With AI, you can upload an image and base an image off that one, here is an example of AI changing elements of an existing image, the source:
And the AI generated image:
These two were deliberately made similar, however the AI can be told to base it less on the original, and that part is the big can of worms as far as detecting plagiarism. 
A massive can of worms.
Do you believe that AI was not involved in the creation of the first image you posted (I don't)?
If it was involved, what does it matter if the subsequently posted images also involved AI in their production?
FiL said
Do you believe that AI was not involved in the creation of the first image you posted (I don't)?
If it was involved, what does it matter if the subsequently posted images also involved AI in their production?
The source image could be any, it was just chosen as one example, the input does not really matter.
It’s a big can of worms especially for ID plagiarism and forensics.
The creative IP plagiarism is also a big problem, especially once the small changes are impossible to detect. Your examples are really good and valid. I don’t know when the smack down will come but I feel we will see experience it.
Yes, but it's not Ai plagiarising, it's the user. I can give a photo to any photographer and say, 'replicate it' and that's plagiarism as well. It's yet another tool, how it's used is no different to other tools, apart from maybe being easier.
Kirk Schwarz said
Yes, but it's not Ai plagiarising, it's the user. I can give a photo to any photographer and say, 'replicate it' and that's plagiarism as well. It's yet another tool, how it's used is no different to other tools, apart from maybe being easier.
Quite - who owns that original example image?
Gothic Image said
Kirk Schwarz said
Yes, but it's not Ai plagiarising, it's the user. I can give a photo to any photographer and say, 'replicate it' and that's plagiarism as well. It's yet another tool, how it's used is no different to other tools, apart from maybe being easier.
Quite - who owns that original example image?
See
Its a FPI.
-sp●●n- said
FiL said
Do you believe that AI was not involved in the creation of the first image you posted (I don't)?
If it was involved, what does it matter if the subsequently posted images also involved AI in their production?
The source image could be any, it was just chosen as one example, the input does not really matter.
So essentially, you stole an image from another PP member and used it without permission?
Without even crediting them?
Please correct me if I'm wrong...
-sp●●n- said
FiL said
Do you believe that AI was not involved in the creation of the first image you posted (I don't)?
If it was involved, what does it matter if the subsequently posted images also involved AI in their production?
The source image could be any, it was just chosen as one example, the input does not really matter.
I have to ask, particularly given that Tarmoo has indicated that the base image is here on PP, did you have the photographer's permission to use it for your AI experiment?
I do wish people who don't know how to spell words would make the tiny effort of looking them up in the dictionary; it's never been easier. It doubtless seems a trivial crime to some, but my native language is under attack from all sides. One day you will realise that it matters.
Photowallah In all fairness, ageism aside, I suspect the new, and very valid language of today’s youth is no longer your language.
Just as the language of your forefathers should not be yours now.
I bought up the topic of the use of AI in FPI's a short while ago and it didn't go down well. At the time I refused to point out which images I was referring to as it wasn't a finger pointing exercise nor was it an attempt to discredit the work that went into producing those images. This is where it becomes even harder. As is demonstrated here, it is possible to take your own image and upload it to an AI server. the AI will pretty much replicate it and send it back without the flaws. No badly placed lamp posts, lighting fixed, creases removed from clothing etc. It's still art. We are permitted to replace backgrounds here, sometimes that makes up a very large proportion of the image.
My question (at the time) was going to centre around and come back to gear. Do we still need to invest in expensive lenses and cameras? If AI can perfect our images and all we have to do is lay the original model over the top, I could do that with an iPhone. For me, the element of photography I like is capturing a moment in time. That said I still edit my photos and I use the AI tools in LRc and PS freely. I quite like what AI can do but, as was quite rightly pointed out, it is also open for abuse. I personally now think (a couple of months down the line) that there is a place for AI and there is a place for Photographs and there is a place for a blend between them. I think they need to fall into different categories though. Id like to see the stylist, MUA's, models and photographers art and effort separated now from AI. Not in a bad way. I also started a second post a few weeks later about total AI generated instagram accounts and used the one below as a sample. In approx 4 months I have grown my Insta following to a massive 60, this AI generated model has grown to almost 100k in half that time.
It's highly unlikely that AI will stop or even slow down, in the arts sector anyway. Top brains of the world say it's by and far the fastest developing technology the world has ever seen.
GPA6 if you’ve bought a new camera in the last five years, you automatically rely on some kind of ‘AI’ in the final images.
FiL said
Do you believe that AI was not involved in the creation of the first image you posted (I don't)?
If it was involved, what does it matter if the subsequently posted images also involved AI in their production?
I don't think the original image is at all generated. I think it's had effects added. If it is AI then it has come a long way in the last couple of months. Normally if you stare at an image for a minute or two it will become obvious, but I can't see the flaws. I can in the others. The metal work in the banister is the first place I looked and saw it in both immediately.
Kirk Schwarz said
GPA6 if you’ve bought a new camera in the last five years, you automatically rely on some kind of ‘AI’ in the final images.
I'm not sure what that has to do with this subject Kirk?
Kirk Schwarz said
Photowallah In all fairness, ageism aside, I suspect the new, and very valid language of today’s youth is no longer your language.
Just as the language of your forefathers should not be yours now.
I don't think that was quite the point he was making?