[vph]

This is not a Turing test. Please correct me if I am wrong, but I bet that none of this was drawn by a computer. Most likely, those that were supposedly "drawn by computers" were pictures drawn by humans but applied various type of filtering (e.g. those by the deep learning algorithms).

[Excavator]

Well, yea. It says as much on the page:

"one is painted by a human and another one is generated by artificial intelligence based on a photo and a style of a painter."

I find this to be easily "beatable" by simply judging which one is most likely to have its origin in a photo (vanity, and such) with a fallback on the one with a lot of repeating patterns.

[mannykannot]

I would say it is not a Turing test primarily because it does not involve a dialog between the examiner and the subjects.

I don't think programs written to imitate a craft, or even to learn to imitate a craft from examples, count as AI, no matter how impressive.

[nbrempel]

What about a photograph with filters applied to it? Does that count?

[pqhwan]

Think what would really count as a "visual turing test" is if the computer-generated images were really "generated" by a computer, not rendered from a photo. Still, it's an interesting exercise in how much the rendering can make the photo feel "opinionated"—as if you can sense the painter behind it; that's the criteria I used for choosing, but I got a 7/10.

[vph]

I think you are teasing me, but my answer would be: no, it doesn't count. The Turing test is about "understanding". The filtering of those images has no understanding of what the images are about.