That would be outright copying. The AI is much more subtle in its copying.
An f8 photo is a photo shot at f8.
Boring Portrait Series
-
- Thread starter Pieter12
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale NIKON FA Black Body
- Started by Acere
-
For Sale FS: Mamiya K/L 250mm f/4.5 L-A Lens
- Started by B.S.Kumar
-
For Sale FS: Anba Ikeda 4x5 Wooden Field Camera
- Started by B.S.Kumar
-
Sold Bessa L ltm 35mm camera
- Started by Gram Nylén
-
For Sale For sale 100 Print File 120-4HB negative preservers.
- Started by spoolman
Forum statistics
That would be outright copying. The AI is much more subtle in its copying.
An f8 photo is a photo shot at f8.
OP
OP
How can one tell from casual observation if a particular photo was shot at f8 and not, say f11?
You can't. It's a background technical detail, like what brand of brush was used while creating a painting. Important the the creator(s) in the moment, but probably not to the final engagement with a viewer. What an image means is mostly disconnected from the details of its production, almost always.
What gets a sad and perplexed laugh out of me is when people tell me that AI "removes humans altogether from the creative process." What separates humans from "the creative process" is thinking that the results and methods have very specific content constraints. The point of "the creative process" is to ask: "what can I make with this?" or "what will it mean to make something with this?" or "what can I get away with here?"
Anyway, here is a picture that might be a portrait, made a couple of weeks ago while awaiting the advent of the Year of the Rabbit, 2023. Pretty sure it was not shot at ƒ/8
OP
OP
Nice shot. Certainly as a single—we haven’t seen the series—not boring. Kind of borderline as a portrait, seems the landscape is the focus and primary subject.
As a series, the sense of being portraits comes out a little more strongly. For the most part, the environments were ones that they were very familiar with, while the actual places might be new...and generally they were invited to pick their poses and place in the landscape. The images are about their interaction with place, each other, the camera, their dad (me), and time (I believe this was a 30-second exposure).
8x10 platinum/palladium print. 159mm lens
8x10 platinum/palladium print. 159mm lens
Attachments
What do you mean? I often plan an f8 photo.
Just gorgeous!
MattKing
Moderator
Thank you. By this age, I would expose one or two negatives, then turn them loose. In the above case, the camera was about 25 or more feet above ground level on top of two crossed fallen redwoods. After this image, the boys explored a large circle around where I was...out of sight, finding a small creek, etc, but within my hearing -- while I photographed that redwood in the light off on the left.
The boys also spent a lot of time growing up with trips to Yosemite Valley, staying behind the Ansel Adams Gallery at a friend's home.
Along the Merced. The Three Brothers and the Three Brothers, 8x10 platinium/palladium print, 300mm lens
Attachments
Yes, the joy of photographing a style of photography, that, for whatever reason, please the shooter.
Some may have an aspiration to mimic or better a style, photographer, photography or internal vision they hold dear or as a challenge or lesson, much needed to succeed in or, as a personal challenge.
Many simply want to get a handle on the lighting, gear, position, location or topic to hand.
Others will simply enjoy the process, the wet tray reveal, the chemistry they compounded themselves or the printing process, such as gum or Platiniumn-Gold tone prints.
Some folks set personal challenges and others want to be seen in Galleries, frames in the homes or workplaces of people they photograph, or sell photographs too.
Then there are the photographers that want to be known for a specific "style" that they make their own and yet still, others have focused on getting the best portrait they can as they learn how to make images, before moving on to other approaches.
Then you have those photographers that love to document friends and willing sitters, that have no other ambition than to make a good photograph, period.
I'm sure others can fill in my near empty list of why, but, if you're no willing or able to look at such works in an appreciative way, it simply means it, portrait work in traditional, everyday styles, really does no inspire you to try it out yourself nor get a thrill from doing it.
I guess I sometimes feel that way about other things Photographically, secretly finding them a puzzling waste of time, material, or a good model or background which I'd never care to try, but just like you, that's me and every other photographer and 'Critic' on the Terran Planet or in the Space Stations.
Life is good, enjoy your work and be gratified you are able to do as you please.
Cheers.
The major concern expressed by that statement is commercial. Up until this point, when a commercial enterprise required some art-product (drawing, painting, designing, photography), they needed to pay one or more trained and skilled people to get it. That skilled work can be shifted to an AI. The person who needs the art is likely neither trained nor skilled in producing or assessing art, so I guess we can expect a flood of overdone AI productions. But there's nothing new about the prevalence of bad taste.
Sure, just like any tool, in the hands of someone competent, the AI can be guided to produce something of merit. But the fact is, the real end user of the AI is not likely to be someone competent. And the problem for people who make their living in the commercial art world is when this AI starts to be seen as a production service, because that's when it "removes humans altogether from the creative process." Asking for something and then choosing the final option, you see, are not part of the creative process, just like asking for a steak and then eating it are not part of cooking.
I see them as portraits and very successful ones at that. Gorgeous photographs/series!
Vaughn what a splendid series of your boys.
But this already exists in large measure: the customers of Getty! Not surprisingly, the people who are most actively trying to stop AI art are Getty images, those people who'd happily charge you $5K/6months for using public domain images on your website.
In some cases, even the purchaser may be an algorithm.
(via SimilarWeb via Scott Galloway, back in early November - before Midjourney 4 etc)
Last edited:
No one else! I'd always credit any image I didn't make.
The vast majority of images Getty sells (or leases or whatever they do) first go in the hands of graphic designers (people) who then adapt them to their ends. So, the majority of Getty users are actually trained and skilled. The image from Getty is seldom the end product.
OP
OP
Well, yes and no. As a former major customer of Getty, I would estimate that about half the images we’d license were used as-is, maybe cropped to fit the use. The others would be composited, usually as backgrounds or sometimes as AI does to create a sort of photo illustration. The big problem with AI for working photographers (and their agents, such as stock agencies) is that AI scours the internet for material with no regard to intellectual rights or compensation. If you have images on the internet, they might end up in an AI creation.
And not yet another reason for me not posting on the internet except to so an example of a technical point.
Don't you mean a "and be there" photo?
No. I pick f8 as the perfect combination of lens performance and DOF for the intended purpose.
Thanks for sharing! Love your work.
Agreed, for a particular camera and task there's often an optimal aperture. But is the (intended or not) content of the picture "ƒ/8"? Is that the starting point of the picture-makng impulse?
Not asking to be snarky -- the idea of a pic that exudes ƒ/8-ness is super challenging to my imagination. I suppose Instamatic snaps are one form, but I doubt very much that's what you're going for! Or.... is it? Or something else?
It strikes me that there are certain kinds of picture that regularly travel hand-in-hand with some extreme ends of the aperture ring, say the wide-angle-high-aperture street genre or the apparent obsession with low aperture numbers among some portrait and wedding shooters (e.g., Benj Haisch or Matt Osborne's Leica-centric channels on YouTube, both big on ƒ-stops below 1.4). Half-frame+ƒ/4 is a cine standard (because it strikes a balance between being able to isolate one actor and being too twitchy to hold focus).
ƒ/4 ftw
Last edited:
Do you think this rule-of-thumb applies across all lenses and formats? A Super Angulon lens is wide open at f/8. My impulse is to avoid the extremes in selecting an aperture but you might be onto something.
The expression “f/8 and be there”is usually associated with photojournalism, where the ability to work quickly in a dynamic situation is crucial. For those photographers, f/8 is typically a few stops down from wide open, giving them a bit of leeway with focusing. I wouldn’t expect that specific aperture to necessarily be the best option with longer lenses.
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |