I heard a quote form George Lucas recently. "When a new tool comes out, everyone goes crazy for it and they often forget that there is a story to tell. You are telling a story using tools, you are not using tools to tell a story".
All true except with AI its a different game now, this tool can create and tell stories better and faster than most average people. If you think AI is just another tool, you need to know more about AI.
@@DM-sc4zy I agree that you must be fluent in the tools of your trade, yet I disagree that the stories are "better". Faster, yes, and this will certainly be the determining factor in most photographers' success. Sadly, speed is more important than quality, these days? I embrace AI but I dont worry what anyone else is going to accomplish with it. 2 carpenters with the same hammer and supplies will fabricate completely different products. :-)
@@monsieurgolem3392 I was thinking that.. People will go all crazy for it then they will want real because in the coming years it will be hard to tell what's real and what's not.. We already have 'AI models' online that are pretty realistic.. People will get sick of it
@DM-sc4zy Sure, AI will revolutionize many things we do and in ways we cannot fully fathom today. But the idea that it will replace professional photography and videography cannot be true. Not even close. Consider for example a wedding. Can AI produce authentic photos of the actual event?
As a CD at a full-service digital agency... I would be hard-pressed to outsource creativity to a photographer when my team will just ideate and generate the AI 'photographs's themselves. Yes, clients could bypass us too and do it directly in-house themselves but our reputation lives and dies by our creative effectiveness and the perception that we are the most awarded creatives in the industry - you won't get fired for hiring us, you might do if you try to do what we do yourself as a marketing director in an FMCG whatever. We hire photographers for their problem-solving, planning, reliability, approach, and repeated teamwork, but mainly because they are currently the gatekeepers of getting something real onto screen/print. MTheir style or creativity helps but that is just to support the very clear campaign creative briefs made by the core creatives - the CD, and/or AD in collab with the client. I can't see big work going to photographers who have dropped their cameras for AI-generated work because they would then be stepping into a totally different creative field. Unless the photographer has already made a MASSIVE name for themselves in that space. Tough call all round. Here's the other rub: current AI/machine learning/generative systems aren't as clever as we all think they are and we are stumbling into another DotCom bubble. But perceptions on what is and what isn't will be changed whether we like it or not.
I don’t make my living directly off of photography, but as a hairdresser, photography has been deeply intertwined with most opportunities I’ve been afforded over the past decade. With all the talk of AI replacing photographers I heard one statement that I liked a lot because it rings true in my own use case for photography- AI doesn’t tell the truth the way a photograph does. There are some huge prestigious competitions in hair which require not only a finished photographed be submitted, but also the raw files, so the judges can confirm how much of the image was hairdressing and how much was retouching. Or a simpler more day-to-day example for how I use photos of my work- how many AI images of haircuts would I have to show someone before they trusted that I could cut their hair well?
this is such an important point: so many different creatives are going to be affected by AI "photography", just as we've seen with the intensification of CGI use in 'live action' movies. it'll be a damn shame that most people just wont care.
I was in a friend's flat in 1994. He was reading about this new thing called the internet. After explaining it to me my response was 'It'll never take off'
As a retired long-time staff photographer for large metropolitan daily newspapers, this reminds me very much of the beginning of the period starting about 20 years ago when digital photography (along with free classified online advertising and free online news) began to pretty much totally hollow-out the photojournalism profession. Basically from about 2000-20002 digital completely overtook film in the news business and that was exciting in terms of the immediacy that digital provided. But by 2004 it became clear that unlike film on a pro level, basically, anybody could shoot digital -- and the domino effect began. Then the iPhone w/a camera arrived and a few years later, news websites were regularly using pictures sent in by the public for free. When I retired about 10 years ago after about 35 years in the business, one could still make a living shooting weddings, ads, etc. but photojournalism die-hards like myself tend to hate the commercial sector for the most part. And the little work left in the pro media space by say 2010 was a bit of a sweatshop-like experience. So. Now AI has landed and it looks like it'll have a significant effect on commercial like the DSLR and the iPhone had on photojournalism in terms of paid work. I think the wedding business is still fairly safe but product and fashion work looks pretty exposed in my opinion. And to be clear, this is just my opinion based on my experience. And now that I'm and old guy I'm enjoying photography again and I think that's bc I'm doing only personal work now. Finally, your studio in the background! That's a master class on how to organize a studio. Very impressed!
So on point. Digital was for the most part the runation of the professional. It opened up an oportunity for so many who relied on the equipment and post production to get the job done, and they worked for just about nothing. Thats how us pros were hurt. I moved off to a different sector of the business, since I was not willing to re-invent myself. I stayed active, but after 19 years as a working pro, digital made me change course. That said AI will do what digital did. Companies can use their marketing departnents and IT to create their own advertising images. The level of AI a year from now will be like a box camera compared to a DSLR. Game over.
I currently work as the in-house director and photographer of one of the UK’s leading advertising agencies. And something mind boggling happened recently. They took a library of work created by me which was from a huge 4 day shoot and used all the images to train an AI to basically create boat loads of more imagery. At first it did make me feel really nervous about the future of my job. But I’ve attempted to reframe it in my mind recently that no matter how many images AI can create, based on my photography or others it will always require someone like me. A story teller/a creative to curate and present the right work and at that rate it’s merely another tool. But it’s still scary. If anything it’ll set the real artists apart from the pretenders.
That is a bit scary! I used to work in an advertising agency 10 years ago. A professional photo shot was often a last resort.. if they couldn't find another way to create the images they needed to bring an idea to life.
Thing is... That AI couldn't have created the images of that 4 day shoot you did out of thin air. AI wasn't there in a robot body, taking pictures with a camera so it can generate more (fake) images of that shoot... That was YOU - a photographer. YOU did the 4 day shoot and then your agency just used YOUR images so that AI can create more of them - fake images but nonetheless, more.
I don’t know, on one side that sounds like the photographer will always be needed as the first point of contact to create source materials for the AI…BUT with machine learning, how much longer might a live person be required for that first step. With billions of images existing online, how long will it take AI to reach the point where ALL the images that have ever been online is enough of a data source for it to create an image for any parameters it’s given? 🤷🏼♂️🤷🏼♂️🤷🏼♂️ only time will tell.
@@odarrien I was thinking the same! One hope is that governments bring in some type of copyright law. As they are technically taking parts of images which are copyrighted. Its a bit if a grey area.. time will tell I guess!
Im a product still life photographer that has now almost fully transitioned to CGI. The thing for me about AI that I can't get over is the notion that I haven't actually made the work if I use it to generate an image. Making the work, literally building the image is the joy I get from being a creative. Ideas are cheap, everyone has them but the difference between working creatives and those that aren't is that we have put in the time to develop the skill sets to create the work. Within the making of that work is where your style comes though. Seeing creatives throw away their style to replace it with the generic 'mid journey' style almost seems like sacrilege you know?
I'm a copywriter. I often work alongside photographers, graphic designers, illustrators, etc. to create ads, app assets, video stuff, etc. Here's my concern: I know AI can't do what I do. I've tried it. It can't empathize with an audience, it needs human direction to do that. But the issue is, who cares? My line of work is not exactly a meritocracy. Most of the people I work for have no idea how I do what I do, and therefore aren't great judges of the value. Brands the world over spend gobs of money on ineffective creative because they can't tell the difference between impactful messaging and crap. So if enough businesses out there don't see the value in, say, your photographs or images, or my copy, and think they can get results just as good by faffing about with AI themselves, is your job really that secure? (This is something I'm currently grappling with, so it's an honest question and wondered what your thoughts were. Thanks for reading.)
@@DynastyUK Definitely the goal, just a bit anxious about how all this is gonna shake out. When desktop publishing hit the scene in the 90s, there was a brief time in which graphic designers had a bit of a job market pinch because enough businesses actually thought that owning a computer made them visual storytellers overnight. Things readjusted, but only after awhile.
@@my.penny.wagers Yeah, I reckon you probably gotta push marketing more than usual for a while until things even out. If there are way to make A.I the Villain yet somehow play it as keeping your friends close but your enemies closer, as to someone make A.I make you better at your job too. It's a difficult one, it's also a time to really make those connections with past clients completely solid and give them offers and such to secure solid foundations. Wishing you the best man :)
So many people feel threatened by progress instead of accepting that it is inevitable . The best way of dealing with it is not to resist and criticise but to embrace it , learn all about it and find the new opportunities that it presents. At the same time you will discover its limitations and why human skills will always enable us to stay one step ahead of the game . After all it is humans that are commissioning the work and not machines and it is humans that may well get bored of it and look for originality. Scratchy vinyl is making a huge comeback because people do not want idealistic perfection - they want real life which contains emotions . A I will never do emotion. Recognise that and move with it
Great video. A.I. is Great....but it can't replace reality. We still need photographers to shoot at weddings, events, graduations, where people ACTUALLY ARE. Companies will definitely take advantage of A.I. to do commercials, they recently did one totally with A.I., it looks horrible, but give it a year, and you won't be ble to tell. But we still need creative ideas and creativity to even make those commercials. A.I. is a very powerful tool, but it's still a tool. We still need someone to wield the tool. Great video. Blessings
It's not a tool. It is literally intelligence. It's another person without a body capable of not only learning, but learning faster and at a capacity not possible by a human. We are all doomed in this. All of us. Not just Photographers or creatives, all of humanity. Those that don't understand that, don't understand what AI is or how it works.
I work in Software Engineering and have photography as my hobby. Most photographers fear AI will be used to generate an image that is better than what they could make, but that is not what will be happening. Lets take advertising as an example, AI will generate lots of variations of an image for an ad campaign, showing everyone a text/image/video tailored for the viewer. It will learn from engagement it got on that what might work and what might not and it will refine it before showing it to the next viewer. By the time the ad campaing reaches millions of viewers it will be better and more targeted than any single thing even the best human could have come up with.
I'm an architectural photographer and we've gone through something similar over recent years with the use of 3D rendering. Everything you've said here is true for us already. And fortunately I can't see AI having any more of an impact on our industry than 3D rendering already has. And there will always be a need for great photographers in the commercial world.
Scary thing is... in 2021 I had absolutely no idea about AI or what it could do. In 2022 I experimented with Imagine AI & Aftershoot for culling/editing weddings.... and discovered ChatGPT in early 2023... which now writes most of my copy and does my research. Although there's no real panic for us creatives at the moment... what's going to be around in 2 years time that we have absolutely no idea about right now?
Perhaps AI can stuff all he photos i taken into the right folders so I can find them again and not like today where they are scattered all over my computer on hardrives and clouds and on usb pens , CDs etc.
As a Graphic Designer - AI will push alot of people out of the job or transform it; EVEN before Ai with applications like Canva and Simplifyed already doing that but people still need designers to design things; Design is about how people, or even animals, can interact or perceive something with the intent to use or understand. If you are diligent enough, AI is not as much of a threat as people might make it to be. As a photographer - Not a chance. News has to be real and People still want real portraits of themselves. I would want more AI tools for my workflow; Been using ChatGPT for Captioning and Keywording lately and it makes one part of being a photojournalist a much happier time. I would also love something that can learn my editing process and aim to improve upon me and me alone
Weddings, portraits, concerts, news, documentaries, pets, shows, festivals and parties, automotive, motorsports, sports, journalism, travel, fashion and beauty, glamour, editorials, boudoir and even porn and many, many more fields... None of them will ever be replaced by AI.
@@nogerboher5266 I agree that people will still want these images of these types, but will they need professional photographers to create them? AI developers will take on every aspect of image-making - from emulating images entirely to making bad photographs look good (e.g. The photo of the moon on the Samsung S21). The clients who want portraits, beauty, glamour, boudoir, etc. aren't looking for reality, they want hyper-reality (a photographer to make them look better than they actually do) and when AI turns their ordinary photos into better photos for free, why pay a photographer for it? Concerts might already be covered well enough by smartphones (someone in the front row with an iPhone will capture good-looking images and post them freely on Instagram). Pets are probably quantity (posting daily on Instagram) over quality - how many pet owners still pay for portraits? Sports images will probably be emulated from video footage (a 3D model of the action will be created using video feeds from multiple angles and combined high resolution studio images of players, allowing a 'photograph' to be emulated from currently impossible angles as James Cameron does with his Avatar movies). Even wedding photos could be emulated (in part) in the same way (e.g. a photo of them cutting the cake from the perspective of the cake). Travel? AI will take existing photographs of any location to create a model which can render a new image from any angle, with artificial people and any lighting condition (and given the rate at which things move, this might be available in just a few months). As for news, half of news is now smartphone coverage given to them for free. Will we still need photographers? Absolutely. But only a fraction of the current number of photographers and, therefore, most of them are unlikely to command high prices. I am no longer confident that there is *anything* which won't be affected by AI.
@@AA-ni3km That's the thing. Nothing you've mentioned holds any weight in the real world. People said the same about modern digital cameras when they started coming out; ''Oh no! Cameras do everything instead of you now! Professional photographers will no longer be needed!'' And yet here we are... Still very much needed. Look and listen; I am and was a graphic designer, web designer/developer, photographer and videographer for almost two decades now. The reality of the whole AI situation is that only photographers in certain fields (e.g product, commercial, real estate, etc...) will actually be affected. When you say stuff like portraits and beauty being full of clients who want hyper reality with AI making their regular photos better, you're still forgetting the photography aspect of it. Nobody is going to spend years of learning about lighting, composition and so on, just so they can take a snapshot grade photo for their AI program. These people will still need someone who knows photography to take photos for them. When you say concerts, shows and festivals being covered by smartphones - that's just marketing nonsense. Cameras are professional tools, not to mention being bigger, better and more feature packed than a phone. It's a professional tool, specifically made and designed with that in mind and it is so, solely for that specific purpose. A phone will never replace a professional tool. When you say weddings or events being emulated, you're forgetting that the AI isn't a robot with a camera in it's hand and a free thinking mind, walking around the event or a wedding, taking photos. AI can only create imaginary, unrealistic and non-existent ''reality.'' AI can only emulate a fake version of the event that looks nothing like the actual event and it can not emulate all the things that happened at the event or a wedding, all the people that were there and all the real world detail that was then and there. Only a person with a camera, being physically present at said event or wedding, can represent and capture what happens at the event, how the event looks, all the people that are at the event, what they are wearing, what they are doing, the food, the flowers, the tiniest little details... Not to mention unexpected or once-in-a-lifetime situations that happened at the event or wedding, only being there with a camera and taking a picture of it will give a real and true representation of it... Long story short, 90% of photography will remain untouched and unaffected by AI.
@@nogerboher5266I didn't say that AI would *remove* the need for photographers. It won't. I was reacting to your claim that AI could never replace certain types of photography. It can and it will. Photographers will still be needed but AI will reduce the number of images which are done photographically and it will reduce the skill level required. Neither is good for the earning prospects of photographers (and they were never that good in the first place for the average professional photographer).
What's at risk is camera production. The more people who abandon photography with a camera, the few cameras are made, there will be fewer choices and higher costs.
I agree with you. What people generally don’t get is that an artistic communication starts at the creator as an idea or concept and then makes this idea beautiful or whatever with the tools of that art. It’s not just the color light shadows and composition that makes it great it’s the alive communication at the creator. AI is soulless just throwing around patterns but can be useful for other boring tasks. Especially now when AI is so fantastic it’s more important than ever that we can enhance our fantasy and ability to think beyond the ramifications of today’s society.
You have mentioned creative aspect, but there is another more important, I think: experience. Not only it's not easy to make a good photo of yourself, the memory of all the experience of meeting the photographer, talking with him even about weather or cats, seeing the process of the photo being made, getting emotional after seeing the effect - these are all worthwhile memories. Human to human, this is still valued. I would even suggest retouching to lose a lot of its appeal, as heavily edited images would feel to some extent like generated by AI.
This is the 7th time I have watched or listened to this video. It calms me more than a cup of chamomile. The underlying message seems to be a point you make often - know your Genre, Style, and Niche!
What I do now would not work in the age of AI in a year or two from now. I don't have any good photography portfolio, so I will probably end up using AI as a tool to generate some elements for an image, as a parts of background and make portfolio as a mix of product photography and AI. I think there are levels to everything and in future, you will have work of professionals that are amazing and are true photographs and you will get a lot of generated images and no one would really care unless you are really interested like now in photography to check if its a film or just a filter on digital file. A lot of people will lose, you might adapt and strive to survive or wait and see what will happen. One thing that I don't get is, how will people learn what did, what I gathered through years, what will they prompt without knowledge about camera or lighting. I guess they will get 1000 slightly different variations of the same image. I think we will see a lot of changes in styles and its interesting and scary at the same time.
Spot on. However, AI is already servicing clients that want something that just does the job, in many fields. The other problem is that the education system is creating more and more automatons that make the AI look intelligent. A poorly educated humanity will make the AI look more and more cleaver. We, as consumers must demand more, so in turn, our clients demand more from the creative process.
I definitely agree. I'm just starting out in photography, thinking lifestyle is my niche. AI has been a great help getting myself started and has helped me have more time to be creative and creating work.
You hit the nail on the head, not just about Ai, but photography in general. I am a very experienced photographer over many years with a technical education and I have looked at your work and thought I could easily do that. However I compare myself to an old guitarist friend of mine. He has played on movie soundtracks and with the likes of Van Morrison. He can play superb covers of Carlos Santana and Mark Knopfler tracks such as Sultans of Swing, but the penny dropped with me a long time ago. He may well be able to play as well as these famous guitarists, but they wrote it. Like you they had the ideas not him. The realisation was yes I could take the same pictures as you in terms of composition, lighting etc, but could I come up with the ideas in the first place?
The next few years are going to be rough though. Whilst AI has limitations and probably always will, until people question what AI presents them with there’s going to be a genuine risk of an entire generation attaching themselves to flawed knowledge and incorrect application. The problem is us. We, the human thinkers, have to be able to be clever enough to accept that AI is just a tool and not the solution…but lots of people are pretty thick.
While I definitely think that AI can generate some wildlife photography, I think it has a long way to go when it comes to the creation of animals. There is almost an uncanny valley affect when looking at AI generated animals, especially birds! But only time will tell if wildlife/nature photographers will be out of business!
I shoot three things: 1) Architectural work, architects will still want their projects shot. 2) Event work for a major university - events aren't going anywhere. 3) Editorial work/food/cookbooks - Chefs will still cook, authors will still write cookbooks (I could see lower budget books using AI)
You're of the belief that AI can't replace photographers because a human is needed for the "idea for the project". I hate to be the bearer of bad news, I work in software, my friends are PhD researchers for AI. This is exactly what they are working on right now. AI is very very much coming for your photography job. It's also coming for directorial, story boarding, cinematography, animation, and everything else. It's not there yet, but just a few years ago we said "computers can't draw faces properly". It's only a matter of time. I am also privy to the thoughts from executives at production studios and the lead artists at game development studios. All the executives want is to eliminate all the creatives. They already lay off 50% or more of their staff after every project is done. A dream scenario for them is laying off their entire production staff and hiring 5 "prompt engineers" to make their "idea man" thoughts into a film, game, or photo shoot. If I haven't made myself clear. There are research projects that are well on their way that can analyze the most popular movies out there to create, write, story board, and drop a promo trailer without any human intervention. All you say is, "I want a sci-fi hit for Summer 2024 based on what was popular over the last decade". Then AI produces all of the ideas, characters, plot, shot descriptions, etc for you. No need for serious human oversight except for a minor edit and follow through on the production. It goes even further though, other groups are working with Unreal and other 3D engines to replace the entire production process. AI will shoot the film for you. Goodbye gaffers, lighting, actors, or even a director! This is their goal. Completely customized content for everyone based exactly on what they want to watch with no need for creatives at all. I'm sorry that I'm being all doom and gloom, but if you saw what is being cooked up by research labs at the University's here, being funded by Sony, Paramount, WETA, Google, Meta, and Microsoft, you wouldn't be so confident. They stand to save billions in production, why wouldn't they at least try to do this? Will all this come to pass? I don't know. It's still early days, but I know that at the very least, the stock watching, money grubbing accountants in charge of big productions and large companies would LOVE to pay $15,000/mo instead of hiring photographers and crews of people to flesh out their content for them.
If movie studios can use this technology to create films without cast and crew, then so can ordinary individuals. It will lead to a lot of job losses, but also empower individuals without money and resources to make their own films.
In an ideal world AI would mean we could all work a little bit less hard to be as comfortable as we are now. I fear what will happen is that some will lose their jobs and have to do lower paid and/or less enjoyable jobs while some will make huge profits, worsening inequality. I’m a bit worried about being caught on the wrong end of that, not because my current (low paid customer service) job will be replaced by AI but because the jobs I might have moved into will be eliminated or filled by more experienced people whose prior job has been eliminated
I record, write and mix music (mostly metal) and I don't think it will replace the stand out artists at all, or mix engineers who have a sound. People who have something to say and aren't writing lyrics for a grade 2 reading level. It will replace those with nothing to say though. Especially if more popular artists do what Grimes did and allow other artists to use their voice. I think it will get old fast and then the people who learned to use AI to further their creative workflow (like you're saying) will benefit. Always enjoy your videos Scott!
I do architecture/ interior design photography and real estate. Exterior architecture work will possibly suffer, but they already do renders and stuff. However I'm more of a media provider, so I do videos, floor plans, drone etc. Not only photography. So, I'm safe. But I accepted during covid, that I needed to branch out and be diversified to stay employed
Very well spoken and yes I totally agree - don't belive AI will ever be able to create. I say this in the broad spectrum of uniqueness. I do however fear that AI, when abused can result in a very warped sense of reality I do belive and the fallout is both unknown and longwinded. It sure is the future version of the industrial revolution. We as creative need to embrace it, at the same time I urge all not to abuse it or become to reliant on it. When seen as a tool, the possibilities of even more exceptional work are boundless? I am an artist/photographer - main commercial sector of work is tourism lifestyle. Main focus of work, conservation driven pieces directed at attention to the intricacies of the natural world.
One issue with ai is that it's really just an image blender. Whenever I have a weird idea the ai doesn't know what to do no matter how much I prompt it because it hasn't been trained on images with those things. Even if I googled certain ideas I would get very few image results.
I spent most of my life not listening to myself and avoiding being creative because as a child, my father told me artists don't make money until they're dead and I believed him. So my biggest struggle as a photographer is being able to get ideas in my head out into a form communicate those creative ideas to other people. Midjourney has helped A LOT with this. Now I can put in a prompt real quick, refine the idea back and forth, then communicate it to my team, then get their input and change elements when planning the project to bring it to life. Ethical image sourcing issues aside, these "AI" have been very helpful in improving my ability to communicate my ideas for personal shoots to other people.
As i have said before AI will replace a lot of the jobs in fashion photography. Make-up artists, stylists, creative directors and so on. Replaced by AI because they digitize the clothes they are trying to sell and put them in hyper realistic models of every size, shape, weight, race and gender within minutes. The desired pose, the environment and background. Everything done in ai. Its going to put like 70% or more of the people currently working in fashion photography teams out of a job within the next few years.
@@monsieurgolem3392 people buy clothes to be seen in them. Obviously it will be really easy in the near future to generate ai images of people in any clothes you/they can imagine. But to be seen in them will stay worth money to those that care about such a thing. Personally I never buy clothes beyond what I at a absolute minimum need to have some clothes on, so the cheapest possible Amazon stuff.
As a buyer specialized in project procurement for a district heating company, one of the things I do a lot is trouble shooting - especially in regards to invoices, where the automatic system comes up short. It's not a well paid job, so hopefully I'll find something else to do, but I don't feel threatened at by AI at all. AI might make my job easier over time, but it can't replace what I do, because even if an AI system could do everything related to the invoices coming in, the decision what invoices are okay to pay and what invoices aren't okay to pay is down to human beings in procurement and the project department. And of course as a buyer there is also the whole negotiation regarding price and conditions and so on, that's not going away, unless society changes dramatically in say the direction predicted in Star Trek or something like that.
I mainly shoot PR, events, loads of headshots for departments at Universities etc. Although I'm worried I really don't see my work disappearing. A lot of what I do aimed at capturing reality. I can see photographers who are clambering for campaign work or lifestyle shoots to go down the plug hole. Which is a shame because I really admire those types. I don't think I was ever good enough to shoot an ad campaign or take portraits of models in the countryside for some fashion brand. Good luck to everyone.
Taking pictures for an auction house. I don´t think it will leave me jobless any time soon in the next 5 years. Companies are slower to adapt to new tech, especially if not grown up with it. It (AI) needs to proof itself first, by being used by an industry leading company or so, to be adapted by smaller businesses. But we´ll see, exciting times nevertheless
Not a chance. first I love what I do and the way I do it . the process is for me as important as the final result and my enjoyment is paramount; Simply put I want to have fun and AI is not quite as fun for me. Now from the practicality side/client work , it will speed up certain process and stock photo and uninventive work will take a hit . it's honestly a good challenge , to keep up creatively against whatever a prompt would do. you're right on the money regarding the decision aspect and ideation process , ultimately I choose what goes or not . In my field client do not pay for just pictures they pay for ideas and the ability to capture intangible concept through narrative , composition, model attitude, clothing ...and amidst this let their product shine ,those concept that all need a human sensibility and touch and sense of details. Whether AI is used to achieve that or not is almost a moot point, at best a tool like any other. One thing I haven't seen talked about is the loss of mastery. I had discussions ad nauseam about the matter, one particular point was "I can't draw , but now its not even a requisite to execute great work" , It was quite telling that the person talking gave up on drawing pretty fast but all of sudden is feeling his wing grow back thanks to AI. I can't imagine not being able to take a good photograph in the first place and now turning to AI to do my bidding.
I saw this question earlier within a digital art and also a photography forum I replied "No, AI Visual works especially the raw one that hasn't been retouched by a person is very souless and uncanny"... As an artist i can easily can spot the difference between which is AI which is Human creative works or which is mix of both by seeing a few details that orndinary people maybe couldn't see
When I started drumming and had a great time earning and then electronic drums came in. Killing analogue drumming..... for a while. Because the sound and feel of certain drums and cymbals just did not, and even today, cut it. So what happened. We adjusted and incorporate the best of both and every drummer today, inc this old rocker, has some kind of electronic drum thingy on their kits. Roll with it people and keep having fun.
I'm a university professor who teaches writing (among other things) and if the industry embraces that writing is about building critical/analytic thinking then my job is safe, but if it's just for pushing out written content then I'll see a few folks on the breadline
I attended a presentation on Ai, it was to do with Ai in factories, where in a carplant for instance full of Ai robots could replace all the production employees with 4 maintenance staff and could run 24/7/52 not including breakdowns, we were left with the view, be careful what you wish for, their dreams Ai warehousing, Ai autonomous transport/ distribution, orders picked & delivered byAI, then they got, on to Ai procedures at hospitals,Im glad Im old, I probably won't have to suffer, much of the Star Trek world.
40 years ago as an aspiring textile designer the next big thing was computers in design, what killed my career path was the economics at that time. I love your style and enjoy the content of your videos. The technology is a tool, if you are creative it will be a useful tool couldn't agree more. But I still prefer to use all the other basic tools, brushes, paint etc
Hello. I heard about all of the capabilities of AI, and I got into exploring everything about it. The art work is amazing. It can create what I want, and can't draw. It's helped me a lot. It's a great tool. I also looked into virtual photography as well. I'm using this ability as well since I cannot travel around the world. What ever gets the image done, or shot It will be captured. The creativity doesn't have to end. It's limitless.
I was imagining the other day a drone going round taking wedding photos. Obviously that would have downsides, and it would also need to be able to communicate with people in a pleasant way, but I was wondering if it could work in theory.
The most pernicious aspect of ai is the fact humans are creating it knowing its effects on other humans not and in the future. That should warrant imprisonment.
It is hard to predict the future. Todays AI is far from becoming really creative but it is becoming great in mimicking it. There is already a tool you can buy that automates most of the culling process. Now they also have a beta where you can upload 5000 of your edited images to train a model on your personal style of editing including cropping and correcting composition to automatically apply it. As a photographer I do not want this, because it tries to automate important parts of my creative process, but I can imagine there are a lot of photographers who prefer the time saving aspects of this, especially for business applications. I can imagine that in a not so far future, a simple smartphone video gets enhanced with automatic cropping and cutting, changed perspective and composition, fixing most shake and blur to produce a cinematic result in any imaginable style the model has been trained with, and combinations of them. Still, I am optimistic. Photography as an art will survive, forever changed, just as painting and drawing survived the dawn of photography.
It may be unnecessary for you to redo the video in 20 years. AI will have done it for you. Every time the statement is made, "AI won't be able to do ...", the immediate follow-up should be, "Why not?" When you say your creative career is safe because "there are too many variables", [4:30], you just told the self-learning AI what it needs to address. And it will.
From my first 6 year old Birthday gig the mother is planning a "Mum and Son" park walk shot. I know I know I said I wouldn't but hay here we are. Can AI do a gig like that or either ?
Heard it all with the advent of CDs and the death of vinyl. My local record store had a queue round the block on record day… I’m an architectural photographer and I wouldn’t be at all surprised if we have a trend back towards film before too long. For things coveted and worth having, people want analogue, the human-made, the rare, something laboured over.
AI won't replace: Event photography, religious and cultural milestone photography, Family and corporate team portraits, construction equipment photography, very specific product photography... to name a few. Plenty of niches that can't be replaced by AI generated imagery. Of course maybe 20 years from now robots may be deployed to take photos of these things but we'll cross that bridge when it's time to...
"A.I." has in fact added to what I do a large amount, feels odd calling a chat bot an "A.I.", anyway I linked chat GPT up to my website as a tool where photographers can ask advice, so far it has helped a few with marketing ideas, or with ideas on how to pose and even advice on gear, absolutely love embracing new tech and making it work for the people, all these fancy new tool are aftee all just well fancy tools. Embrace the change, or get left behind
Hi, great videos first of all! Very direct and real, one can feel the passion for photography in your voice. I noticed you only on Friday, however I've been binging ever since. There's a small personal problem, however, with all the outstanding and smart advice given. I was born and live in Poland, and as such all the gear and else is 5x as expensive as in the UK, yet the payrates seem to be 5x worse (100 PLN vs 100 GBP for the same thing). I'm going into uni in October, only starting photography though - got my Fuji X-T20 three years ago. I would like to pursue photography more professionally however, as to help with paying for my studies, but I can't seem to find a way to break through even the lowest barriers. Is there any advice you could give me, or how should I approach the subject? Thank you in any case for the videos, Bartosz
There is a tactile element here, however, that is part of the creative process for many of us. From a filmmaking perspective, I was in film school when we still shot on actual film, shot and edited everything. I enjoyed the hands-on work that was part of creating. Even when it all went digital, I can still operate a camera, I can still edit. Cameras go away, digital editing no longer performed by a person, part of the exhilaration disappears, for me anyway. Of course, if I were part of the small percentage of well-employed screenwriters or a non-craft film technician, maybe I wouldn't care that much.
I photograph the world in UV and IR, the point there is to discover what do things precisely look like when recorded in wavelengths invisible to us. So I don't fear being replaced. But then, it's not like I make any money, so even if I was, I'm not sure I'd care.
Your comments are sensible, reasonable and eminently plausible, given this time in our culture. We can of course all speculate. For instance, my off the cuff reaction is that AI might be used in a sort of "shotgun creative" method e.g. you. have to take some pics promoting chilli con carne, so you type in a load of parameters: origin, ingredients, demographic of those who enjoy it, target demographic etc. and the AI throws about 30 draft pics at you. I can't imagine anyone using them but perhaps rather taking one as a springboard for one's own ideas, a sort of digitally-inspired plagiarism. BTW I really enjoy your RUclips clips although I'm only a hobbyist and would never get involved in your sort of projects. This is one of two RUclips channels I subscribe to.
It great to have a common Sense Photographer around. You are right on. I am not worried. Like you said my ideas are just my ideas. I actually like playing around on Midjourney and bouncing compositions around. Been using AI in Photoshop for years. The only problem is when the AI starts Thinking for itself. In that case just don't use it, because it will STEAL your ideas.
Kodak came out around 1910 i believe with the slogan "you take the pictures, we do the rest" with a portable boxcamera. Professionals thought it be the end of photography. Kodak announced the first portable digital sensors to add to your filmbody. Again the pro world was furiously against digital as it would destroy the business. Now AI is bringing the same conversation to the table. Yes the boxcamera added a new set of amateur photographers, yes digital brought its own massive set of images, AI will do so in its own way. Yet professionals will always be there. The best warrior is not the strongest but the one that can adapt easily.
My photography is ALL about my vision. That portrait shooting I want to do, because I see something in her ... no sexy shooting, no sensual portrait. but my vision. An AI might be able to create those images using a company portrait shot of her and some input. But that input is the thing. What I do see in that person. The beauty, The sassy. The woman. The person. How I perceive it. How I am able to create the reactions. The expression. A portrait is not actually about the model, it is about the painter/photographer. I see something and I create something. Not just recombining. I give it a personality.
I’m a programmer and I do worry a bit about AI as it can already generate code for achieving tasks but I can’t see a company trusting it’s entire reputation in AI building software. If something goes wrong and you need it fixed, usually very quickly, then a someone would need to intervene and fix it. Probably, it would cut down the workforce, have staff to validate the code and to understand it to intervene if necessary so would definitely need to be in the top x% to feel safe.
@@DM-sc4zy True, will probably change the way start-ups operate. Would be very difficult for large financial institutions with a lot of legacy code to move to AI anytime in the near future though and they’re usually slow to adopt new tech so maybe that’s where the job security will be
Before we rule out AI for journalistic, wedding and event photography, we should be mindful that drone, facial recognition and battery technology are all developing rapidly. Imbued with AI these autonomous devices would be more than able to fill the photographer’s ‘shoes’, and would excel in many scenarios. A wedding/event ‘photographer’ would become the battery changer (not operator) for 3/4 AI stills / video drones. News agencies could get war / disaster footage previously impossible for a human photographer to reasonably access.
I'm not as confident as you are because our competition isn't AI, it's other humans using AI (and the skill set required to *select* a good image is much smaller than the skill set required to *create* a good image).
May not replace wedding photography, for now. But it would be possible to set up multiple cameras in a ceremony and video the whole thing and A.I will take stills and make them look amazing. Or train it on billions of wedding photos so when it sees a similar moment it snaps a shot. Cameras already have face/eye detection, next step is "moment" detection haha. People are already using software that culls images for them, and another (Imagen) to learn your style of editing and do it for you. ReTouch4me basically saves 80% of Retouching time too. It's early days, but these days are will speed up incredibly fast. A.I is similar to that guy in china who wanted 2 grains of rice for each square on a chessboard, but each square you times the number by 2. it's already getting to silly numbers.
I believe the camera gear manufacturers will suffer most from AI. Images can be captured on gear from yesteryear or mobile phones. Then enhanced with AI. The composition is up to the artist, yes. Software such as ON1 already has AI to improve workflow, editing and production. Maintaining image integrity will be challenged.
well infact i'm pretty shure ai will also completely change the way we photograph weddings. we are not that far away from near real time image generating and alternating. take an image with regular lens with regular sensor, and let the ai fix composition, exposure, depth of field and storytelling around the subject. one shot and endless alternative interpretations of that on the fly is what i expect to see in the near future. still its a tool. nonetheless its a biiiiiiig leap in technology and will have a huge impact on the industry around photography)
There are numerous issues regarding impacts to photography with AI, similar to impacts from computing. For one, knowledge gap that even some has trouble with today's technology, let alone AI. In computing, I had served as an Agent of Change to guide business decision makers to profit and to do things that never have done before with IT, without using much of the jargon for 3-4 decades. Maybe in the future, many sectors of photography will be involving what Quentin Tarantino once said that it isn't his job to create a vision but have a vision and hire someone else to create it. Now, how many will be holding the job to have a vision vs. create a vision (via AI)? As well, similar to the use of statistic, we are talking about a large sampling population. There will be individual sectors affected by AI directly or indirectly. For instance, some recent movies were using front LED wall (Volume) and Unreal engine that displaced most post production CGI work. Therefore, it isn't technology replacing human skills but a shift to different skills. Hence, after the public and clients start to change their POV, expectations and accept new technology as the new norm, then a new era will begin. Such as digital warehousing that contains only model file of parts for local 3D printing. What really happens is that each new generation replaces the previous one and new jobs get created while old jobs disappeared.
I mostly do portraits and architecture photography for one company in the construction industry. Im safe. My job involves photographing projects as they progress
I told someone I was a headshot photographer and they told me they preferred their AI portrait because it was close enough and looked cool. Imma have to get a lot more creative
100 %. I love AI tools. Took me two weeks to learn and make money with it. Amazing. But I needed to have the idea in how to leverage AI to make my clients thrilled. And not terrified. Cause the idea of AI is scaring people. But that's true of innovations in general. “All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.” - Arthur Schopenhauer, Philosopher
AI can be very creative, more than many artists, but we still need to pick the right image AI made :) As photographers we are somehow picking images anyway as we click on camera :)
I think there will be jobs of "prompt artists" or something along them lines, someone who has either has the idea and write the exact words to get it, or simply someone who knows how to word things to A.I of someone elses idea. I've seen people creating incredible art by using ChatGpt to gather the right prompts to input into an A.I Art generator. For someone who doesn't have time to learn these things they will pay someone to do it.
It is all about confidence. You got to believe in yourself. You have to believe you are creative. If people will buy this confidence, it's another question. But, the minimum you can do is to believe in yourself. And you gotta learn how to sell it. Who is the one to decide if a photography is something else, completely different from what others are doing? Who? So, at least you have to believe in yourself. It is all about confidence. I don't understand the superiority feeling towards people who took the time to learn how to use the equipment properly. It doesn't mean they are not creative people as well. I can have the most amazing out of this world idea of a photography, but if i cant execute it, then what's the point? And, again, who gives us the certiricate of not ordinary work?
Don't evaluate AI as it is now because within a decade (or less) the 'Creative Photographers' of today will be equipment grips for AI. Lets hope the Content Authenticity Initiative (CAI) can help someway/somehow.
I think family, wedding photogrpahers, underwater photogrpahers etc won't die out especially whoes working in touristic sector.. But the ones who cannot work with AI and improve their results will have much less jobs. I do photo. To retouch and modify my foto takes no time now. On another hand if you want to work with AI in digital art, you must learn it, and understand it. Thats the factor where will many fails. I think.
Bloody good show olde chap. Yeah the AI thing is making me wake up from being a "has been" and "past the year by date" to be informed, cost-effective and with a "fcuk you attitude". At the end of the day, be smart, be productive, and think creatively. Awesome!!!
AI doesn't capture real events and it copies its "ideas" from "source data". Source data is everyones images on the internet. That is something you could have been doing since photoshop came around. So basically AI is just faster photoshop.
I think AI is really going to affect product photography and advertising. As far as the photographer out doing senior portraits or quinceaneras, it might actually speed up work flow. Not too worried. I do senior photo shoots, quinceaneras, and dance photography.
@@monsieurgolem3392 That's a good point. For smaller start-ups, AI could be very helpful. I agree that luxury brands might stick with a tried and true product photographer, but I also see those brands enlisting the help of individuals who have mastered AI in the advertising space. Interesting time. We'll see what happens.
I don't think I qualify for the discussion as I do photography only on the side. I bake high end artisanal bread for a living and don't see AI replacing me anytime soon ;p
Ai can only make images by stealing existing images and Frankenstein them together, which people do already. Until droids or drones start wandering around powered by Ai someone still needs to create the source images.
Best time ever to get into photography. If you can’t out create AI…jog on. Generative AI, is just that, generative. The algorithms are based on copying what already exists. If anything, AI might just drive photographers to a new level of creativity.
I think that you miss a point on that one... it's not AI vs you... it's just that for example graphic designers won't need you anymore to make the picture... because they are creatives as well... But, photography remains photography...
Im not sure your argument stacks up. There’s a lot of commercial photographers who get hired to shoot by creative ad / marketing agencies. As you know these jobs would have a concept created by creative directors and the photographer would just get hired to execute the vision as just one part of the production team. Therefore saying you are safe because you’re a creative and not a technician is not entirely accurate because working photographers are seldom creative outside of their own personal work. The people hiring you are often themselves creatives with ideas, so if AI develops enough for them to cut out photographers / artists etc then it will have an impact on the industry. Copyright laws and AI regulation could possibly prevent this from happening though before AI runs wild because at the moment it’s not quite there yet.
1 year from now. "AI, plz design me images for this campaign. Be creative." AI: here are is a selection of 100 images in 10 different styles. "Hmm, nr 2 looks good, thx! Glad I didn't have to call that photographer.".
Well, like I always say... Smartphones aren't going to replace me as a photographer the same way the Thermomix hasn't replaced chefs. Same is true for AI to at least some extend. 🤷♂🤷♂
If you want to learn how commercial photographers do marketing then head over to here www.tinhouse-studio.com/product/photography-marketing-101/
I heard a quote form George Lucas recently. "When a new tool comes out, everyone goes crazy for it and they often forget that there is a story to tell. You are telling a story using tools, you are not using tools to tell a story".
All true except with AI its a different game now, this tool can create and tell stories better and faster than most average people. If you think AI is just another tool, you need to know more about AI.
@@DM-sc4zy I agree that you must be fluent in the tools of your trade, yet I disagree that the stories are "better". Faster, yes, and this will certainly be the determining factor in most photographers' success. Sadly, speed is more important than quality, these days? I embrace AI but I dont worry what anyone else is going to accomplish with it. 2 carpenters with the same hammer and supplies will fabricate completely different products. :-)
@@monsieurgolem3392 I was thinking that.. People will go all crazy for it then they will want real because in the coming years it will be hard to tell what's real and what's not.. We already have 'AI models' online that are pretty realistic.. People will get sick of it
@@DM-sc4zy this shit not create anything, it's create COMPILATION from STOLEN works of many people's
@DM-sc4zy Sure, AI will revolutionize many things we do and in ways we cannot fully fathom today. But the idea that it will replace professional photography and videography cannot be true. Not even close. Consider for example a wedding. Can AI produce authentic photos of the actual event?
sports photography, kindergarten photography... AI can't replace that EVER! thank for the video
As a CD at a full-service digital agency... I would be hard-pressed to outsource creativity to a photographer when my team will just ideate and generate the AI 'photographs's themselves. Yes, clients could bypass us too and do it directly in-house themselves but our reputation lives and dies by our creative effectiveness and the perception that we are the most awarded creatives in the industry - you won't get fired for hiring us, you might do if you try to do what we do yourself as a marketing director in an FMCG whatever. We hire photographers for their problem-solving, planning, reliability, approach, and repeated teamwork, but mainly because they are currently the gatekeepers of getting something real onto screen/print. MTheir style or creativity helps but that is just to support the very clear campaign creative briefs made by the core creatives - the CD, and/or AD in collab with the client. I can't see big work going to photographers who have dropped their cameras for AI-generated work because they would then be stepping into a totally different creative field. Unless the photographer has already made a MASSIVE name for themselves in that space. Tough call all round. Here's the other rub: current AI/machine learning/generative systems aren't as clever as we all think they are and we are stumbling into another DotCom bubble. But perceptions on what is and what isn't will be changed whether we like it or not.
I don’t make my living directly off of photography, but as a hairdresser, photography has been deeply intertwined with most opportunities I’ve been afforded over the past decade. With all the talk of AI replacing photographers I heard one statement that I liked a lot because it rings true in my own use case for photography- AI doesn’t tell the truth the way a photograph does. There are some huge prestigious competitions in hair which require not only a finished photographed be submitted, but also the raw files, so the judges can confirm how much of the image was hairdressing and how much was retouching. Or a simpler more day-to-day example for how I use photos of my work- how many AI images of haircuts would I have to show someone before they trusted that I could cut their hair well?
this is such an important point: so many different creatives are going to be affected by AI "photography", just as we've seen with the intensification of CGI use in 'live action' movies. it'll be a damn shame that most people just wont care.
I was in a friend's flat in 1994. He was reading about this new thing called the internet. After explaining it to me my response was 'It'll never take off'
As a retired long-time staff photographer for large metropolitan daily newspapers, this reminds me very much of the beginning of the period starting about 20 years ago when digital photography (along with free classified online advertising and free online news) began to pretty much totally hollow-out the photojournalism profession.
Basically from about 2000-20002 digital completely overtook film in the news business and that was exciting in terms of the immediacy that digital provided.
But by 2004 it became clear that unlike film on a pro level, basically, anybody could shoot digital -- and the domino effect began. Then the iPhone w/a camera arrived and a few years later, news websites were regularly using pictures sent in by the public for free. When I retired about 10 years ago after about 35 years in the business, one could still make a living shooting weddings, ads, etc. but photojournalism die-hards like myself tend to hate the commercial sector for the most part. And the little work left in the pro media space by say 2010 was a bit of a sweatshop-like experience.
So. Now AI has landed and it looks like it'll have a significant effect on commercial like the DSLR and the iPhone had on photojournalism in terms of paid work.
I think the wedding business is still fairly safe but product and fashion work looks pretty exposed in my opinion.
And to be clear, this is just my opinion based on my experience. And now that I'm and old guy I'm enjoying photography again and I think that's bc I'm doing only personal work now.
Finally, your studio in the background! That's a master class on how to organize a studio. Very impressed!
So on point. Digital was for the most part the runation of the professional. It opened up an oportunity for so many who relied on the equipment and post production to get the job done, and they worked for just about nothing. Thats how us pros were hurt. I moved off to a different sector of the business, since I was not willing to re-invent myself. I stayed active, but after 19 years as a working pro, digital made me change course. That said AI will do what digital did. Companies can use their marketing departnents and IT to create their own advertising images.
The level of AI a year from now will be like a box camera compared to a DSLR. Game over.
I currently work as the in-house director and photographer of one of the UK’s leading advertising agencies. And something mind boggling happened recently. They took a library of work created by me which was from a huge 4 day shoot and used all the images to train an AI to basically create boat loads of more imagery. At first it did make me feel really nervous about the future of my job. But I’ve attempted to reframe it in my mind recently that no matter how many images AI can create, based on my photography or others it will always require someone like me. A story teller/a creative to curate and present the right work and at that rate it’s merely another tool. But it’s still scary. If anything it’ll set the real artists apart from the pretenders.
That is a bit scary! I used to work in an advertising agency 10 years ago. A professional photo shot was often a last resort.. if they couldn't find another way to create the images they needed to bring an idea to life.
Thing is... That AI couldn't have created the images of that 4 day shoot you did out of thin air. AI wasn't there in a robot body, taking pictures with a camera so it can generate more (fake) images of that shoot... That was YOU - a photographer. YOU did the 4 day shoot and then your agency just used YOUR images so that AI can create more of them - fake images but nonetheless, more.
If anything, this sounds like a future upsell to our work. "$50 per photo for AI usage"
I don’t know, on one side that sounds like the photographer will always be needed as the first point of contact to create source materials for the AI…BUT with machine learning, how much longer might a live person be required for that first step. With billions of images existing online, how long will it take AI to reach the point where ALL the images that have ever been online is enough of a data source for it to create an image for any parameters it’s given? 🤷🏼♂️🤷🏼♂️🤷🏼♂️ only time will tell.
@@odarrien I was thinking the same! One hope is that governments bring in some type of copyright law. As they are technically taking parts of images which are copyrighted. Its a bit if a grey area.. time will tell I guess!
Im a product still life photographer that has now almost fully transitioned to CGI. The thing for me about AI that I can't get over is the notion that I haven't actually made the work if I use it to generate an image. Making the work, literally building the image is the joy I get from being a creative. Ideas are cheap, everyone has them but the difference between working creatives and those that aren't is that we have put in the time to develop the skill sets to create the work. Within the making of that work is where your style comes though. Seeing creatives throw away their style to replace it with the generic 'mid journey' style almost seems like sacrilege you know?
I'm a copywriter. I often work alongside photographers, graphic designers, illustrators, etc. to create ads, app assets, video stuff, etc. Here's my concern: I know AI can't do what I do. I've tried it. It can't empathize with an audience, it needs human direction to do that. But the issue is, who cares? My line of work is not exactly a meritocracy. Most of the people I work for have no idea how I do what I do, and therefore aren't great judges of the value. Brands the world over spend gobs of money on ineffective creative because they can't tell the difference between impactful messaging and crap. So if enough businesses out there don't see the value in, say, your photographs or images, or my copy, and think they can get results just as good by faffing about with AI themselves, is your job really that secure? (This is something I'm currently grappling with, so it's an honest question and wondered what your thoughts were. Thanks for reading.)
Build a Story Brand, Soulless A.I Is the villain.
@@DynastyUK Definitely the goal, just a bit anxious about how all this is gonna shake out. When desktop publishing hit the scene in the 90s, there was a brief time in which graphic designers had a bit of a job market pinch because enough businesses actually thought that owning a computer made them visual storytellers overnight. Things readjusted, but only after awhile.
@@my.penny.wagers Yeah, I reckon you probably gotta push marketing more than usual for a while until things even out. If there are way to make A.I the Villain yet somehow play it as keeping your friends close but your enemies closer, as to someone make A.I make you better at your job too.
It's a difficult one, it's also a time to really make those connections with past clients completely solid and give them offers and such to secure solid foundations.
Wishing you the best man :)
So many people feel threatened by progress instead of accepting that it is inevitable . The best way of dealing with it is not to resist and criticise but to embrace it , learn all about it and find the new opportunities that it presents. At the same time you will discover its limitations and why human skills will always enable us to stay one step ahead of the game . After all it is humans that are commissioning the work and not machines and it is humans that may well get bored of it and look for originality. Scratchy vinyl is making a huge comeback because people do not want idealistic perfection - they want real life which contains emotions . A I will never do emotion. Recognise that and move with it
Great video. A.I. is Great....but it can't replace reality. We still need photographers to shoot at weddings, events, graduations, where people ACTUALLY ARE. Companies will definitely take advantage of A.I. to do commercials, they recently did one totally with A.I., it looks horrible, but give it a year, and you won't be ble to tell. But we still need creative ideas and creativity to even make those commercials. A.I. is a very powerful tool, but it's still a tool. We still need someone to wield the tool. Great video. Blessings
It's not a tool. It is literally intelligence. It's another person without a body capable of not only learning, but learning faster and at a capacity not possible by a human. We are all doomed in this. All of us. Not just Photographers or creatives, all of humanity. Those that don't understand that, don't understand what AI is or how it works.
event photography may be safe for now. but many others like stock or landscape not so much.
I work in Software Engineering and have photography as my hobby. Most photographers fear AI will be used to generate an image that is better than what they could make, but that is not what will be happening.
Lets take advertising as an example, AI will generate lots of variations of an image for an ad campaign, showing everyone a text/image/video tailored for the viewer. It will learn from engagement it got on that what might work and what might not and it will refine it before showing it to the next viewer. By the time the ad campaing reaches millions of viewers it will be better and more targeted than any single thing even the best human could have come up with.
I'm an architectural photographer and we've gone through something similar over recent years with the use of 3D rendering. Everything you've said here is true for us already. And fortunately I can't see AI having any more of an impact on our industry than 3D rendering already has. And there will always be a need for great photographers in the commercial world.
Scary thing is... in 2021 I had absolutely no idea about AI or what it could do. In 2022 I experimented with Imagine AI & Aftershoot for culling/editing weddings.... and discovered ChatGPT in early 2023... which now writes most of my copy and does my research. Although there's no real panic for us creatives at the moment... what's going to be around in 2 years time that we have absolutely no idea about right now?
Perhaps AI can stuff all he photos i taken into the right folders so I can find them again and not like today where they are scattered all over my computer on hardrives and clouds and on usb pens , CDs etc.
As a Graphic Designer - AI will push alot of people out of the job or transform it; EVEN before Ai with applications like Canva and Simplifyed already doing that but people still need designers to design things; Design is about how people, or even animals, can interact or perceive something with the intent to use or understand. If you are diligent enough, AI is not as much of a threat as people might make it to be.
As a photographer - Not a chance.
News has to be real and People still want real portraits of themselves.
I would want more AI tools for my workflow; Been using ChatGPT for Captioning and Keywording lately and it makes one part of being a photojournalist a much happier time.
I would also love something that can learn my editing process and aim to improve upon me and me alone
Weddings, portraits, concerts, news, documentaries, pets, shows, festivals and parties, automotive, motorsports, sports, journalism, travel, fashion and beauty, glamour, editorials, boudoir and even porn and many, many more fields... None of them will ever be replaced by AI.
@@nogerboher5266 I agree that people will still want these images of these types, but will they need professional photographers to create them? AI developers will take on every aspect of image-making - from emulating images entirely to making bad photographs look good (e.g. The photo of the moon on the Samsung S21). The clients who want portraits, beauty, glamour, boudoir, etc. aren't looking for reality, they want hyper-reality (a photographer to make them look better than they actually do) and when AI turns their ordinary photos into better photos for free, why pay a photographer for it? Concerts might already be covered well enough by smartphones (someone in the front row with an iPhone will capture good-looking images and post them freely on Instagram). Pets are probably quantity (posting daily on Instagram) over quality - how many pet owners still pay for portraits? Sports images will probably be emulated from video footage (a 3D model of the action will be created using video feeds from multiple angles and combined high resolution studio images of players, allowing a 'photograph' to be emulated from currently impossible angles as James Cameron does with his Avatar movies). Even wedding photos could be emulated (in part) in the same way (e.g. a photo of them cutting the cake from the perspective of the cake). Travel? AI will take existing photographs of any location to create a model which can render a new image from any angle, with artificial people and any lighting condition (and given the rate at which things move, this might be available in just a few months). As for news, half of news is now smartphone coverage given to them for free. Will we still need photographers? Absolutely. But only a fraction of the current number of photographers and, therefore, most of them are unlikely to command high prices. I am no longer confident that there is *anything* which won't be affected by AI.
@@AA-ni3km Most people in trades - plumbers, electricians will be very safe for now. AI can't do anything physical yet. 🤣
@@AA-ni3km That's the thing. Nothing you've mentioned holds any weight in the real world. People said the same about modern digital cameras when they started coming out; ''Oh no! Cameras do everything instead of you now! Professional photographers will no longer be needed!'' And yet here we are... Still very much needed.
Look and listen; I am and was a graphic designer, web designer/developer, photographer and videographer for almost two decades now. The reality of the whole AI situation is that only photographers in certain fields (e.g product, commercial, real estate, etc...) will actually be affected.
When you say stuff like portraits and beauty being full of clients who want hyper reality with AI making their regular photos better, you're still forgetting the photography aspect of it. Nobody is going to spend years of learning about lighting, composition and so on, just so they can take a snapshot grade photo for their AI program. These people will still need someone who knows photography to take photos for them.
When you say concerts, shows and festivals being covered by smartphones - that's just marketing nonsense. Cameras are professional tools, not to mention being bigger, better and more feature packed than a phone. It's a professional tool, specifically made and designed with that in mind and it is so, solely for that specific purpose. A phone will never replace a professional tool.
When you say weddings or events being emulated, you're forgetting that the AI isn't a robot with a camera in it's hand and a free thinking mind, walking around the event or a wedding, taking photos. AI can only create imaginary, unrealistic and non-existent ''reality.'' AI can only emulate a fake version of the event that looks nothing like the actual event and it can not emulate all the things that happened at the event or a wedding, all the people that were there and all the real world detail that was then and there. Only a person with a camera, being physically present at said event or wedding, can represent and capture what happens at the event, how the event looks, all the people that are at the event, what they are wearing, what they are doing, the food, the flowers, the tiniest little details... Not to mention unexpected or once-in-a-lifetime situations that happened at the event or wedding, only being there with a camera and taking a picture of it will give a real and true representation of it...
Long story short, 90% of photography will remain untouched and unaffected by AI.
@@nogerboher5266I didn't say that AI would *remove* the need for photographers. It won't. I was reacting to your claim that AI could never replace certain types of photography. It can and it will. Photographers will still be needed but AI will reduce the number of images which are done photographically and it will reduce the skill level required. Neither is good for the earning prospects of photographers (and they were never that good in the first place for the average professional photographer).
What's at risk is camera production. The more people who abandon photography with a camera, the few cameras are made, there will be fewer choices and higher costs.
I agree with you.
What people generally don’t get is that an artistic communication starts at the creator as an idea or concept and then makes this idea beautiful or whatever with the tools of that art.
It’s not just the color light shadows and composition that makes it great it’s the alive communication at the creator. AI is soulless just throwing around patterns but can be useful for other boring tasks.
Especially now when AI is so fantastic it’s more important than ever that we can enhance our fantasy and ability to think beyond the ramifications of today’s society.
I just watched 3 of your videos. I really like your honesty, your professionalism, your soul. Thank you.
You have mentioned creative aspect, but there is another more important, I think: experience. Not only it's not easy to make a good photo of yourself, the memory of all the experience of meeting the photographer, talking with him even about weather or cats, seeing the process of the photo being made, getting emotional after seeing the effect - these are all worthwhile memories. Human to human, this is still valued. I would even suggest retouching to lose a lot of its appeal, as heavily edited images would feel to some extent like generated by AI.
This is the 7th time I have watched or listened to this video. It calms me more than a cup of chamomile. The underlying message seems to be a point you make often - know your Genre, Style, and Niche!
What I do now would not work in the age of AI in a year or two from now. I don't have any good photography portfolio, so I will probably end up using AI as a tool to generate some elements for an image, as a parts of background and make portfolio as a mix of product photography and AI. I think there are levels to everything and in future, you will have work of professionals that are amazing and are true photographs and you will get a lot of generated images and no one would really care unless you are really interested like now in photography to check if its a film or just a filter on digital file. A lot of people will lose, you might adapt and strive to survive or wait and see what will happen. One thing that I don't get is, how will people learn what did, what I gathered through years, what will they prompt without knowledge about camera or lighting. I guess they will get 1000 slightly different variations of the same image. I think we will see a lot of changes in styles and its interesting and scary at the same time.
Spot on. However, AI is already servicing clients that want something that just does the job, in many fields. The other problem is that the education system is creating more and more automatons that make the AI look intelligent. A poorly educated humanity will make the AI look more and more cleaver. We, as consumers must demand more, so in turn, our clients demand more from the creative process.
I’m not concerned about AI replacing photography My clients hire me not the photography!
I definitely agree. I'm just starting out in photography, thinking lifestyle is my niche. AI has been a great help getting myself started and has helped me have more time to be creative and creating work.
You hit the nail on the head, not just about Ai, but photography in general. I am a very experienced photographer over many years with a technical education and I have looked at your work and thought I could easily do that. However I compare myself to an old guitarist friend of mine. He has played on movie soundtracks and with the likes of Van Morrison. He can play superb covers of Carlos Santana and Mark Knopfler tracks such as Sultans of Swing, but the penny dropped with me a long time ago. He may well be able to play as well as these famous guitarists, but they wrote it. Like you they had the ideas not him. The realisation was yes I could take the same pictures as you in terms of composition, lighting etc, but could I come up with the ideas in the first place?
The next few years are going to be rough though. Whilst AI has limitations and probably always will, until people question what AI presents them with there’s going to be a genuine risk of an entire generation attaching themselves to flawed knowledge and incorrect application. The problem is us. We, the human thinkers, have to be able to be clever enough to accept that AI is just a tool and not the solution…but lots of people are pretty thick.
While I definitely think that AI can generate some wildlife photography, I think it has a long way to go when it comes to the creation of animals. There is almost an uncanny valley affect when looking at AI generated animals, especially birds! But only time will tell if wildlife/nature photographers will be out of business!
I shoot three things: 1) Architectural work, architects will still want their projects shot. 2) Event work for a major university - events aren't going anywhere. 3) Editorial work/food/cookbooks - Chefs will still cook, authors will still write cookbooks (I could see lower budget books using AI)
You're of the belief that AI can't replace photographers because a human is needed for the "idea for the project". I hate to be the bearer of bad news, I work in software, my friends are PhD researchers for AI. This is exactly what they are working on right now. AI is very very much coming for your photography job. It's also coming for directorial, story boarding, cinematography, animation, and everything else. It's not there yet, but just a few years ago we said "computers can't draw faces properly". It's only a matter of time.
I am also privy to the thoughts from executives at production studios and the lead artists at game development studios. All the executives want is to eliminate all the creatives. They already lay off 50% or more of their staff after every project is done. A dream scenario for them is laying off their entire production staff and hiring 5 "prompt engineers" to make their "idea man" thoughts into a film, game, or photo shoot.
If I haven't made myself clear. There are research projects that are well on their way that can analyze the most popular movies out there to create, write, story board, and drop a promo trailer without any human intervention. All you say is, "I want a sci-fi hit for Summer 2024 based on what was popular over the last decade". Then AI produces all of the ideas, characters, plot, shot descriptions, etc for you. No need for serious human oversight except for a minor edit and follow through on the production. It goes even further though, other groups are working with Unreal and other 3D engines to replace the entire production process. AI will shoot the film for you. Goodbye gaffers, lighting, actors, or even a director! This is their goal. Completely customized content for everyone based exactly on what they want to watch with no need for creatives at all.
I'm sorry that I'm being all doom and gloom, but if you saw what is being cooked up by research labs at the University's here, being funded by Sony, Paramount, WETA, Google, Meta, and Microsoft, you wouldn't be so confident. They stand to save billions in production, why wouldn't they at least try to do this?
Will all this come to pass? I don't know. It's still early days, but I know that at the very least, the stock watching, money grubbing accountants in charge of big productions and large companies would LOVE to pay $15,000/mo instead of hiring photographers and crews of people to flesh out their content for them.
If movie studios can use this technology to create films without cast and crew, then so can ordinary individuals. It will lead to a lot of job losses, but also empower individuals without money and resources to make their own films.
In an ideal world AI would mean we could all work a little bit less hard to be as comfortable as we are now. I fear what will happen is that some will lose their jobs and have to do lower paid and/or less enjoyable jobs while some will make huge profits, worsening inequality. I’m a bit worried about being caught on the wrong end of that, not because my current (low paid customer service) job will be replaced by AI but because the jobs I might have moved into will be eliminated or filled by more experienced people whose prior job has been eliminated
I record, write and mix music (mostly metal) and I don't think it will replace the stand out artists at all, or mix engineers who have a sound. People who have something to say and aren't writing lyrics for a grade 2 reading level. It will replace those with nothing to say though. Especially if more popular artists do what Grimes did and allow other artists to use their voice.
I think it will get old fast and then the people who learned to use AI to further their creative workflow (like you're saying) will benefit. Always enjoy your videos Scott!
I do architecture/ interior design photography and real estate. Exterior architecture work will possibly suffer, but they already do renders and stuff. However I'm more of a media provider, so I do videos, floor plans, drone etc. Not only photography. So, I'm safe. But I accepted during covid, that I needed to branch out and be diversified to stay employed
Very well spoken and yes I totally agree - don't belive AI will ever be able to create. I say this in the broad spectrum of uniqueness. I do however fear that AI, when abused can result in a very warped sense of reality I do belive and the fallout is both unknown and longwinded. It sure is the future version of the industrial revolution. We as creative need to embrace it, at the same time I urge all not to abuse it or become to reliant on it. When seen as a tool, the possibilities of even more exceptional work are boundless? I am an artist/photographer - main commercial sector of work is tourism lifestyle. Main focus of work, conservation driven pieces directed at attention to the intricacies of the natural world.
One issue with ai is that it's really just an image blender. Whenever I have a weird idea the ai doesn't know what to do no matter how much I prompt it because it hasn't been trained on images with those things. Even if I googled certain ideas I would get very few image results.
Fantastic outlook, 100% agree.
I spent most of my life not listening to myself and avoiding being creative because as a child, my father told me artists don't make money until they're dead and I believed him. So my biggest struggle as a photographer is being able to get ideas in my head out into a form communicate those creative ideas to other people.
Midjourney has helped A LOT with this. Now I can put in a prompt real quick, refine the idea back and forth, then communicate it to my team, then get their input and change elements when planning the project to bring it to life. Ethical image sourcing issues aside, these "AI" have been very helpful in improving my ability to communicate my ideas for personal shoots to other people.
If we consider photography as only a passion. Love to Play with Lights , focus and Click. Nothing can end photography.
As i have said before AI will replace a lot of the jobs in fashion photography. Make-up artists, stylists, creative directors and so on. Replaced by AI because they digitize the clothes they are trying to sell and put them in hyper realistic models of every size, shape, weight, race and gender within minutes. The desired pose, the environment and background. Everything done in ai.
Its going to put like 70% or more of the people currently working in fashion photography teams out of a job within the next few years.
@@monsieurgolem3392 people buy clothes to be seen in them. Obviously it will be really easy in the near future to generate ai images of people in any clothes you/they can imagine.
But to be seen in them will stay worth money to those that care about such a thing.
Personally I never buy clothes beyond what I at a absolute minimum need to have some clothes on, so the cheapest possible Amazon stuff.
As a buyer specialized in project procurement for a district heating company, one of the things I do a lot is trouble shooting - especially in regards to invoices, where the automatic system comes up short. It's not a well paid job, so hopefully I'll find something else to do, but I don't feel threatened at by AI at all. AI might make my job easier over time, but it can't replace what I do, because even if an AI system could do everything related to the invoices coming in, the decision what invoices are okay to pay and what invoices aren't okay to pay is down to human beings in procurement and the project department.
And of course as a buyer there is also the whole negotiation regarding price and conditions and so on, that's not going away, unless society changes dramatically in say the direction predicted in Star Trek or something like that.
I mainly shoot PR, events, loads of headshots for departments at Universities etc. Although I'm worried I really don't see my work disappearing. A lot of what I do aimed at capturing reality. I can see photographers who are clambering for campaign work or lifestyle shoots to go down the plug hole. Which is a shame because I really admire those types. I don't think I was ever good enough to shoot an ad campaign or take portraits of models in the countryside for some fashion brand. Good luck to everyone.
Taking pictures for an auction house. I don´t think it will leave me jobless any time soon in the next 5 years. Companies are slower to adapt to new tech, especially if not grown up with it. It (AI) needs to proof itself first, by being used by an industry leading company or so, to be adapted by smaller businesses. But we´ll see, exciting times nevertheless
Not a chance. first I love what I do and the way I do it . the process is for me as important as the final result and my enjoyment is paramount; Simply put I want to have fun and AI is not quite as fun for me. Now from the practicality side/client work , it will speed up certain process and stock photo and uninventive work will take a hit . it's honestly a good challenge , to keep up creatively against whatever a prompt would do.
you're right on the money regarding the decision aspect and ideation process , ultimately I choose what goes or not . In my field client do not pay for just pictures they pay for ideas and the ability to capture intangible concept through narrative , composition, model attitude, clothing ...and amidst this let their product shine ,those concept that all need a human sensibility and touch and sense of details. Whether AI is used to achieve that or not is almost a moot point, at best a tool like any other.
One thing I haven't seen talked about is the loss of mastery. I had discussions ad nauseam about the matter, one particular point was "I can't draw , but now its not even a requisite to execute great work" , It was quite telling that the person talking gave up on drawing pretty fast but all of sudden is feeling his wing grow back thanks to AI.
I can't imagine not being able to take a good photograph in the first place and now turning to AI to do my bidding.
I saw this question earlier within a digital art and also a photography forum
I replied "No, AI Visual works especially the raw one that hasn't been retouched by a person is very souless and uncanny"...
As an artist i can easily can spot the difference between which is AI which is Human creative works or which is mix of both by seeing a few details that orndinary people maybe couldn't see
All true, thank you, love it!
When I started drumming and had a great time earning and then electronic drums came in. Killing analogue drumming..... for a while. Because the sound and feel of certain drums and cymbals just did not, and even today, cut it. So what happened. We adjusted and incorporate the best of both and every drummer today, inc this old rocker, has some kind of electronic drum thingy on their kits. Roll with it people and keep having fun.
I'm a university professor who teaches writing (among other things) and if the industry embraces that writing is about building critical/analytic thinking then my job is safe, but if it's just for pushing out written content then I'll see a few folks on the breadline
I attended a presentation on Ai, it was to do with Ai in factories, where in a carplant for instance full of Ai robots could replace all the production employees with 4 maintenance staff and could run 24/7/52 not including breakdowns, we were left with the view, be careful what you wish for, their dreams Ai warehousing, Ai autonomous transport/ distribution, orders picked & delivered byAI, then they got, on to Ai procedures at hospitals,Im glad Im old, I probably won't have to suffer, much of the Star Trek world.
40 years ago as an aspiring textile designer the next big thing was computers in design, what killed my career path was the economics at that time.
I love your style and enjoy the content of your videos. The technology is a tool, if you are creative it will be a useful tool couldn't agree more.
But I still prefer to use all the other basic tools, brushes, paint etc
Hello. I heard about all of the capabilities of AI, and I got into exploring everything about it. The art work is amazing. It can create what I want, and can't draw. It's helped me a lot. It's a great tool. I also looked into virtual photography as well. I'm using this ability as well since I cannot travel around the world. What ever gets the image done, or shot It will be captured. The creativity doesn't have to end. It's limitless.
I was imagining the other day a drone going round taking wedding photos. Obviously that would have downsides, and it would also need to be able to communicate with people in a pleasant way, but I was wondering if it could work in theory.
@@monsieurgolem3392 Who doesn't? :D
The most pernicious aspect of ai is the fact humans are creating it knowing its effects on other humans not and in the future. That should warrant imprisonment.
It is hard to predict the future. Todays AI is far from becoming really creative but it is becoming great in mimicking it. There is already a tool you can buy that automates most of the culling process. Now they also have a beta where you can upload 5000 of your edited images to train a model on your personal style of editing including cropping and correcting composition to automatically apply it. As a photographer I do not want this, because it tries to automate important parts of my creative process, but I can imagine there are a lot of photographers who prefer the time saving aspects of this, especially for business applications.
I can imagine that in a not so far future, a simple smartphone video gets enhanced with automatic cropping and cutting, changed perspective and composition, fixing most shake and blur to produce a cinematic result in any imaginable style the model has been trained with, and combinations of them. Still, I am optimistic. Photography as an art will survive, forever changed, just as painting and drawing survived the dawn of photography.
It may be unnecessary for you to redo the video in 20 years. AI will have done it for you.
Every time the statement is made, "AI won't be able to do ...", the immediate follow-up should be, "Why not?" When you say your creative career is safe because "there are too many variables", [4:30], you just told the self-learning AI what it needs to address. And it will.
From my first 6 year old Birthday gig the mother is planning a "Mum and Son" park walk shot. I know I know I said I wouldn't but hay here we are. Can AI do a gig like that or either ?
💯. Ideas aren’t the domain of AI. AI by design is derivative.
Heard it all with the advent of CDs and the death of vinyl. My local record store had a queue round the block on record day… I’m an architectural photographer and I wouldn’t be at all surprised if we have a trend back towards film before too long. For things coveted and worth having, people want analogue, the human-made, the rare, something laboured over.
what are the copyright implications of AI (if gleaning stuff from creators stuff and reworking it)?
AI won't replace: Event photography, religious and cultural milestone photography, Family and corporate team portraits, construction equipment photography, very specific product photography... to name a few. Plenty of niches that can't be replaced by AI generated imagery. Of course maybe 20 years from now robots may be deployed to take photos of these things but we'll cross that bridge when it's time to...
"A.I." has in fact added to what I do a large amount, feels odd calling a chat bot an "A.I.", anyway I linked chat GPT up to my website as a tool where photographers can ask advice, so far it has helped a few with marketing ideas, or with ideas on how to pose and even advice on gear, absolutely love embracing new tech and making it work for the people, all these fancy new tool are aftee all just well fancy tools.
Embrace the change, or get left behind
Hi, great videos first of all! Very direct and real, one can feel the passion for photography in your voice. I noticed you only on Friday, however I've been binging ever since. There's a small personal problem, however, with all the outstanding and smart advice given. I was born and live in Poland, and as such all the gear and else is 5x as expensive as in the UK, yet the payrates seem to be 5x worse (100 PLN vs 100 GBP for the same thing). I'm going into uni in October, only starting photography though - got my Fuji X-T20 three years ago. I would like to pursue photography more professionally however, as to help with paying for my studies, but I can't seem to find a way to break through even the lowest barriers. Is there any advice you could give me, or how should I approach the subject?
Thank you in any case for the videos,
Bartosz
Don't price yourself considerably less than it would be in UK, the difference for the same quality level is not that big.
What was the sixth word you said? and can we please get the origin story on that word?
There is a tactile element here, however, that is part of the creative process for many of us. From a filmmaking perspective, I was in film school when we still shot on actual film, shot and edited everything. I enjoyed the hands-on work that was part of creating. Even when it all went digital, I can still operate a camera, I can still edit. Cameras go away, digital editing no longer performed by a person, part of the exhilaration disappears, for me anyway. Of course, if I were part of the small percentage of well-employed screenwriters or a non-craft film technician, maybe I wouldn't care that much.
I photograph the world in UV and IR, the point there is to discover what do things precisely look like when recorded in wavelengths invisible to us. So I don't fear being replaced.
But then, it's not like I make any money, so even if I was, I'm not sure I'd care.
Your comments are sensible, reasonable and eminently plausible, given this time in our culture. We can of course all speculate. For instance, my off the cuff reaction is that AI might be used in a sort of "shotgun creative" method e.g. you. have to take some pics promoting chilli con carne, so you type in a load of parameters: origin, ingredients, demographic of those who enjoy it, target demographic etc. and the AI throws about 30 draft pics at you. I can't imagine anyone using them but perhaps rather taking one as a springboard for one's own ideas, a sort of digitally-inspired plagiarism. BTW I really enjoy your RUclips clips although I'm only a hobbyist and would never get involved in your sort of projects. This is one of two RUclips channels I subscribe to.
It great to have a common Sense Photographer around. You are right on. I am not worried. Like you said my ideas are just my ideas. I actually like playing around on Midjourney and bouncing compositions around. Been using AI in Photoshop for years. The only problem is when the AI starts Thinking for itself. In that case just don't use it, because it will STEAL your ideas.
Kodak came out around 1910 i believe with the slogan "you take the pictures, we do the rest" with a portable boxcamera. Professionals thought it be the end of photography. Kodak announced the first portable digital sensors to add to your filmbody. Again the pro world was furiously against digital as it would destroy the business.
Now AI is bringing the same conversation to the table.
Yes the boxcamera added a new set of amateur photographers, yes digital brought its own massive set of images, AI will do so in its own way. Yet professionals will always be there.
The best warrior is not the strongest but the one that can adapt easily.
My photography is ALL about my vision. That portrait shooting I want to do, because I see something in her ... no sexy shooting, no sensual portrait. but my vision. An AI might be able to create those images using a company portrait shot of her and some input. But that input is the thing. What I do see in that person. The beauty, The sassy. The woman.
The person. How I perceive it. How I am able to create the reactions. The expression. A portrait is not actually about the model, it is about the painter/photographer. I see something and I create something. Not just recombining. I give it a personality.
I’m a programmer and I do worry a bit about AI as it can already generate code for achieving tasks but I can’t see a company trusting it’s entire reputation in AI building software. If something goes wrong and you need it fixed, usually very quickly, then a someone would need to intervene and fix it.
Probably, it would cut down the workforce, have staff to validate the code and to understand it to intervene if necessary so would definitely need to be in the top x% to feel safe.
It does not need to replace everyone. imagine a coding job usually needs 10 people now only require 1 + AI.
@@DM-sc4zy True, will probably change the way start-ups operate. Would be very difficult for large financial institutions with a lot of legacy code to move to AI anytime in the near future though and they’re usually slow to adopt new tech so maybe that’s where the job security will be
Before we rule out AI for journalistic, wedding and event photography, we should be mindful that drone, facial recognition and battery technology are all developing rapidly.
Imbued with AI these autonomous devices would be more than able to fill the photographer’s ‘shoes’, and would excel in many scenarios.
A wedding/event ‘photographer’ would become the battery changer (not operator) for 3/4 AI stills / video drones.
News agencies could get war / disaster footage previously impossible for a human photographer to reasonably access.
I'm not as confident as you are because our competition isn't AI, it's other humans using AI (and the skill set required to *select* a good image is much smaller than the skill set required to *create* a good image).
May not replace wedding photography, for now. But it would be possible to set up multiple cameras in a ceremony and video the whole thing and A.I will take stills and make them look amazing. Or train it on billions of wedding photos so when it sees a similar moment it snaps a shot. Cameras already have face/eye detection, next step is "moment" detection haha.
People are already using software that culls images for them, and another (Imagen) to learn your style of editing and do it for you. ReTouch4me basically saves 80% of Retouching time too. It's early days, but these days are will speed up incredibly fast. A.I is similar to that guy in china who wanted 2 grains of rice for each square on a chessboard, but each square you times the number by 2. it's already getting to silly numbers.
I believe the camera gear manufacturers will suffer most from AI. Images can be captured on gear from yesteryear or mobile phones. Then enhanced with AI. The composition is up to the artist, yes. Software such as ON1 already has AI to improve workflow, editing and production. Maintaining image integrity will be challenged.
well infact i'm pretty shure ai will also completely change the way we photograph weddings. we are not that far away from near real time image generating and alternating. take an image with regular lens with regular sensor, and let the ai fix composition, exposure, depth of field and storytelling around the subject. one shot and endless alternative interpretations of that on the fly is what i expect to see in the near future. still its a tool.
nonetheless its a biiiiiiig leap in technology and will have a huge impact on the industry around photography)
It's also not going to be free.
@@stevemadrid6522
But much cheaper.
@@peterschmidt6482 You think so?
@@stevemadrid6522
No, wrote it just for fun.
There are numerous issues regarding impacts to photography with AI, similar to impacts from computing. For one, knowledge gap that even some has trouble with today's technology, let alone AI.
In computing, I had served as an Agent of Change to guide business decision makers to profit and to do things that never have done before with IT, without using much of the jargon for 3-4 decades. Maybe in the future, many sectors of photography will be involving what Quentin Tarantino once said that it isn't his job to create a vision but have a vision and hire someone else to create it. Now, how many will be holding the job to have a vision vs. create a vision (via AI)?
As well, similar to the use of statistic, we are talking about a large sampling population. There will be individual sectors affected by AI directly or indirectly. For instance, some recent movies were using front LED wall (Volume) and Unreal engine that displaced most post production CGI work. Therefore, it isn't technology replacing human skills but a shift to different skills.
Hence, after the public and clients start to change their POV, expectations and accept new technology as the new norm, then a new era will begin. Such as digital warehousing that contains only model file of parts for local 3D printing. What really happens is that each new generation replaces the previous one and new jobs get created while old jobs disappeared.
I mostly do portraits and architecture photography for one company in the construction industry. Im safe. My job involves photographing projects as they progress
Not sure AI will impose itself on documentary and photojournalism, when news agencies insist on jpegs as Raw files can be easily doctored.
Hey bud, the Sony A9iii might be able to do that “pull a a still from a movie” thing and do it without motion blur. 😏
I’m a maternity/graduation/engagement/event/portrait photographer. I think I should be good vs AI
I told someone I was a headshot photographer and they told me they preferred their AI portrait because it was close enough and looked cool. Imma have to get a lot more creative
Plus AI could never come up with anything as weird and original as reality
Maybe your brain can't imagine future possibilities of AI.
100 %. I love AI tools. Took me two weeks to learn and make money with it. Amazing. But I needed to have the idea in how to leverage AI to make my clients thrilled. And not terrified. Cause the idea of AI is scaring people. But that's true of innovations in general. “All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.”
- Arthur Schopenhauer, Philosopher
AI can be very creative, more than many artists, but we still need to pick the right image AI made :)
As photographers we are somehow picking images anyway as we click on camera :)
I think there will be jobs of "prompt artists" or something along them lines, someone who has either has the idea and write the exact words to get it, or simply someone who knows how to word things to A.I of someone elses idea. I've seen people creating incredible art by using ChatGpt to gather the right prompts to input into an A.I Art generator. For someone who doesn't have time to learn these things they will pay someone to do it.
It is all about confidence. You got to believe in yourself. You have to believe you are creative. If people will buy this confidence, it's another question. But, the minimum you can do is to believe in yourself. And you gotta learn how to sell it.
Who is the one to decide if a photography is something else, completely different from what others are doing? Who? So, at least you have to believe in yourself. It is all about confidence.
I don't understand the superiority feeling towards people who took the time to learn how to use the equipment properly. It doesn't mean they are not creative people as well. I can have the most amazing out of this world idea of a photography, but if i cant execute it, then what's the point? And, again, who gives us the certiricate of not ordinary work?
Don't evaluate AI as it is now because within a decade (or less) the 'Creative Photographers' of today will be equipment grips for AI. Lets hope the Content Authenticity Initiative (CAI) can help someway/somehow.
I think family, wedding photogrpahers, underwater photogrpahers etc won't die out especially whoes working in touristic sector.. But the ones who cannot work with AI and improve their results will have much less jobs. I do photo. To retouch and modify my foto takes no time now. On another hand if you want to work with AI in digital art, you must learn it, and understand it. Thats the factor where will many fails. I think.
Bloody good show olde chap. Yeah the AI thing is making me wake up from being a "has been" and "past the year by date" to be informed, cost-effective and with a "fcuk you attitude". At the end of the day, be smart, be productive, and think creatively. Awesome!!!
AI doesn't capture real events and it copies its "ideas" from "source data". Source data is everyones images on the internet. That is something you could have been doing since photoshop came around. So basically AI is just faster photoshop.
I think AI is really going to affect product photography and advertising. As far as the photographer out doing senior portraits or quinceaneras, it might actually speed up work flow. Not too worried. I do senior photo shoots, quinceaneras, and dance photography.
@@monsieurgolem3392 That's a good point. For smaller start-ups, AI could be very helpful. I agree that luxury brands might stick with a tried and true product photographer, but I also see those brands enlisting the help of individuals who have mastered AI in the advertising space. Interesting time. We'll see what happens.
I don't think I qualify for the discussion as I do photography only on the side. I bake high end artisanal bread for a living and don't see AI replacing me anytime soon ;p
Ai can only make images by stealing existing images and Frankenstein them together, which people do already. Until droids or drones start wandering around powered by Ai someone still needs to create the source images.
Best time ever to get into photography. If you can’t out create AI…jog on. Generative AI, is just that, generative. The algorithms are based on copying what already exists. If anything, AI might just drive photographers to a new level of creativity.
I think that you miss a point on that one... it's not AI vs you... it's just that for example graphic designers won't need you anymore to make the picture... because they are creatives as well...
But, photography remains photography...
Im not sure your argument stacks up. There’s a lot of commercial photographers who get hired to shoot by creative ad / marketing agencies. As you know these jobs would have a concept created by creative directors and the photographer would just get hired to execute the vision as just one part of the production team. Therefore saying you are safe because you’re a creative and not a technician is not entirely accurate because working photographers are seldom creative outside of their own personal work. The people hiring you are often themselves creatives with ideas, so if AI develops enough for them to cut out photographers / artists etc then it will have an impact on the industry. Copyright laws and AI regulation could possibly prevent this from happening though before AI runs wild because at the moment it’s not quite there yet.
AI and 3D renders in general might kill product, but food will stay around
1 year from now.
"AI, plz design me images for this campaign. Be creative."
AI: here are is a selection of 100 images in 10 different styles.
"Hmm, nr 2 looks good, thx! Glad I didn't have to call that photographer.".
Every question I have asked AI the answer is partially wrong
Well, like I always say... Smartphones aren't going to replace me as a photographer the same way the Thermomix hasn't replaced chefs.
Same is true for AI to at least some extend. 🤷♂🤷♂