This a very measured and thoughtful take. I agree with you that AI is another tool that when used correctly can enhance your work and simplify a workflow without compromising one's ethics. People have been using AI for years without even thinking of it that way, so their outrage at those who acknowledge using it is often misguided.
Heck, you could even argue that when the world shifted from film cameras to digital cameras they started using AI to capture every image since it's a digital interpretation based on an algorithm controlling a sensor vs an organic chemical reaction to light.
We are in dicey territory when it comes to copies (or replicas if you prefer) and the general theft of creative works by AI companies. There are a few court cases in the US pertaining to written works, and motion picture works that will shape the future of this space for years to come. Pay close attention as the AI companies are lobbying hard to get rid of copyright laws in the US and I fear with this administration and current dismissive trend of certain courts that are stacked against the artist, those rulings might not go in favor of intellectual property...or they'll be appealed and appealed until the AI companies finally reach the court that rules in their favor. The EU may be our guiding light in protecting intellectual property these days as they seem to be proactively creating laws with the intention of establishing ethical AI usage and compensation for artists.
Thanks for sharing some great thoughts. Ethics and IP protection is such a contentious issue in AI and one that needs consensus and collaboration. Like you, I’m hopeful that Europe can take the lead, as it did around data privacy with GDPR 🤞🏻
I agree completely with your take and I use the tools to the same extent. I believe any respectable photographer with true passion for the craft will not cross that threshold.
What I value about photography over AI imagined stuff, is that what's in a real picture actually happened.
That dramatic sky on that particular afternoon took place on the real world and some photographer was there to use it to tell their story.
We control the colors and remove small distractions and decide to leave things out of the frame and we choose the moment we press the shutter but we abide by reality when doing all of this because that's been the whole point of photography. Otherwise we grab some brushes and paint.
It'll be of utmost importance that we can clearly separate what's AI generated from what's not so we don't loose ground with the stories we tell through this medium.
I have not talked to brides, but I do wonder for some if using AI for their "fantasy shots" will ever come into play. I'm sure some will think it's cool, but I know it will not be something for me to offer.
Like you, I use it judiciously and for cleaning up things I could do manually (it's pretty awesome for this)
Funny you should mention AI editing because I just finished a theatre performance and used Imagen for the processing. It's good for the most part but I only like to use it when I have 300 or more shots that are fairly tightly lit.
My client is NOT a bride so the level of importance is very different.
Good conversation and I appreciate you raising it up.
I completely agree with your thoughts, Giles. If AI can help, and let's concentrate only on AI for use in photography, it should be used as long as it doesn't change the creative idea of the creator in a way that it turns that creation into a completely different thing. In the example that you show in your post, your creation has remained the same only a bit expanded. Did the image become better than it was before? To me, it didn't. I would like both because they are beautiful images. Did the expansion you did with the help of the AI turned your image into a different one? I don't think so, actually, you have got what you wanted which is good. As long as we make it better for ourselves, a little bit of help is always welcome. I mean, we all have made once photos that are too dark. Where would we be if Lightroom or whatever software one is using, couldn't help a bit making that photo a bit lighter and better? It doesn't work all the time but it is there for us to use. This is what photo editors do and have been doing all the time, even when people were shooting only film and the typesetting of books and magazines was always done by hand.
We have arrived at a point in human civilisation where what matters is produce the most we can with the least effort. This in a way has made us lazy and dependable of machines. Still, I think that machines do a lot for us but I still find that they cannot do everything. Maybe people who create these AI's should tell them not to steal images but instead give credit to the information they gathered in order to produce something. Just like a bibliography at the end of a book, an image created at random by an AI should mention where it got it from.
Eventually, this should be a way to coexist with each other: the real creator and the machine that makes use of it.
Thank you, Luz for sharing your thoughts and perspectives. As with so many others who have taken the time to comment, your points are all great and I couldn’t disagree with them. If we look outside photography we are starting to see credit to information sources, which is a positive. I guess it’s more tricky with photography, as where do you provide this and how to your credit hundreds of images. Hopefully this is a process we just need to work through as humanity and we will end up in the right place.
I think there is no conundrum here - it's digital art once you do that kind of color grading, and even more so with AI. No shade either. I love it. Photography left the realm of reality 60+ years ago. I just appreciate when people are clear about what they've done.
I tend to agree with you Giles - if AI helps business run better that's a good thing especially when you're self employed and have to take on many roles. However, the run in I've had a couple of times with AI automated phone interactions leaves me cold and the thought of dealing with an AI doctor for instance is downright scary given some of the AI generated incorrect answers that come up in online searches! 🙄 Creatively using it to clarify or order our thoughts or grammar checking again I'm all for it. Where photo processing is concerned I'll just use the simple cloning corrections tools that I assume use AI, but generative fills etc leave me a bit cold to be honest...I'm a 'leave a messy woodland messy' type of person! 😊
As a portrait photographer, I often photograph families/children. Sometimes it’s fun to go completely over the top and ask AI to create anime, cartoon or super hero images from my photos. The kids absolutely love them, and it’s so obviously a fictional image that nobody ever gets mad. It’s when photographers try to pass AI on as something “real” that I start to feel uncomfortable. But admittedly, that line is fuzzy. If a mom asks me to remove the bags from under her eyes, is that telling a lie? We as photographers live in miraculous and contentious times.
Thanks for your thoughts, Lauren and I would agree and have no issue with using it for fun. I guess portrait photographers have touched up images forever, even back in darkrooms. Using AI for that falls under the "making us more efficient" category, to me at least 🤔
You offer the best guidance I’ve heard in this new AI landscape. As a photo manager I often see pictures (and have taken them) that would be ‘better’ my removing a distraction or extraneous person, but I usually leave it be for the reasons you mention. Photography is like any skill that enriches through mastery and I resist making changes I could not have done with film. I do think there’s more latitude with commercial images which are somewhat manufactured anyway, but I would be disappointed in a world where the default assumption is that AI contributed to a picture rather than that it did not.
Fully agree. I also use AI in my professional life. Certain tasks saved me numerous hours a week. As for photography, I do not edit that much and certainly not what would benefit of AI.
I am glad you left the beautiful image of the pony as is: letting us imagine what it saw, what it was immersed in. Also: because the first thing I spotted in the artificially-generated photograph was a rather phallic cloud (in the shape of a toppling Eiffel Tower, if you want to be less Freudian)!
Perhaps AI simply reflects our own psyches. Personally I believe that most of its current output is theft… – especially with regards to my speciality, the written word.
Thanks and so pleased you like the original shot. Your points about written word are well made. The large language models (LLM’s) are predictive and not thoughtful. They are using all the written content they have consumed to work out what the next words could/should be. They are mimicking what has come before rather than creating something new.
This a very measured and thoughtful take. I agree with you that AI is another tool that when used correctly can enhance your work and simplify a workflow without compromising one's ethics. People have been using AI for years without even thinking of it that way, so their outrage at those who acknowledge using it is often misguided.
Heck, you could even argue that when the world shifted from film cameras to digital cameras they started using AI to capture every image since it's a digital interpretation based on an algorithm controlling a sensor vs an organic chemical reaction to light.
We are in dicey territory when it comes to copies (or replicas if you prefer) and the general theft of creative works by AI companies. There are a few court cases in the US pertaining to written works, and motion picture works that will shape the future of this space for years to come. Pay close attention as the AI companies are lobbying hard to get rid of copyright laws in the US and I fear with this administration and current dismissive trend of certain courts that are stacked against the artist, those rulings might not go in favor of intellectual property...or they'll be appealed and appealed until the AI companies finally reach the court that rules in their favor. The EU may be our guiding light in protecting intellectual property these days as they seem to be proactively creating laws with the intention of establishing ethical AI usage and compensation for artists.
Great post!
Thanks for sharing some great thoughts. Ethics and IP protection is such a contentious issue in AI and one that needs consensus and collaboration. Like you, I’m hopeful that Europe can take the lead, as it did around data privacy with GDPR 🤞🏻
I agree completely with your take and I use the tools to the same extent. I believe any respectable photographer with true passion for the craft will not cross that threshold.
What I value about photography over AI imagined stuff, is that what's in a real picture actually happened.
That dramatic sky on that particular afternoon took place on the real world and some photographer was there to use it to tell their story.
We control the colors and remove small distractions and decide to leave things out of the frame and we choose the moment we press the shutter but we abide by reality when doing all of this because that's been the whole point of photography. Otherwise we grab some brushes and paint.
It'll be of utmost importance that we can clearly separate what's AI generated from what's not so we don't loose ground with the stories we tell through this medium.
So pleased to hear that and thanks for sharing your perspective, Rodrigo. I couldn’t agree more.
Yes, great summary. I’m with you on where AI can help and where it shouldn’t be used in photography.
Glad to hear that, Andrew.
I have not talked to brides, but I do wonder for some if using AI for their "fantasy shots" will ever come into play. I'm sure some will think it's cool, but I know it will not be something for me to offer.
Like you, I use it judiciously and for cleaning up things I could do manually (it's pretty awesome for this)
Funny you should mention AI editing because I just finished a theatre performance and used Imagen for the processing. It's good for the most part but I only like to use it when I have 300 or more shots that are fairly tightly lit.
My client is NOT a bride so the level of importance is very different.
Good conversation and I appreciate you raising it up.
Thanks, Chris and thanks for sharing your perspective as well. I’ve not tried Imagen yet myself but will give it a look. 👍🏻
Great read Giles.
Thanks, Tom 😊
Original composition with the pony is much better than the AI generated wide-angle shot. Thanks for writing this piece. I subscribed.
Thanks, Cameron. Glad you like it and welcome onboard 😊
I completely agree with your thoughts, Giles. If AI can help, and let's concentrate only on AI for use in photography, it should be used as long as it doesn't change the creative idea of the creator in a way that it turns that creation into a completely different thing. In the example that you show in your post, your creation has remained the same only a bit expanded. Did the image become better than it was before? To me, it didn't. I would like both because they are beautiful images. Did the expansion you did with the help of the AI turned your image into a different one? I don't think so, actually, you have got what you wanted which is good. As long as we make it better for ourselves, a little bit of help is always welcome. I mean, we all have made once photos that are too dark. Where would we be if Lightroom or whatever software one is using, couldn't help a bit making that photo a bit lighter and better? It doesn't work all the time but it is there for us to use. This is what photo editors do and have been doing all the time, even when people were shooting only film and the typesetting of books and magazines was always done by hand.
We have arrived at a point in human civilisation where what matters is produce the most we can with the least effort. This in a way has made us lazy and dependable of machines. Still, I think that machines do a lot for us but I still find that they cannot do everything. Maybe people who create these AI's should tell them not to steal images but instead give credit to the information they gathered in order to produce something. Just like a bibliography at the end of a book, an image created at random by an AI should mention where it got it from.
Eventually, this should be a way to coexist with each other: the real creator and the machine that makes use of it.
Something for in the future, I guess.
Thank you, Luz for sharing your thoughts and perspectives. As with so many others who have taken the time to comment, your points are all great and I couldn’t disagree with them. If we look outside photography we are starting to see credit to information sources, which is a positive. I guess it’s more tricky with photography, as where do you provide this and how to your credit hundreds of images. Hopefully this is a process we just need to work through as humanity and we will end up in the right place.
I think there is no conundrum here - it's digital art once you do that kind of color grading, and even more so with AI. No shade either. I love it. Photography left the realm of reality 60+ years ago. I just appreciate when people are clear about what they've done.
Totally agree, Michael 👍🏻
I tend to agree with you Giles - if AI helps business run better that's a good thing especially when you're self employed and have to take on many roles. However, the run in I've had a couple of times with AI automated phone interactions leaves me cold and the thought of dealing with an AI doctor for instance is downright scary given some of the AI generated incorrect answers that come up in online searches! 🙄 Creatively using it to clarify or order our thoughts or grammar checking again I'm all for it. Where photo processing is concerned I'll just use the simple cloning corrections tools that I assume use AI, but generative fills etc leave me a bit cold to be honest...I'm a 'leave a messy woodland messy' type of person! 😊
Thanks, Lin. Your concerns sound more than reasonable and I would guess are shared by many of us. 👍🏻😁
As a portrait photographer, I often photograph families/children. Sometimes it’s fun to go completely over the top and ask AI to create anime, cartoon or super hero images from my photos. The kids absolutely love them, and it’s so obviously a fictional image that nobody ever gets mad. It’s when photographers try to pass AI on as something “real” that I start to feel uncomfortable. But admittedly, that line is fuzzy. If a mom asks me to remove the bags from under her eyes, is that telling a lie? We as photographers live in miraculous and contentious times.
Thanks for your thoughts, Lauren and I would agree and have no issue with using it for fun. I guess portrait photographers have touched up images forever, even back in darkrooms. Using AI for that falls under the "making us more efficient" category, to me at least 🤔
You offer the best guidance I’ve heard in this new AI landscape. As a photo manager I often see pictures (and have taken them) that would be ‘better’ my removing a distraction or extraneous person, but I usually leave it be for the reasons you mention. Photography is like any skill that enriches through mastery and I resist making changes I could not have done with film. I do think there’s more latitude with commercial images which are somewhat manufactured anyway, but I would be disappointed in a world where the default assumption is that AI contributed to a picture rather than that it did not.
Thank you, Paul. That is extremely kind of you to say and I am glad it resonated with your own opinions on the subject 😊
Agree.
Glad to hear that 😊
i follow you now,great work,give me direction or tips....keep going
Thank you 🙏🏻
Fully agree. I also use AI in my professional life. Certain tasks saved me numerous hours a week. As for photography, I do not edit that much and certainly not what would benefit of AI.
Thanks, Marcel. Great to hear it resonates with your own experiences.
I am glad you left the beautiful image of the pony as is: letting us imagine what it saw, what it was immersed in. Also: because the first thing I spotted in the artificially-generated photograph was a rather phallic cloud (in the shape of a toppling Eiffel Tower, if you want to be less Freudian)!
Perhaps AI simply reflects our own psyches. Personally I believe that most of its current output is theft… – especially with regards to my speciality, the written word.
Thanks and so pleased you like the original shot. Your points about written word are well made. The large language models (LLM’s) are predictive and not thoughtful. They are using all the written content they have consumed to work out what the next words could/should be. They are mimicking what has come before rather than creating something new.
Hello friend, Ive been on Substack for about a week, and im trying to connect with interesting people, so I thought I’d comment!
I write about history, with a philosophical touch.
My latest work -
https://open.substack.com/pub/jordannuttall/p/historic-forged-photos?r=4f55i2&utm_medium=ios