April 26, 2026

"Instead of painting live models or photographs, Ms. González uses an A.I. system on that laptop to generate composite digital images."

"These amalgamations are drawn from a combination of baroque portraits, her own sketches and, in her most recent series, catwalk photographs from a fashion show that Hermès invited her to in Paris. Those digital collages, which she calls 'Frankensteins,' serve as the inspiration for her painted portraits. While the models are imaginary, she said, she sometimes sees a trace of her own face in the finished portraits. Not too long ago, she said, the idea of living off these portraits seemed impossible. 'But here we are,' she said. 'It’s like a dream I always had, but times 50.'"

From "How a Pop Star’s Portrait Launched the Career of an Unknown Spanish Artist/Nieves González, a 29-year-old painter, once worked in relative obscurity in Andalusia. Her picture of the British singer Lily Allen changed that" (NYT)(gift link, so you can see the paintings and other things).

15 comments:

Achilles said...

Digital art is actually quite easy and amazing.

It will be printers that need to catch up. Printers that can print the base image that allows humans to edit and manipulate and edit.

More like a 3d printer than current ink or laser based printers.

Wince said...

I’ve done my best artistic work in Colorforms. Perhaps you’ve seen my “Batman’s Torso on the Penguin’s Legs”?

Howard said...

I'm sorry but mixing your paint with a brush is just idiotic. It ruins the brush and it ends up over mixing the paint, which as anyone with serious oil painting skills will tell you causes even the brightest colors to look more dull.

Peachy said...

Digital art - IMO will not impress me. An artist's brush strokes, by an actual hand and mind, do. Using digitized images to paint from, that's done all the time.

Howard said...

That's a great point about printers, Achilles. The toughest thing about making prints of my artwork are getting them to match not only the chroma, hue but the value distribution of the lightness and darkness. This is why most prints look a little flat and lifeless when compared directly with the original.

Peachy said...

Nothing beats an original.

Achilles said...

Howard said...

That's a great point about printers, Achilles. The toughest thing about making prints of my artwork are getting them to match not only the chroma, hue but the value distribution of the lightness and darkness. This is why most prints look a little flat and lifeless when compared directly with the original.

When creating digital characters you get the best bad guys by messing with the chroma and hue and saturation. I don't really know what the words mean but crazy stuff happens when I move the sliders.

I think GIMP is available on windows/mac. It is a free pixel editor which means you are using it only for art and picture generation it isn't good for animations. But it has infinite buttons and sliders to manipulate. At some point turning pictures into vector graph images for animation purposes makes sense though.

I am not sure how to get a printer to do chalks or inks. HP has a chance here to do something cool.

Peachy said...

"For some, Ms. González’s rising star reflects her country’s renewed cultural vibrancy."
The whole of Spain receives credit.

Also
"After getting her master’s in art at Seville, she found herself working in a Huelva cosmetics store and wanted out. She had Italian friends and an ear for language, so she gave Italy a try, working as a nanny for “two demons” in the country’s north before escaping south to Aquila, where she was ultimately offered a job as a dentist’s assistant. “Me,” she said, “who knows nothing about teeth.”

That is wild. How do you get a job in dentistry and you know nothing?

Peachy said...

I am happy for her. She is the real deal.

Peachy said...

Instagram pages and youtube channels - they can sometimes pay off.

Indefinitely Extended Excursion™️ said...

What concerns me most about AI in "art" is that it delegates the creative core—the most fulfilling, enjoyable part—to a machine. For tidying an Excel file? Fine. But when it comes to something we genuinely love and find pleasure in, handing it off feels self-defeating. You can achieve perfection, but it can still be soulless. That’s what separates us from AI.

tommyesq said...

Interesting question on whether she can claim copyright in the paintings. In the US, the AI digital collage would not be protectable, other than to the extent the collage was based on her own sketches that she fed into the AI. Her painting, as a derivative of the public-domain collage, would only be protectible to the extent that she made additions or changes to the collage.

Peachy said...

Again - she is merely using digitized images (with AI help) for inspiration. Most artists work off of an image or photograph of something or someone they want to paint. That the image can now be generated by AI - is not really a big deal.
We all know who Bob Ross is - right? Happy little trees?
Well - he used his own imagination for inspiration. It all comes from somewhere.

Peachy said...

Using AI to generate a digital painting, that you then print - is that real art? Well - perhaps. Is it art anyone would want to buy?

This woman is a painter.

Smilin' Jack said...

The photo in the article shows the real Lily Allen standing next to her painted portrait. She looks attractive and interesting. The portrait does not. Best use of AI here would be to have it smoothly remove the “art” from the photo. Then you would have an excellent portrait. Yes, I know, I should have been an artist….

Post a Comment

Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.