The only time that will get complicated is if we try to be too idealistic about it. Going down that road would involve us excluding anything that didn't fit into a universally agreed upon idealised notion of what a real photograph is. We should be looking to do as little excluding as possible. Put another way, we should be leaning towards being as accommodating as possible, without going so far that the concept of photography becomes meaningless.

It's probably easier and simpler if we start by defining what a photograph is not, which in this case would specifically be images generated from scratch by AI software or computer graphics software. That would mean using the medium of origin as one of the defining factors (but not the only one). In the spirit of keeping things simple, where photographs are concerned we could define the medium of origin as "photographic equipment", which, from a photographer's point of view means cameras, including cameras built into non-camera devices such as phones.

The definition of "photograph" could then realistically include composites (which may or may not include AI generated elements). Photography has a long history of including composites of various types.

Just because a photo has been given some post processing, that needn't mean that we have to stop referring to it as a photo. All photos (digital and analog) have to be given some kind of processing, whether it's in camera or in a computer or a dark room, so the idea that any post processing is a no-no is not realistic.

We would still have to allow for the possibility of photographs being extensively modified. It should be up to the individual to decide whether they felt the need
for disclosure in such matters. The alternative would be to exclude extensively modified photos and then we are left with the problem of where to draw the line.
Those who felt the need for disclosure could refer to such images as "modified photos" which would cover all possibilities.

If someone had the intention of producing a creatively edited image from a photo, the chances are they wouldn't want to refer to it as a photo anyway, so getting precious about such definitions would seem to be futile and trivial.

What's the definition of a photograph? To answer that there are two possibilities - we can be idealistic or we can be realistic. Perhaps to be clear we should specify that we're looking for a working definition. In that context, being realistic would seem to be the better choice. That involves being flexible and accommodating and making sensible assessments. Some people aren't very good at any of those things and they prefer the rigid exclusiveness of idealism. The down side is that being rigid and exclusive is the option that's least likely to produce a working, real world definition.

The possibility of deception will be with us no matter what definitions we choose. For those who feel the need for disclosure there's no problem because there's nothing stopping them. For those who have the intention to deceive, they don't care what the agreed definitions are.

There can be no argument that commercial advertising will use the cheapest, fastest method to achieve its goal, even if that means eliminating people (real people) entirely.

I have my doubts about movies, though, since using AI animation for an entire documentary, dramatic, or comedic movie without any real people might not sell too well. Even the Marvel Universe still requires some real people to blend into the explosions and come out the other side. There is already very little reason to have actual people in this type of movie, but I can't see humans being completely replaced any time soon.

I think there will still be a place for wedding, portrait, and senior photography, documenting news, sending images from space, broadcasting and recording important events, speeches and what have you, personal memorabilia and many other uses that will always require a device to record an actual event.

If you are in certain lines of work, you may have to worry about your job in the future, but cameras in general are going to be around for a long, long time. You'll still want that picture of you at the Grand Canyon.

As we know Adobe has been integrating more and more AI features into Photoshop generative fill and has upgraded Firefly, its AI generating program, to Version 3. In the latest release of Photoshop beta it is now possible to generate a multiple layer composite image using only verbal commands. Generative Fill and Generative Expand, both AI functions, allow us to add AI images to photographs easily and Generative Expand allows us to expand the borders of a photograph with the push of a button.

Topaz Labs Gigapixel AI, DeNoise AI, Sharpen AI and Photo AI use Artificial Intelligence to correct our photographic mistakes. These have become accepted Post Processing steps and are no longer mentioned in photo descriptions yet are truly AI modified images by definition.

Ugly Hedgehog has guidelines on how and where AI and AI/photograph hybrid images may be posted. I believe it is time to revisit these guidelines. With few exceptions most of us use AI to one degree or another in Post Processing. I believe it is time to allow AI generated images to be posted in any Forum as long they are identified as such.

As we know Adobe has been integrating more and more AI features into Photoshop generative fill and has upgraded Firefly, its AI generating program, to Version 3. In the latest release of Photoshop beta it is now possible to generate a multiple layer composite image using only verbal commands. Generative Fill and Generative Expand, both AI functions, allow us to add AI images to photographs easily and Generative Expand allows us to expand the borders of a photograph with the push of a button.

Topaz Labs Gigapixel AI, DeNoise AI, Sharpen AI and Photo AI use Artificial Intelligence to correct our photographic mistakes. These have become accepted Post Processing steps and are no longer mentioned in photo descriptions yet are truly AI modified images by definition.

Ugly Hedgehog has guidelines on how and where AI and AI/photograph hybrid images may be posted. I believe it is time to revisit these guidelines. With few exceptions most of us use AI to one degree or another in Post Processing. I believe it is time to allow AI generated images to be posted in any Forum as long they are identified as such.