Number of the records: 1  

The (theoretical) elephant in the room. Overlooked assumptions in computer vision analysis of art images

  1. 1.
    SYSNO ASEP0582543
    Document TypeJ - Journal Article
    R&D Document TypeJournal Article
    Subsidiary JČlánek ve SCOPUS
    TitleThe (theoretical) elephant in the room. Overlooked assumptions in computer vision analysis of art images
    Author(s) Balbi, Camilla (UDU-I) ORCID
    Calise, A. (IT)
    Number of authors2
    Article number4757
    Source TitleSignata. Annales des sémiotiques - ISSN 2032-9806
    -, č. 14 (2023)
    Number of pages14 s.
    Publication formPrint - P
    Languageeng - English
    CountryBE - Belgium
    Keywordsartificial intelligence ; digital archives ; image ; art ; ideology
    Subject RIVAL - Art, Architecture, Cultural Heritage
    OECD categoryArts, Art history
    Method of publishingOpen access
    Institutional supportUDU-I - RVO:68378033
    EID SCOPUS85180877878
    DOI https://doi.org/10.4000/signata.4757
    AnnotationContemporary computer vision software represents an incredible opportunity for both art history researchers and museum practitioners: it is a tool through which images can be described, organized, studied and shared. In this process—the one in which a computer vision software operates over a database of art history images—there are however a variety of dynamics at play. They have to do with theoretical assumptions, historical categories, technological constraints and ideological stances: a set of premises which calls for a closer methodological survey of the process. We propose an account which uses art theory and visual culture studies to scrutinize the different steps and activities which constitute the computer vision analysis: after all, the study of images has historically been a prerogative of art historians. Our intuition is that art images databases somehow provide a “protected environment” in which to observe how old problems, inherent to the discipline, interact with new problems created by the way we consume and design software. The three levels at which we will try to detect biased stances answer three different questions. Which images are we talking about? Which research questions are we asking? Which linguistic and political logics are at play? In order to do so, we will begin the discussion by debunking the myth of a simple parallelism between these new forms of conceptualizing the real and traditional ones, challenging Manovich’s (1999) use of Panofsky’s symbolic form (1927) as a hermeneutic of the database. We will show instead how the art-database logic somehow sticks to the traditional art historical narrative, while at the same time producing new kinds of biases. Then, we will focus on how this technology actually works, and which kind of art historical thought lays behind the algorithm. Our guess is that the praxis of this software is closer to the connoisseurship than to the art historical research. Thirdly, we will analyze the labeling process through which computer vision software creates descriptive metadata of the images in question, using Mitchell’s critical iconology (1994) account to problematize the strong ideological and political stance behind the image-text relationship. Throughout the discourse, and especially in the final paragraph, we will address the transparency and evaluation standards which need to be defined in order to allow a strict methodological approach to guard and guide the process, at times lacking both in the cultural sector and in the wider visual field. What will emerge is an account of computer vision software and processes which appear to be far from ‘neutral’ or ‘objective’ in their extremely layered functioning, built in the midst of diverse stakeholders’ interests and procedural false steps. Granted that these technologies are however contributing to build the visual culture of our time, we detect a series of overlooked assumptions along the way through the lenses of art theory, hoping to contribute to the design of a clearer view.
    WorkplaceInstitute of Art History
    ContactVeronika Jungmannová, jungmannova@udu.cas.cz, Tel.: 221 183 506 ; Markéta Kratochvílová, kratochvilova@udu.cas.cz, Tel.: 220 303 939
    Year of Publishing2024
    Electronic addresshttps://journals.openedition.org/signata/4757
Number of the records: 1  

  This site uses cookies to make them easier to browse. Learn more about how we use cookies.