I only watched the 1st minute (may watch more later), but TWO point quickly came to mind.
1) Retouchers that "lost their jobs" ... ummm, some chose to pivot into digital. It was a different tool, not a different skill. The video point sounds like an ominous setup, so the bias in that point gets taken with a grain of salt.
2) The "crappy" photo that gets turned into a "professional" image ... comes across as a shill for the software product. Fine, I get it ... you're an influencer, trying to influence.
AI is on its way, no doubt ... but, shooters will still shoot.
p.1 #12 · Photographers finally realize AI has won
RoamingScott wrote:
At least AI knows how to get their photos in focus.
It depends on the species. Brachycephalic species like humans are fine with it, but others are dolichocephalic and not so good.
The AI focus often focuses too far back because it only knows the eyes.
p.1 #14 · Photographers finally realize AI has won
dmcphoto wrote:
I can't believe that anyone is surprised by this small incremental step in AI as it relates to photography. It's only beginning, folks.
p.1 #18 · Photographers finally realize AI has won
AI can't replace everything. Many things yes, but everything, no.
There will always be a market for images where people want authenticity. For instance, here is our resort or hotel room. This is the restaurant and our food. This is a photo of your wedding. Computer generated images can never truly replace these types of images. Sometimes people want to see the real deal. I don't think people will want to see a very good approximation, they will want to see the real thing.
Or a even some portraits. When I look at photo's of loved ones who have passed away, I couldn't image staring at an AI version of them. I want the real deal.
The same arguments was made for painting when photography came out. The industry will change, it will shrink, but it will not die.
p.1 #19 · Photographers finally realize AI has won
Photographers have been 'faking' photos of food, resorts, and restaurants for years. Most food photos were taken in studios, not in actual restaurants and often not even using real food.
Many portraits were taken in studios with 'unreal' lighting, special make-up, and photo retouching.
Paintings are more valuable than photos because they are originals, not 'X' numbers of prints that can be made from original negatives.
The point of the discussion is that AI has become, and will continue become better. Already images can be altered or created that most people can't tell from 'real' photos. For better or worse, that is a fact.
p.1 #20 · Photographers finally realize AI has won
Yes, I know. I spent 20 years in advertising and marketing. In Canada at least the food has to be real to start.
There is a difference between retouching and composite vs AI generated. I do also believe going forward people are going to want to see an actual photograph.
Eventually I think the law will catch up. I imagine some country will do a decent job of writing laws, then the rest will adopt as a starting point.
