Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
three ways evaluation becomes an intrinsic part of the creative process. First, artists
typically exercise evaluation as they experience, study, and find inspiration in the
work of other artists. In practice artists will execute countless micro-evaluations as
part of making aesthetic decisions for works-in-progress. Once completed, artists
evaluate the final product, gaining new insights for the making of the next piece.
If computers are to become artistically creative their need for an evaluative func-
tion will be no less acute. Computer artists have invented a great variety of fe-
cund computational methods for generating aesthetic possibilities and variations.
But computational methods for making aesthetically sound choices among them
have lagged far behind.
This chapter provides specific examples of computational methods for making
aesthetic choices. Longer examples have been selected as good illustrations of a
particular approach, with shorter examples providing variations. Some examples
show where a path is already known to lead, while others are provided as trail heads
worthy of further exploration.
10.1.1 What Do We Mean by Computational Aesthetic Evaluation?
The word
evaluation
is sometimes prone to ambiguous use due to the multiple mean-
ings of the word
value
. For example, a mathematician can be said to evaluate an
expression or formula. An art expert might evaluate a given object for market value
or authenticity. Part of that might involve an evaluation of style and provenance.
For this discussion
aesthetic evaluation
refers to making normative judgements
related to questions of beauty and taste in the arts. It's worth noting that the word
“aesthetics” alone can imply a broader critical contemplation regarding art, nature,
and culture. The topic of aesthetics, including evaluation, goes back at least to Plato
and Aristotle in the West (for a good overview of philosophical aesthetics see Carroll
1999
).
The term
computational aesthetics
has been somewhat instable over time. For
some the term includes both generative and analytic modes, i.e. both the creation
and evaluation of art using a computer. For others it purely refers to the use of com-
puters in making aesthetic judgements. This chapter concentrates on systems for
making normative judgements, and to emphasise this I've used the terms “computa-
tional aesthetic evaluation”, “machine evaluation”, and “computational evaluation”
as synonyms (Hoenig
2005
, Greenfield
2005b
).
Computational aesthetic evaluation includes two related but distinct application
modes. In one mode aesthetic evaluations are expected to simulate, predict, or cater
to human notions of beauty and taste. In the other mode machine evaluation is an
aspect of a meta-aesthetic exploration and usually involves aesthetic standards cre-
ated by software agents in artificial worlds. Such aesthetics typically feel alien and
disconnected from human experience, but can provide insight into all possible aes-
thetics including our own.
