The AI thread

[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.

[Tin Can]

Soon AI will certify most IRL things

Trust...me

[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.

[Tin Can]

4 Men and a naked woman

I did not subscribe

[Drew Wiley]

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.

[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.

[Pieter]

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.

[BrianShaw]

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!

[Tin Can]

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

[paulbarden]

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.