Am I overthinking this? (Page 2): Since the beginnings of photography it has been about capturing AND creating. Things which today's purists object to, like sky replacement, or adding...

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

wmurnahan wrote:

I'm a photographer, for me, part of the hobby is the challenge of capturing not creating. Getting the perfect shot is what brings a smile to my face. If I was a graphic designer, needing to come up with specific content, it would be AI all the way but I'm a photographer.

Since the beginnings of photography it has been about capturing AND creating. Things which today's purists object to, like sky replacement, or adding or removing objects, were done in the darkroom from the earliest days of photography. AI apps to modify photographs fit right into this tradition. AI images created entirely on a computer are a completely different medium, although they may resemble photographs.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

pithydoug wrote:

We will all ponder this. All I want to know is it AI created or not. I can enjoy them differently.

I enjoy an image (or not) for what I see/feel when I look at it.
Do I have to know if it is real? Not necessarily.
Do I have to know how it was created? Not necessarily.
Do I have to know what camera was used? Not necessarily.
Do I have to know what editor was used? Not necessarily.
It will either move me or it won't.

wmurnahan Loc: Bloomington IN

JohnSwanda wrote:

Since the beginnings of photography it has been about capturing AND creating. Things which today's purists object to, like sky replacement, or adding or removing objects, were done in the darkroom from the earliest days of photography. AI apps to modify photographs fit right into this tradition. AI images created entirely on a computer are a completely different medium, although they may resemble photographs.

I'm from the color slide, no tricks, no making up for bad exposure. What you shot is what you got. The AI is not photography, it is something else, AI. I does allow a person who can't paint, the ability to put together an image they imagine, but that is not photography. The best you can say is my computer created this image from what I told it.

srt101fan

User ID wrote:

Not only is the use vs non-use of a camera irrelevant but this image has something no camera photo could offer. Its a sneak peek inside your skull, unadulterated by objects gathered from the material world by a lens.

I disagree with the first half of your first sentence (“Not only is the use vs non-use of a camera irrelevant….”). This is the kind of broad, sweeping generalization you accuse others of. Irrelevant in what context?

Note that, according to the OP, the AI image was selected by Flickr as a PHOTO to be included in their Flickr Explorer section…..

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

wmurnahan wrote:

I'm from the color slide, no tricks, no making up for bad exposure. What you shot is what you got. The AI is not photography, it is something else, AI. I does allow a person who can't paint, the ability to put together an image they imagine, but that is not photography. The best you can say is my computer created this image from what I told it.

I guess you never printed your slides. You could burn and dodge just like negatives. Slides could also be manipulated by duping them, and slides which were published could also be manipulated.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

JohnSwanda wrote:

I guess you never printed your slides. You could burn and dodge just like negatives. Slides could also be manipulated by duping them, and slides which were published could also be manipulated.

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

srt101fan wrote:

I disagree with the first half of your first sentence (“Not only is the use vs non-use of a camera irrelevant….”). This is the kind of broad, sweeping generalization you accuse others of. Irrelevant in what context?

Note that, according to the OP, the AI image was selected by Flickr as a PHOTO to be included in their Flickr Explorer section…..

It's not the use of a camera that makes a photograph, it's the use of light on a light sensitive material to create images. Photograms have always been considered photography, and there is no camera used.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

JohnSwanda wrote:

It's not the use of a camera that makes a photograph, it's the use of light on a light sensitive material to create images. Photograms have always been considered photography, and there is no camera used.

sippyjug104 Loc: Missouri

When a magician performs, do they disclose that their actions are fake or stop performing? When someone sings to recorded music, do they disclose their efforts are fake or stop performing? Does a Conductor of an orchestra stop performing because the music is not his own creation nor is the playing of the instruments? The list of creating illusions in the name of art goes on and on.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

sippyjug104 wrote:

When a magician performs, do they disclose that their actions are fake or stop performing? When someone sings to recorded music, do they disclose their efforts are fake or stop performing? Does a Conductor of an orchestra stop performing because the music is not his own creation nor is the playing of the instruments? The list of creating illusions in the name of art goes on and on.

Perception.....

srt101fan

JohnSwanda wrote:

It's not the use of a camera that makes a photograph, it's the use of light on a light sensitive material to create images. Photograms have always been considered photography, and there is no camera used.

By regurgitating the same ole same ole you totally missed the point.

wmurnahan Loc: Bloomington IN

JohnSwanda wrote:

I guess you never printed your slides. You could burn and dodge just like negatives. Slides could also be manipulated by duping them, and slides which were published could also be manipulated.

None of that is AI. I've dodged and burned many hours in the darkroom with black and white, but everything I brought out of the negative with my dodging and burning was already captured by my skilled exposure, all I did was improve. AI has nothing you did other then type in a scene. Nothing against the new creative medium, but it is not photography.

tdozier3 Loc: Northern Illinois

alphonso49uk wrote:

So Ive never been one of those photographers who t... (show quote)

I think it's fake. Sorry, you asked.

PhotogHobbyist Loc: Bradford, PA

alphonso49uk wrote:

So Ive never been one of those photographers who t... (show quote)

I like the "pic" and it does look very much like an actual photograph...that is until I looked more closely at the bottle. To me it appears to be floating in space and not sitting on the pavement. Also there is no shadow of it, but there is a slight shadow of the man in the pic. Aside from those two minor "discrepancies" it is a very interesting, well composed and realistic depiction. Makes me a bit more appreciative of AI. I still prefer to use my DSLR for making images.

wapiti Loc: round rock, texas

Not a problem, IMO. YOU GO

Not a problem, IMO.