Modern Work Flow, Speedy Results (latest PS, AI)

That would limit the images to here and now, I have one of a star trek transporter, no one can photograph a real person transporting. With double exposure being around since the dawn of the camera, people have been pushing what is normal for the effect, it would not be for this site to limit creativity.

The real question is why bother with the manipulation at all when a similar, likely better, result can be had by simply having AI generate the image from scrath?

Photography has bifurcated into two lanes: the documentarian and the image generator.

for now, the two lanes are traveling, fairly close together. In the near future, with each iteration of (AI) improving, the lanes will split further and further apart.

An interesting exercise and interesting exercise would be to generate an AI image and put it next to this one and then ask people which one they prefer.  Over time, any gap will disappear.  

if we have a fetish to have a specific person in an image, the technology will emerge quickly to put anyone in any situation. That technology is just a few years away.

Edited by Dino.3000

Allesandro B said

Russ Freeman said

-sp●●n- said

Russ Freeman said

It's a wonderful tool, I love it.

I'd rather see the skills of a photographer on a photography site, and creations like this just seem weird in uncanny valley ways. Something about the angles and lighting I can't quite put my eleven fingers on.

I guess a large part of my dislike for such creations is because they fundamentally lack integrity, and that is important to me.

There is skill in part, it is a real model, with real clothes, I would have liked not to have to replace legs, but back when this photo was taken, I had cramped room and a 50mm lens (a guess) to play with and that is all which was captured. The lighting setup was bespoke, model stood in middle of 5 mini lights. Until now this photo was 0...1..'s on a HDD because there was no easy way of bringing it out on how I wanted to present it, I could have kept it black, that is not my thing (first model I shot was that in a studio), I prefer the scene, to transport somewhere else, a creative process, I am not pretending to be anything than an amateur, it is not my day job and grabbing a few hours here and there is all I can afford.

AI can lift my level of output up, it is an enabler, just as when PS appeared, it opened the door to image manipulation which previously was only available to well financed studios. I know this site is about connecting models and photographers, and AI can remove the model which is not what this site is about, however if there is a real model, and real photographer then the tools used to bring capture to final should be welcomed.

If the job is to churn out images for a client at the cheapest rate and fast as possible, then I totally understand why you would want to get the process finished quickly, but when it's for fun it makes no sense to me.

It makes me think that we do need a way to mark such images so people aren't fooled into thinking you and the model were in that scene and took the time to pose, light, and compose it as displayed.

It does remind me that Amazon now restricts self-publishing authors to just three books per day because they are swamped by AI generated content. I bet they wanted to say "three crappy, banal, AI-written books per day" but that would have given their game away.

It's your trainset Russ but why is this any different to compositing prior to ai tools?

Prior to AI tools it was hard work, required skills, was time-consuming, and was often fairly obvious.

Nowadays, anyone can do it in a few minutes, and with almost no skills and effort, and it *at least* looks superficially convincing to such an extent it can be used to deceive.

It's not my trainset, it's our community. As a community, we ought to work together to ensure it has integrity.

Maybe the community is okay with pages of FPIs and comp wins that are merely machine hallucinations, maybe it's okay to allow people to join who claim to be photographers but have only ever used midjourney for five minutes.

Dino.3000 said

The real question is why bother with the manipulation at all when a similar, likely better, result can be had by simply having AI generate the image from scrath?

Photography has bifurcated into two lanes: the documentarian and the image generator.

for now, the two lanes are traveling, fairly close together. In the near future, with each iteration of (AI) improving, the lanes will split further and further apart.

An interesting exercise and interesting exercise would be to generate an AI image and put it next to this one and then ask people which one they prefer.  Over time, any gap will disappear.  

if we have a fetish to have a specific person in an image, the technology will emerge quickly to put anyone in any situation. That technology is just a few years away.

Edited by Dino.3000

I think the idea Dino is something like this, you take an average (at best) image of a model and then use AI to transform it. By doing so it can fall into the 'edited image'catagory rather then the AI generated image category. The problem is, the two overlap and where do you draw the line.  If you look at spoons image, he is not only generating a background but also regenerating the subject in some of his work.  Someone else said 'why not just do a face swap?' well why not?  but it's not-in my view, photography. 

Anything in the final image not created by the photographer should be attributed, even stock backgrounds, IMHO.

Since the dawn of PP someone could take an average photo, then pass it off to a retoucher, then pass the results off as their own, there is no requirement for attribution AFAIK.

There is one space left under "member tags" when you upload an image.
Like "Photographer", "model", etc.

Maybe it should be compulsory to add an "AI" tag? 
"AI Wizard" - MidJourney, etc. - seems unfair to take the credit away from the machine that did the real work   ;)

My view on this is that if those that create A I images and those that look at and admire them are happy then so be it, but I can not see why you would look at an image that never has existed in front of a camera , but I supose it goes with a world were fake news is comon so why not fake images, Does it really mater not to those like me that enjoy photography as a hoby but for the people in the industry who make a living from it I am sure it is a concern, Take that image above what if it was turned into a porn style image !!!  kids at school have

already done it !!! meanwhile peodofiles and scammers have already embraced A I , I am still looking for a new location for a studio but should I bother if all you will need is a laptop and A I , It is certain we can not stop it but it will come with a whole lot of problems they talk about driverless cars yet they can not even fix the potholes, as for speed

yes its faster probably but is it as good ? the difference at present is to enhance an image or create there is a line but it is getting closer.

/

Huw 😁😁😁

J.S. creative images. the porn side of it is very real, one of the websites I use it's a job to keep the images decent now. This is because the site learns from it's users.

Huw said

There is one space left under "member tags" when you upload an image.
Like "Photographer", "model", etc.

Maybe it should be compulsory to add an "AI" tag? 
"AI Wizard" - MidJourney, etc. - seems unfair to take the credit away from the machine that did the real work   ;)

should be one to give credit to the camera processor for all those shooting in auto also then yes ?  sinse technically they are using AI tech

Edited by Retouchguy

-sp●●n- a few days ago, maybe a week, I liked an image of yours, the one with the violin. Then I took a closer look and unliked it, because AI had been applied to the subject. That's my take. The state background changes are acceptable but not subject, even if it is similar.

J.S. creative images.

Is there anybody on PP who does nothing....nothing whatsoever to every photograph they take.

Reality is manipulated in some way or other.

A discussion is needed on what is the point of taking photographs. Personally, reality is low down the list.

GPA6 said

-sp●●n- a few days ago, maybe a week, I liked an image of yours, the one with the violin. Then I took a closer look and unliked it, because AI had been applied to the subject. That's my take. The state background changes are acceptable but not subject, even if it is similar.

I've altered every image I've ever shot, and that's a lot of images, from brightening and sharpening eyes to correcting blemishes, maybe not to the extent of some but still it is altering the original image i took, i clean the backdrop in post correct lighting drop offs etc. 

Retouchguy said

Huw said

There is one space left under "member tags" when you upload an image.
Like "Photographer", "model", etc.

Maybe it should be compulsory to add an "AI" tag? 
"AI Wizard" - MidJourney, etc. - seems unfair to take the credit away from the machine that did the real work   ;)

should be one to give credit to the camera processor for all those shooting in auto also then yes ?  sinse technically they are using AI tech

Edited by Retouchguy

If you think a camera is AI you have a fairly limited understanding of the term.

Sorry to be blunt.