Is AI painting really like some painters exclaiming that "the wolf is coming"? Wang Jia, a researcher and professor at Guangdong Art Museum, believes that every progress in science and technology is an opportunity for human beings to refresh their ideas. Of course, we cannot call it "machine aesthetics", but "algorithm aesthetics" is more appropriate. Instead of adapting to AI painting, the first thing is how to evaluate these paintings. We can look at this emerging field with a stable mind, constantly pursuing the possibility of painting, but often limited to the lack of vision, time and energy. This objective contradiction has puzzled mankind for many years, hasn't it? It is in this respect that AI has broken through the limits of human beings themselves, thus allowing painting analysis to enter a broader vision. In this sense, the new trend of human painting should be how to use artificial intelligence to enter the field of thinking that was once difficult for human beings to reach. If we can re-examine the past art history images through artificial intelligence, and stand on the height of big data to explore more space for the development of painting, why not?

　　 "Artificial Intelligence" and "Art Apprentice"

The Portrait of Edmund de Bellamy, completed by the French art group Obvious with AI, was sold at Christie's auction in New York for an unexpected 430000 dollars, which further aroused great discussion in the art field. Recently, a teacher from Southwest University wrote an article in the Art Daily that from the work of Edmund de Bellamy's Portrait, we can see that AI technology is still in the stage of art apprenticeship in the art field, and still needs human intervention and design calculus. The high auction price is still inseparable from the promoter and operation of the art market. Human art students need to learn knowledge, practice techniques and finally become artists with their own characteristics and independent thoughts under the guidance of instructors in the edification of various art genres and art history, while AI today also needs to self evolve a large number of art images, art history, sociology, bionics and other data input with the help of human instruction intervention, Maybe in the near future, he will become an independent individual machine artist with mature creativity, and will become a super power and reasonable extension of human art creation, so that human art forms can inspire a new direction.

　 Let the collection live in the present

Zhao Chang, a critic, recently wrote in the Fine Arts Daily that when it comes to collecting, many people are confined to collecting for collection. Its most typical performance is to pursue the rapid appreciation of the collection, or even to show off. Although such collection is legal, it can not be blamed. However, in any case, especially in the original sense of collection, it is very superficial to measure the requirements of a real collector. In the final analysis, even if such a collection has happiness, it is short-lived. Once it encounters devaluation, it will be more sad and unable to love itself. Collection, of course, is to "collect", but this does not mean that collections can be shelved. In addition to appreciation and research, real collections sometimes have to make good use of it and use it under the premise of careful protection to make it "live" in the present and serve the current people. Real collection should be subjective and dynamic, and collectors must build a bridge between themselves and the collection. There is no bridge, no interaction. Collections are collections, and collectors are collectors. Such collection for collection is at best just to preserve and increase the value. Once the cultural attribute of collection is removed, the dry collection will become hateful and even uninteresting.