Photography AI as art

[Pieter12]

AI will affect pgotographers and videographers as well.

From what I have seen of AI, the raw results can be mediocre to pitiful. I takes a talented person--one who understands what makes a good photograph or video--to provide the input, both prompts and images if necessary. Then an eye for detail to spot indiscrepancies. A friend had to sort through dozens and dozens of images created by AI, ended up compositing the image from the results to get something that he found acceptable. Not as much time or effort as creating the image from scratch or from his archives, but not just the push of a button either.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Here's an AI video that's worth watching, if you want a good laugh, especially Xi.

les plaisirs de la technologie.mp4 - Bing video

www.bing.com

 

[MurrayMinchin]

Don't know if this has been posted yet.

I'm not one for 'colourizing' old B&W movies, and given the choice, would buy an original old B&W photo over a computerized version of the original.

Having said that, the following video is pretty cool and hints at what's coming in the future:

 

[Pieter12]

A recent news story:
"OpenAI, a prominent artificial intelligence powerhouse, has quietly taken down its AI-detection software, citing a disappointing level of accuracy. The tool, which was launched on January 31, aimed to assist users, particularly educators, in distinguishing between human-written text and AI-generated content. However, the company has acknowledged its shortcomings, leading to its decision to shut down the AI classifier as of July 20, 2023. ..."

 

[dutchsteammachine]

I think this is just a new tool and medium like any other major shift.

In the beginning people will use it to make art of already known concepts. But eventually some creative people will use it to make something completely new and unique, a new form of art of expression.

Any mechanism that allows people to express themselves that prior had great difficulty with existing forms of art should be celebrated ^^

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Don't know if this has been posted yet.

I'm not one for 'colourizing' old B&W movies, and given the choice, would buy an original old B&W photo over a computerized version of the original.

Having said that, the following video is pretty cool and hints at what's coming in the future:

Murray that was great. Whenever I've looked at old pictures, its like the people were from a different time and we are so different and so advance. So when you look at updated moving pictures of these old pictures of our ancestors, it brings them into today and into life. They seem just like us and we like them. Nothing really has changed with humankind. We're all prety much the same.

 

[Pieter12]

This will help slow down the commercial use of AI a bit: https://www.theverge.com/2023/8/19/23838458/ai-generated-art-no-copyright-district-court

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

This will help slow down the commercial use of AI a bit: https://www.theverge.com/2023/8/19/23838458/ai-generated-art-no-copyright-district-court

It seems if he claimed he was the artist rather than a machine, he could have copyrighted it. Only humans can be granted copyrights. So this case really doesn't settle much.

 

[warden]

More news from my inbox today

AI Art Lacking ‘Human Expression’ Cannot Be Copyrighted, US Officials Say

Content generated solely by artificial intelligence is not protected by copyright law, according to new guidelines issued by the US Copyright Office.

www.artnews.com

edited to add this pic from the Copyright office executive summary From January 2025.

 

[Pieter12]

I find it amusing that Open AI and others are upset that the Chinese DeepSeek has been harvesting their programs...

 

[RalphLambrecht]

In a word NO, they are not art! They are art wannabes and will never be art. Art is human made, not machine made.

AI isn't entirely machine-made. It requires human instructions, and consequently...

 

[koraks]

AI isn't entirely machine-made. It requires human instructions, and consequently...

That's a good point Ralph. AI-generated art as we presently discuss it is indeed heavily influenced/guided by the human prompts. I'm not talking about the people who 'programmed' it, but the actual user input/prompts that are aimed at having the machine generate a specific outcome. I think that's a very pertinent aspect in this discussion.

 

[AERO]

As far as this argument goes I consider the manipulation of a photo by PC apps - fakery.

 

[grain elevator]

As far as this argument goes I consider the manipulation of a photo by PC apps - fakery.

The modest particle "by" is doing a lot of work here, as it allows a reading that gives these apps agency. "With" would not. And therein lies the question, how are apps different from other tools? Are you specifically referring to apps with some degree of automatisation?

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Here's the current status of 15 lawsuits regarding AI. I didn't read all but they appear to be not settled yet.

Current Edition: Updates on Generative AI Infringement Cases in Media and Entertainment

www.mckoolsmith.com

 

[Arthurwg]

I don't know much about AI, but I know what I don't like.

 

[AERO]

The modest particle "by" is doing a lot of work here, as it allows a reading that gives these apps agency. "With" would not. And therein lies the question, how are apps different from other tools? Are you specifically referring to apps with some degree of automatisation?

By /with - its fakery....................... no quible..its my opinion..you have yours what ever it is......

 

[koraks]

Humbug!

 

[MattKing]

Digital photography and image manipulation is now a well accepted art form, but should photographic images produced by AI be considered in the same way? I don't think they should.

Some may have missed how this thread started.
The critical words being "considered in the same way?"
Some of the discussion in the thread reminds me of the discussions around electric pianos, music synthesizers and modern recording equipment - all of which has changed and added things to the the music landscape.
Being "instruments" (pun intended) of change, they require adaptation and further change.

 

[Pieter12]

As far as this argument goes I consider the manipulation of a photo by PC apps - fakery.

How is that any different from manipulation photos by analog means? Intention is more important than whether an image has been manipulated.

 

[Taylor Nankervis]

Digital photography and image manipulation is now a well accepted art form, but should photographic images produced by AI be considered in the same way? I don't think they should.

Not, it should not.
AI is not photography, whether a process, concept or a result.
What people are most worried about is AI's untethered, wild existence: AI is stealing the works of established photographers as part of its learning and freely allowing these to be available in millions of iterations.

 

[Pieter12]

Just saw this post on Instagram:

 

[Pieter12]

You will note he only has 4 fingers...

 

[DREW WILEY]

I'd rather be debating whether or not finger paintings by gorillas or paw paintings by cats are legitimate art. At least they're sentient breathing creatures.

 

[koraks]

AI is stealing the works of established photographers as part of its learning and freely allowing these to be available in millions of iterations.

This phrase implies that "AI" somehow includes the images it used for learning into the produced result. For the record: this is false.

AI is not photography, whether a process, concept or a result.

Certainly, it's a different medium. That doesn't mean it's up to any photographer to deny its potential for artistic expression, just like it's not up to a painter to deny the possible merits of, say, pottery.