¶If you didn’t know the scene, I think this would look perfectly plausible.
¶This article is about the technology of AI-assisted photography, but I couldn’t help thinking of the impacts of the technology as I read it.
¶I’m not against AI in photography. Indeed, I think all of the features described here are interesting and will prove to be quite useful. But, reviewing the before and after photos in this article reminds me that you cannot accept a photograph as reality.
¶This isn’t new, of course. Media has been manipulating photographs to convey a narrative for quite some time. Probably quite a long time.
¶But new AI tools take the opportunity to manipulate to a new level. Surely we’ll see actual manipulations rise to a new level, too. This isn’t a problem, in my opinion, for creative photography. I think photographers should disclose the use of such tools in some manner, but I’m also ok if they don’t when the photograph is being used for purely creative purposes.
¶Photojournalism is the thing. The before and after photos in the linked article show that angles can now be easily altered, and content can be made from whole cloth, even for “a pretty big ask of the reframing tool as it essentially has to invent much of her arm.” Spolier: her arm in the manipulated photo looks…real.
¶Photojournalists will no doubt respond accordingly by selling trust alongside their imagery. Consumers should respond, too, by rewarding outlets that truly earn their trust and ignoring those that lack or destroy it. I’m still thinking about that equation, wondering if I worry more about the producer or consumer side of it.