What AI does, is make us, eventually, less competent. It takes away our ability to solve problems in the real world and offers us a digital version of the solved problem. It makes us lazy (And I was pretty lazy to begin with)
In days of yore It would be a whole day's shooting and everything would have to be right and perfect on the final polaroid which we'd study with a magnifying glass for 10 minutes before loading the film holders into the camera. And even more recently, we'd have shot the two digital photographs and spent an hour combining them in photoshop... Or buying the background stock picture and combining them... Now we just make a selection of the background and click "Gerative fill" and it plagiarizes a thousand images and creates the right background... And in this particular photo, (which btw, I shot and processed for a restaurant here in the conventional way) it didn't even go into photoshop.... I uploaded it into an AI site and said... "Put a chef and a restaurant in the background" and it did it and even corrected the perspective of the original dish.
FYI, here's the original shot
On Sun, Jun 29, 2025 at 9:52 AM Andrew Davidhazy <andpph@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Food for thought ... Herschel's photograph raises a topic of conversation I think.
It is an excellent image for sure. Should anyone quibble about the fact it was significantly assembled/modified by and "AI" device? What if it had been totally a creation of AI ... well, directed by a human at least? Will machines create images on their own without being prompted? Is the end product the important thing regardless of who or how it was produced?
There is more to this than my tiny brain can deal with. :)
Andy
This message was sent to subscribers of <b>PhotoForum educational network</b> ("https://lists.rit.edu/sympa/info/photoforum").
Unsubscribe: https://lists.rit.edu/manage/unsubscribe.php?listname=photoforum&email=herschphoto@xxxxxxxxx&uuid=&id=CH3PR16MB6404C3C176D4E3D4780D1D08CC47A
