Images being removed.

Unfocussed Mike said

ANDY00 said

Unfocussed Mike said

Parkstone Photography said

Gothic Image said

I'm not sure that I see the problem here.  My understanding is that PP will remove an image that has been reported as possible AI generated, then contact the photographer to ask for a RAW or other proof that the image originated from a real photograph.  Have they not done so in this case?

In some of those images I never claimed to be the original photographer anyway. I never tagged myself as the original photographer. Some of those images as well remained on Purpleport without being removed!

I think you seem to be missing the point completely. My images were removed as PP admin didnt believe I only use Photoshop, to create my edits. They thought I was just using prompts to create an edit which I wasn't.

This is unfortunately the destiny of almost all creative edits; they will be indistinguishable from AI.

Purpleport is doing the best it can with human surveillance. Automated surveillance might be better for your case (might be less likely to flag you as AI) but unless we as purpleport members are prepared to pay a lot more for membership I doubt it is plausible.

I am wondering if there is some sort of tool you can use to make an automatic montage of the layers of your images, which you then upload to a private album with each shot.

Frankly it is not only you who will have to do this, and increasingly I am wondering if there needs to be an "evidence" mechanism that allows extra file assets to be attached to photos that only admin/a team can view, so that people doing creative work can show it.

I would actually really like a mechanism where any photo could have this in a way that _can_ be shown, because sometimes I think it's nice to show your thinking/contact sheet/comedy outtakes only in the context of the original photo. Like a per-photo album. It might help encourage people to post fewer, better photos to their portfolios, knowing the alternates can still be shown. It's been part of an image management system I wrote years ago, as it goes.

Edited by Unfocussed Mike

This is exactly what I said a few weeks back that people did not like, lol. It is becoming impossible to tell, although it does look like most of the image generators online may be adding metadata soon in every image to indicate its origin, which could serve as a checking point to determine if it's completely AI-generated.

Oh, I would not have disagreed with this. Alas, I think AI is going to ruin every trust mechanism it touches.

What would be better is if the major ones agreed to embed some kind of hidden, steganographic pattern that goes beyond metadata and emerged from the AI model itself (rather than added on at the end). But then it would always be possible to train a system *not* to do that.

There will always be ways around anything for those determined enough 

ClickMore 📷 said

If you have a photographer account and then mentioning you were not the photographer on some images on your profile, then you need to open a Photoshop Wizard account to run alongside.

Yeah, I think that's very wise advice. I'll definitely look into doing that, but then I won't be posting work here where somebody couldn't be tagged, which I did in the past.

I have seen other people do that, including myself, and not had work removed.... Maybe this is just a change in the identification process, and creating a PSW account is something I need to do, moving forward. 

We feel your pain, Mr. Parkstone.

HotFridgePhotos said

We feel your pain, Mr. Parkstone.

LOL. Life's a bitch huh...🤣

I'm pretty sure, though that other people on here, that won't be quite so sympathetic. Matter of fact they'll probably like the fact that I've had my images removed.... Oh well. That's their beef, not mine. I won't be losing any sleep over their petty jealousy's.....

Edited by Parkstone Photography

Parkstone Photography said

Gothic Image said

I'm not sure that I see the problem here.  My understanding is that PP will remove an image that has been reported as possible AI generated, then contact the photographer to ask for a RAW or other proof that the image originated from a real photograph.  Have they not done so in this case?

In some of those images I never claimed to be the original photographer anyway. I never tagged myself as the original photographer. Some of those images as well remained on Purpleport without being removed!

I think you seem to be missing the point completely. My images were removed as PP admin didnt believe I only use Photoshop, to create my edits. They thought I was just using prompts to create an edit which I wasn't.

I'm sorry, but I think you've missed my point.  Did Admin remove the images and then ask for proof that they weren't AI?  If so, that's normal behaviour and should be expected.

Photoshop is basically AI in a development stage. It all works by algorithms.

Niek said

Photoshop is basically AI in a development stage. It all works by algorithms.

LMFAO!! YEAH....... OK!!🤣

 Sounds to me like you're the kind of person who's never used Photoshop....🤣

FYI, if you're the kind of person who uses photoshop, you'll know that it takes a long time to do an edit. It's not AI but does have some AI elements to it, you don't necessarily have to access those elements. 

Then again, the person who probably wasn't new to photography thought that creating an image through a camera could never be considered as art..... We've all seen how wrong that person was....

If you do image creation AI, it can take about five minutes if that. 

Edited by Parkstone Photography

Edited by Parkstone Photography

Parkstone Photography said

Niek said

Photoshop is basically AI in a development stage. It all works by algorithms.

LMFAO!! YEAH....... OK!!🤣

Yes it's funny. The irony! It's the way photography is going, you won't be able to tell the difference between an AI image an a photograph soon. As you have found out ;)

Edited by Niek

Niek said

Parkstone Photography said

Niek said

Photoshop is basically AI in a development stage. It all works by algorithms.

LMFAO!! YEAH....... OK!!🤣

Yes it's funny. The irony! It's the way photography is going, you won't be able to tell the difference between an AI image an a photograph soon. As you have found out ;)

Edited by Niek

Are you kidding me?????? It's like the same as trying to tell bread from toast......

Parkstone Photography said

Niek said

Parkstone Photography said

Niek said

Photoshop is basically AI in a development stage. It all works by algorithms.

LMFAO!! YEAH....... OK!!🤣

Yes it's funny. The irony! It's the way photography is going, you won't be able to tell the difference between an AI image an a photograph soon. As you have found out ;)

Edited by Niek

Are you kidding me?????? It's like the same as trying to tell bread from toast......

Or fresh bread from stale bread or Coke from Pepsi or lager from lager. :)

Niek said

Photoshop is basically AI in a development stage. It all works by algorithms.

This statement is technically true to a point. Nearly every tool in Photoshop has an associated algorithm. From the cloning tool to color adjustment tools, they all rely on algorithms with intelligent systems attached. The difference is that these tools rely on human control and are not autonomous.

There seems to be some confusion over how things are.

Let me clarify;

1. An image is reported as suspected AI-generated. 
2. Admin looks, and if they agree, the image is deleted pending evidence that that image is not AI-generated.
3. Failure to share evidence means the image remains deleted.

If an image was challenged and the image has remained deleted, then either evidence was not provided or something else must have failed.

There is no complexity in this process and no algorithms are involved.

As an aside, I am thinking of creating a new service where AI-generated images can be shared. It will have bots to like and comment on the images, and automated awards will be given out for participation in automated competitions. I am just concerned about it being swamped by real people wanting to take photos of other real people and I'm not sure how to keep them out.

Here's the thing: we already have extremely intelligent camera control systems that manage exposure, frame the face, and search and track eyes and faces, among other things. We have flash units that can direct themselves to the optimal position, fake backdrops that look ultra-real, and digital backdrops that can be added in post-production. This is before we get to models with fake tan, fake eyelashes, other fake body parts sometimes, and professional makeup. With all that artificial lighting, backdrop, and control, how much of an image is truly real? The camera alters pixels in the nanoseconds between you pressing the button and the shutter click. i would argue that a retoucher is more involved in the creation of an image than todays straight out the camera photographer :-) but at the end of the day, to me at least its all about the final image, if i like to look at it then -its all good :-) dont get me wrong i understand the images need to have real people in them and i agree with that as if an image is 100% photoshop or AI then its not photography

Edited by ANDY00

ANDY00 said

Niek said

Photoshop is basically AI in a development stage. It all works by algorithms.

This statement is technically true to a point. Nearly every tool in Photoshop has an associated algorithm. From the cloning tool to color adjustment tools, they all rely on algorithms with intelligent systems attached. The difference is that these tools rely on human control and are not autonomous.

Exactly!

Russ Freeman said

There seems to be some confusion over how things are.

Let me clarify;

1. An image is reported as suspected AI-generated. 
2. Admin looks, and if they agree, the image is deleted pending evidence that that image is not AI-generated.
3. Failure to share evidence means the image remains deleted.

If an image was challenged and the image has remained deleted, then either evidence was not provided or something else must have failed.

There is no complexity in this process and no algorithms are involved.

As an aside, I am thinking of creating a new service where AI-generated images can be shared. It will have bots to like and comment on the images, and automated awards will be given out for participation in automated competitions. I am just concerned about it being swamped by real people wanting to take photos of other real people and I'm not sure how to keep them out.

In your Point 3.  I shared proof/evidence within the support ticket that the image I created was not created by AI yet you still not reinstated that image......

Like I said to you as well in that support ticket, I can't be bothered doing that with every image.

If you reinstate that image now, I'll probably keep it on here for about a week and then remove it anyway.

There are better platforms to share my work on where my work will be appreciated and showing proof that I can do, what I do, will be an easier process than doing that on PP

Edited by Parkstone Photography