Is this the start of camera obsolesce?

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).

Member's gallery
Probably it will lead to the usage of AI tools to screen for AI generated images in competition.

Welcome to the AI arms race :).

Btw, the fact that the image didn't raise red flags speaks volumes on how AI-illiterate the judges of the competition are. (Hint: currently AI is terrible at creating human hands... you can see in the picture if you look at the hands that they look more like claws and less like hands).
 
Member's gallery
Outback said:
No doubt a conversation piece in the making.

www.abc.net.au

Award-winning photograph revealed to be AI-generated image

Sony World Photography Award winner Boris Eldagsen has refused to accept his trophy during the prize ceremony in London, revealing his lauded photo is actually an AI-generated image.
www.abc.net.au www.abc.net.au
Click to expand...
Mistaking an AI generated image for the real thing is as absurd as thinking Disney’s Italy pavilion is the equivalent of actually being in Venice, or visiting a zoo is a true wildlife experience. As Marvin Gaye sang, Ain’t Nothin Like the Real Thing.
 
Member's gallery
Cutting edge A.I. (Machine Learning) is doing a remarkable job in certain photographic genres such as landscape and portrait... and getting better at it at an amazing rate. There are images being produced today that are virtually indistinguishable from the real thing. It will be interesting to see the impact to photography going forward. Tony and Chelsea have commented on this recently -
 
Member's gallery
The AI quality will continue to improve witth mre “learning”, improved algorithms and such. We already take advantage of basic versions with things like sky replacement, noise management, sharpening, and object removal in some images. It is less likely to gain a foothold in documenting real-time events like weddings, sporting events, news, where there is a separate memory or record of what happened. And, given how much image doctoring goes on already by some/many/most photographers, AI is here to stay Even as the fakes create pblems all around in dealing with them.

I do not make any money from my photography, though I do spend a fair amount on my hobby. AI to generate whole images defeats the whole purpose of why I shoot. Yes, AI will be a problem for some who generate income from their work, but how do you put the genie back in the bottle?
 
Member's gallery
We need to be careful with AI, otherwise we're in danger of making humans obsolete, let alone cameras.

I know it's a bit of a stretch at this point but why use AI to take over things that we enjoy doing, that allow us to express our humanity? The same thing is happening in music. I'm guessing that's the point of this "protest" by the photographer and good for him for doing so.
 
Member's gallery
Photography is art. It cannot become obsolete any more than painting or music.

Using a camera to create art is already an inefficient process compared to digital composition via Photoshop. "AI" is simply making Photoshop an inefficient tool, in turn.

Social media has democratized written and spoken communications. You might say it has also reduced the average "quality" of the things you read and hear (ie: a Bob Woodward article versus Elon Musk "pedo guy" quips on Twitter).

"AI" will similarly reduce the barrier to entry for unskilled people to create pleasing art. I am able to create a fantastic (as in, "fantastical") landscape that a photographer or could only dream of, simply by typing some words. And with a few more words, I can turn it into an oil painting or pencil sketch.

How does this affect society? There's too many variable to predict. We can only speculate.

I will say that I made a portrait of a monkey in a top hat last year using Stable Diffusion that is better than anything I've ever painted. So AI has already obsoleted me. ;)
 
Member's gallery
Doomrider74 said:
We need to be careful with AI, otherwise we're in danger of making humans obsolete, let alone cameras.

I know it's a bit of a stretch at this point but why use AI to take over things that we enjoy doing, that allow us to express our humanity? The same thing is happening in music. I'm guessing that's the point of this "protest" by the photographer and good for him for doing so.
Click to expand...

When I can type "infinite Stevie Ray Vaughan guitar solo" into some AI music app, I don't know how I'm going to feel. I think I'll be happy, because I was robbed of the opportunity to see him live. I might also be a bit upset that future generations won't understand just how rare such artistry was back in "the old days".

In what might be hope for the future, I introduced my pre-teen kids to The Twilight Zone a couple weeks ago. At first there were wails about black and white and primitive special effects. After a few episodes, they now agree that they don't even notice that it's not color, and they love the stories.

Perhaps our fears for the demise of humanity are no more well-placed than those who decried the steam shovel. I guess we'll find out soon enough!
 
Member's gallery
I read the article. I don’t think photography replaced painting. I don’t think AI will replace photography. I don’t think AI will replace painting. Just because something new comes along doesn’t mean something preexisting has to die off. People still ride horses and ride bicycles. Why?
 
Member's gallery
Not for me. No AI/VR/AR can replace the experience of spending thousands of dollars on heavy equipment, rising before the sun, driving hours to a location, hiking for miles, standing in the freezing cold and intermittent rain waiting to capture that moment in time only have it not happen and have to come back the next day. Wait! Now that I think about it AI here I come!
 
Member's gallery
You need to be pretty thorough when describing how you arrived at your final image in the Sony Worlds. The photographer knew this. He entered it into the creative category and described it to the judges as an AI creation based upon his own photograph and, on that basis, the judges decided to let it through. It certainly started a discussion which is good but it was a bit of a convoluted way of going about it and leaves people with the impression that Sony Worlds judges were totally fooled.
There was a pure AI generated image that won a major Australian competition not so long ago so the judges were fooled there. Maybe they didnt stipulate supply of the original RAW/JPEG complete with metadata, that came out of the camera. Thats whats usually asked for anyway.
 
Member's gallery
AI is here to stay - and it would be to our (as photographers') advantage to know how this all works. From creating AI photos to the legal side thereof.

The winner of a major photography award has refused his prize after revealing his work was created using AI.


www.bbc.com

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 www.bbc.com
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
If you read the article, you could see that the judges knew the image was AI from the beginning, and there was a little controversy not about the nature of the image but about how the winner handled the ongoing discussion. I think AI is fascinating technology, and most of us have no clue how it will come to affect our lives. One thing I like about photography is that i am always learning stuff as a photographer. I think people are going to do both amazing and horrific things with AI, as the have done with most other major technological developments. It's on us to keep watching and learning.
 
Member's gallery
AI based imagery is just another genre, like photography or painting. I don't think AI replaces photography anymore than photography replaced painting or painting replaced sketching. The conundrum comes when someone is passing off one art form for another.
 
Member's gallery
JAS said:
We already take advantage of basic versions with things like sky replacement, noise management, sharpening, and object removal in some images.
Click to expand...

Man has been modifying photographs since we've had cameras, but we did not (to my knowledge) called them (as a whole) artificial images. At worse, they can change facts about an event in photojournalism, which is not ethical.

But when I worked in a photo lab in the 80s, we had little rooms with human retouchers removing all sorts of unsightliness. Today's manipulation is far more sophisticated, but it doesn't cross the line into AI until we have a computer do it (from conception).

Chris
 
Member's gallery
Chris, I believe that AI is used when you use the new more complex automatic adjustment features on the editing programs. That is, there are various levels of AI use.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JAS
Member's gallery
Rodamu said:
Chris, I believe that AI is used when you use the new more complex automatic adjustment features on the editing programs. That is, there are various levels of AI use.
Click to expand...

There's a difference between AI-trained algorithms (such as what Topaz does) and AI-manufactured images. Using a database to help AI process something does not in any way replace the creativity of a human. Sharpness and denoise processing is not creation. It's still your choice to use it and hopefully, make your own configuration choices before hitting the GO button, but you still captured the image with your camera (and your eye/brain behind that).

Chris
 
Member's gallery
In the 1880's there were experienced photographers who thought that being able to buy paper and chemicals and film with the emulsion already applied was cheapening their craft. The experienced landscape photographers derided the newbies that did not know how to combine an image of a cloudy sky with another scene to make a composite picture much as a landscape painter would do.
 
Member's gallery
Rodamu said:
Chris, I believe that AI is used when you use the new more complex automatic adjustment features on the editing programs. That is, there are various levels of AI use.
Click to expand...
Agree. The newer NR and healing/object removal tools are varying degrees of AI as are some of the resizing tools which make decisions for you in certain circumstances. The difference between this and the old ways is that now you move sliders to get the result you want while in the old darkroom days you used dodge and burn, paper masks and changes to the the wide range of unsafe development chemicals and printing techniques to modify the printed outcome. Take a look at the "printing plans" for certain famous as seen in print, in magazines, etc. The difference is when the netire image is generated from scratch with only limited input from the individual generating the image.
 
Member's gallery
My personal thought is it doesn’t matter how technology evolves. We all know it will, sometimes in ways we like, or don’t like, or in ways that we use, or shun.

As long as I can get my hands on photo gear I like, I’ll be out there challenging myself to get photos that appeal to me.

These days, I’m still surprised that with the Z9 and S quality glass, I find myself smiling from both the joy of using the gear in the field, and viewing the photos in post.

I can’t envision how AI (by any name) will ever be able to replace that joy for me.
 
Member's gallery
RecalcitrantRon said:
Not for me. No AI/VR/AR can replace the experience of spending thousands of dollars on heavy equipment, rising before the sun, driving hours to a location, hiking for miles, standing in the freezing cold and intermittent rain waiting to capture that moment in time only have it not happen and have to come back the next day. Wait! Now that I think about it AI here I come!
Click to expand...
You can buy fish from a fishmonger for far less money than probably the bait you will buy, let alone to go out in the boat you bought and all the fishing gear you have. People still buy boats and go fishing. Photography is no different. And it is about as expensive!
 
Member's gallery
Agree wholeheartedly. I shoot for my own enjoyment, have more equipment than I ever thought, and get to try so many different thinbgs - filmF100), Infrared(D600 590nm), older lenses Nikkor micro 70-180 on my D750, D850, Z6, Z9. The Z cameras and. especially, the Z glass just help with the fun. All fun and the post-processing technology from Helicon Focus, to Nik Suite to LrC/PS and now with AI just give me a few more options. I would still be shooting as much as I can as when I was shooting a D5000.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top