Thursday August 15, 2024; 9:15 AM EDT
- Thinking about the debate between AI and photography. I've heard the question, "what is a photo?" being raised, implying a definition of a photo as a graphical capture of a real moment. The introduction of AI tools that allow one to alter photos from something that really "happened" to something that didn't is what is being considered a problem. Except, what about how Photoshop has been used all these years? Presumably, people see editing a photo to improve it is different, but that editing can turn into a photo of something that did not happen. What about Google's Magic Eraser? #
- Perhaps there ought to be a definition of what is produced when one uses AI to alter a photo. I would suggest calling them composed pictures. In my mind a photo that is "re-imagined" into something else is more like a painting than a photo and I think I would refer to them as something other than a photo. I think we are seeing the development of a new art form, the ability to craft the right words to generate a picture.#
- While I personally would never present a "re-imagined" picture as a photo, I think there needs to be at least a best practice where these AI tools include some type of watermark indicating they were produced by AI. The whole idea of discerning that which is real (news, photos, videos) and that which is fake is a problem because humans are lazy. I personally want to trust people and think living in a world in which everything has to be verified is exhausting.#