I haven’t watched the video, so sorry if this is off the point…
It’s probably just me, but I don’t really see that “AI” makes, or will make, one bit of difference to enthusiast photographers.
Pros, yes, if it cuts into their sales, but people like me? No way! I started taking photos because I like doing it, I like the process.
I think that applies to most really, otherwise why do people take photos of landscapes. etc, that have been photographed perfectly well before? Because they want to do it themselves, because it’s rewarding. Maybe finetuning AI is rewarding too, but I can’t see it ever replacing hobbyist photography… ever!
OK, that’s my grumble of the day out of the system.
The industries affected will be those that are those producing and processing images for markets such as stock photography. Culturally that’s no loss. So much of the images in advertising and today even newspapers are just incredibly bland placeholder illustrations. Ai will have a very easy time replicating those images. It’s unfortunate if people loose their jobs over it but compared to changes that already happened to press photographers etc it seems like a minor thing.
These tools are more relevant to illustrators than photographers. Of course some have issues separating the two but I think photography will win on putting distance between them.
I agree. AI won’t stop people from taking family snapshots, posting from places they visit (not art, but a human aspect to photography), and I don’t think it will stop artists, who create because they want to express something. I think the situation is like how photography did not mean an end of painting.
Absolutely. I take photos because I like the entire process. I like learning about the camera, exposure, composition, techniques and other hardware. I like going on location, I like the process of “designing” the shot and how to get there. I like post processing, I like software and I like the final image (hopefully… theoretically).
So I agree about the pros, but although AI will affect hobbyist photography, it won’t directly do away with it. Will it reduce the demand for actual “pro-shot” images to the point gear sales drop, manufacturers tighten their belts and reduce product offerings, choices narrow and hobbyists don’t have the range of selection we now enjoy? Hope not, but it could happen.
Pretty much what everyone said above. In the end non commercial photographers will not be impacted if they create photographs for themselves(or to give to somebody), and if they don’t, what’s the point? Maybe they should rethink their drive.
There already are better photographers out there with whom I’ll never be able to compete. AI is just another player in the game.
This reminds me of the rifleman’s creed: “There are many like it, but this one is mine.”
When it comes to hobbies, art, and some other fields, you should be proud of what you manage to accomplish, independently of where everyone else is at.
Even within commercial photography few areas will be affected and then primarily the really low grade stuff. Could you imagine ai generated
food photography (ignore fast food chains for a bit)
Generally speaking photography brings value with the relationship to the real thing depicted. This will always remain for many subjects. There can be tension between the photograph and the as-seen and it’s always a cut or a view. But when the anchor to reality is fully pulled up your in a different territory all together.
Yes, I could. Maybe not wedding, though I imagine there will be services like: ‘take a few photos / a short video of yourselves and family/friends, upload to our site, and we’ll deliver your dream wedding video. Huge selection of venues you could never afford’.
Same for event photography: from automatic drones circling a sporting event / concert / political campaign event, AI could generate the reportage, taking literally millions of photos and selecting what they think the masses / the marketing department / campaign team will like most.
Food photography: sure. Who needs more shots of coffee, pizza, sushi, wine… There are millions out there, and the AI can customise them.
Same for portraits: upload a selfie, we’ll take care of the rest. Well, not exactly portraiture, but a portrait-style photo of the customer, retouched by IA.
In China (20% of the world), and other places no doubt, people would have their wedding pics taken in front of painted backdrops. Then when they became wealthier a whole industry of taking couples to the actual locations, including clothes to wear, stylists, complex lighting rigs grew up, as anyone who’s been somewhere with a good view of the Eiffel Tower may have seen in the past decade or so. When I got married in Edinburgh, there was basically a queue of newly weds at key locations, along with shots of the ceremony and reception of course. Tangentially, they’re pretty spots in the city that used to be little known and are now thronged by phone photographers any time of the year thanks, I presume, to instagram. Cities are even modelling their architecture and public spaces to be more instagram friendly. An example of tech having wide ranging and unpredictable effects
This really ought to have a large impact on the porn industry.
All this people who, to larger or greater extent, suffer to produce the same products as has been produced in thousands every year for decades …
(But I guess if motivation to participate is exposure, whether for sexual pleasure or hoped carrier promotion, things may continue, though.)
I don’t understand all this fuss about AI going on in Pixls.us.
You/we are already using AI with our digital edits. The algorithm, computing power, and data are the three basic elements of artificial intelligence and we are exploiting all them three when we use Darktable, Raw Therapy or Gimp (or whatever) to post our over-saturated, local-contrasted, profiled-denoised, tone-equalized, color-zoned, lens-corrected, completely artificially edited photos.
The history of analog photography is also made of faking the original shot (dodge and burn, brush retouch, f.i.).
I think that AI will be a very useful tool for photography professionals.
For me, for my family photos, I prefer to print the most-close-to-my-original-memory image when I cross the threshold of the print shop.
AI will only devalue photography that already has very little value. They closer your photography is to what an AI will produce, including it’s relation to a place, event or other non visual factors, the less value it has.
Photography gains against on other forms of images in it’s relation to an actual situation.
IMO not really. We’re making the decisions, not pushing a “meta-button” and letting machine learning take it from there to completion. Darktable has no AI that I’m aware of. It’s just a tool to do what we tell it.
Also it’s not the AI technology, per se, but rather the use and (potential for) massive misuse of it over the long run, as well as the dishonesty that will inevitably be involved. We can be dishonest now but AI multiples that possibility by orders of magnitude.
100% agreed. I believe people will really “wake up” to its dangers in the next few years. Voice synthesis is almost indistinguishable, video deep fakes are also getting there. Image is still behind in the realism front but otherwise it’s evolving at a scary rate. And this is only what’s public, imagine what governments like the US’s already have behind closed doors.
Not to be a doomer but it’s hard to look at it in a good light given how it’s gonna be misused.
This is a decent article based on Nick Bostrom’s book.