Paul Spinnler
Well-known member
It is a fantastic analogy - riding the crocodile! Will keep that in mind, Steve!
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
Remember when Bill Gates/Microsoft thought everyone was going to have monitors on their walls instead of physical art? They even came up with the interactive Surface "coffee table" with images you could flip through and move around and enlarge, sort of as a replacement for photo albums. "It will change the world" was one review at the time. I think Gates' purchase of the Bettman Archives and later the founding of Corbis was to be a source for some of the art to be displayed on those monitors. Well, the public didn't bite. They want the large monitors to stream shows and sports, not to display art. I think the only time I've seen such was at the now-defunct Annenberg Center for Photography in Los Angeles, and I really didn't like it as much as the prints on the wall. Oh, and hospitals. Cheering up the patients in the waiting rooms. And the little digital photo frames at grandma's house.Note that I was referring to the market for "commercial" arts. Those are the ones first in danger. There will always be someone who will want to buy "physical", "hand-made", "analog" art.
No one knows where we will end up, but it's going to bump rides for some people.
Gates thought digital representations would replace physical art in the home and institutions--that is why I brought it up. I was also expressing my concern that it would not permeate culture, but it seems very probable it will. Although I hope AI generated art will not replace man-made art, photography was once considered a threat to painting but it has become a semi-respectable art form unto itself.and maybe changed the direction of representational painting to a certain extent. But when serious artists start using AI, it is bound to become an artform unto itself beyond just creating commercial scenes that could have been photographed or the fantastic sci-fi images that it is being used for right now. Imagine AI in the hands of Damien Hurst, Andy Warhol or Jeff Koons (not that I like their particular art, just that they are/were willing to step outside the boundaries of tradition).Not sure what that has to do with what I wrote. The commercial arts/photos will be made by AI, and of course can be and will be printed. Just because Bill Gates was wrong, and he was wrong more often than just that one time, has absolutely nothing to do with the current topic.
I'm not talking artists that are currently making hundreds of thousands, or millions of dollars. I'm talking about artists that make $35K doing headshots, or doing gig work for Levi etc.... But when serious artists start using AI, it is bound to become an artform unto itself beyond just creating commercial scenes that could have been photographed or the fantastic sci-fi images that it is being used for right now. Imagine AI in the hands of Damien Hurst, Andy Warhol or Jeff Koons (not that I like their particular art, just that they are/were willing to step outside the boundaries of tradition).
Head shot, portrait and wedding/event photographers shouldn't be jeopardized much. Maybe using AI to enhance the location or create a new background, but somebody's got to make the shot of the people involved. AI can't invent that. (Is AI good enough to take a mediocre snap and alter it to fit another body? Maybe soon if not now.)I'm not talking artists that are currently making hundreds of thousands, or millions of dollars. I'm talking about artists that make $35K doing headshots, or doing gig work for Levi etc.
You are unfortunately incorrect. There are already a number of "headshots" companies that you send in some photos, and they generate "perfect" headshots for you, for very low cost.Head shot, portrait and wedding/event photographers shouldn't be jeopardized much. ...
Someone had to take the shot. What you are talking about is extensive retouching, something that has been done for decades. A bad angle or lighting is difficult to correct for, even with AI and have it still look like the subject.You are unfortunately incorrect. There are already a number of "headshots" companies that you send in some photos, and they generate "perfect" headshots for you, for very low cost.
Automotive photography is my main industry. CGI has had a massive impact but not in a negative way. Not only is there still lots of photography going on but photographers are heavily involved in the CGI. When working on this type of project I will shoot a location in the same way as I would with the car in the scene (difficult as I have to imagine and understand how the light will fall and the car sit within the frame). I also have to record a 360 degree 32bit hdri dome to help light the model. I even shoot textures to be used on the model and do processing work on the final image.Car photographers lost a lot of business to CGI. Maybe if the product represented is generated by the same CAD/CAM model as the actual thing it is considered OK by the watchdogs. The public sure doesn't give a damn.
ha ha, I'm done. Clearly you have strong strong opinions and you have to be right.Someone had to take the shot. What you are talking about is extensive retouching, something that has been done for decades. A bad angle or lighting is difficult to correct for, even with AI and have it still look like the subject.
I certainly have strong opinions. But I hope I am not right.ha ha, I'm done. Clearly you have strong strong opinions and you have to be right.
nope, any image remotely resembling your face will do, AI will take of lighting, options of outfits, hair color,....considering that most people want headshots to look like ideal versions of what they think they look like, its pretty perfect. I heard of one service charging 17$ for 100 shots with options of outfits (business, casual,....) and of course you can choose any of these and get variations.Someone had to take the shot. What you are talking about is extensive retouching, something that has been done for decades. A bad angle or lighting is difficult to correct for, even with AI and have it still look like the subject.
We're doomed. So now I can make an ID with fake pictures. ID photos are usually made by an uninterested employee with a fixed, standard set-up (think drivers license or passport photos). The majority of those who generally employ photographers to make head shots are actors and models (although AI might soon eliminate those jobs) and the casting director or photographer will be bound to be upset and disappointed when the model/actor shows up and doesn't look quite like the perfect AI image that was submitted for the job.nope, any image remotely resembling your face will do, AI will take of lighting, options of outfits, hair color,....considering that most people want headshots to look like ideal versions of what they think they look like, its pretty perfect. I heard of one service charging 17$ for 100 shots with options of outfits (business, casual,....) and of course you can choose any of these and get variations.
this will likely not replace higher end portraits but for 99% of headshots (business cards, Linkedin,....) I think it's over. people don't want to sit for the anyway and if I can get all these options for no money, sitting at home, right now, and man! I look good! people might go for the extra package and get those shots of themselves looking amazing in all these places they have never been, including maybe the corner office
This is why it may not be mandatory anymore to have the latest 60k P1 setupAutomotive photography is my main industry. CGI has had a massive impact but not in a negative way. Not only is there still lots of photography going on but photographers are heavily involved in the CGI. When working on this type of project I will shoot a location in the same way as I would with the car in the scene (difficult as I have to imagine and understand how the light will fall and the car sit within the frame). I also have to record a 360 degree 32bit hdri dome to help light the model. I even shoot textures to be used on the model and do processing work on the final image.
I’m sure ai will shake things up again very soon. It may well mean I spend even more time in front of a computer and less behind a camera but hopefully the industry will continue to need the knowledge, understanding and creative abilities of photographers and visual artists.