Is photography dying?

x-ray

Mentor
Local time
1:00 PM
Joined
Jun 15, 2005
Messages
4,888
When I started my career in photography I never would have guessed we’d be making photos without film and making prints without a darkroom and chemicals. A lot of professions have gone away and companies gone out of business because they never anticipated what was coming. When I started process cameras and enlargers were used to make color separations then drum scanners and now no one even makes a professional scanner because there’s no market for them.

How many companies made film cameras and how many now. Is there even a medium format pro level film camera made now and no one makes view camera lenses for film anymore either.

Typesetters, paste up artists, process camera operators, scanner operators, litho strippers, dot etchers and air brush retouched are just a few of the people I’ve seen loose their jobs because technology put them in the unemployment line.

The evolution has occurred because companies can cut overhead, streamline production and get jobs out faster with shorter lead time. And you can bet as soon as it’s economically feasible companies will close their photo departments, stop booking photo shoots and go fully AI.
 

Ko.Fe.

Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Local time
1:00 PM
Joined
Jul 14, 2013
Messages
10,143
I've been reading about artificial intelligence (AI) "photographs" and how they will make photography redundant, especially for commercial use in, say, magazines and ads. I know there's been a few threads on AI and photography here, but the ubiquity and quality of AI image-making has evolved very fast since the the beginning of the year, but I wonder what we think of this new technology as it's clear that (a) it will kill off some areas of commercial photography and (b) photographs and photorealistic AI images will become impossible to tell apart.

Here's my brief summary.

The rise of synthographers...

AI will make photographers extinct: magazines are already starting to use photorealistic images created by feeding carefully written text descriptions into software. These virtual photographers have coined a new term for themselves: synthographers.

Synthographs are fast becoming indistinguishable in every way from digital photographs, and those with the skill to precisely visualise the AI image from the wording of the text input can create "photos" will take over from commercial photographers because the images are faster and cheaper to create, and will fulfil clients' needs better - the text can be quickly tweaked to create a multitude of variations, giving far wider choice to clients than traditional photography.

Example: Midjourney v5 Creates Photorealistic Images and Even Does Hands Correctly

View attachment 4818346

View attachment 4818347

Photography is dying as much as your cabbage state of mind is degenerated.
 

RichC

Well-known
Local time
5:00 PM
Joined
Jan 3, 2006
Messages
1,506
I could not care less if a picture of a hamburger is made by a computer program or a photographer.
But perhaps we should...

I was recently asked which program I used to create my last photographic project (see below), not what camera! I mostly take still-life photos, and carefully stage them even outdoors. No Photoshop, let alone AI!

C803AE87-5694-4C57-B515-AE436959B78E.jpeg

98EDC095-6A72-4864-B603-498D071BF36F.jpeg

62D85B2D-59E4-4D95-B75D-4D1BBE371987.jpeg
 

Out to Lunch

Menteur
Local time
12:00 AM
Joined
Mar 28, 2009
Messages
9,089
Instead of rejecting AI out of hand as a matter of principle, it would be better to make an effort to try to understand what's going on in the visual arts today. A photographer friend who teaches visual arts (high school), and photography (college) in Nanjing told me today that teachers and students are increasingly involved with generative AI image creation. Teachers are also increasingly making use of ChatGPT to develop teaching materials, including AI. Cheers, OtL
 
Last edited:

Tom R

Established
Local time
1:00 PM
Joined
Mar 26, 2016
Messages
152
A lot of interest in "AI" is driven by its potential to generate nearly limitless profits by the replacement of costly (and troublesome) human labor from the workplace. Thus, almost all areas of photography will likely be impacted by this technology. I would guess that the costliest applications of photography would be the first to be "automated." These areas include, but are not limited to commercial and vocational work. The various "arts," to the extent they are valued as commercially attractive products, will be impacted as well: look no further than the troubling fascination in the press that happily fill their front pages with stories of how an AI generated text, composition or image has "won" some prize or fooled experts, ..., etc.

But, behind all of this "excitement" is a more problematic reality. The replacement of human beings by algorithms (whose behaviors are "emergent" and "tacit"--but these are other concerns) will be only one of the more problematic results from the inexorable march to a "better world through technology that we don't understand." Human beings, unlike algorithms, are living, sentient creatures that need a sense of purpose and place in the world. Isn't that why many people who participate in this forum make photographs?
 

jsrockit

Moderator
Staff member
Local time
1:00 PM
Joined
Nov 5, 2009
Messages
22,489

Dogman

Mentor
Local time
12:00 PM
Joined
Oct 12, 2007
Messages
3,118
Blissfully ignorant of almost all things AI, I have to wonder how it is essentially different from manipulated images done with Photoshop. It's a fiction, staged and created with computers. True, the manipulated image starts with a photographic image but otherwise the concept is the same. Now the concept expands the computer's roll to the initial creation. Not a huge step IMO.

From my POV this makes the role of the Photographer of more importance. And by Photographer I mean the human being who takes a photograph with either film or electrical means using a mechanical/electronic device. This role of work being done by a Photographer separates factual from fictitious. The only real problem to confront is how to recognize the fiction and the fact. That is something well above my pay grade.
 

NLSparks

Newbie
Local time
6:00 PM
Joined
Jan 9, 2023
Messages
1
Today people are photographing with Large Format; Medium format Analog and Digital, Analog fullframe, etc, all declared dead long ago.
As long as we remain photographing with whatever camera we like, photography is far from dead.
(My favoriete system (OLympus m4/3) is also declared dead many times, but will suit me fine for years and years to come.)
 

Pál_K

Cameras. I has it.
Local time
10:00 AM
Joined
Aug 27, 2019
Messages
1,984
I could not care less if a picture of a hamburger is made by a computer program or a photographer.
Long before AI synthetic photography, you could go into McDonalds, look at the photo of a Cheeseburger Deluxe, then look at what they gave you, and wonder how these were supposed to be the same thing.
 

jsrockit

Moderator
Staff member
Local time
1:00 PM
Joined
Nov 5, 2009
Messages
22,489
Instead of rejecting AI out of hand as a matter of principle, it would be better to make an effort to try to understand what's going on in the visual arts today. A photographer friend who teaches visual arts (high school), and photography (college) in Nanjing told me today that teachers and students are increasingly involved with generative AI image creation. Teachers are also increasingly making use of ChatGPT to develop teaching materials, including AI. Cheers, OtL
That's ok, but it isn't photography right?
 

571514m3

Established
Local time
7:00 PM
Joined
Oct 29, 2015
Messages
151
So many aspects to this issue and worth unpacking.

For example:

"I could not care less if a picture of a hamburger is made by a computer program or a photographer."

Absolutely true. Some time ago people used sketches/paintings to advertise on billboards, then it was offset prints of analog photos and then the same with digital photos and now its computational photography. >>>Not AI. It's not intelligent but follows an algorithm!

A long time ago I saw a movie where a politician was framed with a doctored (analog) photograph. Presumably to show how we can not rely on film as being 'true'. That made me limit (wet) developing to exposure and choice of grade of paper and also print the whole image with that nice black line around it.

When full frame M cameras became available I started using LR but limited myself to: adjusting exposure and shifting the histogram. That was the same as choosing a grade of paper. I felt and still feel that the file was the same as a negative - it is just a different medium. I use a 'fake' black lime imitating the edge of a negative.

So my photography is like painting/sketching etc and maybe it is art. I still use LR6 and am scared what I should do when it no longer works. I have looked around for alternatives but EVERY developer uses algorithms to 'fix' this and that, from inserting sky to you-name-it. That way we have been lured into the world of IMAGINED PHOTOGRAPHY. My take is that when we use software that does stuff over which we have no control then it is no longer photography.

We then get something that we imagine what a hamburger is like.
Or on Insta where influencers make us believe what humans should look like.

So:
I think that visual artists will strike back and take control, somehow.
I hope that there will be a basic software that allows us to print/publish a photo as it was taken by the person who pressed the button.
I don't get people who like computational photography of x/b/w-phones where reality is re-imagined.

Surely at some point people will wake up and not want to live in make believe?
 

raydm6

Yay! Cameras! 🙈🙉🙊┌( ಠ_ಠ)┘ [◉"]
Local time
1:00 PM
Joined
Oct 20, 2006
Messages
2,292
Then, there's this:

Perhaps the most compelling reason that GANs are widely studied, developed, and used is because of their success. GANs have been able to generate photos so realistic that humans are unable to tell that they are of objects, scenes, and people that do not exist in real life.

Astonishing is not a sufficient adjective for their capability and success.
 

cboy

Established
Local time
4:00 AM
Joined
Jun 9, 2020
Messages
184
If ppl sell they're gear in favour for AI then all the better for die hard photographer for bargain used gear😄.
Though I doubt it'll happen. In 50 yrs time the paradigm shift would totally have moved from mirrorless. To what I don't know...but I hope I'm still around to see it, or maybe not lol.
 

raydm6

Yay! Cameras! 🙈🙉🙊┌( ಠ_ಠ)┘ [◉"]
Local time
1:00 PM
Joined
Oct 20, 2006
Messages
2,292
^^ And, which makes more cameras available for "camera-tossing": :)
 

Yokosuka_Mike

Onsen Lover
Local time
2:00 AM
Joined
Sep 22, 2016
Messages
6,378
Next up is the AI bathroom mirror.
Get up in the morning and face the mirror and say the magic words:
"Mirror mirror on the wall, make me the fairest of them all"
Soon we’ll all talk, think and look the same. In the year 2525!

Mike
 

Ricoh

Well-known
Local time
5:00 PM
Joined
Feb 9, 2014
Messages
572
Based on what I’ve read, more pictures than ever are being posted on the internet - due to the genius of the mobile smart phone. Everyone is a photographer these days.
 
Top