Why do you think commercial photography is toast? (asking as someone who paid obscene amount to few photographers last year ((wedding, budoir, maternity photos hoot))
If anything I feel like ads and product listings are a case that definitely won't move to AI. Surely the ad needs to be a photo of the actual thing, rather than an approximation? I realise ads are often heavily edited, but correctness is still a very important concern in advertising in general and well supported with legal precedent in much of the world. There are industries that have moved almost entirely to digital renders (car adverts, Ikea catalogues, etc), but in these cases I think there's still a legal necessity to use highly accurate modelling.
I think the area that will move will be stock photos. They're only really used when the photo doesn't actually matter. I'm already seeing many AI generated images replacing stock photos on random blog posts.
Depends. I already see low quality news sites and stuff doing this, but the images are always a bit mangled.
It’s fine for filler images that don’t serve any purpose. But say you want a photo of a specific street for your story, having a street that looks a bit similar but mostly randomised significantly detracts from the value.
Honestly, I could see AI also disrupting wedding photography. For example, instead of paying several thousands of dollars for a photographer, you could instead pay $1,000 to rent a set of 4 tripod-mounted 360 degree cameras. These would monitor everything that's happening during the ceremony from different angles. Then you have each guest do an "optimization photo" when they sign your guest book. This would be like an abbreviated version of setting up FaceID on your iPhone — getting a couple different angles.
The software would then create a bunch of photos based on the positioning and expressions captured by the tripod-mounted panoramic cameras, but enhanced with the facial photos taken at check-in. The number of photos you could create would be infinite, of course (and would likely be priced based on the number of photos you review and download).
Photographers do provide value when they compose photos, but this aspect would be less important if you can edit photos after-the-fact using AI. Hell, I might like to touch up some of the photos from my wedding, to get rid of unsightly background elements that the (expensive) photographer failed to account for.
From a few crappy photos of your face, you can generate photos of you in nearly every setting: so I think all the "studio" part of a commercial photographer's job is toast.
> Why do you need the actual baby when you can have a fake baby with mangled hears and 7 fingers per hand?
Comments like these are fine on Twitter and Facebook, but if you're on HackerNews, commenting on an article about AI, it makes you look completely out of touch. You've clearly not kept pace with the technology and are just repeating verbatim what you saw 6 months ago.
HN, as a whole, has been so behind the curve that it's not even funny.
smt88|2 years ago
No one needs to take a photo of a can of Coke sitting on a poolside bar when Midjourney can create it in 30 seconds.
danpalmer|2 years ago
I think the area that will move will be stock photos. They're only really used when the photo doesn't actually matter. I'm already seeing many AI generated images replacing stock photos on random blog posts.
Gigachad|2 years ago
It’s fine for filler images that don’t serve any purpose. But say you want a photo of a specific street for your story, having a street that looks a bit similar but mostly randomised significantly detracts from the value.
imtringued|2 years ago
charlieyu1|2 years ago
gnicholas|2 years ago
The software would then create a bunch of photos based on the positioning and expressions captured by the tripod-mounted panoramic cameras, but enhanced with the facial photos taken at check-in. The number of photos you could create would be infinite, of course (and would likely be priced based on the number of photos you review and download).
Photographers do provide value when they compose photos, but this aspect would be less important if you can edit photos after-the-fact using AI. Hell, I might like to touch up some of the photos from my wedding, to get rid of unsightly background elements that the (expensive) photographer failed to account for.
aubanel|2 years ago
From a few crappy photos of your face, you can generate photos of you in nearly every setting: so I think all the "studio" part of a commercial photographer's job is toast.
guappa|2 years ago
Why do you need the actual baby when you can have a fake baby with mangled hears and 7 fingers per hand?
spaceman_2020|2 years ago
Comments like these are fine on Twitter and Facebook, but if you're on HackerNews, commenting on an article about AI, it makes you look completely out of touch. You've clearly not kept pace with the technology and are just repeating verbatim what you saw 6 months ago.
HN, as a whole, has been so behind the curve that it's not even funny.
aquafox|2 years ago