Listen up: Acclaimed Shakespearean actor immortalized with cutting-edge interactive portrait

GReactor actors have always fascinated artists. I suppose edmund keene He looks wild and devilish, like George Clint's Sir Giles Overreach. Ellen Terry as Lady Macbeth in a green gown saved by John Singer Sargent; and Ruskin Spear's research on oil. Laurence Olivier As Macbeth, who suffers and suffers from guilt. For over a century, it has also been possible to record the voices of leading actors. But what happens when images and sounds are combined?

One answer can be found at an innovative new exhibition. Shakespeare portrait On display at red eight gallerynext to the Royal Exchange on Cornhill in the City of London. The show consists of 10 digital portraits of live actors accompanied by speeches from Shakespeare's plays. It is easiest to explain with an example. As I sat under a large framed statue of Ian McKellen and chatted with the exhibition's creative director, I said: Arsalan Sattari-HicksI noticed that Sir Ian's head was moving from time to time, that his gaze was changing slightly, and that his features expressed different emotions. At one point, I even heard him recite part of “All the world's a stage” from As You Like It with his unique virtuosity. Richard Brierley, the gallery's director, told me: “Usually the portrait is passive and you are active. In this case, the portrait is active and you are passive.”

There it is in the eyes… Portrait of Juliet Stevenson. Photo: Stage block

I would like to qualify this by saying that the changes in the sitter's movements are often so subtle, almost imperceptible, that the viewer can activate the speech by pressing a button. But the overall effect was amazing and I was intrigued by how it was done. I'm told that Sattari-Hicks and a small crew record the sitters in a studio using state-of-the-art cameras, then adjust the images through hours of post-production. The audio text was selected by the actors in collaboration with Shakespeare director Ron Daniels, who curated the final version. Considering the extensive experience of the actors, the process usually takes 1 hour and 20 minutes.

I was struck by the intimacy of the experience. The faces of the actors are shown in close-up, as if they suddenly appeared on the gallery wall. And the text is spoken in a way that further enhances the pervasive calm. Patrick Stewart quotes Henry V's St. Crispin's Day speech and strips away the rhetoric to show a man talking to other men on the eve of battle. He suggests that Crispin's holiday “will be remembered from this day until the end of the war.” Olivier famously let his lines soar skyward in his films, and he did so with understated conviction.

Impressive members… Juliet Stevenson, Derek Jacobi, Ian McKellen, Patrick Stewart, Harriet Walter, Charles Dance. Photo: Stage block

The big question is, what happens next? The ten portraits on display are unique collectibles that will be sold to individuals or organizations. But they're the work of StageBlock, a company co-founded by Sattari-Hicks and Francesco Pierangeli that has ambitious plans for the future. They are already planning to record the second volume of A Portrait of Shakespeare in the new year. They also dream of extending the idea of ​​living portraits to other authors and other cultures, and funneling 10% of the funds raised from introductions and exhibitions into the performing arts.

Given the impressive roster of names at the first exhibition, which also includes David Suchet, Juliet Stevenson, Adrian Lester, Simon Callow, Charles Dance and Frances Barber, there's a good chance the profits will continue. there is. This is a bold and visionary new idea in the digital age, but we hope it doesn't inhibit the talent of individual portraitists. For example, I value the concept of Salvador Dali's paintings. Olivier as Richard III On the walls of the gallery are displayed captivating images of McKellen gazing attentively and seductively.

Source: www.theguardian.com

BBC Presenter Deceived into Using AI-Generated Voice for Advertisement: A Portrait of the Incident

Her voice seemed off, not quite right, and it meandered in unexpected ways.

Viewers familiar with science presenter Liz Bonnin’s Irish accent were puzzled when they received an audio message seemingly from her endorsing a product from a distant location.

It turned out the message was a fake, created by artificial intelligence to mimic Bonnin’s voice. After spotting her image in an online advertisement, Bonnin’s team investigated and found out it was a scam.

Bonin, known for her work on TV shows like Bang Goes The Theory, expressed her discomfort with the imitated voice, which she described as shifting from Irish to Australian to British.

The person behind the failed campaign, Incognito CEO Howard Carter, claimed he had received convincing audio messages from someone posing as Bonin, leading him to believe it was the real presenter.

The fake Bonin provided contact details and even posed as a representative from the Wildlife Trust charity, negotiating a deal for the advertisement campaign. Carter eventually realized he had been scammed after transferring money and receiving the image for the campaign.

AI experts confirmed that the voice memos were likely artificially generated due to inconsistencies in accent and recitation speed. Bonin warned about the dangers of AI misuse and stressed the importance of caution.

Incognito reported the incident to authorities and issued a statement cautioning others about sophisticated scams involving AI. They apologized to Bonin for any unintended harm caused by the deception.

Neither the BBC nor the Wildlife Trust responded to requests for comments on the incident.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Australia’s ‘Contemporary’ Portrait Award permits art entirely produced by Artificial Intelligence (AI)

A prestigious portrait competition has defended its ability to allow entrants to submit works generated by artificial intelligence, arguing that art should reflect social change rather than being stagnant.

of Brisbane Portrait Award The work, which is worth a top prize of $50,000, is being described as Queensland’s answer to the Archibalds, and selected works will be exhibited at the Brisbane Powerhouse later this year.


This year, the Brisbane Portrait Prize has announced in its entry terms and conditions that as long as the artwork is original and “fully completed and fully owned” by the entrant, it is “completed in whole or in part by generative artificial intelligence.” It states that it will accept submissions that have been submitted. .

A spokesperson for the awards told Guardian Australia that allowing AI submissions acknowledged that the definition of art is not stagnant and is always growing.

“The BPP prides itself on being a contemporary prize, fostering the continued evolution of the art and participating in the conversation around it, while always being interested in what ‘contemporary’ portraiture is.” ” they said.

// Image details

A spokesperson said that in the past, more traditional artists objected to allowing digital and photographic submissions, but it is now generally accepted in the art world.

“As technology continues to adapt and integrate into our society, the use of assistive technology is already paving the way for inclusion for artists with disabilities, and we believe that the use of AI tools and methodologies will continue to grow in this field. “We believe this is the next step,” the spokesperson said.

The previous winner, painter Stephen Tiernan, said: told ABC The creation of AI-generated works still involves an artistic process, and the rule changes ultimately kept the awards modern.

A spokesperson said the contest will determine ownership of works based on the terms of the process used and the AI program behind it. At the time of submission, artists must declare that they have full copyright to their submitted work.

Dr Rita Maturionite, a senior lecturer in law at Macquarie University, said that under Australian copyright law, AIs themselves cannot be authors, but how much of an AI-assisted work of art can humans own in order to claim ownership. He said whether the information would have to be entered remains an open question.

“What is unclear is [is] “How much human contribution is enough for a person to become a writer?” she said. “Is one prompt enough for her, or does she need to create 100 prompts?”

A spokesperson for the Brisbane Portrait Prize said if the artist contributed “sufficient independent intellectual effort” to the creation of the work, it was likely to be protected by copyright.

“An example of someone determining full ownership of content is when an artist uses an AI tool to use elements of some of their own original work, and all original designs belong solely to the artist. This could be the case if we create new artwork,” the spokesperson said.

“We recognize that AI is an evolving field and that our laws often keep pace with technological advances.”

Dr TJ Thomson, Senior Lecturer in RMIT's School of Media and Communication, said: 'Creating an image through a camera and imagining an image through a keyword prompt are completely different experiences that require very different skills. There is,” he said.

// Newsletter details

“If you have some knowledge of photography principles and equipment, you can understand the intent of the photo, but it’s not fair to pit camera-generated images against AI-generated images.”

This is not the first contest to tackle AI entries since the explosion of widely available generative AI applications over the past year.

The National Portrait Gallery’s 2024 National Photographic Portrait Awards allows the use of generative AI tools in the development of submitted photographic works, but does not allow images that are entirely AI-generated.

However, there are strict conditions, such as requiring details of which tools were used and how. If your prompts to AI include someone else’s name, image, work, or creative style, you must obtain their explicit consent.

Thomson said the competition was a messy space with many unanswered questions, but other competitions in the meantime are likely to have similar results.

In November, the World Press Photo Contest announced it would exclude AI-generated entries from its public format after receiving “honest and thoughtful feedback,” and said the ban was “in line with our long-standing values ​​of accuracy and authenticity.” He said that it was something that

German artist Boris Eldagsen said he submitted an AI-generated photo of two women “as cheeky monkeys” to see if there would be a competition for AI images, and he won a prize at Sony last year. He declined the award in the Creative Open category of the World Photography Awards.

“They’re not,” he said last April.

In Sydney last year, a woman claimed to have taken a photo of her son with a mobile phone but lost out in a competition after judges suspected it was generated by AI.

At the NGV Triennial Exhibition to be held in Melbourne this year, Works by Irish artist Kevin Abosch They created “deepfakes of scenes depicting social unrest around the world,” including in Melbourne, and investigated how manipulated information fuels social unrest.

Source: www.theguardian.com