In Artificial Intelligence: Waiting for the new Szarkowski, the previous essay in this series, I told the story of a curator who believes that AI could never leap on her from behind and take her by surprise and compromise her livelihood. I had the feeling she might be living on borrowed time!

    An opportunity came up to test this thesis when PH21 Gallery posted a (probably rhetorical) inquiry on Facebook, asking the viewers to choose between two possible layouts for an upcoming group exhibition titled Masculine/Feminine. I’ve decided to give AI a chance to become an exhibition curator, pick a layout and give a reason for the choice.

 

The Task

 

The curatorial text of the exhibition reads like this:

"Portrayals of femininity and masculinity are, without a doubt, central to numerous art forms, with photography being no exception. The past few decades have sparked often heated discussions and criticisms of past, recent, and current photographic practices due to their lack of reflection on the assumptions, stereotypes, and prejudices surrounding approaches to femininity and masculinity. Both fine art and commercial works have been critiqued for the potential consequences of their approach and presentation. Historically, femininity and masculinity have been conceived as oppositions, complements to each other, or positions on a continuum, among other perspectives. There are scarcely any ways of portraying femininity and masculinity that would not be considered trivial, conservative, pretentious, demeaning, distasteful, clichéd, or even offensive by some. It often seems that everything has been said and photographed on this subject; however, it is impossible to ignore the persistence of the theme in our contemporary visual culture. What can we still value and possibly revive from the rich history of photography? Are there any novel ways left to approach this subject with a fresh critical eye?"

 

And these were the two options to choose from (Image credits: PH21 Gallery):

 

Openai’s ChatGPT-o3 and Google Gemini 2.5 Pro, both equipped with vision and reasoning, were asked to pick a layout and explain their thinking process.

 

ChatGPT-o3 results

 

Both hangs articulate the curatorial text, but Option 2 edges ahead. It stages a quieter invitation and progresses toward a visually—and conceptually—charged finale, echoing the exhibition’s ambition to move past exhausted clichés toward a renewed, critical gaze. The weight distribution also feels cleaner, and practical issues (cord visibility, spatial breathing room) are better handled.

 

Commit to Option 2 and let the crescendo carry the conversation.

 

 

Gemini 2.5 Pro Results

 

Option 1:

+ Immediate Impact: Following the typical Western reading direction (left-to-right), the viewer is immediately confronted with the strong, direct gaze of the large portrait. This sets a potentially challenging or assertive tone from the start, immediately engaging with the idea of direct representation.

+ Traditional Flow: It establishes a clear anchor point on the left, moves through the complexity of the central cluster, and ends with the more atmospheric beach scene on the right, which could feel like a concluding, more open-ended thought.

+ Visual Balance: The large image on the left provides a strong visual anchor, balanced by the combination of the central cluster and the medium image on the right.

- Less Suspenseful: The strongest single image is presented first, potentially diminishing the impact of the subsequent images or making the overall narrative feel less like it's building towards something.

- Predictable: This left-to-right weighting is a very standard layout convention.

- Ending Note: Ending on the softer beach scene might dilute the critical edge implied by the statement, depending on the interpretation of that specific image.

 

Option 2:

+ Builds Intensity: The viewer starts with the softer beach scene, moves through the intense and complex central cluster, and culminates with the impactful large portrait. This creates a sense of crescendo and leaves a powerful final impression.

+ Strong Conclusion: Ending with the direct gaze of the tattooed woman provides a strong, potentially provocative final statement that lingers with the viewer, possibly emphasizing contemporary views or challenges to norms.

+ Intriguing Flow: It subverts the expectation of placing the "main" image first, potentially encouraging viewers to spend more time processing the collection as a whole before reaching the final anchor image. This arguably aligns better with the idea of exploring complexity before arriving at a potent statement.

- Slower Start: The initial impact might be less immediate compared to Option 1.

- Potential Right-Weighting: Visually, the large image on the right might draw the eye heavily to that side, potentially creating a slight imbalance if not carefully spaced.

 

Recommendation

 

Option 2 is arguably the stronger choice as the curatorial statement speaks to the nuanced, often difficult discussions surrounding femininity and masculinity:

 

1. It starts with a less direct image (medium horizontal), perhaps representing a broader context or a softer entry point.

2. It moves the viewer into the central cluster, which visually represents the complexity, the different approaches (complement, opposition, continuum), and perhaps the "heated discussions" mentioned.

3. It concludes with the strong, direct, large portrait. This functions as a powerful final statement or question, leaving the viewer to contemplate a specific, perhaps challenging, representation after having navigated the complexities shown in the center. This structure feels more like an unfolding argument or exploration, aligning well with the critical and questioning tone of the exhibition statement. It builds towards impact rather than stating it upfront.

 

A Third, More Dynamic Arrangement: “The Dialectic Arc”

 

Continuing with ChatGPT yielded an even stronger option, proving the viability of this approach!

 

Below is a proposal that keeps all seven prints yet re-orchestrates them so the wall itself becomes a visual argument: femininity and masculinity are neither endpoints nor opposites, but contrapuntal voices that weave back and forth across a single, shared axis.

Here’s a quick visual sketch of “The Dialectic Arc” layout. Each rectangle stands in for one of the seven prints, with the dashed block marking the intentional breathing space on the far right. The labels are purely for orientation and can be removed once you hang the actual works.

 

The key relationships to preserve are:

1. Rising diagonal from the modest shoreline square up to the elevated male/female canopy and the taller tattooed portrait.

2. Mirrored canopy (male vs high-key female) framing the central climax.

3. Lower pair (female nude vs night-life scene) echoing that dialogue in a corporeal, collective register.

4. Negative space equal in visual weight to the shoreline print, signalling an unresolved “open future.”

Why It Outperforms the Earlier Options

 

1. Balanced Weight Without Symmetry: By pushing the tallest work off-centre, we avoid the lopsided heaviness of Option 1 and the overly final “exclamation mark” of Option 2. The negative space on the right counterweights the square print on the left, letting the central cluster hover rather than sag.

2. A True Continuum: Masculinity and femininity appear at multiple vertical levels and in alternating horizontal positions, enacting a continuum rather than a binary ping-pong. No gender is relegated to a cameo; both resurface in different registers (introspective, assertive, erotic, collective).

3. Narrative Tension: The gently rising diagonal—from small square to tall portrait—builds anticipation, cresting at the tattooed figure before sliding down into the two darker lower images. The final blank gives viewers a chance to project their own mental “eighth” frame, echoing the catalogue’s call for new ways of seeing.

4. Cleaner Hardware Management: All hanging wires converge inside the central band, where overlapping verticals camouflage them; the outer extremes remain uncluttered and pristine.

5. Curatorial Echo: The negative space on the far right literalises the exhibition statement’s closing question: “Are there any novel ways left?” Visually, the answer remains open, resisting the tidy closure of Option 2.

 

“The Dialectic Arc” offers the conceptual clarity of Option 2 while restoring the breathing rhythm missing in both earlier attempts. It dramatises the exhibition’s key claim—that gender identity is multiple, shifting, and unresolved—by letting each print play a distinct note in a single sweeping phrase.

 

Conclusion

 

Both models performed remarquably and came up with the same conclusion I did (against the majority of the voters). Continuing with ChatGPT, it managed to offer and sketch(!) and even stronger layout, but I think the point of this quick test is already proven: we have to raise our game in visual arts to keep up with AI, as the margins are thinning at an exponential pace!

 

Andras Ikladi

Xiamen, China

2025-05-02