Artificial intelligence.

[koraks]

"It" might just be a whole lot more sentient than a y of us imagined, hah!

 

[loccdor]

I'd like to see the data on click-throughs for videos and news articles that have AI thumbnails vs. those that don't, broken down by demographic groups. For example I'm less likely to watch a video if it has a cheesy AI thumbnail, especially an over-the-top one. However an audience must exist which finds it appealing or eye-catching, or it wouldn't be so common.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

AI doesn't have taste. Then again, most people are pretty tacky when it comes down to it. Me being one of them when I'm honest with myself.



I'd say closer to CGI in movies. People were floored by it when it started being used and then quickly tired of it when it was over used. Eventually it got so good that even if it was identified that it was obviously CGI it was ignored. People are still mad at George Lucas for that early 2000's edition of Star Wars where he CGIed over the original special effects.

Also Star Wars isn't for nerds. Star Trek is.

I;ve got the last year a TV was produced to show 3-D. It's a Sony. I thought it was fun watching 3-D but like others it gets boring and the intent of the movie is more important. One of the things special was that private shows were posted on YouTube such as the guy who rafted down the Grand Canyon with rapids and all. In 3-D that was really terrific.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Nearly everything AI now facilitates in Lightroom or other photo editing tools has its roots in the darkroom, where experienced and skilled printers shaped images to their will through exceptional craft. It was just more time consuming so not many bothered to do these changes in the past. Seen that way, today’s tools feel less like a rupture and more like a continuation. So I don’t find it that alarming/dramatic

AI creates fake images of unreality. Its programmed graphic representation that looks like a photo image. It;s nothing like editing in the darkroom negatives that captured reality.

 

[BrianShaw]

AI creates fake images of unreality. Its programmed graphic representation that looks like a photo image. It;s nothing like editing in the darkroom negatives that captured reality.

Has AI ever represented itself otherwise? So I don’t find it that alarming/dramatic

 

[MattKing]

AI creates fake images of unreality. Its programmed graphic representation that looks like a photo image. It;s nothing like editing in the darkroom negatives that captured reality.

Jerry Uelsmann.

Perhaps one of the best ever at this sort of darkroom work, but far from the only one.
I manipulate most of my darkroom printing, but usually in far more subtle and less consequential ways.
AI has the same relationship to photography as the stage has to story telling.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Jerry Uelsmann.
View attachment 417822
Perhaps one of the best ever at this sort of darkroom work, but far from the only one.
I manipulate most of my darkroom printing, but usually in far more subtle and less consequential ways.
AI has the same relationship to photography as the stage has to story telling.

The exception that makes the rule.

 

[MattKing]

The exception that makes the rule.

Thanks for referring to me as exceptional Alan .
By the way, the saying is "The exception that proves the rule", and in that saying the use of "proves" is a relatively archaic one that we rarely see now - it essentially means "tests", and is most often now encountered in the context of alcohol. We refer to "80 proof rum" when we reference rum that tests out as 40% alcohol by volume.
To a certain extent Alan I think you are greatly influenced by the fact that you historically used slide film and projected it. Those of us who mainly shot slides tended to manipulate their images less, whereas those who did a lot of work printing in darkrooms tended to be more likely to manipulate their images.
I've spent a lot of time in both camps.
I can assure you that, outside of lab environments, manipulation at the time of printing has always been common. That includes newspaper work. Manipulation doesn't necessary add untruth - it usually adds emphasis or delineation. But it can certainly be used to add mystery or fancifulness.
The creation of montages - assemblies of multiple images into one - have been common for years.
I don't have a lot of that in my history, but there is a little.
I should see if I can find my published work that does that.
I can probably more easily find some of my wedding work where I dd that - although that was always done in camera. You know, the bride and groom imaged in a brandy snifter with lighted candle and wedding invitation at the side.

 

[Pieter12]

AI creates fake images of unreality. Its programmed graphic representation that looks like a photo image. It;s nothing like editing in the darkroom negatives that captured reality.

That is not what it is limited to. It is used, to great benefit, to enhance or modify existing images. Nothing fake beyond what had been traditionally been done by retouching--only better.

 

[wiltw]

Has AI ever represented itself otherwise? So I don’t find it that alarming/dramatic

Yet folks continue to ask if AI will replace photography with cameras. Editing out undesirable elements using AI is a different matter, so is creating a fictitious image. So is an AI-controlled robot shooting a real scene.

 

[Pieter12]

Yet folks continue to ask if AI will replace photography with cameras. Editing out undesirable elements using AI is a different matter, so is creating a fictitious image. So is an AI-controlled robot shooting a real scene.

AI might replace certain aspects of commercial photography, such as scenic landscapes and product/catalogue work. J.Crew recently took a lot of flack for using AI-generated images for an ad campaign.

 

[Cholentpot]

AI might replace certain aspects of commercial photography, such as scenic landscapes and product/catalogue work. J.Crew recently took a lot of flack for using AI-generated images for an ad campaign.

How did people know?

 

[MattKing]

How did people know?

Everything J. Crew looked artificial before AI existed, so I'd ask the same question.

 

[Pieter12]

Everything J. Crew looked artificial before AI existed, so I'd ask the same question.

How did people know?

Many small glitches in the images, plus a big tell: on of the models feet is bent backwards underneath him. Search J.Crew AI ads for annotated images.

 

[Cholentpot]

Everything J. Crew looked artificial before AI existed, so I'd ask the same question.

Many small glitches in the images, plus a big tell: on of the models feet is bent backwards underneath him. Search J.Crew AI ads for annotated images.

Right.

So J.Crew used a basic off the shelf free AI service which cranked out slop. If you pay, and pay attention then you can fool most people. However I'm happy they did this and that people noticed.