[Wheatfield]

As we all know, artificial intelligence has become a thing. I suspect by now it is used in some form or another for every image shot with a newer cell phone camera.
That AI technology is now moving into the realm of commonality with the introduction of Generative Fill with Adobe Photoshop. Anyone who is on the Adobe Creative Cloud rental program can download the Beta version of Photoshop and very easily (I think perhaps too easily) create images from practically nothing.

The way it works is you load your image into Photoshop, select the subject and refine the selection as needed, then select the inverse and go to the Edit tab and select Generative Fill from the dropdown. This will open a dialog box where you tell the program what sort of fill you want for your background.
Click generate and Adobe creates 3 backgrounds and superimposes your image onto it. If you don't like what you see, pick the one that you like the most and do it again (and again) until the software comes up with something you like.
And that's all there is to it.
It can also be used to remove things from the image by lassoing the distracting elements and clicking on generative fill without entering anything. The program will then fill that area with what it thinks would be there behind whatever has been selected.
It can also be used to add elements to an image by lassoing an area of the image and when the dialog box opens, telling the program what you want as a fill.
The latter is something of a crap shoot at this point in time.

The processing is done on an Adobe server, so how fast the image generation works is going to be dependant on one's internet connection. An image off the 40MP XT-1 seems to take about half a minute or less.
Also, Adobe has placed restrictions on exactly what the tool can be used to generate, so hopefully the internet trolls will find it frustrating when making their ugly little memes attacking whatever has triggered them.

A couple of examples of what the new feature can do in my very less than skilled hands:

the first is a random truck photographed in a parking lot:



And using Generative Fill to put it someplace more truckish. I told the program to put it in a construction site.



Next is a picture of my truck, also in a parking lot:



And, using Generative Fill, I told it to park my truck on a logging road.



And yes, that's a Cummins badge on my truck.

And finally, an image I shot a couple of years ago in a park near where I live, and a couple of different versions:

This is as shot with no edits:



and an edit where I placed her in a nicer scene:



And another scene, this time I made the dog a little cooler:



This is still the Beta version of Photoshop, and I have found that over the past couple of weeks since I started playing around with the tool that it has gotten better, so it is still a work in progress as they refine the algorithm.

Some will see this as a giant step backwards for photography, and in many ways it is. Why bother going somewhere nice when you can shoot your subject in front of a blank background and just put it wherever you like? Some will see it as a very powerful creative tool.

Either way, it's here to stay for better or worse.

[gatorguy]

As we all know, artificial intelligence has become a thing. I suspect by now it is used in some form or another for every image shot with a newer cell phone camera.
That AI technology is now moving into the realm of commonality with the introduction of Generative Fill with Adobe Photoshop. Anyone who is on the Adobe Creative Cloud rental program can download the Beta version of Photoshop and very easily (I think perhaps too easily) create images from practically nothing.

The way it works is you load your image into Photoshop, select the subject and refine the selection as needed, then select the inverse and go to the Edit tab and select Generative Fill from the dropdown. This will open a dialog box where you tell the program what sort of fill you want for your background.
Click generate and Adobe creates 3 backgrounds and superimposes your image onto it. If you don't like what you see, pick the one that you like the most and do it again (and again) until the software comes up with something you like.
And that's all there is to it.
It can also be used to remove things from the image by lassoing the distracting elements and clicking on generative fill without entering anything. The program will then fill that area with what it thinks would be there behind whatever has been selected.
It can also be used to add elements to an image by lassoing an area of the image and when the dialog box opens, telling the program what you want as a fill.
The latter is something of a crap shoot at this point in time.

The processing is done on an Adobe server, so how fast the image generation works is going to be dependant on one's internet connection. An image off the 40MP XT-1 seems to take about half a minute or less.
Also, Adobe has placed restrictions on exactly what the tool can be used to generate, so hopefully the internet trolls will find it frustrating when making their ugly little memes attacking whatever has triggered them.

A couple of examples of what the new feature can do in my very less than skilled hands:

the first is a random truck photographed in a parking lot:



And using Generative Fill to put it someplace more truckish. I told the program to put it in a construction site.



Next is a picture of my truck, also in a parking lot:



And, using Generative Fill, I told it to park my truck on a logging road.



And yes, that's a Cummins badge on my truck.

And finally, an image I shot a couple of years ago in a park near where I live, and a couple of different versions:

This is as shot with no edits:



and an edit where I placed her in a nicer scene:



And another scene, this time I made the dog a little cooler:



This is still the Beta version of Photoshop, and I have found that over the past couple of weeks since I started playing around with the tool that it has gotten better, so it is still a work in progress as they refine the algorithm.

Some will see this as a giant step backwards for photography, and in many ways it is. Why bother going somewhere nice when you can shoot your subject in front of a blank background and just put it wherever you like? Some will see it as a very powerful creative tool.

Either way, it's here to stay for better or worse.

Thanks for starting this thread Bill, and coupling it with perfect examples of what it's about. This is a discussion I'll be eagerly following.

[Wheatfield]

Here's something a little more complicated, it took me about 5 minutes:

The original:



And something a little more fanciful:



I took the original image and selected the background area and the sky over the walkway and told Photoshop to generate an ocean scene.
I then lassoed a section of what had been created and told it to put a cruise ship there.

[Kevin B123]

It is pretty scary now. You can't trust any image you see and any "normal" image will start to look pedestrian

[Dartmoor Dave]

Scary stuff. In the past I've never agreed with the "straight from the camera jpeg" brigade, but lately I'm starting to wonder if they might be right. Except that it won't be long before even proper cameras are applying AI to their jpegs like phones already do.

At least I'm safe in that I only shoot for my own pleasure, so as long as I know that my own photos aren't fakes that's all that really matters. I'm already way beyond the point where I'll consider a photograph taken by another person to be any sort of evidence of any actual reality.

Maybe it's time to go back to shooting slides.

[nosliwmit]

I find it a bit frightening too. With photos it’s mostly harmless fun but how will we trust photographic evidence of crimes etc. in the future? I think AI will reinvigorate interest in film cameras because you can’t fake it (until you scan it, I suppose…).

[luftfluss]

Next is a picture of my truck, also in a parking lot:



And, using Generative Fill, I told it to park my truck on a logging road.



And yes, that's a Cummins badge on my truck.

Sorry to see that Generative Fill damaged the rear bumper of your truck. Maybe when you get it repaired you can send the bill to Adobe.

[Serkevan]

At least I'm safe in that I only shoot for my own pleasure, so as long as I know that my own photos aren't fakes that's all that really matters.

Cheers to this, Dave. When I shoot it's because I enjoy not only the result, but also the process - from the gears grinding trying to find a good composition to letting the Satobi profile work its magic on the K-1 because I'm lazy and don't wanna open RawTherapee (at least most of the time ).

[FozzFoster]

very interesting to see the shadow under the truck.
Impressively detailed.
Thanks for sharing.

[BigMackCam]

Maybe it's time to go back to shooting slides.

You know it makes sense

Of course, any digitised version of your film images could still be manipulated in AI-capable software... There's really no escape

I really don't know where I stand on AI image manipulation. I guess so long as the photographer is honest about the use of it (as in Bill's opening post) then it's as valid artistically as any other kind of editing. I just wish I could be more confident that all enthusiast and professional photographers will be so honest, or even feel they ought to be.

I don't share many photos online, but when I do, I've been honest about any serious manipulation - editing out telegraph poles and wires, sky replacement, compositing to remove people in busy locations etc. (as a general rule, I'm not keen on that kind of editing, even pre-AI, and have only done it very rarely)... but then, I feel like a bit of a hypocrite as I routinely carry out spot replacment / healing to get rid of dust spots, bits of litter, a distant bird in an otherwise clear sky, that sort of thing - which results in better-looking but not entirely honest representations of what I actually captured; yet I don't explicitly mention those when I post a photo... So I really don't know... I'm rather conflicted and confused on what I personally find ethical in manipulation of a digital (or digitised) photo presented as such, and I suspect folks differ greatly on the matter. One thing's for sure - whilst Bill's examples show there are real creative uses for AI image manipulation, at this level I'm certain they've crossed over from being photographic works to composite digital art works...

...at least, I think I'm certain

[Wheatfield]

Sorry to see that Generative Fill damaged the rear bumper of your truck. Maybe when you get it repaired you can send the bill to Adobe.

That's the unskilled part of my use of Photoshop. I didn't get a clean selection and didn't bother to fix it prior to the fill routine. On other words, user error, not a program fault.

[Kiwizinho]

Some will see this as a giant step backwards for photography, and in many ways it is. Why bother going somewhere nice when you can shoot your subject in front of a blank background and just put it wherever you like? Some will see it as a very powerful creative tool.

People have been doing this kind of thing with Photoshop for years to the point 'Photoshopped' has become a verb, just it's easier now, and instead of having to shoot the individual components of a composite image yourself, or obtain stock images for the parts you didn't shoot yourself, you can now type in a prompt for what you want.

I think what this will do is lower the skill level and staffing requirements for creative agencies, as instead of having highly skilled Photoshop creatives, it may be possible to combine a graphic designer and copyrighter role in one if the copyrighter can generate effective prompts for Photoshop.

With ChatGPT of course the reverse is also possible where a photographer who might not be so good at writing can potentially come up with suitable text to accompany an image.

Photoshop has been around a long time, and it hasn't done away with photographers, and I don't think AI will either for certain genres of photography, but I don't think I'd want to be getting into stock photography in the current environment, as generic images of things are going to be increasingly easy to generate using AI.

I think the truck on the logging road is a perfect example of where real vs AI have different uses. For an ad promoting the back country capabilities of a truck, why drive out to a logging site when you can just use AI and a photo from the sales yard? If it's your own truck though, what's the point of a photo on a logging site if you haven't been there?
Images can be used to capture memories, in which case real is more useful, or capture imagination and present possibilities in which case AI can be useful. (As long as you're not trying to sell a tourist package to a place that doesn't exist for example.)

[AstroDave]

And, using Generative Fill, I told it to park my truck on a logging road.

Didn't know you had bamboo forests up there in Canada!

[Oldbayrunner]

Lest we forget though lightroom was developed as a cataloging software with Photo editing capabilities, Photoshop is and has been developed primarily a graphics software. Composited photo imaging combined with graphics has been around for awhile now so Photoshop is and has been over the years improving on that capability. Both software still do photo retouching exceptionally well so it is up to the user how they want to use the software.

[c.a.m]

Interesting examples.

I think my camera club will need to update its rules governing 'image competitions' -- both to provide opportunities for members to submit 'digital art' based on photographs, and to bound what is allowed in traditional photo submissions. It's a tricky issue with a wide grey zone.

- Craig