All true except with AI its a different game now, this tool can create and tell stories better and faster than most average people. If you think AI is just another tool, you need to know more about AI.

@@DM-sc4zy I agree that you must be fluent in the tools of your trade, yet I disagree that the stories are "better". Faster, yes, and this will certainly be the determining factor in most photographers' success. Sadly, speed is more important than quality, these days? I embrace AI but I dont worry what anyone else is going to accomplish with it. 2 carpenters with the same hammer and supplies will fabricate completely different products. :-)

​@@DM-sc4zyreal world photography will become a status symbol once Ai runs its course, like having your own personal driver or portrait painter. Computer generated images with no point of reference in the fabric of time will get old, quickly.

@@monsieurgolem3392 I was thinking that.. People will go all crazy for it then they will want real because in the coming years it will be hard to tell what's real and what's not.. We already have 'AI models' online that are pretty realistic.. People will get sick of it

@@DM-sc4zy this shit not create anything, it's create COMPILATION from STOLEN works of many people's

this is such an important point: so many different creatives are going to be affected by AI "photography", just as we've seen with the intensification of CGI use in 'live action' movies. it'll be a damn shame that most people just wont care.

So on point. Digital was for the most part the runation of the professional. It opened up an oportunity for so many who relied on the equipment and post production to get the job done, and they worked for just about nothing. Thats how us pros were hurt. I moved off to a different sector of the business, since I was not willing to re-invent myself. I stayed active, but after 19 years as a working pro, digital made me change course. That said AI will do what digital did. Companies can use their marketing departnents and IT to create their own advertising images. The level of AI a year from now will be like a box camera compared to a DSLR. Game over.

That is a bit scary! I used to work in an advertising agency 10 years ago. A professional photo shot was often a last resort.. if they couldn't find another way to create the images they needed to bring an idea to life.

Thing is... That AI couldn't have created the images of that 4 day shoot you did out of thin air. AI wasn't there in a robot body, taking pictures with a camera so it can generate more (fake) images of that shoot... That was YOU - a photographer. YOU did the 4 day shoot and then your agency just used YOUR images so that AI can create more of them - fake images but nonetheless, more.

If anything, this sounds like a future upsell to our work. "$50 per photo for AI usage"

I don’t know, on one side that sounds like the photographer will always be needed as the first point of contact to create source materials for the AI…BUT with machine learning, how much longer might a live person be required for that first step. With billions of images existing online, how long will it take AI to reach the point where ALL the images that have ever been online is enough of a data source for it to create an image for any parameters it’s given? 🤷🏼‍♂️🤷🏼‍♂️🤷🏼‍♂️ only time will tell.

@@odarrien I was thinking the same! One hope is that governments bring in some type of copyright law. As they are technically taking parts of images which are copyrighted. Its a bit if a grey area.. time will tell I guess!

Build a Story Brand, Soulless A.I Is the villain.

@@DynastyUK Definitely the goal, just a bit anxious about how all this is gonna shake out. When desktop publishing hit the scene in the 90s, there was a brief time in which graphic designers had a bit of a job market pinch because enough businesses actually thought that owning a computer made them visual storytellers overnight. Things readjusted, but only after awhile.

@@my.penny.wagers Yeah, I reckon you probably gotta push marketing more than usual for a while until things even out. If there are way to make A.I the Villain yet somehow play it as keeping your friends close but your enemies closer, as to someone make A.I make you better at your job too. It's a difficult one, it's also a time to really make those connections with past clients completely solid and give them offers and such to secure solid foundations. Wishing you the best man :)

It's not a tool. It is literally intelligence. It's another person without a body capable of not only learning, but learning faster and at a capacity not possible by a human. We are all doomed in this. All of us. Not just Photographers or creatives, all of humanity. Those that don't understand that, don't understand what AI is or how it works.

event photography may be safe for now. but many others like stock or landscape not so much.

The way the youtube algorithm knows exactly what video you want? cant wait....😏

Weddings, portraits, concerts, news, documentaries, pets, shows, festivals and parties, automotive, motorsports, sports, journalism, travel, fashion and beauty, glamour, editorials, boudoir and even porn and many, many more fields... None of them will ever be replaced by AI.

@@nogerboher5266 I agree that people will still want these images of these types, but will they need professional photographers to create them? AI developers will take on every aspect of image-making - from emulating images entirely to making bad photographs look good (e.g. The photo of the moon on the Samsung S21). The clients who want portraits, beauty, glamour, boudoir, etc. aren't looking for reality, they want hyper-reality (a photographer to make them look better than they actually do) and when AI turns their ordinary photos into better photos for free, why pay a photographer for it? Concerts might already be covered well enough by smartphones (someone in the front row with an iPhone will capture good-looking images and post them freely on Instagram). Pets are probably quantity (posting daily on Instagram) over quality - how many pet owners still pay for portraits? Sports images will probably be emulated from video footage (a 3D model of the action will be created using video feeds from multiple angles and combined high resolution studio images of players, allowing a 'photograph' to be emulated from currently impossible angles as James Cameron does with his Avatar movies). Even wedding photos could be emulated (in part) in the same way (e.g. a photo of them cutting the cake from the perspective of the cake). Travel? AI will take existing photographs of any location to create a model which can render a new image from any angle, with artificial people and any lighting condition (and given the rate at which things move, this might be available in just a few months). As for news, half of news is now smartphone coverage given to them for free. Will we still need photographers? Absolutely. But only a fraction of the current number of photographers and, therefore, most of them are unlikely to command high prices. I am no longer confident that there is *anything* which won't be affected by AI.

@@AA-ni3km Most people in trades - plumbers, electricians will be very safe for now. AI can't do anything physical yet. 🤣

@@AA-ni3km That's the thing. Nothing you've mentioned holds any weight in the real world. People said the same about modern digital cameras when they started coming out; ''Oh no! Cameras do everything instead of you now! Professional photographers will no longer be needed!'' And yet here we are... Still very much needed. Look and listen; I am and was a graphic designer, web designer/developer, photographer and videographer for almost two decades now. The reality of the whole AI situation is that only photographers in certain fields (e.g product, commercial, real estate, etc...) will actually be affected. When you say stuff like portraits and beauty being full of clients who want hyper reality with AI making their regular photos better, you're still forgetting the photography aspect of it. Nobody is going to spend years of learning about lighting, composition and so on, just so they can take a snapshot grade photo for their AI program. These people will still need someone who knows photography to take photos for them. When you say concerts, shows and festivals being covered by smartphones - that's just marketing nonsense. Cameras are professional tools, not to mention being bigger, better and more feature packed than a phone. It's a professional tool, specifically made and designed with that in mind and it is so, solely for that specific purpose. A phone will never replace a professional tool. When you say weddings or events being emulated, you're forgetting that the AI isn't a robot with a camera in it's hand and a free thinking mind, walking around the event or a wedding, taking photos. AI can only create imaginary, unrealistic and non-existent ''reality.'' AI can only emulate a fake version of the event that looks nothing like the actual event and it can not emulate all the things that happened at the event or a wedding, all the people that were there and all the real world detail that was then and there. Only a person with a camera, being physically present at said event or wedding, can represent and capture what happens at the event, how the event looks, all the people that are at the event, what they are wearing, what they are doing, the food, the flowers, the tiniest little details... Not to mention unexpected or once-in-a-lifetime situations that happened at the event or wedding, only being there with a camera and taking a picture of it will give a real and true representation of it... Long story short, 90% of photography will remain untouched and unaffected by AI.

​@@nogerboher5266I didn't say that AI would *remove* the need for photographers. It won't. I was reacting to your claim that AI could never replace certain types of photography. It can and it will. Photographers will still be needed but AI will reduce the number of images which are done photographically and it will reduce the skill level required. Neither is good for the earning prospects of photographers (and they were never that good in the first place for the average professional photographer).

Don't price yourself considerably less than it would be in UK, the difference for the same quality level is not that big.

They will not, Ai will become a "poor mans" game, real world phorography will be for those that want to signal wealth, lol, so get ready to be somebodies photo person like being their driver.

I dont know about that, because the clothes and the entire aesthetic are marketed towards real people that will purchase and try to look like the models annnnnd...who will take their photos when they step out for the evening? You have to think beyond the Ad campaign, its one photo with a target of 3,000 real people, you have 3k people that want their photo taken. You say well; Ai can compile their photos, well, then the fashion industry is out of business, because I can generate a photo of myself wearing their clothes.

@@monsieurgolem3392 people buy clothes to be seen in them. Obviously it will be really easy in the near future to generate ai images of people in any clothes you/they can imagine. But to be seen in them will stay worth money to those that care about such a thing. Personally I never buy clothes beyond what I at a absolute minimum need to have some clothes on, so the cheapest possible Amazon stuff.

Maybe your brain can't imagine future possibilities of AI.

It's also not going to be free.

​@@stevemadrid6522 But much cheaper.

@@peterschmidt6482 You think so?

@@stevemadrid6522 No, wrote it just for fun.

Hey, if you want a device with fast spinning blades taking close ups of you....

@@monsieurgolem3392 Who doesn't? :D

@@weswheel4834 fly it in the church during the service😀

But lets go with that idea: 100mp camera that can retain quality when cropping, because the drone has to fly at a certain height; safety. Then the actual drone that can hold the camera and lens, external monitors and a person that knows how to both fly it and take the right photos. Not too many people will be able to afford that, so youre photographer still has a job.

Im confused, so the drone will fly indoors at the church, the recpetion hall and the dressing room and will know which photos to take? Even if its outside, the drone or drones (if youre really loaded with cash) will know to take the picture of a ......butterfly landing on the flower girl? The drone will fly over at an incident and will know to take a picture of the molotov cocktails than landed against some electrical wires?

If movie studios can use this technology to create films without cast and crew, then so can ordinary individuals. It will lead to a lot of job losses, but also empower individuals without money and resources to make their own films.

It does not need to replace everyone. imagine a coding job usually needs 10 people now only require 1 + AI.

@@DM-sc4zy True, will probably change the way start-ups operate. Would be very difficult for large financial institutions with a lot of legacy code to move to AI anytime in the near future though and they’re usually slow to adopt new tech so maybe that’s where the job security will be

....Im still on the fence about that one, I feel luxury branda will still use actual photographers in keeping with their ethos of wealth signaling as I think AI will be a "poor mans" game. Tiffanys may not want a computer generated image of their real jewels.

@@monsieurgolem3392 That's a good point. For smaller start-ups, AI could be very helpful. I agree that luxury brands might stick with a tried and true product photographer, but I also see those brands enlisting the help of individuals who have mastered AI in the advertising space. Interesting time. We'll see what happens.