Why is a Vermeer painting like a great book written by ChatGPT?
there’s nothing wrong with using technology in the creative process
‘The lens can’t draw a line, only the hand can do that, the artist’s hand and eye … This whole insight about optical aids doesn’t diminish anything; it merely suggests a different story.’
David Hockney
I recently attended a conference for educators, and like most of the conferences I have been attending lately, ChatGPT conversations pop up all over the place, from conference rooms to the hotel bar. Some think it is cheating and will not allow students to use it, while others feel it is a great tool. This made me think about the technologist Johannes Vermeer.
After reading Phillip Steadman’s Vermeer’s Camera, and David Hockney’s Secret Knowledge and finally watching the documentary Tim’s Vermeer, I was convinced that the great Dutch artist, Johannes Vermeer, was not an artist. Vermeer was a technologist. He used the tools available to him to equal and, in most cases, surpass the artist painters who have been taught and practiced for hours toiling, learning, mistaking, and perfecting their craft. Vermeer figured out a way to use mirrors, lighting, and camera obscuras to paint portraits that, even today, look more like photographs than many of the photos used in media advertisements today.
David Hockney had convinced me years ago through his books and YouTube videos proving that Western artists had started using optics, mirrors, and lenses to create living projections in the early fifteenth century. Phillip Steadman approached the subject as a detective, outlining the progression of optic glass development and the reading and distribution of books that helped drive optic technology.
After watching, Tim’s Vermeer documentary, I was 98.7 percent sure that the secret to Vermeer’s painting had been revealed. Tim Jemison is a modern inventor who set out to prove or disprove that an untrained person can make a painting with the quality and style of Vermeer by using the tools and techniques Tim demonstrated. Tim’s version of Vermeer’s The Music Lesson was as good as the original masterpiece. Vermeer’s painting showed no signs of sketches, and using Tim’s method, there was no need to learn how to draw.
If Tim Jenison would continue to produce and sell his paintings using the technique he displayed, would he be considered an artist? Most reasonable people would agree that he is an artist. After all, it is a relatively expensive, long, and painful process, and it does take a certain amount of skill, patience, and planning. There will only be a few people jumping to use his method, which would make his paintings rare. And then there are people around us today who are considered artists who do not know how to paint or draw but use algorithms and digital media to do the heavy lifting for their work.
There are practical reasons I believe Vermeer used optics. Less than thirty-five paintings are attributed to him. According to my research, some of those paintings are not Vermeer’s (that’s another story). I would lower that amount to 20 paintings. If he was a tinkerer, as I suspect, this makes total sense. He may have been a technologist trying different ways to produce paintings and felt no need to make a living by painting portraits, no more than Tim Jemison felt the need to paint for a living, even after painting a masterpiece on his first try.
The size of his paintings suggests that some projection was being used. Using a camera obscura could project a naturally occurring scene onto canvas in a controlled size. Lastly, paintings such as “The Music Lesson.” It shows peculiarities in perspective and lighting that could suggest the use of the lens. Check out the natural detail and unique quality of light in his paintings; there is nothing else you need to know to prove the theory correct.
While the theory about Vermeer’s use of optics is intriguing and backed by some compelling evidence, it remains a point of contention among art historians. There are some who say that if Vermeer actually used these techniques, he was a fraud. Nothing could be further from the truth. Whether Vermeer used such aids or not, it doesn’t take away from the fact that his works are masterpieces of artistry, technique, and observation. It’s like arguing if a modern photograph is less of an art because it’s taken with a high-tech camera. The tool may aid, but the artist’s vision brings the art to life. What about those who use ChatGPT for writing? Well, what about them?
The rules of good writing remain the same. Communication must be understood and geared toward the correct audience, clear, and free of jargon. This is true regardless of how data is produced. Using tools to speed up your job, make it easier, or improve processes is the purpose of most technology. We are too early in AI technology to see the first great human AI writer. She would have to be a great prompt writer. She’d have to be an AI whisperer, something like an AI behaviorist, in tune with the computer through human language in the form of prompts! To follow in her footsteps, humans still must use their creative talent that surpasses computing power. All we have left is to demand good writing, whether done manually, through AI, or a combination of both. Technology is magic; it can transform a tinkerer into a master artist. Let’s see what great new writers ChatGPT will produce, who will write the literary masterpiece equivalent to “The Girl with the Pearl Earring”.
