A.I. in photography processing?

ByRiker'sBeard · Sep 18, 2026

Is artificial intelligence used in any cameras in the processing of the raw images as they're taken or is it all algorithms that just clean images up from known weaknesses in the camera sensors such as reducing noise?

zombiesniper · Sep 18, 2026

There is no processing done in camera for a raw image that I'm aware of.

There is processing to the image displayed in back of camera and to jpegs. I don't think camera processors are powerful enough anytime soon to do much AI work on an image however I do think it's coming and THAT will be the end of buying any new gear for me.

wfooshee · Sep 18, 2026

That's kind of the point of raw, is to be untouched and unprocessed, just a record of what the sensor captured, no enhancement. If you're asking for a camera that can do this or that or such-and-such with the data before writing the raw file, then it's just not a raw file any more.

The JPG that the camera produces though, is processed to whatever extent the camera is capable of. The camera's various scene mode presets manipulate the JPG file with whatever selections have been made in the menus. You have to understand that even the image shown on the camera screen after making the shot is not the raw image, it's the JPG produced in camera, and that JPG preview is stored with the raw file so the camera doesn't have to re-render it every time you look at it on the viewscreen.

If you wanting some kind of AI processing in-camera to do things like remove or change backgrounds as you shoot, it may be a while before that kind of processing power is inside the camera, and it would still not be manipulating the actual raw file, but the processing for the JPG preview image.

ByRiker'sBeard · Sep 19, 2026

I am just considering that with our own eyes our brain which has experience with the world can interpret the real colors and shades of things and distances. I was just wondering if AI could be used to correct for simple raw extraction of pixel information and creating a "fixed" version as well based on past experiences and training?

Ysarex · Sep 19, 2026

ByRiker'sBeard said:
I am just considering that with our own eyes our brain which has experience with the world can interpret the real colors and shades of things and distances. I was just wondering if AI could be used to correct for simple raw extraction of pixel information and creating a "fixed" version as well based on past experiences and training?

We have AI tools available to improve the quality of raw data demosaicing. DXO makes that available in their Raw Processor for computers; Photo Lab. However it's unlikely we'll see anything similar show up in our cameras. The camera's have a processing problem. AI tools typically require consequential processor muscle. When I have my desktop computer process a raw file using PL's AI tools it generally takes PL a few seconds to as many as 10 to 15 to do the job. Assume our cameras will be even slower and so what happens when you press and hold the shutter release expecting 5 frames per second but the AI processing forces that to 2 frames per minute? In camera processing has to keep up with the camera's top frame rate and to do that the engineers are forced to compromise.

AliDee · Sep 22, 2026

There are no in-camera AI tools yet afaik but I wouldn't be surprised if something like that gets announced tomorrow-ish. AI is expremely popular and many phone cameras are said to be using it, so why not regular ones. For the post processing you can use Topaz denoise tool as of now, then there is also Photoglory for old photos. I've read about Lightroom denoise tool as well but haven't tried it myself. It's said to be capable of batch editing though.

Jeff15 · Sep 22, 2026

We have all been using AI for years in our editing software ..

407370 · Sep 22, 2026

As a Nature photographer I am particularly bothered by AI processing.
Process used by "Nature Photographers" on social media.
1. Take a short 8K video of a bee
2. Extract a single frame
3. Stick chosen frame into AI Image processing software
4. Use following prompt (or something very similar)
"Process image into perfectly in focus, static photorealistic photograph of bee carrying lots of bright orange pollen. Remove background and replace with vertical graduated blurry background from blue to green". Add highlights to background to add to authenticity. add 5200k light source from top left of image. Add reflecting pool below bee with slight ripples to perfectly reflect bee
5. Publish on Instagram

I have 2 or 3 once in a lifetime photos of various subjects spread over 30 years of photography. Some people are posting 6 once in a lifetime photos every day using the process outlined above. The amount of likes they get by people who believe this is real photography annoys me.

Am I the dinosaur ?? all they did was edit an existing image............
CHEERS
JBO

TJMcG · Sep 22, 2026

407370 said:
As a Nature photographer I am particularly bothered by AI processing.
Am I the dinosaur ?? all they did was edit an existing image............
CHEERS
JBO

Well, generative digital imaging isn't really "just editing" an existing image; it uses an existing image as a seed or reference for a synthetic digital artwork. It's really an entirely different medium.

407370 · Sep 23, 2026

TJMcG said:
Well, generative digital imaging isn't really "just editing" an existing image; it uses an existing image as a seed or reference for a synthetic digital artwork. It's really an entirely different medium.

The point I am making is not that it is not a photograph. Vast majority of viewers of these images will assume they are taken with a phone and just posted online.
I am seeing these images creep into competitions where it is really difficult for judges to call them out but every serious photographer knows they are fake.

CHEERS
JBO

AlanKlein · Sep 23, 2026

407370 said:
The point I am making is not that it is not a photograph. Vast majority of viewers of these images will assume they are taken with a phone and just posted online.
I am seeing these images creep into competitions where it is really difficult for judges to call them out but every serious photographer knows they are fake.

CHEERS
JBO

I'm in a 55+ community. We're having a photo contest in the next week or two with 5 other 55+ communities. We hire a judge. We do this once a year. I have a feeling that some people are using AI to create their photos. It's going to be a bone of contention after the contest ends. WE'll have to create rules about it for future contests. Up to now, they've accepted cloning, removing and adding objects. (I don't approve but was outvoted). We'll see what happens with AI. If they allow it to create photos from a computer, I;ll probably stop competing and may even drop out of our photo club.

TJMcG · Sep 23, 2026

AlanKlein said:
I'm in a 55+ community. We're having a photo contest in the next week or two with 5 other 55+ communities. We hire a judge. We do this once a year. I have a feeling that some people are using AI to create their photos. It's going to be a bone of contention after the contest ends. WE'll have to create rules about it for future contests. Up to now, they've accepted cloning, removing and adding objects. (I don't approve but was outvoted). We'll see what happens with AI. If they allow it to create photos from a computer, I;ll probably stop competing and may even drop out of our photo club.

I was removing objects from photos long before today's generative AI, and there have always been those who said that anyone doing digital photography was not doing real photography, because a computer made the picture. Today's AI really does make the picture and is not photography.

There are lots of uses for cloning, and today's AI remove tools, generally speaking, are just automatic cloning tools, up to a point. For dust or spots, the occasional distracting branch, or little annoyances, they aren't much different than a clone tool in actual results. Where it gets really controversial, IMO, is when you start taking out backgrounds and replacing them, replacing dead trees with healthy ones, taking out people and objects and filling in the missing background with generative fill, etc. etc.

Photographers have always altered their photographs, made composites, opened eyes, and more, but it was done with skill and creativity, not with a sentence typed into a computer, which then created something; maybe what you envisioned, maybe not.

I think you're correct to demand that photo contests be about photography and not about how great your AI software is. The problem is that there are too many who disagree...

cotribune · Sep 30, 2026

Interesting thread. I don't mind AI tools that stay inside what the photo actually captured — things like better denoise or demosaicing feel like a natural evolution of the darkroom. But swapping skies or generating subjects crosses a line for me, especially in competitions where viewers assume the image was actually made in the field. Transparency is what matters most; if heavy AI was used, say so.