Sony Awards AI "Photograph": The Future of Photos?

I started using Musicbed for my music. Maybe that's why this video sounds better than my previous ones! Sign up for your free account to listen for yourself and get your 1st month free: www.musicbed.c...
__________________________________________
My Video Camera (Sony FX3): amzn.to/3RPFxfJ
My favorite video lens: amzn.to/3WYPkCa
2nd best video lens: amzn.to/3DwfZiX
G7xii: amzn.to/3uM8VtE
__________________________________________
Join my Patreon for exclusive content and how-tos: / ulyssesaoki
__________________________________________
【Follow Me】
Instagram: / ulysses_aoki
Twitter: / ulysses_aoki
Facebook: / ulyssesaoki

[@UlyssesAokiPhoto]

Hey Guys! Like the video if you can, it can help me a lot❤

[@FachyMarin]

AI art generators are one of those trends from untalented techbros that completely missed the point of art. We've seen NFTs flops, we've seen the metaverse flop, I really hope this is next in line. Writing a prompt to steal the art of someone else will never replace the feeling of going outside and experimenting the joy of painting with light and capture unrepeatable moments.

[@rofi3930]

Yes is not photography, but i think they have their own use case

[@aepheeckunthe]

how is a photograph someone's own creation? it's just a mold of something that already exists, something you have nothing to do with. the value of a photograph is not in its originality or authenticity, but in the fact that you noticed it. you noticed a beautiful girl, an interesting combination of colors, or just something you have never seen before. this is the product of attention and observation, that is the only merit of the photographer. ai generates a lot of garbage, something that is completely ugly, uninteresting and meaningless, and the person who can select from all this a picture that will win in a photography contest is a real photographer - he understands how photography works, he understands what is beautiful. he has shown attention, selecting the jewels among the dross. yes, people from this picture were never born, and the place where they stand is nowhere in the world, but this does not stop it from being beautiful.

[@whchong1133]

the joy of taking photo is one of the most important reason why we love photography - AI is good for a reason, but the Sony Winner miss the point - don't think know the joy of taking photos

[@sendnukes4859]

I agree with you nothing new could be encouraged. Also people panicked when Photography first came out and artists thought they would lose their job whereas it made handmade art more valuable.

[@mrccurri13]

I’m not a fan of AI-generated “photography” for the same reason I’m not a fan of late-night TV shows or mainstream news. It’s all fake. Fantastic video Ulysses!

[@GregCarrick]

Thanks Ulysses, I like your points, and have much the same mind. Cheers

[@IainHC1]

AI is a form of painting with a keyboard! It is art.......... but in its own folder!!

[@barangay13]

Love the video! I personally use AI to conceptualize unique shoot concepts. It allows me to see how the model could be styled, what positions they could use, and what outfits or props that would work. AI photography has its uses, but ultimately, it should not be called an end product or a photograph, but may always be used as a tool to better oneself behind an actual camera 🙌🏼🙌🏼

[@rofi3930]

Cant agree more, AI have their own use case espcially for making a rough concept of something like movie or even a game

[@UlyssesAokiPhoto]

Great point Jose. I see use in it too as a tool, and as you said, should be distinguished with the end product or a photography

[@rightfeelI]

In my opinion those who prefer a.i. to real art (photography) have missed the point. The whole purpose of photography was to freeze something that's going on and on and never stopping for no one and in no condition, freezing time freezing present in a special moment. Having a piece of gone time on your computer or on your analog film. I might be wrong but you can never replace that with another things. Great video Ulysses.

[@aramdavid]

Couldn't agree with this statement at the end more. I found that the thousands of copycat photos I saw online (due to the instagram algorithm choosing them) were boring me to death and I turned to abstractionism as a way of being algorithm proof in my own photography. Since the same forces are at work with AI photography, I think your feeling that this will usher in an age of more abstract photography is correct. This will be the age of the instant, the analog, and the abstract, all as calling cards for authenticity.

[@rofi3930]

An issue like this is already happen back in the day but not about ai, is about photo manipulation like photoshop. I think to resolve the issue is to put an AI art on their own cartegory. And i really disagree about thats called a photography because photography is all about capturing a moment in real life. If people hate AI art is fine but you must know they have their own usage like for example making a rough visualization of concept for a movie, photography, or even a game.

[@UlyssesAokiPhoto]

I agree! They're tools with different purposes. But my point being "don't group it the same with pure photography"

[@StreetPhotographyChannel]

Nobody is going to say that is a crappy image? I do it!

[@-grey]

People forget that the value of photography is capturing story and truth. I don't dislike AI generated art, but I would categorise it in the same bracket as photo montage/manipulation. There was an awarded image from a Nat Geo photographer a while back where he added in a shot of the moon with Photoshop over an ice berg to give it more pizzazz. Which is fine, but don't try to pass it off as real. Own it. If we blur the lines of truth in photography to the point that it loses credibility as a documentary art form, then we will also end up devaluing reality. When we see a bunch of kaede trees around a temple made pink with HSL masks to look like an insane explosion of sakura, we'll just be disappointed if we make the pilgrimage over there ourselves to see it with our own eyes, and there's not a sakura tree in sight. It's why we have different values for approaching fact and fiction. The criteria we use to critique them is vastly different. If we were to judge every fictional story by how realistic it was, we'd have no magic at all. If we were to judge factual story by how well it follows narrative structure we'd miss the point and value of it entirely. AI photography is a work of fiction and should make that clear at face value, so it can be properly critiqued. Finding great stories is completely different to writing great stories. Producing great things is completely different from concepting great things.

[@jojojojo88888]

Ah...Ulysses, I was actually thinking of whether or not you'd make a video to talk about this. I am so glad you did! I am really concerned about how AI will change the landscape for creatives...what is real what is not, what is art and what isn;'t.

[@UlyssesAokiPhoto]

What is real and what is not has always been hard to distinguish since photoshop! Even the OG issues like the Steve McCurry photoshop incident. I hope this vid shed some light on what might be happening in the future

[@jeremoe1]

I'm one who is a fan of getting it right in camera, so you know I don't give a damn about AI ! I don't really care much about Photoshop, though it has its place for minor adjustments, but as for manipulating images, naw - that's just my take on it. Guess I'm somewhat of a purest when it comes to photography. And, I don't care for digital photography either. Nice video!

[@mr_cramberry]

Simply digital art has been done since Photoshop has been around. It's just the composite is done by AI, but commissioned by the artist essentially. Question lies on issues relating to nature of creativity and the artist role passing off work that's was supposedly conceived solely by the 'artist'. In AI digital art the artist is the client giving the 'brief' to AI from which to composite that art. What's disingenuous is passing off AI work that was believed to be both conceived and created by the 'artist'. Should there be AI category? I believe so.

[@UlyssesAokiPhoto]

agreed

[@jmbaug1229]

Imagine AI artwork/photography in 10 years ...

[@weisserth]

This incident just confirms what many ought to have known all along: these competitions are meaningless. The image was not only OBVIOUSLY AI generated (look at the hands!), it's also a mediocre image regardless its AI origin.

[@LeonWei]

AI is already part of photography and it’s just one of many tools in a toolbox like those in adobe apps

[@drendelous]

my fourth video of yours in 1 hour and i wanna marry you

[@Numb3r23]

Maybe in my opinion it's the future of images not "photos"

[@UlyssesAokiPhoto]

Hence the title..... "Photograph" with quotes ;)

[@Numb3r23]

@@UlyssesAokiPhoto ✌🏻

[@Bossti]

I think you‘re making a lot of great points in this video. I don‘t think we can even call it AI art at this point because most of it is still mashed together taking real imagery. It will come into its own some AI generations from now when AI starts to build on AI generated content which is already based on AI generated content. This will be the advent of „AI art“ and I‘m curious what it will look like. As for AI image generators: I think they can be a helpful tool (just like Chat GPT which I‘m using a lot already nowadays to get quick and understandable explanations) but as with all tools there will always be people using it in shady ways. And while those pictures may generate a quick „wow“ on Instagram I think judges of competitions need to step up their game. The picture that won is interesting on a first glance but did it really create an emotional response in the judges? Why did it win? I think there needs to be more transparency and explanation. Future will be interesting (as always) and potentially creepy (like most of the time). Most people I know want real pictures of their life events (I had the great honor to shot the baptism of a friends child past weekend) but when will people start using those pictures just as a reference point to generate „perfect“ moments in pictures of those events that never happened? When will we start to realize that reality as we knew it will break down and possibly never existed because neither our perception nor our memory is objective and what we use to take „objective“ pieces out of time is most of the time not able to do so (dynamic range in pictures is just one example) or gets manipulated by us anyway. Which kind of eliminates the question of „displaying reality“ and emphasizes the one important question of authorship. Who truly created a piece, conceptually and then through skill and work.

[@Hackzyyz]

it looks pretty AI so im surprised it won

[@drendelous]

BUT I dont agree with you. ai generation is not theft, these are ai generated pictures. standalone genre, like photography was at first to paintings

[@kennethmyrez]

AI generated images are not going anywhere. They don't generate everything though so in a way, they still lose

[@nicoli8437]

bye sony.

[@kennethmyrez]

first