Are the morphometric dimensions of artificial drawing out of measure?

In recent years, drawing (and designing) is increasingly done using artificial intelligence applications to the extent that the (theoretical-practical) academic discipline of Drawing can be reformulated in terms of “Artificial Drawing” [AD], remaining faithful to its ancient aesthetologic and scientific mission: “to depict the sensible form of things”. The qualitative morphological mission of drawing, in the era of computational aesthetics, encounters a development of possible morphological measurements well beyond the possibilities of human perception and computation. To qualitatively measure the morphometric dimensions of AD, this contribution addresses primarily the principles of scientific morphography and morphometry of the 19th century in its connections with today’s computational aesthetics, in order to compare them with the possibilities open to AD. It then proposes to map the “black box” of image description algorithms in terms of levels of semiotic analysis of images of Greimassian tradition to measure how today’s systems of “artificial perception” implement a total syncretism of the semiotic dimensions of the “figural” decomposed into the ca-tegory of the “figurative” (abstract vs. iconic) and its neutral term: the “figurable” or “indiscernible” (non-iconic vs. non-figurative). On these semiotic maps, it will be possible to measure the processes of descriptive AD (which starts from the figurative) and generative AD (which moves from the figurable) and which lead to generally measurable outcomes in the dimensions of “asemic writings”. Based on the arguments presented, we can conclusively answer the initial question. The morphome-tric dimensions of the artificial design are indeed measurable to a degree that allows us to provide an appropriate semiotic representation.