no type of photography requires a camera. and film photograph has been photo illustration since the 1840s. it's no different, just a new crop of cranky people who don't like what photography has become..Originally Posted by ic-racer
no type of photography requires a camera. and film photograph has been photo illustration since the 1840s. it's no different, just a new crop of cranky people who don't like what photography has become..
I hope you didn't buy it at $60,000. I'm waiting for the Velvia 50 4x5 in my freezer to go to $16,000. Of course, by then, the question will be did AI leapfrog it?
Flickr Home Page: https://www.flickr.com/photos/alanklein2000/albums
I guess your film might be a good investment, but IDK the chemistry will change and it might be difficult to develop a full color diapositive (unless you are Harry Dean Anderson or his brother from another mother), and who knows, the terrestrial baseline ambient radiation might have already done it's work and exposed your plates by that time (the freezer probably doesn't help much and is just a $sink)
.... LOL I think Philip K DIck wrote about this back in 1971.
have fun with your film, I love cross processing it, sometimes they look like orotones (without the banana oil and gold ) which are kind of fun.
Alexa is the first thing you want to pull the batteries from. One more nag. I have live cats for that kind of thing.
im not sure what the problem is with these images ... advertising images, Facebook and linkedIN mugshots are all ephemeral and not "art" from what I can tell and if they are art, whatever ...
If someone doesn't have to leave the comfort of their covid free, cold free, flu free, 7plagues of Egypt free home to make some sort of cheesy photo illustration why not?
If someone wants to buy a computer generated landscape or seascape or urban blight-scape, and it is fabricated by some sort of AI thing I don't really understand why that is a bad thing, they bought it why not sell it to them. it's not
like the AI is going to stop you or me or anybody else with a camera from making photographs and indexing what's infront of us, it's just allowing clients to get stuff cheep (some ad work is already shot in video and stills plucked from the stream by some sort of underpaid person anyways), photographic creations have existed since daguerreotype . this has been the way of film and video for decades with entire movies shot infront of a green or blue screen, at least no one is dying from mercury poisoning, cyanide fumes or oxalic acid induced rubber bones syndrome. I think it would be fun to make digital negatives of AI invented things and then make other stuff from it, why not?
I also make prints from screen shots broadcast from the international space station which may or mayn't exist, I did see Capricorn 1.
I WAS tongue in cheek, so few understand me
Boo Hoo
The real problem is we are just in the way.......... humans...dust to dust
Soon the bots will use us for grease
We ARE GONERS
or is that goonies
I really do pity our very young
Tin Can
At least some of the ancient Egyptian elite got repurposed by having their mummies ground up into a brown paint pigment actually called Mummy, which was popular in the Victorian era. Their dust lives on as art.
But given today's diet, it probably will be more realistic to convert us back into that grease we've been eating all along. Instead of being labeled, Mummy, the cans of lubricant will be labeled McDonalds.
...in stores now - right next to the Soilent Green!
I just saw a 30 year old episode of the xFiles that had to do with this thread. I've come to the realization that the problem isn't the images it is that the program being used to make these images already thinks for itself. I saw Sarah Connor, heard the rantings of John Bigbooté recently. .. and know no mater where you go there you are. It's a good thing I've been drinking a lot of Brawndor, you know it's filled with electrolytes and sh*t... man I love ticktock.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks