• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

Photography AI as art

Two Rocks

H
Two Rocks

  • 2
  • 2
  • 23
.

A
.

  • 2
  • 3
  • 20

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
203,583
Messages
2,856,780
Members
101,913
Latest member
General
Recent bookmarks
0
It would simply change the subject, and move the debate to the definitions of "meaningful", "profound", "beautiful", and "moving".

I'm afraid you're right, but it wouldn't be the only way. One other way that I find more appealing would be to demonstrate it. See if it can be done. Of course, this might make the whole process even more confronting. For one thing, it would now become a confrontation of personal aesthetics. Another issue would be that it would now be a test of talent more than of verbal prowess. One way or another, I bet the thread wouldn't take 11 more pages to come to a stop.
 
In what way?

Rewards, recognition, satisfaction, success - they don't always/rarely go to the most talented, the hardest working, the most generous, the most deserving.
 
176491134_10159427623178734_8284161538810510851_n.jpg
 
Rewards, recognition, satisfaction, success - they don't always/rarely go to the most talented, the hardest working, the most generous, the most deserving.

That's how the judge felt. 😟
 
Yep. Cartier-Bresson might have rapidly processed images in his brain, and stored them in his memory. But it's his CAMERA images that completed that circuit, and what WE remember. So much for doctrinaire over-statements. Photography isn't just intellectual. It's also a tangible craft; otherwise, the term itself wouldn't even exist, nor would any of us even recognize the name of Cartier-Bresson himself.
 
At least one institution has decided to offer a workshop in AI image generation. It will most probably become part of most schools photo programs.
IMG_0005.png
 
Rewards, recognition, satisfaction, success - they don't always/rarely go to the most talented, the hardest working, the most generous, the most deserving.

Not perfectly no. Life sometimes hands out inappropriate results, both negatively and positively, to undeserving individuals.

But aside from "back swans" like disease, victims of crime or war, or profound mental or physical handicaps, it's been my experience that most people, most of the time, mostly get exactly what they deserve. More to the point, the loudest noise tends to come from the people who are least deserving demanding better outcomes.

Nowhere is this more evident than in the arts community where art school hackery is elevated as the next big thing. Reality rapidly intrudes when people who actually like and consume art reject this stuff for the dreck that it is. This is immediately met with screams of pain on the part of these "artists" that they're being mistreated and are victims.

Then again, there are complete frauds that get taken seriously by the artsy types. I'm thinking of John Cage's "composition" of complete musical silence, Andy Warhol's mockery of serious art, and Jackson Pollock's shower curtain designs ...
 
Last edited:
What did I tell you. Fear among photographers about AI is really fear that someone will cheat in a photo contest.


Moreover, the competition is apparently not really about making art. From their own Instagram post:
Our competition is all about showing us you understand light, composition, f-stops and story etc.

It's more like an exam.

Btw, I think it's a great image in many ways. I can see how it 'intrigued all the judges'.

It's shot on an iPhone, so lots of in-camera processing took place to compensate for a possible lack of technical skill on behalf of the photographer. So maybe it's still AI, and it still doesn't show that the photographer "understands [...] f-stops". Too bad. Excluded, then included, but on closer scrutiny perhaps better excluded anyway.
 
Moreover, the competition is apparently not really about making art. From their own Instagram post:


It's more like an exam.

Btw, I think it's a great image in many ways. I can see how it 'intrigued all the judges'.

It's shot on an iPhone, so lots of in-camera processing took place to compensate for a possible lack of technical skill on behalf of the photographer. So maybe it's still AI, and it still doesn't show that the photographer "understands [...] f-stops". Too bad. Excluded, then included, but on closer scrutiny perhaps better excluded anyway.

Bingo! Someone might use AI to fake a meal at a special restaurant that the Instagram user has never been to and will never go to.
 
AI can take all the photo contests for all I care or that it matters. Tricking people into believing a fake event or situation is much more frightening.

As an aside, the possible (it has been discussed by the studios) use of AI instead of extras in films is one of the issues the actors are on strike for right now.
 
AI can take all the photo contests for all I care or that it matters. Tricking people into believing a fake event or situation is much more frightening.

As an aside, the possible (it has been discussed by the studios) use of AI instead of extras in films is one of the issues the actors are on strike for right now.

AI will affect pgotographers and videographers as well.
 
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:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom