy to view.
I won't jump into the debate of AI vs CGI or real vs. renderings for the first two images; it's obvious that regardless of how they were created, they aren't existing buildings.
ReplyDeleteThe third is classical Art Nouveau; I wish we had more examples of the style here in the US, but it seems the style only really became predominant on this side of the Atlantic in visual arts (prints, paintings, etc.); while some characteristics were included in buildings in the US, it's super rare to find an entire building or residence that has a pure Art Nouveau aesthetic from top to bottom.
Although technically Art Nouveau, the last image is more a collage of Art Nouveau and Chateauesque, then is tossed like a salad with several Victorian elements thrown in for good measure. The house has no establishment date on it, so maybe it was early in the Art Nouveau movement and the style hadn't found it's signature footings yet. I don't dislike it per se, but going out to the realtor's website (its no longer for sale, but the pics are still there!) and looking at the plan, interior, and exterior pictures that focus on the characteristics of the house, it's a bit confusing (see: https://www.leforestier-immobilier.com/en/property/maison-de-maitre/authentic-art-nouveau-house-located-near-beauvais). I don't blame the owners for "renovating" (as opposed to "restoration") as they did an amazing job of leaving most - if not all - original features; it was just the way the house was designed.
I'm certainly not opposed to mixing architectural styles and adore Art Nouveau; as the early lead in the nascent Arts & Crafts movement of Europe and predecessor to Art Deco and Streamline Moderne, the curves and arabesques that characterize the style are the pinnacle of blending organic, natural shapes and themes into architecture. However, in this case, it appears the house was designed specifically to equally feature characteristics of each of it's three distinct styles, making it a bit of a confusing mish-mash of everything - like making a dinner of leftovers and calling it a "smorgasbord."
I guess I'm just one of those old farts that (when it comes to architectural styles) I just wanna yell, "pick a lane!" 😁
RBrysco - Thank you for that link, it was fun taking the tour.
Delete“If you can’t tell, does it matter?” ~ Westworld, HBO
ReplyDeleteINTERESTING comments above! Thanks.
ReplyDeleteIn looking at the im. ages, not being fully-versed in the architectural styles, I would suspect the image is "an image". The second image, a "rendering". The details are very good, but the placement and types of trees in relation to the dwelling do not seem doable in a normal construction aspect of things, to me.
The third is obviously AI-generated. Reason? The lighting of the building does not look accurate and like those of many AI-generated images I have seen. Very similar to the AI-generated videos of "Mid-Century Modern Life" (with year-approppriate upscale music in the background) on YouTube. The OTHER thing is "lack of fine detail", as if everything is in a more soft-focus realm of things.
The last two images, I'm not sure, but suspect they are not AI-generated. Maybe CGI or real photographs taken at specific times of day to get the lighting correct.
In more recent times, it appears that the "renderings" I have seen are more "ideas" than not. No real indication of how things will end up looking when finished, just "a dream" of what will come. What seems to me, to be more "impressionistic" than high-definition art. In one specific case of a new home for a high-level car dealership complex, when I started looking at the published site plan, there were NO wide streets to allow the large freight trucks to drive on or the warehouses they would serve for the dealership to operate. Much less easy-to-navigate streets for the customers to get to the service areas! As if the architects had NO idea of these things or their necessity! ALL they were doing is drawing lines that looked good to THEM, on paper, and any investors. Period. But after being around car dealerships for decades, I KNEW about these things, but apparently the architects (many building upgrades, expansions, and new construction) did not. Just MY observations.
Y'all take care! Thanks, Rick.
Cdadbr - You're welcome.
Delete+ A Torino abbiamo molti edifici in Stile Liberty, art nouveau italiano.
ReplyDeleteI suoi fautori e Torino furono: Bernazzo, D’Aronco, Fenoglio, Gussoni, Mazzucoteilli, Sommaruga, Vivarelli e Carlo Bugatti (padre del carrozziere Ettore e dell’ebanista Rembrandt)
1902 Prima Exposizione Internationale d’Arte Decrotiva Moderna e 1911 Exposizione Internationale dell’Industria e del Lavoro erano luoghi importanti per espore lo Stile Liberty.
Anon@8:50am - Thanks for the background info.
DeleteWith exception to the last one....they all look fake.
ReplyDeleteThe third one is made with a program called Stable Diffusion, an AI program. There is a watermark in the lower right of the image.
ReplyDeletebrine - Thank you for pointing that out.
Delete