Why Are So Many Photographers Playing Let’s Pretend?

I get it; AI makes image-making easy. But why the incredible defensive posture when discussing what it is? Here are my thoughts on that.

Photo by the author.

A recent discussion on a fairly famous photographer’s feed made me shake my head and wonder why so many AI “photographers” are trying to blow smoke. gaslight, and otherwise obfuscate what it is they do?

Even asking a question about their work brings a petulant attitude, and fierce anger. Almost like a teenager caught in a lie… “Nuh, Uh… You made me do it!”

Like many things these days, there is very little rational discussion. None at all in some circles. Like on the photographer’s feed.

So let me clarify my stance so you know where I am coming from in my points farther below.

I do not fear or hate AI. I use AI.

I use it in Photoshop to choose a subject, create a mask, or smooth out a background.

I use it in other programs to smooth grain, up-res a file, or create a color palette.

I use GPT to outline blog posts, research topics, make lists, and suggest marketing ideas that are often terrific.

I get suggestions for headlines, create customer personas, and find out how many small businesses are located in a zip code or county.

But I don’t use it to make art.

I will generate stuff all day on Adobe Express, Canva, and Descript. I am happy as a clam to use AI to create a sitemap, wireframe, and first-pass website. Meh. If a client needs an image of a penguin on the moon in tights, I will whip it up for them. Meh, it’s content. A visual.

It’s a tool, baby. And I learned a long time ago to stop being romantic about tools if you want to be successful.

But I look at AI “photos’ and wonder why they call it photography.

I wonder because there is not one single solitary commonality between the two.

Chart by the author

AI output has far more in common with digital illustration, digital collage, and even digital abstract constructionism, whatever the hell that is.

So why the push to make it “photography”?

The output looks like photography? Seriously, THAT is the rationale?

Well, here’s the thing, Bubba, LOOKING like something doesn’t MAKE it that thing.

Ever seen a Baby Ruth candy bar floating in a swimming pool? What’s that look like?

A magician doesn’t actually eat a deck of cards and have them materialize across the theater.

Lip-syncing ain’t singing, ya know.

You realize that there is no Spiderman, right? I know you can see him, but. like… it isn’t him.

They are all illusions based on the gullibility of the viewer and the willful suspension of belief.

Yes, they look eerily like they are real, but they are not related.

Here are the latest arguments I have been given:

1. “We already use AI in our cameras to determine exposure so what is the difference?”
   Well, that doesn’t even hold an ounce of equivalency even if we did “use AI” to determine exposure… if we even do that. Do we do that? Using the tool to help achieve a better result from our tools is far different than letting the tool do it all itself. Ya know.

2. “You use AI in your digital output, so isn’t that the same thing as letting AI create the whole thing?”
   No, no it isn’t. Not even close.

3. “It’s just a new photographic tool and you are too much of a Luddite to see how things are changing.”
   Yeah, no. See the graph above. It is NOT a new photographic tool, it is outside the realm of photography by a mile. Is it a new tool? Sure, but not photographic.

4. “Yeah, I get that some of the AI companies ripped off a lot of amateur and professional artists, but, like, isn’t that, like, what we do when we see, like, other photographer’s work and, like, get influenced and stuff.”
   … Yeah, what do you say to someone like who says something like that. NO, it definitely is not the same thing, and you have obviously never done anything even remotely like what you are discussing, or you would know it is a nearly brain-dead response. And, hey, weren’t you the same dude who was bellowing on about copyright a few years ago? Good times, good times.

5. “What’s the difference between using AI and someone’s stock photograph? You didn’t make that either.”
   …
   …
   Yeah, I got nothin’ for that. I cannot argue with people who know so little. It is unproductive for me and stress-inducing for them.

6. “It’s still the idea of the prompter, so it is their work, they created it and you should shut up about them taking credit for it”
   Art Directors used to send me layouts; it was still my photo.
   An editor moves words around during an edit, the book is still the author’s.
   A magazine gives a photographer the idea, “Photograph all the food trucks in Minneapolis”, but the images belong to the photographer.
   GEEEZZZ, dude, do you even know how this stuff works?

7. “I get stuff I could never shoot in the real world.”
   Yes, I know. Because in the real world, you would be in charge of making the decision as to whether you got the shot or not. YOU would have to pick something that you shot and say, “Hey, I can make this better.” Like any artist would. But with AI, the creator never realizes it got something wrong, it just does it again. And again. And again. You know, like a machine would do.

The day an AI says to a prompter, “Hey, hold up, dear. I know I can make a better than this. Let me try it again” - and say it on its own - is the day that AI will be making art. And, well, other things.

Because the word “better” is not in it’s program. Yet.

And it won’t need a prompter. The value of prompting will become as valuable as a bored ape on a boat.

See, here is what I think is really going on.

This new technology needs a base—a user base of devotees.

Like the already built-in user base of photographers. A user base that has grown for over 150 years.

There are not nearly enough people who identify as illustrators to move the needle. And the digital output train left the tracks with Gary V’s massive NFT debacle.

But photography… yes, YESSS!

A bunch of people who are already enamored with their tech, and their goodies, and so ready to be the cool kids on the block. They need to be the cool kids on the block.

So they call it “AI Photography”.

Low-information people, check.
Talentless people, check.
People looking to be cool without practicing or working at it, check.
People who must stay up with every latest tech-photo-thingy, check.
Dudes looking to impress chicks out of their league... yeah, a big check there.

So, yeah, I do understand the focus on adopting and bastardizing a long-established name and heritage.

I loathe it, but I understand it.

But I also know the above, so no one is pulling any wool over my eyes, or fooling me into thinking they are doing something special. They aren’t. They are just creating mountains of digital blah.

AI is wonderful at helping, but it sucks as the final artisan.

Because it is not an artisan.

For decades, we have made fun of and ridiculed the statement:

“I don’t know what I want, but I will know it when I see it”.

We said they were crass, unartistic earthworms who had no aesthetics and zero taste.

Now that very same method is all the rage for creating “Awesome Cool Art You Can Sell for Millions”… (according to at least a dozen Facebook ads.)

It seems that “prompting” has become a legitimate and well-respected thing for artists and photographers all over the world.

Fine, but I remember when all the cool kids were eating Tide Pods, so you’ll understand if I refuse to join in this little train wreck.

(And yes, these are all actual statements made by people claiming to know stuff about stuff they very clearly don’t know anything about, but we do give them points for attendance. I guess.)

---

---

When you are ready, here is how I can help you succeed.

Group Mentorship: a small group of photographers who meet to show images, work on their portfolio, and build their businesses with help from a wonderful group. Lifetime membership for one fee.

One-on-one Mentorship: You and me - working together in an intense 6-month push to get you on the way to over $30K in additional revenue. The work we lay down will help you increase and scale your business for years ahead.

The Creative Class: Expand your toolset and become a one-person visual agency capable of pulling in steady and repeated income. If you have questions, let me know, and I will answer them as fast as possible.
Discount codes for In the Framers:
Cohort Discount $197: $1000  |  A23CD7E72E
Creator Discount: $100: $197  |  2BA98E4053