Doyle Thomas Loc: Vancouver Washington ~ USA

i have been giving a lot of thought to this "content aware" and artificial intelligence going on in what we used to call Photography.

Since Steven Sasson (USA) built his digital camera and Richard G Shoop (USA) created “SUPERPAINT” digital Photography has provided more and improved tools. Having started with film and PS 2.4 it seems the progression to today is it possible that its useful point in Photography has become saturated? Does it already do everything needed to reproduce the reality and vision?

primaryfocusphoto.com

13 Loc: I am only responsible to what I say..not what

Wallen Loc: Middle Earth

It is still based on photography.
The AI is pooling the result from the billions of photographs already in the net.

Think of the bird looking at the feathers on the arrow that hit him.

terryMc Loc: Arizona's White Mountains

One area of interest for me for a long time now has been photo restoration. The machine learning technology in Photoshop can be be a big aid in this particular form of digital imaging, if your intention is to restore a photo to some semblance of the original and not merely recreate it as an illustration or a cartoon. The Internets are rife with people using phone apps like Faceapp and Remini to "restore" a photo to something that it never was, and that holds no interest for me.

I have very few old photos of my ancestors (none of anyone beyond my own grandparents) and to salvage and pass down what is left is a big challenge, but since I am the only one in the family with any kind of experience in photo retouching, it seems to lie with me to get it done.

So do the new tools in Photoshop mean that it does "...everything needed to reproduce the reality and vision?" Not by a long shot. There is still a lot of manual manipulation needed to get an old photo to a state where it will look like the original and not a plastic doll imitation. It may not be the same with your landscape photos, maybe the saturation point has been reached there, but some new tools just introduced in Camera Raw would seem to indicate that there are still advances to be made.

Doyle Thomas Loc: Vancouver Washington ~ USA

You raise a good point. There is still a lot of manual manipulation needed to get an old photo to a state where it will look like the original. I have been toying AI for spotting and noise reduction.

abc1234 Loc: Elk Grove Village, Illinois

Doyle, you can get good results with your current equipment and workflow. However, I started printing in 1959 and to make a long story short, I love all the improvements in gear and software. My work gets better and better while taking less time. When I think that the technology cannot find anything better, it does! Not all new features are useful to me but with every new update, Adobe surprises us with a new must-use feature I had not even imagined.

So stay with what you have or grow your artistry. Photography is such a great blend of science and art but the former is in the service of the latter.

tgreenhaw

In my opinion not even close. More sensitive sensors would allow better low light performance and much higher shutter speeds throughout the aperture range. Meta lenses might someday allow full frame performance in a mobile phone package; the bet camera is the one you have with you. Ultra sharp super zooms would make light work of high quality travel photography. AI that not only focuses on a recognized object but also automatically takes multiple images selecting the best shots. I could go on for more paragraphs about video and the lack of good inexpensive choices.

Our toolset is certainly far more than adequate, but new tools would make our tasks easier.

Doyle Thomas Loc: Vancouver Washington ~ USA

you are speaking hardware, i am speaking of software.

terryMc Loc: Arizona's White Mountains

Perhaps, but where would today's cameras be without software, or more accurately perhaps, firmware? Even lenses today have firmware installed and have to be updated occasionally. I have a ZTF adapter. It has firmware. An adapter.

The first SLR I ever owned was an AE-1P. The P stood for "Program." Alongside today's mirrorless computerized marvels, the term sounds like a bad joke. All it could do was pick a shutter speed to go with the aperture you set.

Not only do you now have automatic focus modes for vehicles, planes birds, people and pets, but you can set modern cameras to pre-edit your photos, shoot color or B&W, automatically adjust for lighting conditions—too much to recount in one post. Today's hardware will not function without the software.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

Artists for centuries have always had free reign to reproduce the reality of their vision. Aren't photographers artists too?

Curmudgeon Loc: SE Arizona

I also started with PS 2. something at work. I learned to do things that earlier photographers or graphic artists would never have dreamed of. By the time Photoshop CS appeared I thought Adobe had reached it's limit. Now at PS 25.1 I begin to wonder if there is a limit. Yes most of the things 25.1 can do I can, or at least could, do manually but not near as fast or in most cases, as good.

I am a picture taker not a photographer. I will never be a photographer because I don't want to work that hard. I take what are derisively called snapshots. I shoot what my mind sees, which is not always what's in front of the lens. Fast food wrappers, barbed wire fences, etc. The camera never sees what I saw when I took the picture.

When I get home I download my day's take to my computer and evaluate the day's shots. I can make those distractions disappear like magic with the push of a button in Photoshop. Plain blue sky? Easily fixed. Cut the tail off a bird? No problem AI will add it back on with the push of a button. In the end I wind up with the image I saw when I tripped the shutter. Some time soon AI will develop a method to fix out of focus shots. I for one can't wait for the next development.

Things I believe:

Lightroom/Photoshop is the Gold Standard in Post Processing software
Contrary to popular belief, Lightroom/Photoshop is not difficult to learn
Other Post Processing software will serve the majority of people as well as LR/PS