This is an interesting take, Marcel! I think it's not a coincidence that alongside the rapid development of AI tools, more and more people are returning to analogue. It makes me wonder whether the only time we're truly in control of our photography is when shooting film!
This! Shooting 4x5 I can honestly say that most of my editing/selecting is done before I ever set the camera up. Some more happens as I get the camera set up and realize that a potentially promising composition just isn't coming together on the ground glass.
Granted, I shoot a little more loosely on smaller formats and digital, but I still try to not go overboard. I *hate* the edit/select process when the number of images starts to increase significantly.
If I were shooting weddings or events, returning home with thousands of images on an SD card, I'd have a very different take on it. Having an AI assistant capable of grading images on technical aspects (Is it in focus? Are someone's eyes closed? Camera shake?) would be handy then. My biggest struggle when sifting through digital shots is the near-duplicates; which of the 4 very similar shots is the "best"? A tool that could help with that would be a real boon.
Thanks for your reaction, Paul! I very much relate to your dislike of the whole editing process - I try to avoid it as much as I can myself, even though I shoot almost solely digital. As for the last part - the pain of selecting 'the one' out of nearly identical set - I feel you, but maybe this is the one part we shouldn't want to leave up to a machine. What makes one particular photograph stand out is usually the ever-elusive feeling of being touched by a work of art. I don't think AI will ever be able to replicate that feeling.
Oh, definitely would not want the AI/other tool having the final say, for sure. At risk of playing devils advocate to myself, one can never rule out that the anguish of making that choice may actually be an important part of the process, and even the suggestion by a machine of which one to choose would risk ceding that to the machine and losing some of the humanity.
Excellent. As with many art forms the human element is the key. Removing
that key piece removes the emotion, the truth about a moment depicted. Artists will not be replaced. My take has always been with the proliferation of fake images, the importance of our work as photographers will become even more so.
I haven't tested it myself, but I can imagine the computer would assess the measurable aspects, taking out all the photographs that are a little 'off' - but aren't the photos that are a little off often the best expression of our vision?
That is what I mean. AI can maybe technically decide what is best, but a photograph to me is an interpretation of a moment which involves emotion and subjectivity.
This is actually a great way to have a use for AI in photography. It gives us more time to go out and create rather than sit for hours selecting and editing photos.
"AI is therefore not a threat to photography but a liberation from technical constraints. It enables us to spend more time on what really counts: developing our vision and telling our stories. Because ultimately, it's not the algorithms that make a photo memorable, but the human touch we put into it."
all points feel true to my opinion and it also brings a little humour to my mind. As a millennial, it has been fascinating growing up between the film, early digital, late digital, smart digital and now AI world of photography. Each time, hearing complaints and comparisons to the “good old days” and not wanting to conform but inevitably do, as there ain’t no stopping humans from wanting to do better 😝
Very well put Marcel. I particularly like your line "The real value of AI lies in removing the technical barriers that sometimes keep us from what really matters".
My two biggest issues with AI is the scraping of copyrighted material and the dull conformity it can produce. Which is why true creatives will always have the human advantage.
Precisely. An AI that learns your 'style' is only ever going to feed you images that match your style. How, in that process, do you ever grow as a photographer and evolve - or even revolutionise - your style. This is just a more sophisticated version of the algorithm problem where Netflix or Spotify just serves up stuff similar to what you already watch or listen to, and closes off while worlds of possibility. Maybe I'm just turning into one of the grumpy old men, but I can't help thinking that there's a connection between the rise of artificial intelligence and human - I was going to say stupidity, but perhaps more lack of curiosity.
This is an interesting take, Marcel! I think it's not a coincidence that alongside the rapid development of AI tools, more and more people are returning to analogue. It makes me wonder whether the only time we're truly in control of our photography is when shooting film!
This! Shooting 4x5 I can honestly say that most of my editing/selecting is done before I ever set the camera up. Some more happens as I get the camera set up and realize that a potentially promising composition just isn't coming together on the ground glass.
Granted, I shoot a little more loosely on smaller formats and digital, but I still try to not go overboard. I *hate* the edit/select process when the number of images starts to increase significantly.
If I were shooting weddings or events, returning home with thousands of images on an SD card, I'd have a very different take on it. Having an AI assistant capable of grading images on technical aspects (Is it in focus? Are someone's eyes closed? Camera shake?) would be handy then. My biggest struggle when sifting through digital shots is the near-duplicates; which of the 4 very similar shots is the "best"? A tool that could help with that would be a real boon.
Thanks for your reaction, Paul! I very much relate to your dislike of the whole editing process - I try to avoid it as much as I can myself, even though I shoot almost solely digital. As for the last part - the pain of selecting 'the one' out of nearly identical set - I feel you, but maybe this is the one part we shouldn't want to leave up to a machine. What makes one particular photograph stand out is usually the ever-elusive feeling of being touched by a work of art. I don't think AI will ever be able to replicate that feeling.
Oh, definitely would not want the AI/other tool having the final say, for sure. At risk of playing devils advocate to myself, one can never rule out that the anguish of making that choice may actually be an important part of the process, and even the suggestion by a machine of which one to choose would risk ceding that to the machine and losing some of the humanity.
Excellent. As with many art forms the human element is the key. Removing
that key piece removes the emotion, the truth about a moment depicted. Artists will not be replaced. My take has always been with the proliferation of fake images, the importance of our work as photographers will become even more so.
I am still not quite there yet to trust AI to decide what I think are the best photos I have taken. What does best even mean in the ‚eyes‘ of AI?
I haven't tested it myself, but I can imagine the computer would assess the measurable aspects, taking out all the photographs that are a little 'off' - but aren't the photos that are a little off often the best expression of our vision?
That is what I mean. AI can maybe technically decide what is best, but a photograph to me is an interpretation of a moment which involves emotion and subjectivity.
Yes. It often is not about those technicalities, but rather emotional feelings.
I'm with you 💯!
This is actually a great way to have a use for AI in photography. It gives us more time to go out and create rather than sit for hours selecting and editing photos.
Totally agree with this, Marcel:
"AI is therefore not a threat to photography but a liberation from technical constraints. It enables us to spend more time on what really counts: developing our vision and telling our stories. Because ultimately, it's not the algorithms that make a photo memorable, but the human touch we put into it."
Great read. Thank you.
all points feel true to my opinion and it also brings a little humour to my mind. As a millennial, it has been fascinating growing up between the film, early digital, late digital, smart digital and now AI world of photography. Each time, hearing complaints and comparisons to the “good old days” and not wanting to conform but inevitably do, as there ain’t no stopping humans from wanting to do better 😝
Thanks Shawn, I see what you mean with these complaints. It is adapt or die.
Very well put Marcel. I particularly like your line "The real value of AI lies in removing the technical barriers that sometimes keep us from what really matters".
Thanks Andrew, we need to see it as a helper, making it easier for us to focus on important things.
Yes, while keeping ultimate control.
My two biggest issues with AI is the scraping of copyrighted material and the dull conformity it can produce. Which is why true creatives will always have the human advantage.
Hear hear
Precisely. An AI that learns your 'style' is only ever going to feed you images that match your style. How, in that process, do you ever grow as a photographer and evolve - or even revolutionise - your style. This is just a more sophisticated version of the algorithm problem where Netflix or Spotify just serves up stuff similar to what you already watch or listen to, and closes off while worlds of possibility. Maybe I'm just turning into one of the grumpy old men, but I can't help thinking that there's a connection between the rise of artificial intelligence and human - I was going to say stupidity, but perhaps more lack of curiosity.