This entire AI “photography” movement is wrong. If you didn’t get the right pose or somehow the shot didn’t come out then that’s it, it didn’t come out. Anything AI does for you after that point is a waste because it didn’t happen in this time and space. It’s not real. Nothing is better the truth of the moment. Any rewards on offer are hollow. Silly cosmetic things are one thing but AI generated “photos” of Isreal/Palestine war are on another level of shame that cannot be photoshopped out.
I think that for personal use, manipulating images through AI, as long as it's not done to harm another person, are fine. What really needs to be regulated is journalistic use of AI. It should be illegal for a journalist to manipulate an image they use for a story.
No, AI is just another tool like blender, photoshop, google, or wiki. Regulating it will only make it less valuable while wasting the time and resources of those who'd be in charge of regulating it.
Feel that a new standard should be developed when it comes to recording images. Each and every image should be digitally signed in such a way that if it is altered from the original, it would be able to be detected. If you can think about it, eventually things like this can be done. Standards, standards, standards.
The point made at 07:28 is key. We probably need to read everything about Pablo Picasso & his contemporaries adaptations to painting vs photography. (NatGeo’s genius season 2 & especially Picasso’s War How Modern Art Came to America) Sometime downstream we will hopefully get the next Salvador Dalí?
i don't think it is too hard to tell the difference to be honest. The images are nice enough to present but even the slightest amount of zoom shows that the images lack depth have the smoothing effect. They do not pass the uncanny calley, it almost feels like video game rendered people and focusing for just a moment would help with weeding out what is real. Lastly real photos have leave traces of chaotic random scenery that AI images do not reproduce well.
@@milootje007 I think once video games surpass the uncanny valley then AI will too. It would be interesting to see that happen in the next 5 years but I don't think it will.
2 notes everyone missing. 1. When you say “this ai image sucks because xyz missing photography features”…. You not insulting the AI. You insulting the designer that doesn’t know squat about how to manipulate the photo. Ai is a tool. Like a camera or a brush. 2. Folks saying the images don’t stand up to any zoom. That’s cause they didn’t upscale properly. Ai images can easily be upscaled 10+ megapixel sizes even on basic home computers.
![“อาร์ต พศุตม์” เกือบเอี่ยวทุกคดีดัง เอ๊ะไว้ก่อน ไม่มีอะไรได้มาง่ายๆ | แฉ 16 ต.ค. 67 [2/3] | GMM25](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/0Gx-0-kUBv8/mqdefault.jpg)
Kahma really captures details that the human eye misses. No more boring profile pics!
This was really interesting to watch. I also tried kahma and really liked the results!
This entire AI “photography” movement is wrong. If you didn’t get the right pose or somehow the shot didn’t come out then that’s it, it didn’t come out. Anything AI does for you after that point is a waste because it didn’t happen in this time and space. It’s not real. Nothing is better the truth of the moment. Any rewards on offer are hollow. Silly cosmetic things are one thing but AI generated “photos” of Isreal/Palestine war are on another level of shame that cannot be photoshopped out.
I would agree with Lexi that context matters as to how AI Imagery can be used.
Its crazy how well AI can mimic photos these days. kahma makes it really easy to get high quality headshots.
I think that for personal use, manipulating images through AI, as long as it's not done to harm another person, are fine. What really needs to be regulated is journalistic use of AI. It should be illegal for a journalist to manipulate an image they use for a story.
Do you think AI photography should be regulated?
I think AI should be regulated on everything it can does. It threatens people's employement and self employed artists etc
No, AI is just another tool like blender, photoshop, google, or wiki. Regulating it will only make it less valuable while wasting the time and resources of those who'd be in charge of regulating it.
Feel that a new standard should be developed when it comes to recording images. Each and every image should be digitally signed in such a way that if it is altered from the original, it would be able to be detected. If you can think about it, eventually things like this can be done. Standards, standards, standards.
This is crazy cool! I never thought AI could make photos look so real. Cant wait to see how this progresses.
BTW, I wish we could get a link in the description to access these images
Girl: "Do we win a prize"
Editorial Manager: "Yes you do you get to go home".
😆😆😆
Ai needs to be HEAVILY legislated. It is very dangerous imo.
The point made at 07:28 is key. We probably need to read everything about Pablo Picasso & his contemporaries adaptations to painting vs photography. (NatGeo’s genius season 2 & especially Picasso’s War How Modern Art Came to America) Sometime downstream we will hopefully get the next Salvador Dalí?
going to be a lot of double checking on future photography contests lol like with those “shot on iPhone” print ads
i don't think it is too hard to tell the difference to be honest.
The images are nice enough to present but even the slightest amount of zoom shows that the images lack depth have the smoothing effect.
They do not pass the uncanny calley, it almost feels like video game rendered people and focusing for just a moment would help with weeding out what is real.
Lastly real photos have leave traces of chaotic random scenery that AI images do not reproduce well.
For now. But what about in 5 years?
@@milootje007 I think once video games surpass the uncanny valley then AI will too.
It would be interesting to see that happen in the next 5 years but I don't think it will.
The AI photos look amazing. Checking out karma now for more natural looking portraits.
Context! All the way
Regarding ai. We need a bill of rights that protects our likeness. We should also revise slander laws to emcompass false or modified images.
Her argument for the toast being real is “I’d eat that”?
Obviously the staged section of the video
Note to self: don’t record a video on an empty stomach again
If the image is Ai, just say so. Then it is Ok.
2 notes everyone missing.
1. When you say “this ai image sucks because xyz missing photography features”…. You not insulting the AI. You insulting the designer that doesn’t know squat about how to manipulate the photo. Ai is a tool. Like a camera or a brush.
2. Folks saying the images don’t stand up to any zoom. That’s cause they didn’t upscale properly. Ai images can easily be upscaled 10+ megapixel sizes even on basic home computers.
The bose headphone inclusion for marketing was so cringe 🤢
Photography will never be the same once everyone can easily create photos that fool experts. Should be interesting to see where it goes!
The family never even asked me about it. Nor did I offer.
what is a photo
“Does REAL matter anymore?” Do you really think people want to have random people on their family pictures?)
😂 What's worse really? A fake Ai picture or a "real" Kardashian?
I wish you showed the complete images. It's obvious that these photo are cropped. Cropping leaves a lot of the evidence of manipulation out.
An enemy could get you in a lot of trouble by putting you somewhere you shouldn’t be.
I am surprised that the human race still isn't forming our kids developing bone structures, to avoid those creepy, unfriendly-looking deep set brows.
Wonder how long before pros have trouble telling the difference. These AI are getting way too smart.
another batman?
& spiderman’s foe
Says the website that publishes AI generated articles LOL
They have bone structure apps these days called "Why Am I Ugly". Where insecure teenage girls superimpose their facial features over that of models.
Seems like they are looking for the wrong things.
The Rep from Utah and his colleagues had to go all the way to the Pentagon to discover all of their crimes.
Inside trading and lying to the FBI, eh Stewart?