AI-Assisted Photography

[acparsons75 12]

Hello All,

I will be teaching an AI-Assisted Photography course this term. I've read up on it and have started using it a bit, but would also like feedback from photographers. How have you incorporated AI into your photography?

 

[smoke665]

How have you incorporated AI into your photography

It took some trial and error to find it's niche, but eventually became just like any other tool for me. Generative remove/fill is probably the most used, followed by text to image for background swaps, AI masking in LR has its place but you have to be aware of the order of operations or it can cause slow downs, especially if like me, you use Sync to paste editing across multiple images in a set.

 

[TJMcG130 14]

Hello All,

I will be teaching an AI-Assisted Photography course this term. I've read up on it and have started using it a bit, but would also like feedback from photographers. How have you incorporated AI into your photography?

If we are talking about AI tools in editing programs here, I can say that I use some of those tools, notably the selection/masking tools and the remove/replace functions in Photoshop, most extensively. When straightening an image, I will now often use Generative Expand rather than cropping off the edges as I would have had to do before. Distraction removal using AI is faster and often more accurate than doing it manually, and if it is appropriate to the image, I will use that. I also use AI noise removal in Camera Raw, and occasionally Topaz, on many images.

I don't usually generate backgrounds; I would still rather use stock photos. When I have used Generative AI to create a background to match perspective, I was usually unhappy with the quality. As the realism factor improves, that may change, but I don't see myself subscribing to premium features that I will use only occasionally.

 

[KJ_North]

Same as above don't need any teaching I can do all I need to.

 

[AlanKlein99 15]

Hello All,

I will be teaching an AI-Assisted Photography course this term. I've read up on it and have started using it a bit, but would also like feedback from photographers. How have you incorporated AI into your photography?

Who will you be teaching? Professionals, amateurs, children, college students, etc? How will you be teaching? Person to person in a classroom, privately, videos on the web, Zoom, etc.

 

[Rickbb81]

Everyone who uses a digital camera, phone or top of the line, is using AI assisted photography most just don't know it or how much it affects their results.

Further AI is used in post processing, adjusting exposure, color, sharpness, etc. etc. This AI has been mostly to automate what was traditional done by hand and is now simple a point and click.

In short, we all have incorporated it, we've had no choice if we shoot digital. Some much more than others, most only what we need. I choose to use it in postprocessing software that replaces the old analog darkroom.

I really don't like calling it AI, since it's just automated programming, (yes, a very large-scale program), but still not what I'd call intelligence. True AI would tell me how to take the photo before I actually press the shutter and would correct my images to my tastes without me needing to later. But that would require my own personal AI to learn from me and me only. Not going to build a 1,000-acre data center in my backyard for that. lol

 

[greybeard51 23]

Hello All,

I will be teaching an AI-Assisted Photography course this term. I've read up on it and have started using it a bit, but would also like feedback from photographers. How have you incorporated AI into your photography?

I use the Ai features in Lightroom for object removal (which is great) and the super resolution that is a res double which is great. I also use Topaz which does some pretty neat Ai things. It will take a RAW file and do some outstanding noise removal and send it back as a .dng file that can still be treated as a RAW file in Lightroom. It has a lot of Ai features that can and cannot improve things as it just depends on the subject. My philosophy with Ai in photography is that if I notice it then it is too much.

 

[Ysarex103 97]

Everyone who uses a digital camera, phone or top of the line, is using AI assisted photography most just don't know it or how much it affects their results.

Further AI is used in post processing, adjusting exposure, color, sharpness, etc. etc. This AI has been mostly to automate what was traditional done by hand and is now simple a point and click.

In short, we all have incorporated it, we've had no choice if we shoot digital.

I don't think so. It's certainly not in my eight year old camera. The one feature my camera has that might be remotely along those lines is pattern metering. Since that always selects what I consider is an incorrect exposure I never use it. As for my processing software it's not in my 2022 version of Capture One. It is in my version of ON1 but since it makes assumptions about how I take photographs and it's assumptions are always wrong it's only good for an occasional laugh to see if any new version or upgrade has gotten more artificially ignorant. Just installed the newest 2026 version this month, and yep it's ignorance has increased (ON1 calls it Brilliant).

And here's my hand-processed version without any ignorant help.

Some much more than others, most only what we need. I choose to use it in postprocessing software that replaces the old analog darkroom.


I really don't like calling it AI, since it's just automated programming, (yes, a very large-scale program), but still not what I'd call intelligence. True AI would tell me how to take the photo before I actually press the shutter and would correct my images to my tastes without me needing to later. But that would require my own personal AI to learn from me and me only. Not going to build a 1,000-acre data center in my backyard for that. lol

 

[JoeW9]

First, I am a strong believer in that we muddy the issue by talking about "AI." It's really a bunch of different factors/tools. It would be like referring to "technology in photography." So I strongly suggest that you differentiate or distinguish between elements of "AI" when it comes to photography.

Second, there are some elements of "AI" that I use frequently with photography. I'll use Topaz to remove noise or identify a face and then smooth it--all examples of AI. I use AI to remove blur/haze or sharpen photos.

However, I'd argue that using prompts (a series of key words) to generate a jpeg is not photography. It's creative visual art. It may be beautiful. But there are two elements that are critical to me. First, such "AI"(prompt-driven to create a person or animal or backdrop or building) relies on scrapping the work of hundreds of other photographers, adapting from them, not giving credit to a single one, and then inserting it into a jpeg. Second, maybe you created that image (just like you painted something with oil or sculptured something out of marble) but it isn't a photograph. It's just stored as a jpeg. It's not something that existed in real life that you saw, took a picture of, and used your skill and perception with a camera and manipulation of light to produce a photo.

Think of it this way: I can be a good violinist. Or I can use a computer to emulate the sound of a violin and instruct (using prompts and data files) for my computer to make violin sounds and play the same tune. Great--I've got great computer skills. But I'm not a great violinist.

 

[webestang6426 5]

I do not use AI for personal work but I do use the AI tools in Photoshop for work. Only works right maybe 10% of the time, I find it to be crap.

 

[cgw134 160]

I do not use AI for personal work but I do use the AI tools in Photoshop for work. Only works right maybe 10% of the time, I find it to be crap.

Looking ahead to helping pals do wet plate and daguerreotypes this Spring. Forward into the past!

 

[smoke665]

relies on scrapping the work of hundreds of other photographers, adapting from them, not giving credit to a single one, and then inserting it into a jpeg.

Not quite right. While AI uses existing images to learn patterns, styles, composition, etc., it does not typically "copy and paste" them. Instead, it creates an entirely new images based on the probabilistic patterns it learned from the training data. Using your violin example, if I tell AI to create Vivaldi's Four Seasons, then yes you would be correct, but if I told AI to compose "a violin concerto to celebrate the passing of the seasons, with emphasis on changing tempos, and a more modern blending of traditional techniques with electronic, pop, and rock styles", then it would be just as original, as if a young violinist after hearing the works of numerous composers, set his own composition to music on the violin. In photography are the poses you use or the lighting setups, strictly your own inspirations or did you compile them from ideas you gleaned from someone else? When tone mapping an image, did you just come up with a color scheme all on your own, or was it the result of viewing what others have done? Humans have been "copying" the work of others (if not exactly then as a basis for another idea) long before AI came on the scene.

AI is still in it's infancy, and as such there are still bridges to cross, especially as regards protections under the copyright laws.

 

[DanOstergren39 4]

Everyone who uses a digital camera, phone or top of the line, is using AI assisted photography most just don't know it or how much it affects their results.

I use a Canon 5D MKIII from 2012. I would love to know how AI assists my photography through this camera (asking genuinely from curiosity).

 

[JoeW9]

Not quite right. While AI uses existing images to learn patterns, styles, composition, etc., it does not typically "copy and paste" them. Instead, it creates an entirely new images based on the probabilistic patterns it learned from the training data. Using your violin example, if I tell AI to create Vivaldi's Four Seasons, then yes you would be correct, but if I told AI to compose "a violin concerto to celebrate the passing of the seasons, with emphasis on changing tempos, and a more modern blending of traditional techniques with electronic, pop, and rock styles", then it would be just as original, as if a young violinist after hearing the works of numerous composers, set his own composition to music on the violin. In photography are the poses you use or the lighting setups, strictly your own inspirations or did you compile them from ideas you gleaned from someone else? When tone mapping an image, did you just come up with a color scheme all on your own, or was it the result of viewing what others have done? Humans have been "copying" the work of others (if not exactly then as a basis for another idea) long before AI came on the scene.

AI is still in it's infancy, and as such there are still bridges to cross, especially as regards protections under the copyright laws.

Yes, most "AI" photography prompt-driven programs don't "copy and paste." But they scrape images of other photographers (from social media, photography sites, almost any source they can get) and they effectively use them to learn "this is what a young woman with blonde hair and big breasts who is nude and smiling looks like."

Your example of a computer creating music also doesn't fit what I'm saying. Yes, a computer might create original music (just as you could tell it to write a story in the style of Hemingway, or compose a poem using the form of AE Houseman). For the music, you set the tempo, indicate what instruments to mimic, what key it's in, the range of volume, the "feel" or emotion to the music, and a style to identify with (effectively, prompts). It is computer-generated and computer-played music. It is not composed by or played by a human with a violin.

Now, something that would avoid the scraping of other's work would be if you provided 200 photos that you personally took of your dog and then, using prompts, told the program to use those photos to create a photo of your dog resting in-front of the fire. No copyright infringement. But it would not be a photo taken by you. It would be generated by a computer (and program) then saved as a jpeg. A similar situation would be if you took a photo and ran it through a program to make it look like a painting--you didn't paint that picture.

 

[CherylL]

I use it for removing items and filling in the gap in Photoshop. I've used AI to create fantasy type photos for friends/grands. Normally, that type of work is composites with items I had shot myself. In a pinch creating an AI specific background worked out better. I still had to clone, add my photos, etc. But the AI photo background was a starting point.

Two examples. The grands wanted the side of a building and a rooftop. I had to add shadows on the side of the building. The roof top took many AI prompts and shading to get the correct look. Had to fill in parts that I didn't want.