For we who make composite images
Mar 31, 2024 20:15:12 #
User ID wrote:
Nearly all definitions become archaic if theyre not updated. Whether your prefered definition of photography is already archaic is just an argument about WHEN the update occurs. If for you that hasnt happened yet, theres no harm in using archaic terms in the interim.
You didn't answer my question. If the definition of photography as the result of the action of light on a light sensitive material is archaic, what definition do you propose which doesn't include that but differentiates photography from other image making media? Do you think all forms of image making can be defined as photography? What other forms of image making which don't fit that definition should be included in the definition of photography?
Apr 1, 2024 00:40:31 #
JohnSwanda wrote:
You didn't answer my question. If the definition of photography as the result of the action of light on a light sensitive material is archaic, what definition do you propose which doesn't include that but differentiates photography from other image making media? Do you think all forms of image making can be defined as photography? What other forms of image making which don't fit that definition should be included in the definition of photography?
Setting limits is not my job but its clear that older limits are lately becoming too limiting.
Typesetting originally meant taking type in hand and *setting* it in place. That ceased ages ago but we still hired "typesetters" by that same unchanged job title.
Crafters of types of imagery that resemble what we usually refer to as photos will very likely still be called "photographers". Your approval is nether sought after nor needed.
Possibly "Content Creatior" will cover whats really going on and the term "photographer" will refer to only persons from the past, as with "daguereoytpist". That would softy pad everyones comfort zone, word-wise. But in either scenario, that term "photographer" is, or will be, quaintly archaic.
Apr 1, 2024 08:24:02 #
Nigel7 wrote:
Is this not a photographic blog. A photograph by definition is produced by the action of light on a light-sensitive material. Therefore using AI to create a new image is nothing to do with photography and should have no place on UHH.
Using AI to clean up a grainy image originally produced by the action of light on a light-sensitive material is not so clear cut.
Using AI to clean up a grainy image originally produced by the action of light on a light-sensitive material is not so clear cut.
Apr 2, 2024 02:53:02 #
A solution has been hiding in plain sight. No matter what mix of sources one may collage or layer into an image, with or without AI, always start with a blank canvas created by the action of light on a sensor. Then add whatever floats your dinghy.
Since the blank canvas is a photograph of blankness thaz created by acknowledged photographic means, the end result is an edited photograph, still a real photograph even according to the archaic definition.
Example of a blank canvas, shot by iphone, attached below. Feel free to borrow it, or if youre a Real Artist acoarst you just steal it.
Since the blank canvas is a photograph of blankness thaz created by acknowledged photographic means, the end result is an edited photograph, still a real photograph even according to the archaic definition.
Example of a blank canvas, shot by iphone, attached below. Feel free to borrow it, or if youre a Real Artist acoarst you just steal it.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.