AI created images vs. Photoshop fabrications. Is there a difference?

[faberryman]

You think Instagram is currently all that different?

Or Flickr or any other photo sharing outlet, even those purporting to be film based.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Or maybe because not everyone wants to be a painter. Do you want to be a painter?

If you want to learn about painting you can. You can also learn about photoshop and AI. There are lots of paths to follow, and all require skill.

Those who can do; those who can't use FauxTow$hop and AI.

 

[faberryman]

Those who can do; those who can't use FauxTow$hop and AI.

Can do what?

 

[Sirius Glass]

Can do what?

What needs to be done to get the job done.

 

[warden]

Those who can do; those who can't use FauxTow$hop and AI.

It seems the most judgmental people about various tech tools on this forum have also never tried them. Apparently because they’re too pure, too skilled, too great, or whatever, and know with certainty that those doing the work of experimenting with new approaches are lazy, unskilled, lesser, etc. It’s charming.

 

[Pieter12]

I don't get the angst. There's no need for it.

The reason for angst is that AI photos can be created and accept by the masses as true representations of events or situations that never happened. In essence lies sold to the people for propaganda purposes. Imagine, for instance, a photo being widely distributed of a member of a group not in favor of the current government, standing and smiling on top of a pile of brutally murdered bodies.

As well as taking income from certain segments of the commercial photography field, all the while using photographers' imagery to "learn" without any compensation.

 

[Pieter12]

I go along with this 100%. It is false. using PS to change images is very very different to AI. A human makes the changes from his own perception of a scene. Importing something which is created using AI is making use of a creation that is, or could be claimed is just convenient and will take less skill to do. Laziness and lack of true creativity comes to mind.

But creativity will be (as it alawsy has been) what separates the good from bad, whether it is AI, photography or art. AI depends on the prompts fed into it, the sources it uses and the discrimination of the originator. There is more bad photography and art than good, same will go for AI.

 

[CMoore]

The reason for angst is that AI photos can be created and accept by the masses as true representations of events or situations that never happened. In essence lies sold to the people for propaganda purposes. Imagine, for instance, a photo being widely distributed of a member of a group not in favor of the current government, standing and smiling on top of a pile of brutally murdered bodies.

As well as taking income from certain segments of the commercial photography field, all the while using photographers' imagery to "learn" without any compensation.

This happens, and has happened for years, right NOW with "real" photos.
WMD
Gas Attacks
Babies killed in incubators
Civilians "targeted" in a war.
You do not now, and never have
needed, a fake photo for mass propaganda.

 

[Pieter12]

This happens, and has happened for years, right NOW with "real" photos.
WMD
Gas Attacks
Babies killed in incubators
Civilians "targeted" in a war.
You do not now, and never have
needed, a fake photo for mass propaganda.

But now it is easier and within the reach of the unwashed masses.

 

[BMbikerider]

I can see a great future for AI in the medical field with early diagnosis of fatal diseases and the more rapid development of safe and viable vaccines or cures for dreadful illnesses similar to that we had just got through and of course cancer. In fact anything I can think of which will be a benefit to man it will be a help. Possibly even to clean up our atmosphere of carbon.

But certainly not where it helps people to plagiarise other peoples work to a level they can pass it off as their own, be it art of any description. (including Photography). Or falsify literature as their own or assist people to pass ANY exam (including Photography).

The risk with AI in photography is one reason why I am remaining with and even using more film and darkroom printing. I don't think the they have managed to take over an enlarger yet.

 

[koraks]

The reason for angst is that AI photos can be created and accept by the masses as true representations of events or situations that never happened.

Sure. But I don't think that's what all of the angst in this thread is really about. Some of it, maybe. Not all, though.

 

[Sirius Glass]

It seems the most judgmental people about various tech tools on this forum have also never tried them. Apparently because they’re too pure, too skilled, too great, or whatever, and know with certainty that those doing the work of experimenting with new approaches are lazy, unskilled, lesser, etc. It’s charming.

It is nice to sit back and hurl grenades into a thread, but you aim is very bad. I started conceiving, developing and producing AI since the early 1980s. What have you produced in AI?

 

[Sirius Glass]

But now it is easier and within the reach of the unwashed masses.

The unwashed are also unreachable.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I can see a great future for AI in the medical field with early diagnosis of fatal diseases and the more rapid development of safe and viable vaccines or cures for dreadful illnesses similar to that we had just got through and of course cancer. In fact anything I can think of which will be a benefit to man it will be a help. Possibly even to clean up our atmosphere of carbon.

But certainly not where it helps people to plagiarise other peoples work to a level they can pass it off as their own, be it art of any description. (including Photography). Or falsify literature as their own or assist people to pass ANY exam (including Photography).

The risk with AI in photography is one reason why I am remaining with and even using more film and darkroom printing. I don't think the they have managed to take over an enlarger yet.

AI has and can be used for practical and useful purposes, but making pictures is not one of them. Making propaganda for the unwashed will be a gold mine for AI images.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Angst? Nobody is pulling a sword out like Manet did over a brushwork argument (but was fortunately too drunken to inflict a wound). What is being insulting is the medium of photography itself. It cheapens it, makes it seem like a common street whore. And as far it being no worse than what you buy at Ikea in a frame, define "you". It sure isn't me. I don't buy anything from Ikea anyway. But even some of what they sell in frames makes more sense to me than a lot of faux nonsense claiming itself to be fine art. I'm not against people being "creative" in any manner they choose, provided it's not harmful to others. But I make a distinction between photography in the sense of actually visually discovering something, and what I would term Lardassography, sitting on one's rear end digitally trying to mimic stereotypes of things they never have perceptually grasped well enough to really appreciate in the first place.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Angst? Nobody is pulling a sword out like Manet did over a brushwork argument (but was fortunately too drunken to inflict a wound). What is being insulting is the medium of photography itself. It cheapens it, makes it seem like a common street whore. And as far it being no worse than what you buy at Ikea in a frame, define "you". It sure isn't me. I don't buy anything from Ikea anyway. But even some of what they sell in frames makes more sense to me than a lot of faux nonsense claiming itself to be fine art. I'm not against people being "creative" in any manner they choose, provided it's not harmful to others. But I make a distinction between photography in the sense of actually visually discovering something, and what I would term Lardassography, sitting on one's rear end digitally trying to mimic stereotypes of things they never have perceptually grasped well enough to really appreciate in the first place.

Now there is a word which time has come, "Lardassography".

 

[faberryman]

You must have had a traumatic experience as a child at IKEA.

 

[MattKing]

You must have had a traumatic experience at IKEA.

Perhaps he had to assemble a piece of furniture - maybe even a bookshelf!

 

[Sirius Glass]

You must have had a traumatic experience as a child at IKEA.

IKEA furniture is built of substandard materials, have a habit of self-disassembling and self-decaying besides looking butt ugly and tasteless. If that is good enough for you, enjoy you and have the IKEA products that I would never buy.

 

[warden]

It is nice to sit back and hurl grenades into a thread, but you aim is very bad. I started conceiving, developing and producing AI since the early 1980s.

Of course you did.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Of course you did.

View attachment 339932

And you did not ...

 

[DREW WILEY]

The primary component in Ikea furniture is termite frass - the worst quality particle board I've ever seen. But their industrial ability to hide it with veneers thinner than an aphid's eyelash is truly astounding.

 

[VinceInMT]

Thanks for this valuable information about this IKEA thing. I’d heard of it but as we don’t have one in this state I’ve never been to one.

 

[faberryman]

IKEA furniture is built of substandard materials, have a habit of self-disassembling and self-decaying besides looking butt ugly and tasteless. If that is good enough for you, enjoy you and have the IKEA products that I would never buy.

I am guessing you are not IKEA’s target demographic.

 

[Brendan Quirk]

From my point of view, I'm just waiting for the AI app that is dedicated to quickly and automatically cleaning away the dust and imperfections on my film scans.
When the technology reaches that pinnacle, it will all be worthwhile!

I WANT THIS for my PRINT scans!!!