This gets me to wondering; shouldn't there be a push to enshrine the image makers right to forbid their images from being sampled by AI technology?
Yes, I know, totally impractical and it would be impossible to enforce, but at least a token gesture in that direction should be made.
A film negative can always be made from a digital original. And since photojournalists don't shoot film anymore, any film negative will automatically be suspect. AI imagery should be required to embed a token indicating it was generated by AI.I had a friend, worked with him when I was with UPI in the 70s he moved to newspapers became the photo editor or a couple big dailies. He hung onto film longer that most, if a press photographer had a picture of Bill Clinton and Newt Gingrich noodling the the Rose Garden he wanted a negative. Maybe we will see more film to authenticate an image.
Good for him, bad for the future of this planet.
From the BBC
Sony World Photography Award 2023: Winner refuses award after revealing AI creation
Boris Eldagsen said he used the image to test the competition and to create an "open discussion".www.bbc.com
Good for him, bad for the future of this planet.
Oh no she's being attacked by a vampire and its her older self....weird.
Its not a good picture, the lightings all wrong, the concept has been done to death and it looks like it was taken in the 1930's not the 2023's. Must of left the print in the Selenium way too long to get such an ugly green.
Judges often pick images that may not be what others might deem the best, much less good. The point was they picked it. One could have produced a similar abomination with totally traditional means.
They chose it to be controversial and gain attention to themselves other wise they would chose a good picture, but nobody would notice.
No biggie. Last time I won an art award with my photography I really duped them, I didn't draw or paint any of it. Just clicked the shutter. Much easier than typing into AI machine.
And how would you go about doing that?AI has nothing to offer if we ban the use of electricity in delineating pictures.
Think about all the image making that was done in the world before electric power was available: Marble sculpture, fresco, mosaic, oil painting, photography, engraving, lithography, mezzotint, etching ... and so on.
That's plenty of room for creative art without a whiff of artificial intelligence; just natural intelligence.
AI has nothing to offer if we ban the use of electricity in delineating pictures.
Think about all the image making that was done in the world before electric power was available: Marble sculpture, fresco, mosaic, oil painting, photography, engraving, lithography, mezzotint, etching ... and so on.
That's plenty of room for creative art without a whiff of artificial intelligence; just natural intelligence.
That would be good for film users. Others might take umbrage.
This just might be an additional impulse for people to find Film (plates, emulsions) Photography being the only Photography left.
They chose it to be controversial and gain attention to themselves other wise they would chose a good picture, but nobody would notice.
Excellent point. You just knocked the Deardorff shooting contact printers off their soapbox LOL. Not to imply that all who work in LF and contact print stand on that particular soapbox, but we've all seen and heard those that do.A film negative can always be made from a digital original. And since photojournalists don't shoot film anymore, any film negative will automatically be suspect.
I'm with you, but consider the above statement.This just might be an additional impulse for people to find Film (plates, emulsions) Photography being the only Photography left.
I'm with you, but consider the above statement.
Is it easy to do without any pixels present on the film in say 60x projection?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?