Come and join our supportive facebook community facebook.com/groups/1893064874281393

How cool would it be to create an avatar of a passed loved one with kahma. Technology brings memories to life.

The biggest problem I have with photo AI is that it is going to destroy our sense of reality. We will see a photo and wonder if that event really happened or if was it computer generated.

I am wrestling with the implications of AI (reading academic literature, and listening to SMEs). Make no mistake, it will change everything. When I think about AI, I don't think about photography at all.

"It all looks the same!" I totally agree on that

Yes as I get older and hopefully wiser , true creatives use innovations and tools , while other use them crunches.

I always tell my students: work on your visual abilities. Paint, draw, go to museums, go to galleries and take your camera in hand every day.

My thoughts exactly. Every image has a particular look. I got very bored, very quickly scrolling through the explore page on mid journey.

I left commercial photography in 1980 for a career in IT, and even back then there was a lot talk of AI taking over every human activity. We just needed a bit more of SOMETHING (processor speed, memory space, whatever) THEN it would happen… It still hasn’t happened, and here’s why: we can’t make an artificial version of something unless we know exactly what the real thing is, and we still haven’t defined the full extent and composition of real intelligence. All we have is the dogged belief that it will magically emerge when we have “enough” of whatever we NOW think is needed. Exactly like Frankenstein believed he could breathe life into his monster with lightning. Creativity is certainly part of intelligence, and the lack of creativity (as in coming up with brand new ideas) is one crucial part of human intelligence which is missing from AI. What is often mistaken for intelligence is the fact that computers (i.e. AI) can learn a lot of facts and look them up and combine them really, really quickly. The ability to do that IS certainly one part of real intelligence, but it’s far from all of it. What computers still CAN’T do is pluck something new and wonderful out of thin air.

I adore your endlessly candid approach, Scott 🤣

Our greatest gift, our greatest strength, is our individuality. And it’s the creative, who see the value in all tools available to us. Both, would describe you.

Are you not worried about AI in the slightest then? While it is still in its infancy, it will only get more advanced. And as someone who is a conceptual product photographer, it is very possible for AI to simply mimic your style.

Great video, I just love the new AI in lightroom as it helps me with tedeous editing. Im still in ”artistic” control.

Great topic, curious to hear thoughts on future

Excited to learn more, change is inevitable but hope photography stays fun too

I just made a video on this very subject which kind of reflects what you're saying here. I think that AI is going to decimate the generic stock photo market - the kind of images that sit above blog posts or in EDMs - nobody will pay for that from Getty when they can make their own to their own precise requirements for virtually nothing.

I think it's a pretty neat tool to sketch out ideas and concepts before you shoot them for real. It's the same way musicians would record reference tracks with software instruments and demo vocals and if the idea got picked up they then proceeded to record it with a proper band and a big artist. I could iterate tons of ideas on Midjourney and visualize them and even present them to the client and if they like it then we spend the big bucks on the shoot.

Spot on correct. AI will be the opiate of the mindless consumer of blandness.

Originality is key! Yes indeed, it’s the only thing that separates the creative from the norm.

AI can't be compared to any previous tech. Digital cameras, cell phones, cheaper and smarter cameras...this is nothing compared to AI. First, there are lots of creatives that just don't want to learn the tech of photography. They will eventually use AI to create images because it is easy. Second, AI-generated imaging is BRAND NEW. Very few people are actually doing it, very few creatives have access to it so far, and all that will change within the next year or so (unless governments shut it down). Third, AI imaging technology is in its infancy. The systems are rudimentary at best compared to what is possible. There are two major types of AI being created...AGI and ASI. These are Artificial General Intelligence and Artificial Super-Intelligence. ChatCPT is an AGI. It does a lot of things, but none of them at the highest levels. AGI is meant to be comparable to human intelligence, but faster and with a better memory. ASI is meant to exceed human intelligence in a specific area, such as image creation, chess, autonomous driving, etc. It is ASI that you must keep your eye on with regards to image creation because it is entirely possible that it will learn to be more creative than humans and that could happen in the next 1-3 years.

Ai is the cubic zirconia of the art world.

AI artist here, and you’re spot on!

I love this, man - and The AI didn't create the title for this video, YOU did!...using AI like an interactive thesaurus or a muse. ;-) Also, I agree it all looks the same, AND people ARE boring LOL. I feel vindicated with you posting this, sent it around to some of my paranoid visual art friends for a thin slice of rich reason.

Been wondering about AIs impact on portraits. The headshots I got from karma turned out great for LinkedIn!

there is a lot of AI stuff that looks the same because it reflects what illustrators do, many of them are just technicians, which can be ok if you give them a task to do, and can draw a technically nice picture, but completelly lack of good ideas. if you check many illustrators portfolios they look mostly the same, they all have now a samurai stormtrooper, a fairy sexy woman, a lotr thing... people with AI just do the same as them, they just don't need to draw it

I think you're overlooking one important thing. People in general don't care for originality. You certainly do care, because you're knowledgeable about your craft. But most people don't care at all. Look at the top 40 chart for pop music. Most of what you find there is the same, not very original, tends to use the same rythms, chord progressions, etc. And people don't care, because most people aren't seasoned musicians or critics who meticulously analyze that is it that they're listening to. And that is what scares me, because stuff like Midjourney v5 has gotten ridiculously good at making "pop" images. I will not be replaced, I do multispecral photography, IR photography, UV photography, that sort of thing. Nobody really cares for this except for nerds like myself and there is no money to be made, so I don't really fear suddenly having no reason to practice my hobby, especially since it's mostly an act of exploration for me anyways. The music I have produced though? Yes, I have not really done anything in a long time, but I fear that once I get to the point in my life where I feel like producing music again, there will just be an AI that will be able to make exactly what I would want to make. So what's the point then? Could still do it for myself, which is probably what will end up happening, but it will be a hard pill to swallow for sure.

AI is just another tool to use - I use it to augment / clean / adjust an existing image but only to the point before it becomes either obvious or intrusive.

Some relief by listening to you. and i really hope that brands will choose originality over fakeness. I am not a fan of AI.

Spot on!!!

My sentiments as well. Love ai and I've been using it more and more, but as elements in a composite, or generating concepts for further exploration, we can do some really cool stuff. But it will all look the same unless you take what it offers and use it in you own voice. I like your position on voice, it is what sets us apart from others as well as machines!

Well said!

It all come to creativity, you are right. This is what we really value the most and it's hard to find, that's why you might have thousands of photographers but only few with vision and style. I'm honestly struggling with this myself, it's hard to 1.find time for personal projects 2. Figure out what is your style, what you would like to do 3. Find what other will like and what's trending now. I bet that creativity one day will be a subject at school.

Charlie Engman and Tim Tadder are doing some cool stuff, where I can’t even fathom the prompts.

Funnily enough I was about to post a really interesting video about AI in the FB group. See you over there!

A positive effect on IA: when integrated to MS office in the next few months, we would be able to redact bills, follow up emails and so on, in 10% of the time, ahahahahah. Less burocracy work, more time for photography.

Boom!

The problem I see with a lot of AI is that it’s not creative, it doesn’t speak to me. There’s a clear distinction between original, and creative.

Well said and I agree.. also, I was getting ai photo fatigued. I'm just a camera operator but people love their photos because they love the people in the photograph. It's simple as that.

I understand what you're saying but "they all look the same" isn't a compelling argument. At some point down the line, some intern at some business will be able to put "X in the style of Scott Choucino" and they'll get dozens of photos almost exactly like yours without ever having to pay you specifically. So I think the issue isn't whether AI can replace/replicate photographers (because for many, it already can)...the issue for me is that there should be regulations on what these AI companies can use for training their models. Its a difficult problem but photographers should at least have the right to know if their photos are currently being used to train AI models

A.I. has been around since Screen Savers 1990s. Wow that screen Saver is cool for about 30 seconds.

"Oh man, I love your work and videos, but I think that the lack of creativity and originality that we're discussing will soon be there with AI as well. It seems like we're entering a new era where progress with AI is happening at lightning speed, and it's no longer just a competition among thousands of other photographers. This is something different I'm afraid.

True,AI can create something in seconds but,now go to an agency and talk to the creative director he gonna give you an brief,something you can do because you are human. AI as you said creat almost always the same kind of image. It's fun at the beginning but for now,I don't think AI gonna replace us

Every time I have an AI wobbly I'm going to watch this again. It's my 3rd time ! The AI wobbly is real, unlike AI.

AI is scary and this is AI at the beginning of its mainstream platform. When mobile phones began using camera's people asked what will this do to the camera industry? Now it's AI and it's scary to think in a few years some genre of photography could be redundant, and someone could sit in front of a computer and generate a masterpiece without even leaving the house. I really hope that's not the future...

I remember a similar level of fear when digital cameras came out...

Very similar with music. I realized that the only people who will be replaced are those just copying others, doing what's trendy, or doing the bare minimum (paying someone on fiverr to write lyrics lol). It's a beautiful assistance tool, but more than anything, it's an accountability enforcer.

Yes, It becomes boring seeing the same tone everytime but with illustration art, it can copy different style of existing great artist and its just on the early stage of AI. I will not be surprised if it will generate an image like a real photo with all the style just based on prompt in a few years or maybe earlier.

I concur. I understand the complaint about stealing work and AI Learning, it's all valid, but the replacement concerns lack ground. I've asked around and I was shocked to find, most people that make those arguments have the same work and no clear signs of evolution. For me, I consume sorts of media: magazines, video games, films, TV series, music videos so on. When i see something interesting, my first instinct is to see if I can do it in my specialization. Analytical thinking and finding ways to solve a problem solving is what Creativity is. AI can't self-improve, it can't complete concepts look back and say "What If..?". As long as you keep evolving, AI can't replace you. If you can't find answers in your field, go to a different field and look there. Ask around, do something; anything! Complaining about AI simply isn't going to give you paper.

I saw so many people in fear of AI, especially Portrait Photographers. And I'll repeat the same thing I've said to many others; "If you genuinely care about the human experience, AI should not be a threat to you" And it shouldn't be. I want to see work/art made by human beings, and maybe an animal... But the core problem with AI in relation to Creativity & the arts is the lack of human experience and touch - there are very few people who have figured out how to blend it together and I appreciate those people very much as they understand how to connect tech with humanity in a way that maintains that experience. but the rest simply see it as a Cheat Code, and if there's anything I've learnt over the past 17 years is that "You cannot cheat yourself out of Creativity" and Human Experience. The only type of photography that we should be worried about when it comes to AI, in my opinion, is Photojournalism. Not only does the human experience matter but also truth, bias, and perspective (Human and Cameras) and we've seen it in full force last month with the fake Trump Photos. Granted they were obviously badly-faked images BUT enough people skewed the truth with their own bias to fuel a certain perspective. When things like Dall-E & Midjourney get really good and THEY WILL, will people stop trusting a Photograph from trusted sources because it doesn't suit or fit their own bias? And in fairness, people already don't - this will only make it worst... but we have to see.

But, I take photos of squirrels in trees… 😁

I still believe in the craft of photography. It is more than the camera you use, more than clever lighting whatever. From a commercial sense there will be some businesses that will try AI. I will still be creating work.

For me, AI is the best dyslexia tool since shouting "how do you spell dyslexia" to the person in the other room.

Yes, uncomfortable truth

AI helps but skill still needed, machines can assist not replace artists

The more AI is *a thing* the more I find my reaction to it is that, for some philosophical reason I can’t unpick, that it’s, well the only word I can come up with is ‘offensive’. Not the stuff AI produces, though there are serious issues appearing around female objectification (though I’d argue that about a whole lot of stuff you see online produced by humans), but somehow about the concept of AI generated content itself. I’ll need a lot more thinking time to unpick this reaction and where it comes from though

what happens when you ask a.i to create an original concept?

As long as you are good enough Photography will survive and I think it's good to have ai.....as a lot of images are already a kind of ai...Insta for instance, we are ai since many years now it's only official by some software. Btw...can you imagine how much energy this consume? It might be the same as bitcoins..... We should stop it

Scott, that's great that you are sharing your perspective 100%, let's hope the majority of your followers get a handle on it. Every situation should be a new experience for people, and for me, you can't beat creativity. Let's learn to be goats and not sheep. As I tell models I work with, let some other wanker do those bikini shots, they're boring and probably not going to get you any work. However, if you want to push your boundaries, let's do it, because model agencies want to see how radical each person is, not a block of meat. I'm not talking nude, but I am talking fashion, locations, and styling. AI certainly cant do that... Theres even an AI model agency now, LOL.

We have to bear in mind that AI was created by humans not the other way round. Of course it will contribute to all areas of life but it relays on data base on our tastes. Time well tell its real value.

Yes, photography isn't about cameras and gear, in the same way painting isn't about brushes and paint.

The most important thing is you, your mind and body. Just like camera gear, AI is simply a tool.

I just binge watched some of your videos, so clearly I'm enjoying your discussions. However I have to say I think you really glossed over the impact digital/internet had on professional and commercial photography at the beginning of your video. Entire fields of professional photography that existed before either went extinct or now exist under life support (even if those were the less creative and less technically demanding ones). While new fields were created that didn't exist before. Professional photography pre-digital wasn't just high end high budget advertisement photography, and even that underwent some significant changes as well. So sure, while I agree with you that most AI images are as bland and generic as your usual "Instagood" copycatting (although not all of them, see Tim Tadder for example), the reality is that many of these generic Insta copycats created some very profitable professional businesses out of this repetitive blandness. So I have no doubt AI can have the potential to cause some disturbances and significant changes again, at least in some areas. I do agree with you though, in that the truly creative masters of their craft with unique visions have nothing to fear.

AI may have it's shortcomings right now but you can rest assured that those shortcomings will be solved in the very near future. You may currently feel safe from the ai scourge in your niche but beware, at the current speed of ai development you will be blindsided and you will be made obsolete. For a long time i thought technology reducing the amount work people needed to do would be a good thing as people would have more time for meaningful social interaction, cultural development and creative expression but the woke are working hard to cancel cultural development, human creativity is already under threat from ai and soon we'll have artificial social constructs designed to perfectly please you, which no human could compete with. What will be left is an enormous amount of people with no purpose to their lives, which currently is already proving to be a recipe for disaster.

Presets. I agree... WTF?

I like this point of view about the bloody AI.. But aren't you worried that soon most of the clients and potential buyers will manage to produce the images they need themselves?.. Ok I agree with you that Creativity and originality has always been the main thing to be a good professional.., but we can't deny that now all become sooooo much easier.. Now it's more important to be a good writer than a good artist.. and they are using GPT to enhance the texts.. They just ask to the bot to be as much "creative" as possible.. Right not is not yet possible to replace human creativity, but you think that in the next future it will never be?.. I'm optimistic by nature but here I can't manage to be so.. I really hope to be wrong.. However, We can just keep on working and see..

For your niche of photography, maybe. Some other niches will surely be dead.

Presets are for weddings and weddings is not photography. These days it is just showing off your statuss. Sick people stuff...

Any thing done by computer or AI imo is mostly not original. It has use what a human has done to come up with something faster. AI is best for generics.

Hi. I'm not Scott and I'm not trying to be but I do actually sell my ai images. Yes I sell my images in Adobe Stock and I'm apart of the Firefly beta. No ai will not replace actual pro photography. It simply doesn't have the pixels and sharpness as a real pro camera. Zoom in on ai images and it's completely crap. Zoom in on a pro cameras image's and it's scary to see all the details. What ai photography does is it gives creatives another tool. I believe if your creative it doesn't matter what you do your going to find something that interests you. It could photography, food. Paonting, music or yes even ai. It's for creative minds and people who need outlets to create. I personally love to create impasto oil paintings with ai. In reality Ai is limited it simply cannot produce the details needed. Ai also is not a true representation of the subject and never will be. It will look great on your cell phone or a PC background but that's where it will stay. That's OK because you don't need a hi Megapixel camera for a phone or PC background. I do think illustrations and the create illustrators will feel more the ai problems than pro photography. Scott big fan thanks for creating. Mike

I love how you speak the word but. I think i will call AI to make a snippet film with all your "buts"

I left m photography and now work as a pm at an agency. I can tell you that ai is a big thing now. and most pitches this year were landed by using ai. it is heartbreaking. and i also have to disagree on the point Scott is making. For one...90% of all commercial work always look the same, with little variations in the style. and if i want a photo that looks like it was taken in a style of a famous photographer...i can type this as a prompt. It is highly un ethical, but capitalism has never been ethical. And from an agencys or clients point of view it is the right thing to do.

I would think your work would be some of the easiest to replace with AI. You have a very basic style. As you say, 1 light, always bold color, everything in focus.

Hahahaha the hate on presets is real with you! Not everyones customer is high end New York modeling agencies. My biggest issue with AI is it's a copy based system in that takes existing photos taken by humans with cameras and merges them in PS style to create a fake image. The images generated non photo real are still comprised of existing artwork in the same sense albeit created by digital artists using digital mediums. So, until AI can actually generate its own unique images without the need of a pool of existing images then the only real threat here is the laziness of the end user in wanting to use such a system!

Some people won’t know or they won’t care but it is pretty boring stuff. Good for some things but creativity isn’t one of them.

and btw I have a friend who makes oil paintings, he is technically very good, but completelly lacks ideas and that is why nobody buys his painting and he totally failed as an artist, nobody really cares about his stuff even if it's technically well drawn, and he won't admit it and do anything abou it :(

we all ARE LEMMINGS :)) we think is cool... we just copy/paste ... i do all the time something out of line,I receive 1, ma 10 likes, but I don't give a ...., that is my point of view you like it we work, you don't like it, go find other photographer :) nice video, thank you!

AI or machine learning is about emphasising mediocrity. The big losers will be the tech manufacturers. For now the software with AI can correct most images on any camera and lens combination. It was never about the gear. Opportunity, composition, light and imagination was key 50 years ago. Nothing changed and everything remains the same. At least Nikon has their industrial & medical gear etc to make a profit, Sony have their consumer goods, Canon have their medical imagery gear. So that leaves Fuji, Pentax and Leica shareholders wondering where their next dividend will come from??

yee ok be creative , client sale tomatos , go photograph a tomato !!! , how creative you will be with that , put the tomato on blue bg paper , put the tomato on fork , put the tomato inside a car engine , on the head of hamster , put a shark mouth on the tomato with Photoshop , o just the tomato on plain white bg and tell him bunch of crap like is bold style , symbolize bla bla bla ,, and charge him 2k for it , WAAAA amazing !!! so creative

What congress need to do is create laws and it loop holes of And company who layoff and replace that position within a year has to still pay that worker monthly Wages in a different A,I. Taxes in level taxes brackets. Cause the objection is the worst future outcome that is states and city government will be less, and the only way they can make up for it it through raising utilities, sewer, property, parking. Police, etc. or more inflation. As alway, leader are too late, reality is all that about 230 thousand jobs lost majority will not come back. Congress is sleeping only thinking about a green future and running the world so they are wanting to take down china and Russia together. Business, worker, and government are a circle cycle. You take away worker done by computer A.I really computer software that rewritten so it make the decision off a scanned instruction book That A human was taught as a job that bring in taxes to run each state that run the Country. The only solution to that is a new type of communism state where everybody are payed a their set amounts of money to live with. And rules and regulations. Worker taxes gone replace by A.I can never be recovered. How can you get company's to pay taxes later of that work or worker they don't need that A.I. Doing? It's a one way street and can't logically work with less state taxes.

AI is the McDonalds of photography. It is regression to the mean. And that's not bad, we all love a Big Mac once in a while.

complainers always loose and who finds a way to use AI wins