Hey! look at this tiger shark !

[Ido]

Hey guys!

I have a bad attitude towards AI. It's frustrating to think that the line between "real" and "fake" is fading.

Unfortunately - the technology is getting better and better thanks to the endless amount of pictures and photos that the AI engines take as a reference without any permission.

Yet, when I edit a picture in Lightroom, I'm also "cheating". Lightroom uses AI without calling it that. Removing backscatters, sharpening blurred objects, etc. Are all part of this revolution. 

What are your thoughts?

Here is a "pic" of a tiger shark I created in AI.

Best wishes for the holidays

Ido

 

Edited December 25, 2023 by Ido

[TimG]

Sure saves time, Ido!

The edit element I think amazing.  Total picture creation, not so much. For now. But doubtless it will be before long. 

[Buddha]

I think with AI it's all about honesty. Be honest with what you create. I personally like seeing an artistic perspective but the artist needs to disclose the process of the art. 

[Crasoner]

Well, we can't avoid technology and it seems the AI is going to be a huge part of the current photography industry. Although, in my humble opinion I would like to see some regulations on it to not destroy the legit real photographer's work. They both can live together but everyone in its own house 🤣.

[bvanant]

looks kind like a cross between a tiger and great white. 

 

From the perspective of users of images, I am not sure they really care.  If you look at most TV advertisements for new cars, most if not all are renderings, rather than actual footage. If I were looking for a pic for an ad needing a shark, why not use an AI one if it were significantly cheaper/better. Advertisers don't owe UW photographers anything, they are trying to sell something. Magazines and websites are an entirely different story.  We make medical devices and clearly use stock photos of people that we pretend are real patients but never claim that they are.

So a lot depends on the end use.

Bill