While AI has been one of the hot topics on the Project, whether you are for or against it, I thought I'd try a different approach to using it. Sometimes I get in a rut as far as ideas of what to shoot. I find that during the winter months, even moreso. So, today I had ChatGPT create a list of thirty subjects for me to shoot over the next month. If you are having a hard time coming up with ideas, why not have AI create a list for you?
@olivetreeann@shutterbug49 - Yes, I, too, have used Ann D's Word of the Day, and I don't mean to take away from her monthly list. I just thought I'd try it to see what it comes up with, where I'm doing something different. Usually, I don't like change.
I have also used it in that way. My take:
- you may well use it as inspiration, to get ideas and to get hints in your process
- you may well use it as a quality control tool at the end, checking for obvious things you have missed, the odd object in the background that just adds noise to the image
But for the creative project itself, it needs to be yours. Composition, sharpness, exposure, depth of field, etc. That is up to you.
@skipt07 Thanks for this thread. Just to add another thought.
AI may be the next creative tool that changes the world, much like photography in the early 1900s and electric instruments in the late one. Both not replacing old but creating new genres in picture and music creation. However it needs to be recognised as such, a new way to express creativity.
And then please, do not call it photography or live music. Call it something else.
Since the meaning of photography is: the process of recording of an image – a photograph – on lightsensitive film or, in the case of digital photography, via a digital electronic or magnetic memory, we are stretching that meaning if we include Ai created images as photography.
Ansel Adams said: “You don’t take a photograph you make it.” I have been playing with my editing tools to try to get a grasp of the difference between editing and AI. For me, I think it comes down to manipulating pixels. But I don’t think there is a clear separation and all of my editing tools seem to be adding AI. I’m glad we are having this discussion.
@shutterbug49 - Many years ago, I came across my first Ansel Adams photographs. I was blown away when I saw what he could do with ten shades from black to white to render an image. That was close to the time color film was starting to become more accessible for the average photographer. My thinking was, why would anyone shoot in black and white if they could do it in color? Seeing Adams' photographs changed my mind drastically. I started my own darkroom and took classes in developing and printing black and white film and prints. There was a man named Fred Picker, who taught Adams' Zone System, and offered to test a photographer's negatives that you would send to him, and he would tell you what negative you achieved middle gray. I thought that if I knew that, every picture I took would look like Ansel's. Boy, was I wrong. Adams spent large amounts of time in the darkroom dodging and burning his prints to achieve his famous photos of Yosemite. So, yes, he did indeed make them.
Totally agree. Thanks for those thoughts, most helpful. AI is out there, but I don't want to use it. I want to take photographs with a camera and create with light, shade, contrast and colour.
AI is a completely different genre and I am deeply uncomfortable with anyone using it to create an image and then calling it photography. The two are completely separate things. If treated as such, then it is personal choice to use or not in your own life and creativity. But please don't call it photography. It isn't. Totally agree.
@shutterbug49@skipt07 Ansel Adams is interesting, in the same way that John and Paul of the Beatles are. They were bending the rules but I don't think that anyone would claim that they were not a photographer or musicians. They knew the craft first and bent the rules later.
And, that's where my problem with the current "AI Slop" is. The early artists of photography and rock did not at all claim to be traditional. Hey, the Beatles even had a hit called "Roll over, Beethoven". Whoever that takes the crown or artistic use of AI, will need that kind of integrity. Here am I, this is my tool, this is my way of expression.
And for the moment this is not what I see, just lots of copying and pasting.
@skipt07 I just spent some time with ChatGPT and have a series of photo ideas complete with a printable monthly calendar and some presets to apply to the images. Quite amazing. My muse has taken a vacation so this is perfect timing. Thanks for the tip Skip, I can’t wait to try these ideas out.
@casablanca I too totally agree.
Great discussion this, a subject I have strong emotions about, I abhor AI generated imagery that has never been near a camera being passed of as photography, the source of photography is about camera craft not computer instructions.
The suggested use of AI for ideas alone is perfectly acceptable, but for me personally I often go out without a preconceived idea, part of the appeal is not knowing where your inspiration is gonna come from. Ideas abound simply by looking at the vast variety of work here, every day...
Write a Reply
Sign up for a free account or Sign in to post a comment.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
@skipt07 a great idea :)
- you may well use it as inspiration, to get ideas and to get hints in your process
- you may well use it as a quality control tool at the end, checking for obvious things you have missed, the odd object in the background that just adds noise to the image
But for the creative project itself, it needs to be yours. Composition, sharpness, exposure, depth of field, etc. That is up to you.
AI may be the next creative tool that changes the world, much like photography in the early 1900s and electric instruments in the late one. Both not replacing old but creating new genres in picture and music creation. However it needs to be recognised as such, a new way to express creativity.
And then please, do not call it photography or live music. Call it something else.
Since the meaning of photography is: the process of recording of an image – a photograph – on lightsensitive film or, in the case of digital photography, via a digital electronic or magnetic memory, we are stretching that meaning if we include Ai created images as photography.
Totally agree. Thanks for those thoughts, most helpful. AI is out there, but I don't want to use it. I want to take photographs with a camera and create with light, shade, contrast and colour.
AI is a completely different genre and I am deeply uncomfortable with anyone using it to create an image and then calling it photography. The two are completely separate things. If treated as such, then it is personal choice to use or not in your own life and creativity. But please don't call it photography. It isn't. Totally agree.
And, that's where my problem with the current "AI Slop" is. The early artists of photography and rock did not at all claim to be traditional. Hey, the Beatles even had a hit called "Roll over, Beethoven". Whoever that takes the crown or artistic use of AI, will need that kind of integrity. Here am I, this is my tool, this is my way of expression.
And for the moment this is not what I see, just lots of copying and pasting.
Great discussion this, a subject I have strong emotions about, I abhor AI generated imagery that has never been near a camera being passed of as photography, the source of photography is about camera craft not computer instructions.
The suggested use of AI for ideas alone is perfectly acceptable, but for me personally I often go out without a preconceived idea, part of the appeal is not knowing where your inspiration is gonna come from. Ideas abound simply by looking at the vast variety of work here, every day...