[ad_1]
In recent months, AI has become one of the most widely discussed topics. A lot of creatives, not only photographers, are saying that AI will kill professional photography. However, this cannot be further from the truth. Here is why.
Remember when AI was this distant thing that we rarely thought about? It almost seemed unimaginable that AI can be so close to us, so easy to use, and so damn powerful. It would be silly of me to not acknowledge that I did not notice how fast AI has become this real and this good. While I was interested in the topic before, it never seemed tangible, especially in an industry and craft so close to me: art.
There is a myriad of content on YouTube that shows off how good AI has become. Just look at all the people who can create automated channels on YouTube using AI. Finding a topic can be done with an AI that scans for trends. Then, one AI will write the script, a different AI will create the voice for such scripts, a third AI will do the SEO optimization for the video, and a fourth AI will do the actual visual content for your video. Starting a YouTube channel has never been this easy and cheap. It can literally be done in a matter of days. Then, just leave the content to be pushed into viewers’ faces by YouTube’s own AI-enabled algorithms. The perfectly balanced exploit of modern technology and shortening the lifespan of the new generation of consumers? Or is it?
AI Makes It Harder, but Not Impossible
What AI enables people to do is create their own art. Why pay for an artist if you can just do it yourself for free? AI is trained to create visually pleasing works that will satisfy on the surface.
The problem with art that is visually pleasing is that it has no depth. It is impossible to put meaning into a work that is AI-generated. Sure, you need creativity to type the prompt, but even then, how creative is that? What difference is there between bashing random words into an AI and coming up with a message?
The process of creating art is rather complex and hard to explain. I find it difficult to explain where the inspiration comes from, where the ideas come from, and where the final image comes from. However, every time I speak with someone about my work, there is always something so deeply personal in each image. I strongly believe that each body of work shows something personal about the photographer that created it.
An AI is not capable of such a dimension to the work. While it is possible to create an individual piece with an AI, it will be next to impossible to create a consistent body of work that can make a name for the artist behind it all. Art is inseparable from the artist in this case. One of the reasons people buy art is because of the brand value of the artist as well as the unique style of their work. While the physical value of the Mona Lisa can be equated to a piece of cloth with paint on it, the moral value is probably even hard to name.
One of the arguments says that AI is simply a glorified form of plagiarism. However, can any AI replace a truly great artist? Sure, someone average who is copying Mona Lisa can be replaced, but someone who is creating work that is authentic, unique, provocative, and appropriate will remain in business. While AI can be used to copy an existing style or technique, it will still be hard to create an authentic style with an AI.
AI Scare: A Natural Fear
I consider the scare of AI to be something completely natural. The talk of robots replacing humans has been going on since the industrial revolution. After all, every time there is a new technology that disturbs the status quo, it inevitably drives the people affected most to hate it. This is absolutely normal. I am sure that the millions of switchboard operators also felt pretty bad when a small box replaced them. However, where one door closes, another opens. While some professions have died, new ones were born in the meantime. Being able to think outside of the box is something every artist should learn to do. The fixation on something constant will let you down, as nothing is constant. AI is that engine disrupting the industry. Many artists are unhappy because there is a replacement for them now.
Photoshop Versus AI
I like to compare AI to what Photoshop did back in the 90s. With the rise of Photoshop, many photographers started to complain that it has become not about getting the shot anymore. This is absolutely true. However, has Photoshop made photography worse? I like to think not. It opened up new possibilities for millions of creators who use the software to their advantage. The genres of photography more about creating an image rather than capturing it benefited from Photoshop immensely. It simply would not be possible to produce a modern advertisement without Photoshop. It is used for artistic purposes as well. Many digital artists combine photography and Photoshop to produce their unique artworks that would not be possible without the software.
Closing Thoughts
The talk about AI being the death of photography is exaggerated. While it will put some photographers out of business, it will create new jobs. For example, there has to be a bank of images for the AI to learn from. Human photographers can take images for the AI and make money doing so, perhaps even pivot to a royalty mechanism, in which each photographer that contributed to the AI’s development will get a small royalty in return for their work. Many of the digital artists complaining about the rise of AI were the same people who took advantage of a similar event 20 years ago: the rise of Photoshop. In a world that is always changing, it is impossible to stay in the same spot and remain profitable. Photography will not die because of AI. Photographers who are not able to adapt to the new reality will.
[ad_2]
Source link
