Bill_de Loc: US

Would you still consider it a photograph or is it a hybrid image?

Isn't photography drawing with light?

If I liked it and it was drawn with crayola crayons I would still hang it on my wall.

Much ado about nothing.

---

MrPhotog

Or photo editors who have to clean up marginal photos, and turn them into gems.

jaredjacobson

You seem to be under the impression that someone here is arguing in favor of the idea that it takes skill as a photographer to use AI to generate something. I haven’t seen anyone say that yet.

The content to which the AI-generated something is added may have required skill with a camera. Using the tools to create an digital image from a captured photograph using AI tools may require skill as an artist and editor, just like creating a polished image from a photograph and possibly other content using non-AI editing tools may require significant skill.

In the end, someone creating a digital image through whatever means is fine as long as they don’t misrepresent the path they took to make it. I believe we should be well past the point of assuming that any digital image—or film capture, for that matter—accurately represents reality. The default assumption should be otherwise unless the image creator states that it does. If the artists claims it accurately represents reality and it doesn’t, that’s a different problem called lying or fraud depending on the circumstances.

Journalism is one of the few areas where we should be able to assume the opposite. Even then, there’s been enough inaccuracy and fraud there that a healthy dose of skepticism is warranted.

Chan Garrett

It is just a matter of how far you go. If I photograph a scene of a dirt road winding up a hill, and I remove the overhead power lines, is it now a hybrid image? What if I add a bird on the fence beside the road? You decide what you are comfortable with.

R.G. Loc: Scotland

Oh oh - anther case of phantom-generated angst.

R.G. Loc: Scotland

oops! There goes #5

The Aardvark Is Ready

After pondering your response, you are quite correct in that it is adding parts to the image that weren't there. But I still feel that is only because of the limitations of the software to stitch the image without distorting it.

Bill_de Loc: US

The last line of my post is my answer.

---

R.G. Loc: Scotland

Apparently he's appalled by the mere suggestion of the possibility that somebody may use AI to create an image and then claim that it's his/her photo. I suppose we should sympathise with his apprehensions. What a fraudulent way to gain access to that elite and noble group which we refer to as "real photographers".

Markag

Grouchy people !
Take a photo of your granddaughter. She has a blemish on her forehead. You remove it.
Are you a “bad” photographer?

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

You're right - we have never been able to automatically assume photographs portray "reality", and not just because of how they are edited or processed. It is possible to "lie" with a photograph with no processing whatsoever. Just deciding what to include or exclude from the photo, the angle or direction the photo is taken from, the timing of when to make the shot, the effects of the focal length of the lens, all can create a misleading photo.

jcboy3

I stitch images frequently, and I don't use content aware fill when I do.

The problem you have is that you don't understand the cause of the distortion. You take an image, and it is a transformation from a spherical space to a rectangular plane. The distortion arises by moving that plane. The stitching software has to correct that distortion, and that results in uneven boundares in the result.

To avoid this, I shoot much wider than necessary for each image. I take many images with a small rotation. I use a tripod and pano head. And I align my lens to the no-parallax point that I have previously calibrated. Or I use a shift lens mounted with a lens adapter to shift the camera.

None of this is creating a fake image via software.

Bill_de Loc: US

You should have had a doctor look at it. Then let the doctor determine the method of removal. I hope you didn't leave your granddaughter scarred for life. Maybe not a bad photographer, just a bad grandparent.



---

jcboy3

No, you are a portrait photographer.

The Aardvark Is Ready

Yes, I am appalled with someone using Ai to create an image and then claim it is their photo. Judging from your sarcastic tone, am I correct in assuming that you are just fine with that? I'll ask a similar question that I've asked others ,but no one's really answered. If you've spent considerable time, effort and money in entering a photo in a competition, would you be just fine with the winner being someone who just sat at home and typed in a few words in a software program, winning? I don't know how many times I can say it. I am not against Ai or Ai generated images. Or anyone having fun creating them. I am saying an Ai image is not a photograph and shouldn't be presented as such. It is as you say fraudulent. Would you use Ai to create and put a bear in an image of a tree you took and then sell it to a magazine as a photo you took?