-
The AI thread
AI is amazing, but it should signal an end for at least one element of photography---photographic proof/evidence/identity---whatever you want to call it.
How can an image be so skillfully created that it defies existence?
Crime scene photography admitted in court, photo identity cards/facial recognition, historic events and other breaking news, even medical imagery will soon need to be justly recognized as untrustworthy and obsolete, with nothing (as yet) to replace it.
Traditional photography can certainly be well manipulated, but not to the extent that AI imagery soon will be, if it isn't already.
Also consider that prints also have a domain of sorts, they come from somewhere and are vetted somewhere along the chain of custody. AI imagery has no such bounds that I'm aware of.
I don't know if this topic has been posted elsewhere, but thought I'd open it up for discussion and pondering.
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
Soon AI will certify most IRL things
Trust...me
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
I follow the Instagram account of a B&W Photography magazine (BnW Minimalism) - or at least I did follow that account until two days ago.
They posted an image that was obviously AI-generated and labeled it as a "photograph", which was very much a misrepresentation, and a lot of people noticed this and commented about this. A number of people stated that they felt that the magazine - which is about photography - was no place for AI-generated fauxtography, and I thought so too. I quit following that account after stating that I thought it was disingenuous to present such work as "photography". Whether or not the magazine realized this was a fake photo or not is unclear, but what is becoming apparent is that this technology is starting to leak into places once occupied only by "real" photography (including digital, to be fair) and its going to be difficult to know which is which going forward.
Part of me doesn't care what is happening with the introduction of this technology, since I will happily continue making work in the way that makes me happy, and if I do so only in my personal bubble, away from the eyes of others - then so be it. But I also recognize the damage AI is starting to inflict on the "art-making" community. I can't help but feel like this is the laziest tool ever thrust into the hands of wannabe "artists" whose efforts to craft imagery are no more than a few lines of text prompt, while the machine does all the work for them. We will always find new ways to amuse ourselves to death.
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
4 Men and a naked woman
I did not subscribe
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
Nothing will change with respect to photography per se. AI is no more photography than AI-generated fake news will be actual reporting. Any gallery or museum venue which displays it - and no doubt the sheer idiotic novelty of it will inevitably lead to that, if only temporarily as the usual fad nonsense - should be snubbed and boycotted. It's a downward spiral.
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
So much hand wringing. This sounds like people read a PetaPixel article and become so alarmed the fight or flight response kicked in. People need to take a deep breath and give the issue serious thought rather than just blurt out the first thing that pops into their head. One question to ask is whether this development will impact your photography, and, if so, how. If it doesn't impact your photography, then carry on. I have determined that it won't affect my photography, which I do for my own pleasure, so my panties are not in a bunch.
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
faberryman
So much hand wringing. This sounds like people read a PetaPixel article and become so alarmed the fight or flight response kicked in. People need to take a deep breath and give the issue serious thought rather than just blurt out the first thing that pops into their head. One question to ask is whether this development will impact your photography, and, if so, how. If it doesn't impact your photography, then carry on. I have determined that it won't affect my photography, which I do for my own pleasure, so my panties are not in a bunch.
It will definitely impact how I look at photos. It has drained the pleasure of looking at many photos because I suspect they might be AI.
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
faberryman
So much hand wringing. This sounds like people read a PetaPixel article and become so alarmed the fight or flight response kicked in. People need to take a deep breath and give the issue serious thought rather than just blurt out the first thing that pops into their head. One question to ask is whether this development will impact your photography, and, if so, how. If it doesn't impact your photography, then carry on. I have determined that it won't affect my photography, which I do for my own pleasure, so my panties are not in a bunch.
Classic; bravo!
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
Watching 'The History of Secret Societies'
It goes way back in prehistory
all lies
https://www.britannica.com/topic/secret-society
and relates to art and power
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
faberryman
So much hand wringing. This sounds like people read a PetaPixel article and become so alarmed the fight or flight response kicked in. People need to take a deep breath and give the issue serious thought rather than just blurt out the first thing that pops into their head. One question to ask is whether this development will impact your photography, and, if so, how. If it doesn't impact your photography, then carry on. I have determined that it won't affect my photography, which I do for my own pleasure, so my panties are not in a bunch.
If you are not paying attention to what is happening in the world of image making, you will be caught by surprise one day, and it will not be a pleasant surprise. I see no harm in drawing attention to the fact that the publishing of imagery is now complicated by the fact that it is increasingly more difficult to tell a genuine photograph from an artificially created image. I suspect I have given this matter much more "serious thought" than you ever will. That doesn't mean I have my "panties in a bunch". As I stated, this doesn't affect what I do in my own creative life, but it IS a subject that warrants examination.
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Pieter
It will definitely impact how I look at photos. It has drained the pleasure of looking at many photos because I suspect they might be AI.
Why? Sounds like your mind is messing with you.
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
I'm a lot more worried about my income than photography.
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
paulbarden
If you are not paying attention to what is happening in the world of image making, you will be caught by surprise one day, and it will not be a pleasant surprise. I see no harm in drawing attention to the fact that the publishing of imagery is now complicated by the fact that it is increasingly more difficult to tell a genuine photograph from an artificially created image. I suspect I have given this matter much more "serious thought" than you ever will. That doesn't mean I have my "panties in a bunch". As I stated, this doesn't affect what I do in my own creative life, but it IS a subject that warrants examination.
Have you ever done the drive-thru at a fast food joint, driven up to the menu and speaker box, looked over the choices, ordered, say, a hamburger, picked up your order at the window, driven back around to the menu and speaker box, and compared the hamburger shown on the menu and the hamburger in your bag? AI in photography is just a variation on a theme that has been going on since Hippolyte Bayard debuted Self Portrait of a Drowned Man in 1839.
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
As I understand it AI created work doesn't or can't have copyright, so it is going to have some serious limitations if you want to earn a living that way. As per usual it seems like an idea that will take the living from many thousands of people and put that money in the pockets of a very few.
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
I think Ai will give people a greater appreciation of traditional silver based photography
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
Here's an idea...
Nikon, Canon, Sony, Fuji, etc.. will become root level encryption certificate issuing authorities. Every 1-3 years you will have to pay and re-enroll your digital camera with a fresh certificate. Every camera image can then verify as an authentic digital photograph made during the cert period. (not ai)
Adobe, and any nonexistent competitors can do likewise and you'll have to pay them anually as well to prove you edited the images their software makes and it will carry the data from your camera maker's cert into the jpeg or secure-jpeg metadata.
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
faberryman
Why? Sounds like your mind is messing with you.
No. It is that I can no longer have any faith that the image I am looking at is not an AI illustration.
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
Here's what worries me.
Unscrupulous actors can use AI to bend imagery for their own end.
Health care institutions can make convincing AI valid arguments for otherwise unnecessary treatments, bilking Medicare among other unsavory outcomes.
How many offers for "free" covid test kits from a never ending variety of suppliers have you received lately? Yeah, there are bad actors in the health care biz.
What about at a race track? A photo finish could be legit---or it could be AI generated---it's already in digital format.
Racetracks are all run by ex-Eagle scouts, right?
Or political races influenced by AI generated proof of misdeeds? This swings both ways. Both Fang Fang and Stormy can certainly be AI'd into convincing liasons and who would be in a position to refute that?
More diabolical, what about photos admitted as evidence? If an entire department or DA's office was crooked, what would guarantee photos admitted as evidence were un-AI'd?
AI is already used to illustrate the physical movement of vehicles/suspects during an incident for juries, so officers of the court are well aware of the opportunities especially during high profile trials where political points are to be made.
What about World War Three? Manufacturing justification for a war when none exists has been part of History for centuries. Imagine the possibilities with AI? That is perhaps the scariest of all.
The issue I see is that in such cases, photography has long been in the service of providing reliable answers. With AI, the reliability part flies out the window.
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
faberryman
Have you ever done the drive-thru at a fast food joint, driven up to the menu and speaker box, looked over the choices, ordered, say, a hamburger, picked up your order at the window, driven back around to the menu and speaker box, and compared the hamburger shown on the menu and the hamburger in your bag? AI in photography is just a variation on a theme that has been going on since Hippolyte Bayard debuted Self Portrait of a Drowned Man in 1839.
You'll need to expand on your drive-through example. The image in the menu is an image of a real burger--although it could be an illustration, styled and retouched to perfection. The smashed, oozing object wrapped in paper you receive is still a burger made with the same ingredients as that perfect burger. AI doesn't necessarily reflect any real things or any reality at all.
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jp
Here's an idea...
Nikon, Canon, Sony, Fuji, etc.. will become root level encryption certificate issuing authorities. Every 1-3 years you will have to pay and re-enroll your digital camera with a fresh certificate. Every camera image can then verify as an authentic digital photograph made during the cert period. (not ai)
Adobe, and any nonexistent competitors can do likewise and you'll have to pay them anually as well to prove you edited the images their software makes and it will carry the data from your camera maker's cert into the jpeg or secure-jpeg metadata.
Too difficult. What would stop an AI image from just picking up such certificates and inserting them into the images created? Better yet, AI software should have to embed a token or watermark indicating the image was created with AI.
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
Soon no physical photo or Digi needed
AI will send it to your brain
We have been able to that for 2 decades
Perhaps AI will enhance my already vivid dream
We also may all be the same 'creature' as we just think we are autonomous
Bugs
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Pieter
No. It is that I can no longer have any faith that the image I am looking at is not an AI illustration.
And that just happened a couple of months ago when AI image generators became a hot topic? Before that you were good to go? No problem with digital images and programs like Photoshop?
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
I can't help but feel like this is the laziest tool ever thrust into the hands of wannabe "artists" whose efforts to craft imagery are no more than a few lines of text prompt, while the machine does all the work for them. We will always find new ways to amuse ourselves to death.[/QUOTE]
Ahhhhhh, this is painters were saying about photography 100+ years ago... ;)
Steve K
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
Typing a request for an image to the AI machine is no different than pressing a button on the camera. I think it takes even more thought and is more time consuming.
Like somehow you 'own' the camera's image, or you somehow created it? Nonsense. They are both machines with a user.
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
John Kasaian
What about at a race track? A photo finish could be legit---or it could be AI generated---
But I don't go to the races, so I don't care :)
Quote:
Or political races influenced by AI generated proof of misdeeds? This swings both ways.
But both sides have been lying to the voters for generations. People vote for one side or the other seemingly regardless of what the truth is.
Quote:
...photography has long been in the service of providing reliable answers.
But we have had photoshop for what, 25-30 years? I can still take just about anyones face and put it on someone elses body in my trusty PS7, and do it well enough that most everyone I show it to is amazed.
I don't know, perhaps my honey bourbon has taken the edge off, I'm just not concerned right now.
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
AI leaves room for those of us with images that are less than perfect.
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
AI has nothing to do with the pictures I make. They take the form of objects bearing marks as a consequence of being struck by light. The well known process used was invented in, and works perfectly in, a world without electricity.
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
faberryman
Have you ever done the drive-thru at a fast food joint, driven up to the menu and speaker box, looked over the choices, ordered, say, a hamburger, picked up your order at the window, driven back around to the menu and speaker box, and compared the hamburger shown on the menu and the hamburger in your bag? AI in photography is just a variation on a theme that has been going on since Hippolyte Bayard debuted Self Portrait of a Drowned Man in 1839.
we live in a post truth world
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jnantz
we live in a post truth world
It has always been that way though.
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
Humans are tribes of 100, any excess is forced out
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
paulbarden
I follow the Instagram account of a B&W Photography magazine (
BnW Minimalism) - or at least I did follow that account until two days ago.
They posted an image that was obviously AI-generated and labeled it as a "photograph", which was very much a misrepresentation, and a lot of people noticed this and commented about this. A number of people stated that they felt that the magazine - which is about
photography - was no place for AI-generated fauxtography, and I thought so too. I quit following that account after stating that I thought it was disingenuous to present such work as "photography". Whether or not the magazine realized this was a fake photo or not is unclear, but what is becoming apparent is that this technology is starting to leak into places once occupied only by "real" photography (including digital, to be fair) and its going to be difficult to know which is which going forward.
Part of me doesn't care what is happening with the introduction of this technology, since I will happily continue making work in the way that makes me happy, and if I do so only in my personal bubble, away from the eyes of others - then so be it. But I also recognize the damage AI is starting to inflict on the "art-making" community. I can't help but feel like this is the
laziest tool ever thrust into the hands of wannabe "artists" whose efforts to craft imagery are no more than a few lines of text prompt, while the machine does
all the work for them. We will always find new ways to amuse ourselves to death.
I've been complaining for years about Photoshop arguing that its editing and cloning capability will diminish photographer's desire to photograph since you need artistic skill to do PS right and why bother shooting? AI takes it to the next step. Why get up at 4am to catch the sunrise shot when any jerk can make beautiful pictures sitting in their armchair in their pajamas at 10am sipping tea?
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
Photography with a camera will be left for photojournalists and regular people just shooting their vacations, parties and family shots, probably with their cellphones.
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jp
Here's an idea...
Nikon, Canon, Sony, Fuji, etc.. will become root level encryption certificate issuing authorities. Every 1-3 years you will have to pay and re-enroll your digital camera with a fresh certificate. Every camera image can then verify as an authentic digital photograph made during the cert period. (not ai)
Adobe, and any nonexistent competitors can do likewise and you'll have to pay them anually as well to prove you edited the images their software makes and it will carry the data from your camera maker's cert into the jpeg or secure-jpeg metadata.
What's to stop Adobe from adding AI to Photoshop? At what point does a photo become fake? Although I've taken static for years, I've always complained about cloning destroying traditional photography. AI is going to put another nail in the coffin.
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
John Kasaian
Here's what worries me.
Unscrupulous actors can use AI to bend imagery for their own end.
Health care institutions can make convincing AI valid arguments for otherwise unnecessary treatments, bilking Medicare among other unsavory outcomes.
How many offers for "free" covid test kits from a never ending variety of suppliers have you received lately? Yeah, there are bad actors in the health care biz.
What about at a race track? A photo finish could be legit---or it could be AI generated---it's already in digital format.
Racetracks are all run by ex-Eagle scouts, right?
Or political races influenced by AI generated proof of misdeeds? This swings both ways. Both Fang Fang and Stormy can certainly be AI'd into convincing liasons and who would be in a position to refute that?
More diabolical, what about photos admitted as evidence? If an entire department or DA's office was crooked, what would guarantee photos admitted as evidence were un-AI'd?
AI is already used to illustrate the physical movement of vehicles/suspects during an incident for juries, so officers of the court are well aware of the opportunities especially during high profile trials where political points are to be made.
What about World War Three? Manufacturing justification for a war when none exists has been part of History for centuries. Imagine the possibilities with AI? That is perhaps the scariest of all.
The issue I see is that in such cases, photography has long been in the service of providing reliable answers. With AI, the reliability part flies out the window.
All those things are already a problem with Photoshop. AI will make it worse and courts will have to be especially vigilant getting testimony from photographers before allowing photos to be used as evidence. Unfortunately, the public is already being lied too with photography. That will continue and become worse.
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
Post Truth Era
This too will pass
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
paulbarden
This message has been deleted by paulbarden.
Wise move. I realized before you did that responding to some posters unnecessarily adds more flat spots to my head. I've enough of those already. :)
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
So much catastrophic thinking, which is generally considered a cognitive distortion, and if serious enough, a personality disorder. Get over AI and carry on with your photography. It is what it is. There is no need to sell your cameras and decommission your darkroom (or, if you are not a real photographer, unplug your scanner). The postage meter didn't deal the death blow to philately. It was pretty much dead already. Yet it lives on in internet forums where you can read a lot of catastrophic thinking about how the Forever Stamp spells doom for stamp collecting. Everyone take a deep breath. Unless you think it is more fun to hyperventilate. Perhaps it brings meaning to your life.
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alan Klein
What's to stop Adobe from adding AI to Photoshop? At what point does a photo become fake? Although I've taken static for years, I've always complained about cloning destroying traditional photography. AI is going to put another nail in the coffin.
I welcome AI for finding objects and people in my photos with lightroom. Google does it very well in Google Photos. Searching for places, people, objects, colors, etc...
A photo being signed by Adobe could have the metadata signed indicated certain types of editing took place.
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
For images where a chain of custody is required - legal, medical, etc. - we have digital signatures. This is what blockchain was intended to do before cryptocurrency took all the attention. Whether this will make it down to commodity cell phones - maybe not.
My wife is an artist, and has been delving into AI images a lot. The effort to use a prompt to get exactly what is required is non-trivial. What she finds most interesting is the blending function, where she can supply her own artwork and photographs. The result is a composite without significant outside contribution. It still takes a lot of iterations to match the planned visualization. At least these should meet the US Copyright Office requirement for significant human authorship!
I do think we have finally developed tools that can really fool most people most of the time. It all started with photographs of fairies at the bottom of the garden.
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Michael R
It has always been that way though.
I know, and it matters as little now as it did then.
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
So, Mr. Can...when the "post truth" era does pass, as all things indeed must...does this equate to a double-negative - and thus a "new truth" era? Hmmm...and what might that look like :confused:
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...=pocket-newtab
We evidently need AI to determine if a photo is generated by AI...
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
John Layton
So, Mr. Can...when the "post truth" era does pass, as all things indeed must...does this equate to a double-negative - and thus a "new truth" era? Hmmm...and what might that look like :confused:
Sounds like it portends to newspeak?
Sort of like modern in no longer modern but vintage stuff baby boomers parents had. Or if AA was modern, most of his students have passed on from old age.
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
Some thoughts on Artificial Intelligence (AI):
Having spent a lifetime in IT starting at the machine level in 1966 all I can say is that the desire of AI to create a sentient being will never happen. Sentient beings are based on life as we know it. "Intelligence" crafted in silicone ie, the transistor in integrated circuits is only a way of processing huge amounts of data to recognize patterns that can be applied to current and future problems. No matter how many concurrent processors are involved they all use the original Von Neyman (spelling ?) architecture that implies a series of steps processed in a linear fashion. Until Quantum computing is practically realized a sentient being must have the ability to truly parallel process a problem. This extremely hard to do from a programming point of view.
I think this applies to Photography as well as most disciplines involving humans. AI will not be able to really create something completely new.
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
linhofbiker
Some thoughts on Artificial Intelligence (AI):
Having spent a lifetime in IT starting at the machine level in 1966 all I can say is that the desire of AI to create a sentient being will never happen. Sentient beings are based on life as we know it. "Intelligence" crafted in silicone ie, the transistor in integrated circuits is only a way of processing huge amounts of data to recognize patterns that can be applied to current and future problems. No matter how many concurrent processors are involved they all use the original Von Neyman (spelling ?) architecture that implies a series of steps processed in a linear fashion. Until Quantum computing is practically realized a sentient being must have the ability to truly parallel process a problem. This extremely hard to do from a programming point of view.
I think this applies to Photography as well as most disciplines involving humans. AI will not be able to really create something completely new.
Neither current digital computers nor future quantum computers have a soul, heart, moral compass, or emotions so they can never "think" as a human does. The most they'll be able to do is make decisions based on what some 27-year-old single geek living in his parent's basement decides when he writes the software. I don't think we should leave the red button in his hands.
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
The problem is not Artificial Intelligence , but Artificial Stupidity.
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Per Madsen
The problem is not Artificial Intelligence , but Artificial Stupidity.
Actually, the largest problem is natural, organic stupidity. The population of this planet has that in spades. :)
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
AI tech will only be doing what it is programmed to do - replace foolish humans, and do foolish things by itself. It will be interesting to see what happens when it is asked to take a "selfie" of itself.
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
John Kasaian
AI is amazing, but it should signal an end for at least one element of photography---photographic proof/evidence/identity---whatever you want to call it.
How can an image be so skillfully created that it defies existence?
Crime scene photography admitted in court, photo identity cards/facial recognition, historic events and other breaking news, even medical imagery will soon need to be justly recognized as untrustworthy and obsolete, with nothing (as yet) to replace it.
Traditional photography can certainly be well manipulated, but not to the extent that AI imagery soon will be, if it isn't already.
Also consider that prints also have a domain of sorts, they come from somewhere and are vetted somewhere along the chain of custody. AI imagery has no such bounds that I'm aware of.
I don't know if this topic has been posted elsewhere, but thought I'd open it up for discussion and pondering.
hi John
the internet already paved the way for non factual "stuff" to be unvetted and passed off as truth, if it happens with photography, sh&t floats and all that. most people lack common sense, the Dunning-Kruger Effect is pretty much where it's at.
the movie "idiocracy" pretty much is where we're going if we make it through the 2030s...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alan Klein
I've been complaining for years about Photoshop arguing that its editing and cloning capability will diminish photographer's desire to photograph since you need artistic skill to do PS right and why bother shooting? AI takes it to the next step. Why get up at 4am to catch the sunrise shot when any jerk can make beautiful pictures sitting in their armchair in their pajamas at 10am sipping tea?
sounds like the same old lame digital versus analog argument to me, "so and so is less of a photographer because they don't use film" or "so and so is less of a photographer because a lab develops and prints their negatives" or "that person scans their film, what a hack"
someone is a jerk for not wanting to waste their time at 4am, who cares if it makes someone happy, and it doesn't hurt someone why not.. if YOU want to get up at 4am you should but don't call someone a jerk who would rather sleep, cause it really doesn't matter, and it has nothing to do with authenticity. I lost my desire to use a camera 3-4 years ago, does that make me less of a photographer? regarding how PS has tainted photography, photography has never been pure, it's never been about reality or the truth and it's too bad people keep trying to make it into something that it never was. even "straight" photographs lies it's a$$ off and people would be lying if they said that's not true.
-
Re: What's going to become of photography?
Yup. AI is dangerous, but not to artforms.
It might also be worthwhile to point out that you get up at 4am because you want to make that photograph that way. Nobody else gives a rat’s ass about your 4am sunrise picture, AI or no AI, so you’d better know why you take pictures. If it’s not “photography for the joy of it” (to quote the great Freeman Patterson), do something else.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jnantz
hi John
the internet already paved the way for non factual "stuff" to be unvetted and passed off as truth, if it happens with photography, sh&t floats and all that. most people lack common sense, the Dunning-Kruger Effect is pretty much where it's at.
the movie "idiocracy" pretty much is where we're going if we make it through the 2030s...
sounds like the same old lame digital versus analog argument to me, "so and so is less of a photographer because they don't use film" or "so and so is less of a photographer because a lab develops and prints their negatives" or "that person scans their film, what a hack"
someone is a jerk for not wanting to waste their time at 4am, who cares if it makes someone happy, and it doesn't hurt someone why not.. if YOU want to get up at 4am you should but don't call someone a jerk who would rather sleep, cause it really doesn't matter, and it has nothing to do with authenticity. I lost my desire to use a camera 3-4 years ago, does that make me less of a photographer? regarding how PS has tainted photography, photography has never been pure, it's never been about reality or the truth and it's too bad people keep trying to make it into something that it never was. even "straight" photographs lies it's a$$ off and people would be lying if they said that's not true.