Just buy the pic perfect AI bundle for photoshop! One time purchase and it’s much better.

i agree.. im a professional wedding photographer. this application is great its brilliant. but their refusal to allow integration with LR or PS and forcing you to use their tool only for exporting and per picture credit is fking stupid. DEADSET stupid. makes for a shit workflow and a high volume wedding photographer like me who does 100+ weddings a year churning out thousands of images per month its just dumb

Can u share the link of the group u read abt evoto in

Thanks

I have not been really a fan of these credit based software like Evoto. It’s very expensive in the long run. Especially new photographers who are just getting into photography.

​@@gregshawphotography8828 No subscription required, you only pay when you export. Actually not expensive

you cant integrate. its infuriating. you have to use EVOTA AI entirely.... or edit and catalogue in LR... do your edits... export and then import into EVOTO to then do your air brushing its such a shit process

@@robbyjai Agree. Can’t move the files after using with Evoto either. I like to move the source files off my internal drive after I process them for storage. Would love a direct round trip with LR. Imagine LR will be 75% as good with AI and we’re will settle for that vs this crappy workflow.

Its a paid software, they"ll charge you once you download the edits.

Ai will never be big enough to completely take photographers out the game. Ai can act like humans but it will never be one. It can’t have values, morals, creativity. Only can be programmed. Ai can help photographers tremendously but Ai can never ever truly be a photographer

@@Ashleyunfiltered For most people, “creativity” is just the result of a combination of following (or deliberately bucking) trends, personal habits and and fixations, one’s collected memories and dreams, as well as symbols and ideas that belong to the collective (un)consciousness. If anyone closely and honestly examines their own work, they will come to this same conclusion. Humans are far more predictable and easy to influence than we pretend to be. AI can do all of those things-identify (or buck) trends, identify or create habits (or have habits programmed in, either hard-coded or via prompt)-and it has instantaneous access and recall of essentially the entire corpus of human creation as its own “memory” and “unconsciousness”, distilled into its training model, which keeps getting bigger and improving. As a result, AI is more “creative” than humans could ever be-capable of more variation, more unexpected combinations, and capable of great perfection-all instantaneously, without years of training, without a salary, without the need for a Human Resources department, etc. AI will thus undoubtedly take over any purely creative “production” tasks such as photography, graphic design, cinematography, etc. It’s already flooded the stock photography market, and it’s only a matter of time until stock photography sites delete the “Include AI?” filter from their interfaces. As for wedding photography and the like, it’s only a matter of time until some company (Apple?) unifies their high quality, pocket-sized, affordable (mostly) cameras with high-quality AI models and drone technology that allow couples to remove the photographer from their wedding budget entirely, instead choosing from a range of “styles” of photographer that they prefer, and a completely autonomous system takes thousands upon thousands of professional-quality photographs during a wedding, uses its training models to select the best ones, and a wedding photo album is available on a website for the couple minutes after the event ends. High-end fashion photography is a bit different, because it involves a range of disciplines, including the fashion itself, and at least at this point, machine intelligence has little concept of how to wear clothes, how they feel, how they operate, how to put them on, how to make them, how to make them at scale and turn a profit for shareholders-then there is the whole interplay between models and the photographer, the concept of the shoot, the brand from which the concept springs, etc. Because the complexity and cost would be too high, I think high-end fashion photography will survive somewhat longer. Catalog photography…not so much. The problem with AI currently is that, because it isn’t human and doesn’t have human needs and attachments, except for what is programmed or prompted into it, it often makes small and/or strange mistakes that humans would never make. It is capable of great creativity compared to humans, and is far less predictable, when allowed to be, but at least at this point in time, there has to be someone to tell the AI what it is that humans want to see, or there is no point to having the AI in the first place. Humans, above all, are creators of _meaning_ rather than creators of images. AI just communicating its own arcane desires to another AI would devolve into a meaningless puddle of noise or tangential subjectivity, so far divorced from human concerns as to be essentially alien. For this reason, the “creativity” of humans is likely to be channeled from the actual production of images to the production of “meaning”. Meaning, people in creative industries that formerly produced images themselves, with cameras, graphic software, etc, will instead be using AI to generate the images must faster, and acting as choreographers, gatekeepers, coaches, and “meaning-makers”-translators between AI “creativity” and human desires and meaning. We will be the ones telling the AI what we want to see, what we care about, what we love and hate-and it will become our hands.

One other thing I will say is: in one respect, at least until we have androids that are indistinguishable (enough) from humans, AI will never replace photographers in situations where the presence of the photographer itself is critical for the response of the subject in the work. There is often a dialectic between photographer and subject, for example, in fashion photography or in portraiture. My profile photo, for example, was taken by a photographer on a shoot that I will never forget, which has personal importance for me. Yes, some people will be more than happy not to have to invite a stranger to their wedding for photos, but others will want a person there taking the photos, someone to interact with, to make people smile and reflect their own humanity. A “floating orb” drifting around a wedding may be a mood-killer for some. So I’m not saying that AI will replace humans _completely_ …but I believe it largely will.