Originally posted by UncleVanya To the naked eye the screen of my laptop was pitch black and the barest hint of a reflection could be seen. The iPhone was able to create an exposure that restored color and revealed my face with zero user intervention. The selfie shot is the reverse of this glitch. It shows how image manipulation can work and be a powerful way to empower a casual photographer with an image that is mostly right despite complex lighting.
Is this what you saw on your phone screen before you pressed the shutter? I find on my own phone (not an iPhone) that the LiveView image doesn't get the same processing as the saved JPEG (along with more subtle differences between viewing the image on two very different displays), which makes photography more of a hit and miss process than using a DSLR. If you can't predict how a photograph will turn out, both casual and non-casual photographers will end up frustrated more often than using a more predictable device (even if the more predictable device is far less capable).
As it is, most modern photographers (both casual and non-casual) are tending to employ a lottery technique; take lots of photos to improve the odds of finding a winner when we check them later. This becomes less rewarding when the time required to get a winner gets longer and the overall glut of photographs reduces the value of the few good ones. This might be the factor that differentiates a passing fad from a long time passion.
---------- Post added 12-04-21 at 12:02 PM ----------
Thinking back to the first 30 years of my picture taking hobby, my main source of frustration was seeing a great image in the viewfinder and discovering that the developed result was wasted because of a failure in technique. Gradually, my technique improved to the point where the main source of frustration was not being able to capture an image because of the limitations of film and my equipment.
I've never taken pictures to be creative, my motivation has always been to make souvenirs of my experiences. I think truly artistic photographers are rather rare creatures, which means that enhancing new equipment to make us common folk more artistic is likely to be wasted (it might help sell more expensive smartphones and standalone cameras in the short term, which is all that matters if you are in the business of making those devices).
Does the application of AI technology to photography empower photographers? I would argue that taking away the opportunity for the photographer to apply his or her learned skills to take better photos is the opposite of empowerment. It seems to me that eventually the people who are passionate about photography will gravitate back to dumber equipment and the less passionate will move on to something completely different.