Did Smartphones KILL Photography?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 2 окт 2024
- Thanks to CleanMyMac X for sponsoring this video! Get Your Mac vacation-ready with a 7-day free trial of CleanMyMac X: clnmy.com/Enri.... Use my promo code ENRICO for 20% off.
--------
🎬 Learn EXACTLY how I make videos:
www.enricotart...
📮 Behind the scenes and nuggets on my free newsletter:
www.enricotart...
💻 My gear and tech setup:
www.enricotart...
🎆 Instagram:
/ enritarta
--------
This video isn't sponsored by Google or Pixel. I bought the phone with my own money
Interesting videos I used as source for how cameras work:
• The Crazy Computations...
• How the Italian Renais...
--------
The Pixel 9 changes what smartphone photography is. After 15 years of computational photography, AI and automated tools turn photos into something different. They are now memories and they allow everyone to take amazing shots. But that aren't Photos anymore.
--------
🖖 Hey! I'm Enrico and on this channel I go behind the scenes of the design, psychology and stories behind tech and making stuff on the internet. I'm a tech Product Manager, builder of things made of pixels.
--------
The visuals or audio herein may not be utilised to train a machine learning algorithm of any kind without express permission of the Copyright holder (Enrico Tartarotti)
p.s. If you made it all the way here, you're cool. Comment "I'm cool"
---------
License ID: 6LP6pwKNV5W
Thanks to CleanMyMac X for sponsoring this video! Get Your Mac vacation-ready with a 7-day free trial of CleanMyMac X: clnmy.com/EnricoTartarotti. Use my promo code ENRICO for 20% off.
The whole video is just a facade for the ad.
@@enricotartarotti really? Cleanmymac? If any of you guys need software to keep organized with something as simple as a macOSX try etiquettes instead of bloatware.
Cleanmymac adds no value to you or your apple machine
Submitting ourselves to a company's definition of perfection will rob us of our own subjectivity.
There's beauty in the broken and imperfect. In chaos and mundanity.
Unfortunately a lot of people will prefer perfection over older stuff and I don't know if I really like it. Glad my Mom is still an actual photographer and what not.
@@sticksstickerson that's so cool. You must have some really nice photos from your childhood
@@sticksstickerson perfection is one thing, manufacturing fakeness is another & that's a problem. One is trying to escape reality & that is scary.
Pixel 8 Pro makes it really hard to change settings. All photos have fake bokeh, contrast and sharpness turned up to 11. E.g. if you're not 35 anymore this is really crappy for portraits. The camera AI represents the 20-something Google developers' idea of what's a pleasing result.
@@mipmipmipmipmip-v5x that's so rude of Google 😐
A further step:
Automatically have the view through everyones Vision Pro type device make the world look nicer. Remove garbage on the street. Paint derelict buildings. Hide surveillance technology.
Want to record police brutality as it's happening?
Nope. Playback will show something else.
Like Ready Player One. That’s scary
@@matticolo or we happy few
the scary part is , this is where we are headed at
we are in a MATRIX!
As a photographer I am completely invested in trying to better understand how smartphone photography is shaping people's consciousness on images.
I agree that most people want to take photos of "memories" but, if you think about it, isn't the skill of a photographer to be able to convey a certain emotion, story and feel through his craft?
I couldn’t agree more!
I have been thinking about this a lot and I think the purpose / function of art photography will change.
Back when eg Magnum photographers did eg street photography, people didn’t travel much, and more life was taking place on the streets. So they conveyed that emotion of what it was like eg in New York.
However today as people travel, see movies etc, that has become diluted.
My guess would be that for example more surreal, ambiguous or abstract photography (like Martin Parr for example) will stand out more in juxtaposition to this overflow of beautiful images.
@@MartinTHoffmann I came across this post once saying that photography is not about feel, light, composition, field, space, emotion, story, it's about vibessss and it's kinda sad and reductive of what is essentially an art form in which people have poured their sacrifices, struggles, joys, fears and ultimately their love and obsession.
Photography as a definiton is to graph(catch) photons - Light particles.
Is it really photography, if you aren't capturing any photons, but merely doodling something with google-ai-software?
I think not.
This will twist peoples general perception of reality way more than it is already is.
If you want a real interesting example, it's that most phone camera lenses are 22-28mm, including the selfie camera. Any photographer knows that portraits look very different at each focal length, so there is some thinking about how this impacts people's self images up to and including plastic surgery.
but most people aren't trying to be a photographer, so just being able to take the best possible pictures with minimal effort is good enough for most people
Smartphones killed photography a long time ago. Nobody knows how to use a camera anymore. Everyone takes vertical pictures & videos.
And don't start talking about "music"
"This camera is garbage because there's motion blur when I stand still taking a photo of my dog running."
And it's even worse when they take vertical 21:9 ratio images, like what the fuck?
as someone who just got into photography recently, I don't get why vertical is bad? Like most of the time landscapes are better in... landscape but for portraits it's most likely better in portrait, why is vertical ratio inherently bad? If anything, I think smartphones made photography more accessible to everyone now that they don't have to bring a separate device to take pictures. I also bought a camera because I thought that the phone images weren't enough for me. Don't all photographers say, "it's not the camera, it's the person behind it"? So why is the phone bad? Of course, the point about computational photography and AI stuff I very much agree with but just couldn't get my head around the aspect of "it's bad because it's not a camera/people take vertical pics"
@@dandyND Not all vertical images are bad, if it's such a scene, then it's okay, but, for example, one of my female friends a few weeks ago took an image of a very beautiful car from the 1920s and she took a vertical 21:9 photo of the car, which is very annoying because the car takes up a very little space of the image.
we are going towards a future where the user’s input matters less and less, google search already does this, youtube search same thing, our cameras are starting to do this, cars will head in that direction too. It’s crazy just to think about that it is less and less about the user’s opinion about what they want but rather the statistical analysis of what the user should want based on some algorithm that probably predicts that better than the user can. Social media is the perfect example of algorithms deciding what to show us so that we can’t put our phones down.
I always imagined a happy bright future not this techno dictator bs
i believe it did,
i love doing photography and when i mention it to people they just ask me if i have a phone and why dont i use that instead of my "expensive" (beginner) gear..
The value of photos for me is the ability to capture reality as it is, without any filters, I'm against AI retouching photos for that reason but again, phone cameras in the first place aren't built to take a picture of reality, but of the reality that appeals to the user
@@afafilaI think you mean phone camera software.
Society has to decide if they value the truth as more important than how they feel.
Photography has never told the truth; it has convinced us it is the truth.
@@softconstructionYour answer doesn't invalidate the original comment.
@@softconstruction🤡 wannabe intellectual, but you failed, photography was invented to “capture” a moment in time, as it is. So yes, photography has always helped us to value the truth.
@@notfamous649 a photo captures the photographers perspective, so it's always subjective and never objective.
@@notfamous649I can style a photo that removes the original meaning of a scene, just because it's a moment captured doesn't always mean it's reality captured
Given the fact that the term photography refers to the painting achieved capturing light on a surface that can store said information, what is the purpose of calling AI photography “photography” if, in fact, it is not created by light? And what’s the purpose of changing a photograph on a Pixel just to edit it beyond reality?
Either we have become so delusional we want to remember fake memories that we didn’t live or, worse, we are so lazy that we aren’t willing to put in the effort and personal sacrifice necessary to achieve a good photo… either way, it’s really really sad
Is it? Nobody's forcing you to use the AI features. Just take photos with your phone and enjoy them as they are.
@@WillyJunior That's not the point. The sadness I talk about is for the delusion or lack of motivation for endeavors modern man is enduring due to socio-economical factors or something more we're not capable of understanding
@@WillyJunior Photography - catching a fossil of light particles on a surface(Film, sensor etc)
This has nothing to do with AI-generated images besides, Artificial Image generators is most commenly trained on actual photography.
But what AI is actually doing is doodling with pixels. It's closer to painting with crayons than photography - Objectively.
The only thing I agree with is the group photo being a nice memory. No one wants the mountains to be fake. That fake mountain is not what your brain remembers and will always feel wrong. But the group photo is whatever. Only time it’s okay. And a certain color wash is just artistic expression.
What is the point in adding in more grapes and removing the trash if it’s a photo for a memory? None. This is all to make your life seem perfect on Instagram.
Imperfect memories are fine but posting a photo with a small thing wrong hurts people lol that’s what this is for.
Photography as a definiton is to graph(catch) photons - Light particles.
Is it really photography, if you aren't capturing any photons, but merely doodling something with google-ai-software?
I think not.
This will twist peoples general perception of reality way more than it is already is.
definitly not ; its an image, not a photography
There is a reason why I started with 35mm photography earlier this year...
The rawness of reality is important.
I take one photo af ordinary and boring places in bad weather. Not on a dedicated camera, but I want to save the imperfect so I don't forget it. Life is imperfect, and that has a beauty all on it's own
Just yesterday I was at an exhibition where they showed prints of medium format images. The compositions of some of the images were not impressive, but the format alone gave them a incredible quality.
It is worrying how much so many people are willing to live in fantasy instead of reality.
People can't handle the truth, that's common sense. Even I have tendency for using escapism as a crutch, sometimes life just suck and most people won't accept that instead of embracing it.
This is why I stopped online dating around 2021... that gravy train is over!
As a photographer, AI helps to solve the opposite problem:
When the camera can’t capture what the naked eye sees:
- range of shadows
- accurate skin tones
- accurate colors
- lens distortion
- precise focus
- field of view
-haze
Cameras simply can see like the human eye yet.
Ceding power to a computer to solve mistakes feels like a failure to me. I want to control the image, and don’t mind being at fault for mistakes since I get credit for success.
Young people don’t seem to mind the fakery. Hopefully for us pros, there will still be demand for that higher quality, ‘natural’ image. If film production were made cheaper I think we’d see a rush back both for the experience and the look.
@@f.kieranfinney457 Failure is what makes us get better. If you’re using a DSLR you are ceding a lot of power to the computer inside for autofocus, metering , profiles etc
When shooting sports, traveling, wildlife fast kids etc using computational photography is the smart move.
I love film but simply don’t have the time or money to learn it.
The point of photography is the meaning of the images.
Yes, you are absolutely right!
Exactly why I like my iPhone photo way better than most fancy cameras I used. Quick and easy and does most of the stuff good.
@@f.kieranfinney457 Well, "control" is an interesting term. An artist who draws/paints a picture does control the image. However, one's image is not that natural.
What is a natural image? Is it a negative or a bunch of brightness values before demosaicing? Is it a dull RAW image after demosaicing? Or is it a demosaiced image with noise cancelled, WB/brighness/contrast adjusted (using some firmware/software/AI tools) that looks exactly like the real scene?
I believe it's not fake, it's just what photography is meant to be. 100+ years ago artists claimed that photography was just a technical process of making snapshots, not art that could make a viewer feel things.
Photographs are designed to be seen by humans (waves in visible spectrum, some human-related wavelength integrals, 3 base colors in color photography). Art photography is desinged to trigger some emotions in humans. A photograph shall cause some special human brain response.
Software enhancements and AI tools make photographs look and feel more like reality and convey what an author wants them to convey.
Maybe. Or did they? *vsauce music plays*
Photography is not about capturing reality; it is about creating a visual interpretation of reality (one of many).
Actually photography just means to catch photons. And there are many different approaches. For example documentary photography with minimal development and reality - but also editorial, organized and creative.
AI is not catching any photons - just merely doodling with pixels
What is a photo?
A picture taken with a film camera with no edits, at this point.
haha photography by definition means to catch photons - Im asking you now: Is AI catching any photons? or does it crumble through it's dataset for pixels it can fit on you screen?
I'd say most digital photos, even phone ones, are photography since the image itself and composition is real. But portrait mode is not real,
WDYT about analog infrared photography? Technically no edits, just a very specific film. Same with B&W analog photography.
In that also, how you develop the film matters. Most film photographers-youtubers scan their film and then edit it anyways in Adobe Lightroom. Colour interpretation depends on film manufacturer's science, then film scanner and then editing if any.
I stopped with analog because of all the editing it required, getting dust from the scans etc 😀
0:22 "Every important moment in history has been been captured with a photograph." Everything before 1816 is a myth
There is the photo creator and there is the viewer, sometimes what they both want is not the same. I do not want to look at AI photos being passed off as real captured images with little to no processing. If I want to look at AI generated fantasy I know where to go. I don't like distortions of reality, they are very unnerving and unsettling. People are trying to take away the sense of realness to anything and have been doing so for a while. I hate all these AI things. What happened to just having a phone on a stand with a timer while you all rush in frame? That picture you took with your parents was never a real actual moment. It is unhealthy to become used to these things.
We all prefer a lie sometimes, but I'm with you. I don't want to see lies replace reality completely. Have been hating the use of internet images on YT videos for quite a while already. So meaningless. Makes everything look like advertising. Years ago I remember seeing these company adds with young smiling people in an office setting and thinking who were those people in the pics really. They were no actual workers of that company. And the same people, how many company adds had they been in? Totally absurd. Had these thoughts over a decade ago already. Why weren't we, the actual workers of my company good enough for advertising the company as a workplace? And what kind of breed of people were the company add picture people? Did they ever hold a real job?
Great video! Maybe we should find different names for 1) hyperreality photography performed by the software to preserve memories, and 2) art photography that is supposed to take us emotionally or intellectually to another level.
Or, to speak in product development terms, both have different user stories, but we still call them by the same name.
This is why I prefer using my Mirrorless Camera because I don't like the look of Smartphone Images.
Then I got kicked out with my dinky xe2 which is older than security guard's child
This is a problem right now, people think camera takes good picture in reality phone had been taking "better" pictures all these times.
I hate people, fr
@@houghwhite411 gives me conniptions. People run around taking pics with phone cameras and that's ok, but a real camera taking pictures is too much apparently.
There are some simplifications in your video that are kind of missing the point:
- camera bumps in smartphones didn't change much. While sensors and lenses are slightly bigger they are stil minuscule in comparison to even some point-and-shoot cameras... smartphones still NEED computational photography in order to produce satisfactory results
- computational photography is as old as (digital) photography itself. Stacking night photos is an old trick to get rid of the noise, except it was done to static images as it took ages ;) smartphones have a capability to do it super fast. Same goes for sharpening, de-bayerisation process etc. In macro photography image stacking do DoF control is a standard thing, same or doing mini-panoramas with telephoto lens for shallow DoF or medium format simulation in portrait photography. There general idea of computational photography in smartphones is not much more different from classic digital photography.
IMHO the biggest problem is the extent to which smartphones started to do computational photography along with lack of knowledge and control over it... and as a result photography (in general) lost its value...
as a (roughly) purist, samsungs overly vibrant camera is already too unnatural for me. i got a pixel because they have good hdr and colour accuracy, any AI stuff i do is purely for fun, like i made my friend a giant lol
I'm writing this comment on my Honor Magic 5 Pro, which features one of the best smartphone cameras currently available.
When I got it I was amazed by the image quality - however, all the gimmicky stuff mentioned in the video is often more of a curse rather than a blessing, since the non gimmicky stuff also just becomes another mere selling point that hasn't been thought through.
The phone features a pro mode that let's you take full manual control of exposure, Focus, Shutter Speed, ISO, etc. It also comes with a LOG mode for video, however, get this, DOESN'T provide you with any information on what technical LUTs to use for conversion! Who comes up with this? That's like selling a bike without wheels!
Unfortunately, so far there also don't seem to be clip-on ND filters available (not even third party ones).
So the target audience seems clear - non professionals that are blown away by the gimmicks and AI enhancements.
Could you please not put that fake ass chromatic aberration everywhere in your videos? It hurts visibility and is very annoying.
Thank you Enrico for that thought provoking content - just as always!
But please stop using that channel seperator effect. most of those shots were very difficult to watch.
Keep having an inspiring week!
There's a name for those images, photo illustrations. Perfectly fine as a form of art or information presenting. Problematic when passed off as photography.
Smartphone photos make average people which are the majority think that a good photo is a bright and processed photo.
The thing is that most people simply don't care. It's a cool gimmick that helps sell more phones and Google will make up a stupid story to justify it. There will always be people who appreciate the true to life, the genuine pictures, sounds and experiences. Those people don't need their phone to superimpose a picture of the moon on top of a white orb, because they know that taking a picture of the moon is pointless (several million high resolution pictures of the moon are already on the internet) and would rather photograph something unique. For me, photoshopped pictures are worthless entirely.
One can argue that photography has never been about capturing reality. Even in the old days, various printing techniques where used to convey meaning or emotions, add or remove stuff. The main difference here is that it's never been easier.
I guess the only real difference is back then they can only subtract, distort, and stack, they couldn't add something out of thin air like modern edits and AI. Want to "add" a mountain to an image? You first have to take a picture of an actual mountain, then you edit it to the desired image; you're still capturing light, something real, even when the end result is fabrication.
Modern edits and AI (depending on the edit) are not capturing anything. They're drawing over the real image, potentially to the point the image becomes more of a painting rather than a photograph.
@@shira_yone the Samsung /Apple moon photo feature just overlaying pre-stored pictures of the moon!
never skipping an enrico tartarotti vid
I always thought of a phone's camera as a tool to capture a moment, while a camera is to capture a story. Wherever I go, I have my phone with me all the time, so it is great to capture little moments as memories. But I bring my camera to capture something that I really want and that I want to communicate through pictures. And yeah, I knew long ago that photos taken with a phone camera weren't true photos, just images processed by a computer based on some fragments of reality. And that bothered me a lot since iPhone 5/6, as everyone said cameras would be replaced. Then I started to accept the fact that photography has split into two parts: daily and enthusiast (artistic, professional, etc.). And I'm okay with that now, as long as it stays that way (though I have a feeling that it won't).
Well all colour digital cameras do interpolation. I still agree that new photo enhancing features are bullshit, and that the real camera quailty is better due to the larger sensor.
I prefer to look at this as a new form of photography. It is an art of its own. No one says that book-based movies ruined the respective books and means it, right?
although I agree that it only holds if we're being honest about our photos: if you used AI to modify your shot then please be so kind to let people know about it
This brings up the classic question that Marques and his team mention on the waveform podcast, what is a photo?
In Japanese, photograph is called “Shashin (写真/しゃしん) that literally means “Capturing truth”.
So, the pictures taken by the modern smartphones are definitely not Shashin.😂
this is such a good high quality video
I'm sorry to say this but photography is only that important to photographers, common people only cares about the look of the picture. If I look good on the picture for me it's perfect, i don't care if it has used a software to improve lighting or remove the blurry. If you still like taking good photos and wait to for the perfect time, etc, then good for you. For me this is like old artisans that complained of the people that used modern tools or machines. As you said fake photos is something that has existed for a long time, we're already used to it, and if someone already wanted to fake a photo for malicious uses he could have already done it, nothing new.
AI generated pictures is imitating painters more than photographers... Photography by definition means to catch photons(light particles) Old days film, today sensors.
AI does not have sensors
It's not fake photos - because it has nothing to do with photography?
Ignorant or skizophrenic people might satisfy with fake shit like this, but for most of us, we care and are concerned about ethics and copyright infringement in regards to training AI.
Oh and allso, when you "remove the blurry".... Instead you can focus properly and change your aperture to a narrower focal lenght, so your field of whats actual is in focus broadens. Focus peaking can help you when shooting manual .
Is it blurry as in movement? try a faster shutterspeed. - Photography aint easy but ffs it aint rocket science either.
You can't become better withouth struggeling and some failure. Get started and stop complaining that its about some artisans story about modern tools.
wrote this before watching: really depends on your own definition of "photography", if your definition of it is just taking pictures for the sake of it or for memory's sake or for anything just casual, then sure smartphones and social media has started to kill that off more than 2 decades ago with even just those 1.3mp smartphone camera (yap, remember those?) . and, tech has come a long way now so if thats just your definition of photography, then sure, that kind of photography is dead.
after watching: yah. as someone who calls myself a photographer, i do agree with most of the points given here. again, given that your definition of photography is just as shallow as that, then youd get, and probably be happy, with as shallow of a thing as that. theres nothing wrong with that if thats all you are happy about. heck, even i as a photographer has stopped bringing my heavy gears if all im doing is a happy casual trip somewhere. sometimes i dont even take photos using my phone anymore on those trips.
creative photography would be turned into an even smaller creative niche. nothing wrong with that.
its the same as paintings as a tool to keep "memories" has become a niche decades ago ever since cameras has became more accessible to common masses.
for those who do photography to gain numbers on social media, yah, those would pretty much be gone by X years.
not just photography. most creative processes are being downplayed by tech, social media and ai.
for those who do photography or any other creative processes for their own enjoyment, nothing could take that away from you except you yourself.
The opposite actually! This stuff is what's making people go back and buying old film cameras. So real Photography is growing! 😉
This is why I got a flashback camera. Feels good to get back to old school photos
Makes one curious where photography is going to be in another decade! 📸
AI generated images and photographs are two very different things...
As a definition photography is simply to catch photons(light particles)
To catch/store photons we traditionally used film and now sensors.
Now tell me how AI is catching photons?
It has more resemblance with doodling with crayons. It can't document history or portray reality, but it can make you a nice doodle of a mountain.
Cell phones are becomming very bad in they camera they are taking our job .that is our bread
That's why I don't take photos anymore because the AI Mambo Jumbo makes all sorts of changes and then Slaps a "Better looking" photo than the original in my face. I take videos with my phone.
I use a real camera that sell used for less than a fancy phone, and i got a 150 $ samsung for calls
Dudeee! I can't take my eyes off the thumbnail fr 🤯😍
Photography is anyway quite poor. World is 3D and 360°, and of course the dynamic range is much larger. So it needs creativity to make good photos BUT why not less limitations?
Nah, it's just fancy photoshop innit
So you will all have the same soulless anaesthetic images. Here's C.R. Mackintosh ‘There is hope in honest error, none in the icy perfections of the mere stylist’. It's time to go back to William Morris.
Unfortunately, photography enthusiasts fail to understand that most users want to pick up something, take a picture, look at it once or twice, and possibly never look at it again. Learning the tricks and techniques the enthusiasts want to apply to photos is too time-consuming and a waste of most people's time. The picture they want is gone when they attempt to use the tricks and techniques photography enthusiasts espouse. Most of the time, the default picture the multi-use device cell phone camera takes is acceptable for most users.
The answer is no. Saying otherwise is an ignorant take by those who lack an understanding of history.
We freed ourselves of restraints in the 1900's after the end of pictorialism. Its not about the technical, its about the art.
Is this video an ad?
Why?
It seems to be that the biggest problem people have with this is the ease of use and availability. I think it is part jealousy, or some type of pompousness or pretentiousness from people who see themselves as "artists". To them, the process has to be hard, the end-result difficult to achieve. THEN something is good. Even if everyone else things it his shi**y, they appreciate the work that went into it more than the end result. So, if someone had similar results in a fraction of the time, then it isn't good to them. Even if the end-result gets more likes, sells more, has more people appreciating it, they will focus on the ease, and that "just anyone could do it".
I must admit I find it disturbing.
AI, and computational power, is just a tool. Where would be draw the line otherwise? At the brush? At the size of the sensor?
- No, to me it is the end-result that matters.
How often, if you really are to be honest with yourself, do you spend a single calorie on what work went into making a song, taking a photo, painting a painting, or even making a movie? You know, of course, intellectually - that this takes work, but do you really spend time appreciating it? Are you really one of those who sits through the credits of a movie looking at every person and acknowledge their achievement? Are you one of those people who think the work behind that song you are listening to is from ONE person alone?
I wouldn't ask "what is a photo", or "what is a song", or "what is a book".
I would ask "Are you entertained?", "Are you inspired?", "Did you like this?"
That is what most people care about anyway. Even if "artists" like to think that it is their efforts and actual work that is appreciated, and NOT the end-result.
This isn't true, photography is actually on the rise. I don't use my old 5 mark 3 as much as I'd like due to not being pocketable, but my new Olympus tough camera just came and will be with me everywhere. And I started using my canon telmax
5:47 is to blame samsung not huawei...!
A long time ago, someone told me that photography can be a form of graphic design using a lens and sensor (or film). A long time ago, I realized that what I am producing is a two-dimensional design, and I always look at my photographs as graphic design production. I don't think that capturing reality has to be the goal of photography, and I don't think that photos have to show us things that are really there.
Having said that, I like to alternate between extremely artistic compositional work and extremely dull boring documentary or stock photo approaches. I like to remember that there's a huge range inside of photography.
But for normal users, the capacity of a smartphone is always adequate. I don't think normal people really benefit from cameras unless they have that obsession the way that photographers do.
It started with the moon, a blurred image of a plate. Now, I can make my zombie uncle look alive without him chowing down on a brain.
Film has equivalent to pixels called film grain
This is the reason I've gone back to film photography. Just like the 'old days' (rose -tinted glasses accepted) when we'd make a picture, send it off to be processed/ printed and then show the physical images to our friends (or put them in a shop-bought album for another time, perhaps decades later). Digital images are disposable, instantly forgettable and often (as this video points out), outright lies. A hundred years from now, if these super-sharp digital images are still even accessible from 'the cloud', will our ancestors want to see the individual hairs on the arse of the fly sitting on the sleeve of their great grand-daughter? Or will they appreciate an old photo held in their hand of her radiant smile? Digital is obviously the way forward for medical applications, forensics and so on. But for memories...? Maybe not so much.
5:19 100% agree, that was one single thing that made me buy a used Canon M6, I never quite understand what makes people like my photos that were taken from my S23, was it the bokeh? was it light enough in dark places? etc. but the sharpening bothers me so much, when I compared it with the M6 it felt like my brain being refreshed and reset to a new standard. and the photos coming out from my phone I considered them as quick ready to upload photos to social media. that's it. also that was the moment when I realized I don't have to upgrade to a new phone whenever I don't feel satisfied with photos from my phone.
Real will stay. Ai is just tool but I much rather prefer to have real pictures than fabricated pictures of mine , because when I watch my old picts there is feelings attached to it, I have no issue with tweaking the contrast or colors and even removing some objects that are on the way , but if I would make a pictures of mine somewhere in Egypt with pyramid yes maybe fun but since I have never been there I will have 0 emotional attachments to it. So I think the real photography will always have a value that nothing can compare not even pixel perfect AI because photography is much more than just pixels, is about freezing the time and the place. Snapshot of a memory if you will.
No it didn't. You can't beat the quality of photos taken with real glass with your Fancy phones Software. I say this as owner of iPhone 15 Pro and Samsung s23 ultra and a mirrorless camera.
Opposed light causes bad flares. This is much less a problem with smartphone cams, and if in the future such bad things will be removed further by SW I will be happy.😊😊😊
While you can manipulate the perceptions of others, your own conscience remains an unwavering judge.
Phillip K. Dick author through Ridley Scott’s film “Blade Runner” showed this over 40 years ago… replicants had photos from a past that never existed to give them a sense of being humans. And now humans are doing the same thing the other way around. Sad.
I dont mind image manipulation to get photos that "look good" out of a limited smart phone camera or even a DSLR or Mirrorless. Tweaking digital images in photoshop or Lightroom has been done for decades at this point and I still think there is artistic merit in the composition regardless of how many filters it has been crammed through. Tweaking images in post processing has been done for over 100 years if you consider darkroom printing which is an art in and of itself just like photoshop. This AI stuff just feels wrong though its making it too easy to create something that never existed and I think that is dangerous as it disconnects us from reality. Memory already generally pairs down to base emotions. What happens when we no longer have objective truth of that memory? Its why I like film, it has a tactile and direct connection to when and where an image was taken and makes the image using scavenged energy from the scene physically altering the film. Those slides you have of your grandparents vacation in 1963 were physically there with them and were taken using captured energy from that time, from that scene. Film quite literally captures reality for you to view later.
Kinda not gonna trust anything online even more now 😅
Shame this video didn't take off, because it's a real issue that people are grappling with when they don't even know it. I have a feeling that at some point one of the major features of a new generation of smartphones is going to be "Real Camera" that provides photos with no processing at all. This kind of thing goes in waves that crest and fall. Like how phones used to have buttons, then they didn't, and now we're getting phones that brag about having buttons again. Phones used to take simple, manual, raw photos, now they don't, and eventually the "style" of raw, unaltered photos is going to come back into vogue, and we're going to see a demonstration of how the newest phone can take the best, bad photos.
Next move is no need to take of the phone to take a picture. Just AI invents your moments in that place and do some random fake pictures with your pre scanned faces and job done. Nothing real and overkill, like a history from your grandfather 😂
Doesn't this eventually reaches a moment where so much of the photography is AI generated that you might as well have generated everything? Like, just generate a photo of you and your family in Japan in front of buddhist temple and imagine you guys took such travel. I don't know...
The Asus Zenfone 9 doesn't have a zoom camera, so to do something about it they programed it in a way that if you zoom, it takes a RAW image with the main sensor and it immediately saves it into a JPG file and this way the zoomed image will look better than the non-zoomed one, I just can't understand that how they didn't thought about that what would be if they wouldn't fuck up the non-zoomed image with their fucked up algorithms? They just admitted that the algorithm ruins the image, then why the fuck they're using algorithms?.
One of the reasons why I kept my old phones and repurposed them as backup cameras. Because I never liked the processed and artificial look most phone companies are doing nowadays.
Anothee stupid question where the answer is obvious. No, smartphones do photography very good, in an extremely powerful small package.
I have separate camera Canon SX740 HS of 2018, and photos from that camera is way better than photos from camera in my phone Ulefone Armor 21 of 2023.
I don't use my smartphone to capture photos, videos. I use my Canon digital camera.
There will always be non-scripted special moments. You can make that special moment be even more special by being a good photographer. Don’t sweat it too hard.
Smartphone is the reality! My eyes see the moon with 100% clear details, but my camera makes a white pan out of it.😢😢😢
Making music is art, freedom and fun. Beethoven has not cared about the problems he caused for violonists.
Bro, I hate to tell you this, but what your eyes see isn't real either 😂 our visual field is also extrapolated, sharpened, color corrected, and even artificially generated sometimes!
We've just gone back to paintings. Digital paintings. The only scary thing is if we keep thinking photos are real. Photos haven't been real for a long time.
Great video and point.
Too many goons don’t know how to take pictures 😂😂
Love your channel ma.
It's a gimmick. Nobody will copy it. It won't last. Pixel is a regional phone. 🙄
Then photographers just us photoshop, which looks unreal and fake. I dont see any diff
this is kind of scary and disheartening
fuck it, you have a great point. I'll probably stick my camera's though.
There is still plenty of skill in capturing the perfect shot with the perfect lighting.. AI can only do so much.. but I love the Photoshop AI tools... and on my recent family holiday I did exactly what was in the video.. I merged a few shots together.. the ones that had each kids best smile, and I moved the kids closer together a fraction to improve the composition.. i.e. its not "fake" its more like taking the best parts of a series of photos to create 1 perfect shot for a keepsake.. who knows how far the trend will go of course.
See this is exactly why these tools are great. For this one reason. And all the kids on Instagram will want their photos to be perfect. But there is no reason to do this stuff on all photos automatically ever. It’s just helping regular people
Aaaaand by doing so you've grated Adobe acces to train their AI on your pictures - Your memories from that trip and the faces of your whole family. well done
Whats wrong and whats right?
Swapping faces between pictures in photoshop is actually very managable when in same lighting condition - Nothing you would require Bob Ross-myass AI to fix.
And what's your intention with such photo? To remember a memory, feeling , time and place or to impress others when sharing?
@@PepsiCat321 Maybe your kids want your family photos to "be perfect" because they are surrounded by fake shit 24/7?
Your solution? Oh lets do some more fake shit
Qual terribile senso di incompletezza sentire più volte una delle migliori tracce di Flume senza mai lasciarla droppare 😣
memories of something you have never experience it
So many photos each one worth less and less to you
(－‸ლ),
Just out of curiosity, do people really experience that moments when they are together standing still and looking at some remote point?
They probably experience walking, talking and things like that. Standing still together for a staged photo near some sight is as fake as AI version of it. Well, it's even worse since people are intentionally create those fake staged photos and don't realize they are fake.
7:37 😎
ironically tiananmen square didnt really happen
Nothing new, one king advertising video for google pixel pro and some sponsor. Made up to place the sponsor inside.
Tech bro technology is the ruination of humanity.
Adoro i tuoi video! Hai mai pensato di ridoppiare i tuoi video in italiano? Faresti veramente faville su youtube italia
I've been thinking about this ever since the first Pixel ads that featured this capability. My first thought was "why on earth would I want to capture a lie instead of what happened?" The more "advanced" smart phone photography becomes, the more I fall back on traditional film and DSLR photography. I can no longer trust my phone.
8:40 I think something is missing here
jokes on you, I only shoot RAW
Without watching the video: no they did not.
Great video ❤
Someone deleted the screenshot while editing 😅
Nice video, love your editing style! This is truly surreal, I like the approach you took
Well... My smartphone shoots DNG ... 🤔