Ugly Hedgehog - Photography
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Generative Fill...Oboy, here we go!
Page <<first <prev 7 of 8 next>
May 24, 2023 20:27:36   #
The Aardvark Is Ready
 
To All:

I would like to apologize for my first comment in this topic. I hold strong opinions about certain kinds of photo manipulation as already voiced. But's that's no excuse to insult other people. As to the person who wondered why I cared at all what other people do. I don't if it doesn't affect me. But as a person who makes a part of his living with photography from clients who are asking for photographs, not Ai creations, I should not have to compete in that arena.
If or when photography ever becomes obsolete and there's no such thing as a photograph anymore, I'm fine with that. When a client such as Outdoor Photographer Magazine starts calling itself Outdoor Image Magazine and requests Images instead of photos then I will try my hand at that.

Reply
May 24, 2023 20:39:25   #
Bill_de Loc: US
 
The Aardvark Is Ready wrote:
To All:

But as a person who makes a part of his living with photography from clients who are asking for photographs, not Ai creations, I should not have to compete in that arena.


I wonder how a client would react if you provided a photograph and then also gave them an AI enhanced version of the same image. If they had a choice would they want one over the other ... or both?

---

Reply
May 24, 2023 21:01:27   #
The Aardvark Is Ready
 
Bill_de wrote:
I wonder how a client would react if you provided a photograph and then also gave them an AI enhanced version of the same image. If they had a choice would they want one over the other ... or both?

---


They might be fine with it as long as it's labeled as such. The stock agencies that have used a few of my images actually require that you label digital creations or Ai enhanced images as such. But it's been quite a few years since I've made any income from them and they may well have changed their requirements.

Reply
 
 
May 24, 2023 22:11:38   #
MrPhotog
 
The Aardvark Is Ready wrote:
To All:

I . . . I hold strong opinions about certain kinds of photo manipulation as already voiced. . .

But as a person who makes a part of his living with photography from clients who are asking for photographs, not Ai creations, I should not have to compete in that arena. . .


I hear ya. And sympathize. After years as a news photographer I opened a studio. PR pictures and advertising images were whatever the client wanted, if I could do it. They were not news pictures, and there was no pretence about it.

Later I discovered a lucrative venture of copying and restoring old and damaged photos. Airbrush work took up a lot more time than the copy work, but backgrounds, and ex-husbands, could disappear—along with folds, creases, and tears.

What the clients got were photographs, and their original. But the photographs were copy shots of a work copy that I had reworked. They looked like photographs, they came from a photo studio. But the image was modified to improve on the version which they had brought in. And they had the original to compare it with.

It made them happy and kept my rent paid for another week.

Almost Every time I do even a small correction in photoshop I recall those years, and with absolutely no fondness! Digital editing is such a sweet improvement over the good ol’ days.

If I was doing such work today I would be delighted with an artificial enhancement that might draw in the pattern of lace on a wedding gown, where the print has a crack in the emulsion. It would be even better than the copy and stamp tools.

I see copy and restoration work as an area of professional photography—but not a journalism area. Different tools and different rules.

Reply
May 24, 2023 22:44:10   #
JimGray Loc: Albuquerque, New Mexico
 
JohnSwanda wrote:
I guess you mean that the only use of post processing is to fix bad photos. In fact, its best use is to take photos which are the best they can be out of the camera and improve them further.


Right on!

Reply
May 25, 2023 00:08:24   #
chasgroh Loc: Buena Park, CA
 
MrPhotog wrote:
Not all the pictures in Nat Geo are necessarily journalism, or even photographs. There is a lot of hand drawn art, particularly of ancient people or animals. Is that journalism, or anthropology, or a scientific/forensic illustration. They do a good job of illustrating their articles, and identifying the people who created those illustrations.

I’m sure when Fox-Talbot showed his first images people must have said something like ‘But those aren’t really portraits, he didn’t use a brush at all’.

It may be the birth of a new age. Be thrilled to be in at the beginning, ‘cause things will probably evolve from this point.
Not all the pictures in Nat Geo are necessarily jo... (show quote)


...hear here.

Reply
May 25, 2023 01:35:24   #
R.G. Loc: Scotland
 
Then there's the use of AI to enhance recovery tools.....

Reply
 
 
May 25, 2023 07:14:49   #
Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington
 
MrPhotog wrote:
Not all the pictures in Nat Geo are necessarily journalism, or even photographs. There is a lot of hand drawn art, particularly of ancient people or animals. Is that journalism, or anthropology, or a scientific/forensic illustration. They do a good job of illustrating their articles, and identifying the people who created those illustrations.

I’m sure when Fox-Talbot showed his first images people must have said something like ‘But those aren’t really portraits, he didn’t use a brush at all’.

It may be the birth of a new age. Be thrilled to be in at the beginning, ‘cause things will probably evolve from this point.
Not all the pictures in Nat Geo are necessarily jo... (show quote)
You quoted a question Aardvark asked me, so just to be clear, I am thrilled to be in at the beginning

Reply
May 25, 2023 18:56:29   #
rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA
 
Linda From Maine wrote:
Yours is the third topic posted today about this subject. People are very excited

And excited people convey excitement, but no information.
What is it.
Why would someone want such a thing??

Reply
May 25, 2023 21:33:22   #
D750
 
Gang --
The real question here is how much dodging, burning, content-aware fill-in, contrast adjustment, brightening, remove-tooling, cropping, straightening, AI, generative fill-in, blah, blah does it take before a photograph isn't "real" anymore?
Photography itself is a real (technical) art. And I admire perfect photos that come right out of the camera. But who among us hasn't had to do "a little something" (in post processing) to make a certain shot really spectacular?
Aardvark is on the right trail, but I think he misses the fact that even Hoggers like to experiment with new toys, even if they drift over the edge of "photographic morality."

Reply
May 25, 2023 21:37:37   #
chasgroh Loc: Buena Park, CA
 
rehess wrote:
And excited people convey excitement, but no information.
What is it.
Why would someone want such a thing??


...find the Kelby vid I posted at the beginning of the thread, watch and find out! I look at it as a tool. <shrug>

Reply
 
 
May 25, 2023 22:35:53   #
Bill_de Loc: US
 
chasgroh wrote:
...find the Kelby vid I posted at the beginning of the thread, watch and find out! I look at it as a tool. <shrug>


That video was the first in a long time I watched end to end with only a short pause to refill my coffee cup.
It is really hard to discuss the topic without seeing what it is all about. Seeing is believing!

---

Reply
May 25, 2023 23:27:52   #
jaredjacobson
 
D750 wrote:
Gang --
The real question here is how much dodging, burning, content-aware fill-in, contrast adjustment, brightening, remove-tooling, cropping, straightening, AI, generative fill-in, blah, blah does it take before a photograph isn't "real" anymore?
Photography itself is a real (technical) art. And I admire perfect photos that come right out of the camera. But who among us hasn't had to do "a little something" (in post processing) to make a certain shot really spectacular?
Aardvark is on the right trail, but I think he misses the fact that even Hoggers like to experiment with new toys, even if they drift over the edge of "photographic morality."
Gang -- br The real question here is how much dod... (show quote)


What if real isn’t the point? I note that photography is taught out of the art department at most universities. While some art is about trying to make images of real things, much art is not.

I don’t think that Monet’s paintings were immoral; I don’t think editing photos into something unrecognizable is, either. The only time it becomes immoral is if someone claims it is as an unedited photograph of a real thing when it is not.

Even then, “unedited” is tricky, because, for example, with my camera I can boost saturation or turn the image monochrome or apply a pinhole effect or do a color wash in camera. Lenses distort: they can make things look closer or farther from each other. The very practice of taking something three dimensional and projecting it into a flat surface makes it unreal.

Reply
May 26, 2023 00:20:15   #
The Aardvark Is Ready
 
jaredjacobson wrote:
What if real isn’t the point? I note that photography is taught out of the art department at most universities. While some art is about trying to make images of real things, much art is not.

I don’t think that Monet’s paintings were immoral; I don’t think editing photos into something unrecognizable is, either. The only time it becomes immoral is if someone claims it is as an unedited photograph of a real thing when it is not.

Even then, “unedited” is tricky, because, for example, with my camera I can boost saturation or turn the image monochrome or apply a pinhole effect or do a color wash in camera. Lenses distort: they can make things look closer or farther from each other. The very practice of taking something three dimensional and projecting it into a flat surface makes it unreal.
What if real isn’t the point? I note that photogr... (show quote)


To All:

I would like the group's opinion as to whether these famous photos would still be considered such works of art if the photographers had used Ai generate parts or allof them. Such as Henri Cartier Bresson just typing in the Photoshop line "Man jumping puddle?"











Reply
May 26, 2023 00:32:27   #
William Loc: Mississippi
 
it's basically ripping off all
the masters we all viewed
future is our loss to find it

Reply
Page <<first <prev 7 of 8 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.