To Edit Or Not, It's Part Of The Art Of Photography

[greybeard31 4]

We are arguing about what should happen vs what will happen. In my experience people will eventually take the cheap and easy way every time. If Ai makes creating graphic art cheaper and easier then it will eventually take it over. As far as amature photography? What would be the point?

 

[William Baroo]

I would like to be involved in the process somewhere. And people are going to be saying that about a lot of things. Not just photography. It is not an exaggeration to say that in many fields, human beings are going to become almost useless, very soon. This is common knowledge, and we have not come up with any strategies to prepare for it. We don't seem to be trying. We are too excited by the gadgetry.

Sooner or later, we will be able to hold a device up and say something like, "Make a great photo of my son's birthday party," and we won't have to think about exposure, focus, composition, or anything. The device will hear us and obey, creating a photo few if any human beings could match. Maybe it will make the whole thing up. And no one who looks at it later will know if it's real. If it moves drunk Aunt Gertrude out and puts a blank wall where she stood, no one who wasn't at the party will know.

And if we don't like what we get, a year later, we'll be able to tell the device to make a better photo.

This is all literally true.

I have tried some AI editing, and so far, it has not measured up to operating a program myself. Things tend to look like they're aren't real. Often they are creepy-looking. Seems like it requires a light touch.

 

[SquarePeg35 6]

There are those who view photography as recording/documenting and those who view it as art. To each their own. Personally I prefer an edited photo to most SOOC shots but it’s a preference. If you’re looking at one of my photos on here there is a 99.99% chance that it has been edited.

When it comes to AI, I’m all for using it as part of the editing process to save time removing unwanted items like branches or power lines or to fill in gaps at the edges when correcting distortion, but once you get into making significant changes to the photo, like adding things that were not there or completely changing the background then I think you need to call it digital art or a digital creation, it’s no longer purely a photo.

There is a line and that line will be in a different place for each of us.

 

[ACHILLEAS]

I hate overediting. I regret about a lot of things i have done. I see it as too much makeup. I think the real beauty is in the composition and the right moment.

Also automation has made photography a 1 click pony. The floor is low you get no respect.

 

[AlanKlein79 18]

We are arguing about what should happen vs what will happen. In my experience people will eventually take the cheap and easy way every time. If Ai makes creating graphic art cheaper and easier then it will eventually take it over. As far as amature photography? What would be the point?

I agree. Amateur photography of landscapes, still life, and other artistic photography will die as traditionally done. Who's going to get up at 4am, travel fifty miles in a snowstorm to shoot the sunrise coming up on a mountaintop when they can sit home on their easy chair, sipping coffee at ten am and creating a better image by pressing a few buttons on an ai computer? Family, street, news, event, and other real world photography will become more popular.

 

[AlanKlein79 18]

AI will make film photography more valuable and desirable.

 

[DanOstergren24]

I hate overediting. I regret about a lot of things i have done.

I have a hard time looking at much of my work from the past without cringing from the over editing and retouching. Over the years I have gotten better at it and apply much less, but it's always a bit of a battle with myself to restrain my editing. I'd like to be completely OK with zero retouching on the skin in my portraits, and sometimes I am perfectly fine not retouching them, but most of the time it feels obligatory to me. One of these days I'll get there... maybe.

 

[greybeard31 4]

I have a hard time looking at much of my work from the past without cringing from the over editing and retouching. Over the years I have gotten better at it and apply much less, but it's always a bit of a battle with myself to restrain my editing. I'd like to be completely OK with zero retouching on the skin in my portraits, and sometimes I am perfectly fine not retouching them, but most of the time it feels obligatory to me. One of these days I'll get there... maybe.

This is why I save my RAWs.

 

[pez1]

To me, AI is sort of like getting a stranger to edit your image for you with only a suggestion or two, while using tools like PS and LR perhaps lend more control to the creative process... Of course, PS and LR now come with AI, I think
But all images are "processed", even "straight out of the camera" (via "factory settings"), and film/darkroom printing is the same- vastly different results depending on paper and chemicals, etc.

 

[SquarePeg35 6]

I agree. Amateur photography of landscapes, still life, and other artistic photography will die as traditionally done. Who's going to get up at 4am, travel fifty miles in a snowstorm to shoot the sunrise coming up on a mountaintop when they can sit home on their easy chair, sipping coffee at ten am and creating a better image by pressing a few buttons on an ai computer? Family, street, news, event, and other real world photography will become more popular.

I respectfully disagree with this comment regarding amateur landscape photography. Do you really think people do it just for the end result without the sense of accomplishment that they got the photo themselves? They’re certainly not in it for the money because there really isn’t a lot of money to be made in landscape photography these days other than taking other photographers on photo tours.

For me, and most of the landscape photographers I shoot with, a big part of the enjoyment is finally getting that great sky at the location for sunrise on the 10th visit or getting out there and capturing the northern lights, or figuring out what shutter speed to use when I want to take dreamy photos of waves. I love being out there at sunrise or after fresh snow, finding a new viewpoint, getting that burner at sunset at my favorite local spot…

Yes I could probably have AI make up a photo that comes close to what I’m envisioning, but the joy is in doing it myself.

 

[RScottie112 26]

My editing thus far has been limited to an occasional cropping.

I have downloaded the Canon Editing Software but had no raw files to play with. I have now switched my camera to shoot in Raw and JPeg so I will get something to play with.

I would prefer not to have to edit much but can see the utility of denoising and getting rid of chromatic aberration or, in the case of my "crooked" shoreline pictures, getting them better lined up. Still though, I hope to have a great image that doesn't need much editing if any.

 

[AlanKlein79 18]

I respectfully disagree with this comment regarding amateur landscape photography. Do you really think people do it just for the end result without the sense of accomplishment that they got the photo themselves? They’re certainly not in it for the money because there really isn’t a lot of money to be made in landscape photography these days other than taking other photographers on photo tours.

For me, and most of the landscape photographers I shoot with, a big part of the enjoyment is finally getting that great sky at the location for sunrise on the 10th visit or getting out there and capturing the northern lights, or figuring out what shutter speed to use when I want to take dreamy photos of waves. I love being out there at sunrise or after fresh snow, finding a new viewpoint, getting that burner at sunset at my favorite local spot…

Yes I could probably have AI make up a photo that comes close to what I’m envisioning, but the joy is in doing it myself.

I understand your point. But for many, it's going to become disheartening to see armchair photographers turning out what seems like better work. Film work will become even more popular though.

 

[smoke665]

IMO there iseems to be a lot of misconception and generalizations on AI. Traditional software is a set of instructions that are deterministic where (the same input always yields same output). Whereas AI software instructions are probabilistic (using accumulated data in decision making) and can improve the decision making process over time as they are exposed to more data. The old adage "garbage in, garbage out" is even more valid with AI.

Seems every software program out there now is touting AI functions, but I have to wonder just how much learning capability they actually have and how much is marketing hype. AI editing tools are very specific function apps...a denoise AI tool won't compile a text to image, but it will use compiled data to sharpen details. Furthermore they all require human input on some level. Much like a mentalist AI makes guesses from tells, the more tells, the better the guesses.

There's alot of hand wringing, gloom and doom, but once the newness wears off, I think you'll find as Sharon indicated people will still do their own thing.

 

[AlanKlein79 18]

IMO there iseems to be a lot of misconception and generalizations on AI. Traditional software is a set of instructions that are deterministic where (the same input always yields same output). Whereas AI software instructions are probabilistic (using accumulated data in decision making) and can improve the decision making process over time as they are exposed to more data. The old adage "garbage in, garbage out" is even more valid with AI.

Seems every software program out there now is touting AI functions, but I have to wonder just how much learning capability they actually have and how much is marketing hype. AI editing tools are very specific function apps...a denoise AI tool won't compile a text to image, but it will use compiled data to sharpen details. Furthermore they all require human input on some level. Much like a mentalist AI makes guesses from tells, the more tells, the better the guesses.

There's alot of hand wringing, gloom and doom, but once the newness wears off, I think you'll find as Sharon indicated people will still do their own thing.

Innovation and newness require intuitive thinking out of the box. If AI is using collected decisions by others, the thinking is not new. It;s just polling and voting on decisions it comes up with made first by others. AI isn't really thinking. You;re right, much of it is hype. OF course, most decisions don;t require thinking out of the box. Given a little time, we can come up with the same analysis just by Googling the web and sorting through the results ourselves.

 

[smoke665]

Innovation and newness require intuitive thinking out of the box. If AI is using collected decisions by others, the thinking is not new. It;s just polling and voting on decisions it comes up with made first by others. AI isn't really thinking.

Actually you may have a little insight into the realities of AI, and why the human mind still rules.