"What's in the picture?"、It seems like a stupid question, doesn't it? For example, the scenery of ○○、Or △'s portrait.、Right?。Oh dear、Is that normal?。
In front of a painting titled "Landscape of ○○"、Are you really looking at it thinking that this is the scenery of that place?。At exhibitions etc.、If you are appreciating the person viewing the painting rather than the painting.、I really don't think so.。Maybe the example isn't appropriate、For example, Van Gogh's "Wheat Field with Crows"。ah、It's a scene with a crow in a wheat field.、There are people who really think that while watching the movie.、I don't think there's even one person.。
It may seem obvious, but in "Wheat Field with Crows"、What you're trying to see isn't a wheat field or crows.、It's "Van Gogh", right?。Set up an easel in the corner of the wheat field、With short hair and googly eyes,、He draws as if he were crazy, slamming his brush against the canvas.、person without ears。The "crow..." you saw、Van Gogh should have been drawn on the edge of the canvas.。And、Weren't you trying to hear the crow in that wheat field?。
Many people、Maybe that's how you look at the picture。That's how I read the pictures.。
happy? especially、That's a perspective that AI can't provide.、I think it's how you read it。If you have text data and image (video) data called ○○ scenery、tie this together、Furthermore, if there is an article like the one I just wrote, read it as well.、It seems possible to explain it plausibly to a third party.。
But、Humans have text data called “○○ scenery”.、Even though the image data is there、Can “read what is not there (data)”。Don’t let AI take everything away、In order to somehow coexist、Let's try to "read pictures"。
