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

It’s going to be pretty difficult to hold ai back with it leaking into every tool in light room and photoshop and people using phones for shooting, I mean models taking selfies and adding filters reshaping with apps etc is totally fine but photographers no, although retouching never used to be an issue and indeed many including myself made money from it through the years but now it’s all in question, so it’s fine for those that don’t retouch now but banned for those that do 🤣 a very sarcastic view but kinda true really and I do think that will change in future but I’ve said that before

Edited by Retouchguy

KernowPhoto said

Retouchguy said

GPA6 certainly you should ask a model before creating ai with them if it alters the asthetic or style of an image created anyway for sure,

Does your model release not contain words to the effect of:

 'I consent to the digital processing, compositing or distortion of the images, including without restriction any changes or alterations as to colour, size, shape, perspective, context, foreground or background or any other elements the photographer considers appropriate.'

TBH I forget to get them signed more often then not. But that's beside the point as I don't expect a model to read the small print, I'd really rather not do anything with the images that they wouldn't approve of.  Maybe I'm living in the dark ages? 

-sp●●n- said

Silly in that I could not have been any more open about this image, it is a real model, and the image of the model is not actually changed too much, it was captured well and just needed sharpening, a bit of skin smoothing and levels...

three things spoon, 1) just recreate the image using a full body shot.  It wouldn't take long.  2) the model was posing, leaning forward for the shot, people walk upright. I don't think she would ever have walked down a street with that posture and for that reason I don't think it was fair. 3) the background and 1/3rd of the subject were AI - I wouldn't expect to get away with that.  It's a great learning curve for you and everyone else. I'm sure you will produce even better and within the guidelines of PP

Personally not a fan of heavily AI enhanced images - not because I'm against AI use, but because the majority of images using it look really fake and bad. Seen some terrible ones on here also awarded fpi's which I always find strange (In general I mean - not a dig at the author of this thread in any way)
I just think if you want a specific scene - go out there and find it as the image will look 100% better that way imo
Especially certain themes like cities or natural backgrounds

Edited by Jay Harrison Photography

Jay Harrison Photography

Why is it better to go out and find your own backgrounds?

What I am interested in is making an image that looks the way I want it to look.

I am not a "straight out of camera person".

I find this pointless and restricting.

Fine Art has rejected all limitations on making images.

I would agree that if we are talking about photography, then some sort of photographic process should be used at some stage in making an image.

Because unless you are very proficient in AI tools the result usually looks awful. Im not saying all does but the majority I see on this site is very amateur

On location photography is more interesting to me personally than shooting in a studio and then trying to work two images together that usually don't blend nicely
Just my preference though

I don't see any problem with JPea 's way of doing it.

I've tried it once or twice as a learning exercise, but it's not for me - I'm basically a "SOOC" person.

Plenty of room for all types.

Models need to be real people on here - there are other places to show AI "people".

Things like a fantasy or scifi setting for a shoot then yes I could see why AI being used to create half the image would be more suitable
Things like a fake city or town backdrop or even a stately home just seems odd to me when these things are so easily accessible already and would look more natural

If it works, and it can work, then I use it.

The models look great and the theme is a cool idea - however the large black areas are super distracting and don't look right (Under her chin to his shoulder, the weird area which I assume is her glove on his waistcoat and the painted area above her head)

She looks like she has a weird black vortex around her and it clearly shows

If people want to use AI then that's great - all I'm saying is, currently most dont look natural and the real deal will always look better until tools get more refined

I'm not going to defend this as it is what I wanted.

Each to his own.

(The hand is exactly as shot).⁹

That's fair - like I said, its not a dig at the photography. I think the male model looks fantastic, it's just the side the female is on which looks off. But AI tools are not there yet imo

Russ Freeman said

...

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.

I've written a book.

I couldn't do 3 a day.

I'm not sure how much Amazon are restricting that activity.

MidgePhoto said

Russ Freeman said

...

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.

I've written a book.

I couldn't do 3 a day.

I'm not sure how much Amazon are restricting that activity.

I'm sure they are simply restricting it to three per day because they cannot even get close to policing the AI ebook spam. I guess it's the best they can do.

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2023/sep/20/amazon-restricts-authors-from-self-publishing-more-than-three-books-a-day-after-ai-concerns

https://www.pcmag.com/news/amazon-limits-authors-to-self-publishing-3-books-per-day-amid-flood-of

Russ Freeman said

MidgePhoto said

I'm not sure how much Amazon are restricting that activity.

I'm sure they are simply restricting it to three per day because they cannot even get close to policing the AI ebook spam. I guess it's the best they can do.

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2023/sep/20/amazon-restricts-authors-from-self-publishing-more-than-three-books-a-day-after-ai-concerns

https://www.pcmag.com/news/amazon-limits-authors-to-self-publishing-3-books-per-day-amid-flood-of

I think I'd go for 1 per author per quarter.  Even if they are just writing them that's a production rate few can maintain. Hence publishers and the pipeline. Then at least many accounts would be required to flood the zone with crap.

I'd think that the game of spam/counterspam has a way to go yet, and artificial inanity may be recognised by simulated intellects.