AI

[chicagosnaps]

As someone who often takes custom stock photos for a living, I am a bit concerned that Ai will replace me. However, there are increasing amounts of lawsuits and now Getty is adding to the list. This gives me a little bit of hope for the future of my work:

https://www.technologyreview.com/2023/07/17/1076416/judges-lawsuits-dictate-ai-rules/#:~:text=Meanwhile%2C%20artists%2C%20authors%2C%20and,providing%20any%20recognition%20or%20payment.

What do you all think?

 

[VidThreeNorth]

As someone who often takes custom stock photos for a living, I am a bit concerned that Ai will replace me. However, there are increasing amounts of lawsuits and now Getty is adding to the list. This gives me a little bit of hope for the future of my work:

https://www.technologyreview.com/2023/07/17/1076416/judges-lawsuits-dictate-ai-rules/#:~:text=Meanwhile%2C%20artists%2C%20authors%2C%20and,providing%20any%20recognition%20or%20payment.

What do you all think?

I think the first problem is identifying what is "AI" and not just "very big programming". Actually, I read about AI programming in books that came out years ago, and at that point new programming languages were being developed for it, trying to address the problem of "fuzzy logic". As far as I could tell from those early writings, it didn't look like anything more than a new layer of semantics. But these days, new hardware is being developed. I think "quantum computing" is being looked at as having potential in the field, but it is not being used for what is currently going on -- not yet anyway. But so far, I can't wrap my head around it to the point of seeing any difference between AI and "really big computing".

Anyway, if it's just "really big computing", then it has all the same old problems, but the bugs will be harder to find.

Here is an example of a problem with YouTube. Now, is this "AI" programming, or is it an example of a problem caused by "really big computing", or is it an example of a human being with poor judgement causing a YouTuber unnecessary problems?

"YouTube is asking ME to trim ME out of MY video!!!",
posted by "Wings of Pegasus" on Jul 3, 2024, [length 11:27]

 

[nerwin]

It is concerning and it has put a damper on my enthusiasm with photography. It's gonna destroy a lot of people I think, photography will always live on. I think this whole AI craze is going to make film photography come back stronger, I'm all for it. I'd like to see cheaper prices on film lol.

I read somewhere about the future of weddings and how the couples won't need photographers anymore. They can rely on the people attending the wedding to capture images and then use an AI to recreate the scenes and make professional realistic photos of the people getting married even though they are completely AI.

It's a bit sad and it's gonna lack soul. I know some wedding photographers who now only shoot weddings on film for authenticity. The thing about photography is the definition is capturing light. AI/Computer generated photographs cannot capture light.

I'm sorry, I'm ranting honestly. I really am not a fan of AI and people will disagree with me. That's OK. We all have our opinions but I been in tech for a long time and I see terrible things happening and they already are. Older generations are being fooled by AI images on Facebook, scammed even. You used to be able to share a photograph online and people didn't have to think twice about it and now we have to run it through our heads, is this photo real?

 

[smoke665]

I'm old enough to remember living in a B&W world. Our first TV was B&W and we only got 3 channels. When I started in photography it was B&W film, when color became available to the masses, it was pretty exciting. Ive been an advanced users of LR & PS many years now. The biggest advantage of PS has been it's ability to do the same task in multiple ways, the biggest disadvantage is that same flexibility. As no two images are the same, it required knowledge/experience on the part of the user to determine the best method to use.

While some of the recent AI improvements to CC have been good, it's also gradually eroding the knowledge and creativity factor that set the photographer apart from the masses.

 

[webestang64]

AI has helped me do my digital restorations on old photos at work using Photoshop. But AI will not help me at all in my new upcoming analog BW darkroom, the only digital item in there will be a CD boombox.

 

[JoolsW]

AI must by it's very nature, take much of the Art out of photography.

 

[DigiFilm]

"The development of full artificial intelligence could spell the end of the human race."
Stephen Hawking

 

[JoeW]

I agree that AI is a major threat to a lot of professional photographers.

 

[JoolsW]

And musicians too.

 

[smoke665]

AI must by it's very nature, take much of the Art out of photography.

I've played around with all the recent AI additions by Adobe, and have a friend who's become quite advanced in the use. Here's some observations.
1. Despite all the hype, it requires input on what to create, otherwise it's a dumb tool. That input comes from the mind of the artist.
2. The text used to tell it what to create is an art form in and of itself. Try describing a scene to someone such that they can create what you see. As AI uses text literally, one word can change everything.
3. AI is a tool, used correctly it can expand the art of those who learn how to use it.

"The development of full artificial intelligence could spell the end of the human race."
Stephen Hawking

I don't fear AI, I fear man with their constant stepping on God's toes. Genetic manipulation will wipe out the human race before AI does.

 

[DigiFilm]

I agree that AI is a major threat to a lot of professional photographers.

It's a major threat to everyone in the wrong hands, the bigger problem is that there's no way to keep it out of the wrong hands.

AI is already having an effect on photography, graphic artists, etc. Camera manufacturer's have joined forces to include information in embedded in an image to verify it was made with a camera. As we all know, however, anything developed will eventually be hacked.

Graphic artists are out of a job. Why hire someone to develop a company logo or lay out a brochure, flyer, or presentation when AI that's already available on the internet can do it quick and free?

People have already been AI'd in fake pornography, including school-aged children. Politics have become a victim as well.

Scammers use AI to convince people a loved one is in trouble and needs money. It only takes one small voice sample, like you saying "Hello" or "Yes" on a phone call to recreate your voice in AI. Look at what happened recently to Scarlett Johanssen.

No mistake, AI is about as dangerous as it gets. And while the industry is currently discussing ways to curb misuse, it's not in the industry's best interest to do so. They make their money by selling technology to whomever will pony up. Regardless, it's nothing more than feel-good conversation to keep people calm. There are plenty of talented hackers with an interest and too much time on their hands that can develop AI for nefarious uses that we haven't even thought of yet.

 

[JoolsW]

Dead right DigiFim. (IMHO of course). And it's happening just as destructively in music too.
We are at the thin end of the wedge now, and some are enamoured with the potential of AI to HELP THEM. But beware!
I'm pretty skilled with Photoshop, but have rarely used it to falsely enhance a shot. Mainly just compositing, optimising and removing blemishes. But unlike AI, PSD requires a large amount of expertise.
BITD this would be done analogue... retouched and montaged prints. Some may call that the thin end of the wedge, but the difference is that the analogue methods required great skill. AI utilises OTHER people's skill to produce the result that the user doesn't have the skill to produce.
(I'm a newbie here, so I'm not confident about commenting on this sort of thing. I think it's valuable to discuss these things, but I don't want to appear 'argumentative').