Photography: Is It Immune To AI Competition?

Some applications of photography demand the scene be real, not generated by a machine.

You’ve all heard the rumblings about how AI art is disrupting the art world. However, while AI is invading almost all creative pursuits from writing to 3D rendering, photography may be in a uniquely “safe” position.

I previously wrote about how writers may be safe from bots taking their jobs — but the more I read about ChatGPT, the powerful AI writing platform from OpenAI, the more I’m unsure. (However, I think writers who share personal stories will never be replaced by a machine, which can’t source from real experience.) Experience is also part of the reason I think photographers may be safe from AI art generators.

More specifically, photography requires a person to venture out there, collecting real moments.

Sure, one can simulate a photograph quite realistically using AI — as I demonstrated recently — but photography cannot be replaced by a bot when it comes to photojournalism, for example. That requires realness, not like generated images pulled together by a complicated algorithm.

You can’t simply insert a generated image into a news story and try to pass it off as reality. Those who have tried manipulating reality with photo editing software have been roasted, and rightfully so.

Meanwhile, while you can mimic fine art photography (including street photography) with AI, it’s the act of connecting with subjects that makes it all really special. There’s nothing quite like seeing something interesting or unexpected unfold in public, and snapping it in the moment before it’s gone.

Photography once drew disdain from the art world too

Ironically, photography was written off as a non-art form when it first arrived on the scene, for some of the same reasons as AI art. There’s a perception there’s less effort or talent involved in taking a photo than creating a scene by hand — after all, it’s just clicking a button, right?

Well, yes. But good photography also takes intuition, timing, creative vision, and at least some technical know-how. I think the same applies to AI art to a certain extent — you can create something interesting without being an artist, but it’s really imagination and acquired skill that will separate the well-known AI artists of the future from amateurs.

Photography has since become (mostly) accepted as a fine art, and a necessary tool for telling the news. I predict AI art will soon also become an accepted form of expression alongside the other disciplines.

While I can empathize with some artists regarding their fear of being replaced by a bot, I don’t think photographers have anything to snap over when it comes to AI (sorry for the pun.) I think it’s possible that machines can co-exist with humans in the art world, even when robots can be used to paint murals and print sculptures from rendered files.

AI can give us ideas, and even enhance our existing photos. But in my opinion, it will not replace the intuitive photographers that are capturing real magic — like you.

What are your thoughts on this topic? Let me know in the comments!