Will AI Ruin the Art of Photography?

Aaron801 said:

I call BS on that... A computer is in no way equipped to judge aesthetics or especially the context and emotional power that a photo can have. Even as far as technical merits I'd say that it doesn't make sense to use this kind of thing as a judge. A lot of great photos are technically "wrong" but have broken the rules for a specific effect and that's what gives them their power...

Click to expand...

The article stated that the AI was trained via input from human judges, and the AI was trained so that it would match the average and standard deviation of the scores given by the humans. The AI was validated by comparing its judgments to human judgements of another set of images. This system was not programmed with 'rules of thumb' such as the Rule of Thirds, and only had a few preconceived ideas about technical merit, but rather followed the lead of the human judges.

As people can and do agree to a large extent on things regarding aesthetics, then this agreement is evidence that aesthetic judgment has an objective quality about it, and therefore in principle can be done on a machine as well. But this AI also takes note of disagreements among the human judges: the AI can state that a particular image is probably good, but not to everyone's taste.

Regarding emotions, while these are subjective qualities, a lot can be objectively known about them, as they are basically motions of a person towards the good and away from evil. Context is another issue altogether, and certainly this AI does not and cannot judge images according to context, which would require a full human intellect to do so, and which would vary in time and place and with the individual. Instead, this AI is judging on a highly abstract level, knowing nothing about the objects and places portrayed in the photos.

While we make much ado about the term "artificial intelligence", at its root, AI is mainly statistical analysis of pre-existing, human-curated data. It's what machines do best: analyze lots of data, and calculate statistics quickly.

Perhaps for routine stuff like weddings or group photos or buildings or pets or patterns..

....... but don't forget that good photographers have the "eye" that sorts out from the enormous visuals all around us all the time where to point the camera, and chooses what to record and thus creates an image. That seems to me a tall order for AI to match, I don't think it ever will.

--
Don

MarshallG said:

I just wonder if we will reach a point where there’s no joy left in being a photographer and creating images, because point and shoot will have so much of its own intelligence.

Click to expand...

Is the AI going to take away your camera and prevent you from taking photos and making your own decisions?

MarshallG said:

... I just wonder if we will reach a point where there’s no joy left in being a photographer and creating images...

Click to expand...

Heh... perhaps I'm just lucky (or ignorant?), but can't see anything or anybody having any influence at all on my joy of creating photographs.

Or it could be an age thing? Being terrible old and feeling days running out horrible fast, perhaps puts things in another perspective?

Happy New Year! :-D

Bobthearch said:

Aaron801 said:

Bobthearch said:

Aaron801 said:

Burnt to a Crisp said:

Aaron801 said:

Burnt to a Crisp said:

To the contrary, advances in AI are poised to restore a modicum of respectability to the art of photography and how it is judged.

Here's just one example:

Google's New AI Can Score Photos on Technical and Aesthetic Quality

Google has introduced a new AI system that's trained to rate photos on whether or not they are good technically and attractive aesthetically. It's called

petapixel.com

Click to expand...

I call BS on that... A computer is in no way equipped to judge aesthetics or especially the context and emotional power that a photo can have. Even as far as technical merits I'd say that it doesn't make sense to use this kind of thing as a judge. A lot of great photos are technically "wrong" but have broken the rules for a specific effect and that's what gives them their power...

--
my flickr:
www.flickr.com/photos/128435329@N08/

Click to expand...

You think so? In an era when we have self-taught AI that has become the world's greatest Go player?

This ability to self-train without human input is a crucial step towards the dream of creating a general AI that can tackle any task.

Surely, judging a mere photograph better than a biased human isn't too tall of an order for such a formidable creation.

Click to expand...

With all due respect, what you're proposing seems so preposterous to me that I can't really be sure that you're not pulling my leg.

Judgement of a piece of visual art, or really any art be it a novel, a movie, a piece of music, painting, etc is always going to be a subjective judgement. It just doesn't make sense to take a way the human element of something that's especially a human expression... It's not a math problem where there's a right and wrong answer.

Click to expand...

The results of photo competitions are very much black-and-white, either Yes or No. The photo won, or it didn't. It was the Right photo, or it was the Wrong photo.

Click to expand...

Yes, but the decision that lead to that judgment wasn't an objective call at all, it's still an opinion and that's how art works...

Click to expand...

That's how A.I. could work too, the A.I. gives an opinion based on it's programming and experience. A.I. is not static, it's intelligent and it learns.

Click to expand...

Yes, the AI could give an opinion.

The human raters, far too often, are steeped in graft. Whether they popped an SSRI that morning could also make the difference between a win and a loss.

Hopefully, AI won't have such vices--unless it becomes like Bender in Futurama.

Look for "landscape photography" on Google. Wide angle, huge depth of field, saturated colors. Camera landscape scene mode or ... photographer landscape scene mode ?

Photography has become extremely standardized, in particular because of all the so called rules. The standardization of products and of consumers come together.

AI become more and more able to create pictures which appeal to a majority of people. But ultimately, as long as you can manually override the AI's choices, nothing prevents you from creating non standard photo... unless you need to be popular.

Krusty79 said:

I think AI will get better and better at producing good exposures, but I don't think AI can master composition and timing. I'm sure there will be algorithms to use the rule of thirds or something similar, but when will the AI know when it's time to break the rules? Or when is just the right moment to snap that portrait of a kid? Photographers have visions of how they want the final image to appear - AI lacks that vision.

If programmers can design an algorithm to capture emotion in a photo, then I'll really be surprised and impressed.

Click to expand...

Too many are confusing photographic technique with photographic art.

Krusty79 said:

--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/greg79
"You can't be young forever, but you can always be immature" - Larry Andersen

Click to expand...

"I just wonder if we will reach a point where there’s no joy left in being a photographer and creating images ....."

Yes I think so. After some years more. Average person won't know it. Photographer using DSLR etc.will be seen as craft and arcaic as the rare view Cam and wet plate artisans out there now. Everyone else will be mesmerized by tech that we would not call photography.

stevenj2 said:

"I just wonder if we will reach a point where there’s no joy left in being a photographer and creating images ....."

Yes I think so. After some years more. Average person won't know it. Photographer using DSLR etc.will be seen as craft and arcaic as the rare view Cam and wet plate artisans out there now. Everyone else will be mesmerized by tech that we would not call photography.

Click to expand...

Videography already commands the lion's share of attention. Photography has been relegated to a cold, dark, and forgotten corner of the collective consciousness for some time now.

Apple has tried to inject some life into photography with its force-touch animated stills, but that's a bit like administering CPR post-rigor mortis.

Burnt to a Crisp said:

Bobthearch said:

Aaron801 said:

Bobthearch said:

Aaron801 said:

Burnt to a Crisp said:

Aaron801 said:

Burnt to a Crisp said:

To the contrary, advances in AI are poised to restore a modicum of respectability to the art of photography and how it is judged.

Here's just one example:

Google's New AI Can Score Photos on Technical and Aesthetic Quality

Google has introduced a new AI system that's trained to rate photos on whether or not they are good technically and attractive aesthetically. It's called

petapixel.com

Click to expand...

I call BS on that... A computer is in no way equipped to judge aesthetics or especially the context and emotional power that a photo can have. Even as far as technical merits I'd say that it doesn't make sense to use this kind of thing as a judge. A lot of great photos are technically "wrong" but have broken the rules for a specific effect and that's what gives them their power...

--
my flickr:
www.flickr.com/photos/128435329@N08/

Click to expand...

You think so? In an era when we have self-taught AI that has become the world's greatest Go player?

This ability to self-train without human input is a crucial step towards the dream of creating a general AI that can tackle any task.

Surely, judging a mere photograph better than a biased human isn't too tall of an order for such a formidable creation.

Click to expand...

With all due respect, what you're proposing seems so preposterous to me that I can't really be sure that you're not pulling my leg.

Judgement of a piece of visual art, or really any art be it a novel, a movie, a piece of music, painting, etc is always going to be a subjective judgement. It just doesn't make sense to take a way the human element of something that's especially a human expression... It's not a math problem where there's a right and wrong answer.

Click to expand...

The results of photo competitions are very much black-and-white, either Yes or No. The photo won, or it didn't. It was the Right photo, or it was the Wrong photo.

Click to expand...

Yes, but the decision that lead to that judgment wasn't an objective call at all, it's still an opinion and that's how art works...

Click to expand...

That's how A.I. could work too, the A.I. gives an opinion based on it's programming and experience. A.I. is not static, it's intelligent and it learns.

Click to expand...

Yes, the AI could give an opinion.

The human raters, far too often, are steeped in graft. Whether they popped an SSRI that morning could also make the difference between a win and a loss.

Hopefully, AI won't have such vices--unless it becomes like Bender in Futurama.

Click to expand...

When a computer can create great art, then a computer can be capable of judging it... Make sure to let me know when a computer has created an artwork on par with Shakespeare, Davinchi, Scorsese, etc...

--
my flickr:
www.flickr.com/photos/128435329@N08/

Not saying that film and current style mirrorless thru DSLR will go away completely, ever, just shrink in usage more.

Aaron801 said:

Burnt to a Crisp said:

Bobthearch said:

Aaron801 said:

Bobthearch said:

Aaron801 said:

Burnt to a Crisp said:

Aaron801 said:

Burnt to a Crisp said:

To the contrary, advances in AI are poised to restore a modicum of respectability to the art of photography and how it is judged.

Here's just one example:

Google's New AI Can Score Photos on Technical and Aesthetic Quality

Google has introduced a new AI system that's trained to rate photos on whether or not they are good technically and attractive aesthetically. It's called

petapixel.com

Click to expand...

I call BS on that... A computer is in no way equipped to judge aesthetics or especially the context and emotional power that a photo can have. Even as far as technical merits I'd say that it doesn't make sense to use this kind of thing as a judge. A lot of great photos are technically "wrong" but have broken the rules for a specific effect and that's what gives them their power...

--
my flickr:
www.flickr.com/photos/128435329@N08/

Click to expand...

You think so? In an era when we have self-taught AI that has become the world's greatest Go player?

This ability to self-train without human input is a crucial step towards the dream of creating a general AI that can tackle any task.

Surely, judging a mere photograph better than a biased human isn't too tall of an order for such a formidable creation.

Click to expand...

With all due respect, what you're proposing seems so preposterous to me that I can't really be sure that you're not pulling my leg.

Judgement of a piece of visual art, or really any art be it a novel, a movie, a piece of music, painting, etc is always going to be a subjective judgement. It just doesn't make sense to take a way the human element of something that's especially a human expression... It's not a math problem where there's a right and wrong answer.

Click to expand...

The results of photo competitions are very much black-and-white, either Yes or No. The photo won, or it didn't. It was the Right photo, or it was the Wrong photo.

Click to expand...

Yes, but the decision that lead to that judgment wasn't an objective call at all, it's still an opinion and that's how art works...

Click to expand...

That's how A.I. could work too, the A.I. gives an opinion based on it's programming and experience. A.I. is not static, it's intelligent and it learns.

Click to expand...

Yes, the AI could give an opinion.

The human raters, far too often, are steeped in graft. Whether they popped an SSRI that morning could also make the difference between a win and a loss.

Hopefully, AI won't have such vices--unless it becomes like Bender in Futurama.

Click to expand...

When a computer can create great art, then a computer can be capable of judging it... Make sure to let me know when a computer has created an artwork on par with Shakespeare, Davinchi, Scorsese, etc...

Click to expand...

Were that to come to pass, I'd likely have to ask the machine overlords for permission to inform you of the same--assuming they've found me useful and kept me around (I don't like my odds!).

Aaron801 said:

--
my flickr
www.flickr.com/photos/128435329@N08/

Click to expand...

MarshallG said:

I read that Apple employs 800 engineers who work specifically on camera technology. As we know, these technologies apply more and more computing power to the act of taking a photograph. They analyze everything in the scene — they detect faces, judge exposure based on a AI algo’s, etc, etc...

At some point, this tech will expose a very high DR and automatically lift shadows based on very advanced scene analysis. They might even crop the photo, shift its colors, and do everything short of composing it for you... which they may somewhat do as well.

I just wonder if we will reach a point where there’s no joy left in being a photographer and creating images, because point and shoot will have so much of its own intelligence.

Click to expand...

that can speed up things and help us achieve artistic goals quicker and painless. Consider the following cases:

• Automatic transmission vs manual
• GPS vs printed map
• Auto vs manual focus
• Auto exposure vs manual
• Auto HDR vs manual at PP
• Auto tracking moving objects vs old school pre-focus and shoot
• Programmable thermostat vs old mercury manual thermostat
• Smart porch lights switches vs manual switches
• Smartphones vs flip phones
• AI assisted image processing vs manual
• AI assisted exposure vs current auto exposure modes

The list can go on and on. In each case, one can chose choice 1 or 2.

AI can perform mechanical and something boring stuff for us with ease. We are left to do the fun stuff like creating great images. AI cannot replace our mind and ability to create art, not yet.

I really hope good photography will never be broken down to to a series of "If this, then do that" decisions.

I don't expect a robot to be able to take great wedding photos, be a great stand up comedian or write a good song because they lack that emotional, human element.

Krusty79 said:

I really hope good photography will never be broken down to to a series of "If this, then do that" decisions.

Click to expand...

We can let the AI do things we don't want to do. Define those (which can be nothing) and you'll be happy.

Krusty79 said:

I don't expect a robot to be able to take great wedding photos, be a great stand up comedian or write a good song because they lack that emotional, human element.

Click to expand...

I agree. But in the meantime, wouldn't it be nice if the robot/AI can take out the trash, unload the dish washer and clean the room? In photography terms, the AI can do the boring calculations such as what the exposure should be based on the sensor DR and the scene DR to formulate a reasonable tone curve to preserve both the highlight and shadow that resembles what we want? Then all left for us to do is to capture the moment or refine the composition.

bullet1 said:

Krusty79 said:

I really hope good photography will never be broken down to to a series of "If this, then do that" decisions.

Click to expand...

We can let the AI do things we don't want to do. Define those (which can be nothing) and you'll be happy.

bullet1 said:

I don't expect a robot to be able to take great wedding photos, be a great stand up comedian or write a good song because they lack that emotional, human element.

Click to expand...

I agree. But in the meantime, wouldn't it be nice if the robot/AI can take out the trash, unload the dish washer and clean the room? In photography terms, the AI can do the boring calculations such as what the exposure should be based on the sensor DR and the scene DR to formulate a reasonable tone curve to preserve both the highlight and shadow that resembles what we want? Then all left for us to do is to capture the moment or refine the composition.

--
Nelson Chen
http://nelsonchenphotography.com/
100% RAW shooter with Capture One Pro V11

Click to expand...

Such free choice is not a given. There's already a growing chorus calling for human drivers to be outlawed on account of the statistically higher risk of accidents vs. an AI driver.

If AI is able to perform well enough to competitively displace (e.g., by better anticipating motion trajectories etc. to "capture the moment") those who shoot in manual mode, what possible refinement could the human accomplish other than coarsen the outcome?

MarshallG said:

I read that Apple employs 800 engineers who work specifically on camera technology. As we know, these technologies apply more and more computing power to the act of taking a photograph. They analyze everything in the scene — they detect faces, judge exposure based on a AI algo’s, etc, etc...

At some point, this tech will expose a very high DR and automatically lift shadows based on very advanced scene analysis. They might even crop the photo, shift its colors, and do everything short of composing it for you... which they may somewhat do as well.

I just wonder if we will reach a point where there’s no joy left in being a photographer and creating images, because point and shoot will have so much of its own intelligence.

Click to expand...

In a world of sleek powerboats, some people find endless joy in carving canoes. Find you happy place, embrace it, and don’t worry about all the white noise.

Technically, thanks to massive computing power combined with dirt-cheap mass storage, it is possible right now to apply 'brute force' AI to photography. Where the computer instantly searches a huge database of all kinds of 'great' images, finds a match or near-match to the scene, and you're done. This is how the self-driving cars go at it, with far more situations to match than we will ever see in photography. With brute force, you don't have to be particularly clever on the AI programming side:

IF lady > if nude > on [optional bearskin] rug > in [optional] private jet THEN read/copy exposure data > Melania Trump pix > GQ Magazine datastore

etc, etc. The Holy Grail of course is that you will never have to ever select a Scene setting, let alone adjust speed or aperture or anything at all. Aren't some of the little point 'n shoots getting pretty good at this? And where is Kodak when we need them most, at the dawn of this New Instamatic Age!

Painting ruined the art of seeing.