No Stupid Questions

Looks like people are finally finding out they've been using AI all along.

Seems to me that employing the use of AI to alter an image should be labeled as "made with AI". It's not made by AI, AI was merely one of the tools used.

If you don't like admitting you used AI, just strip the metadata, I guess. This feels like something you should be able to turn off in your editor's settings, but I guess Adobe hasn't implemented that.

This comment was made with AI, as my phone's keyboard uses AI to automatically complete words, in a process strikingly similar to how ChatGPT works.

I think every touch up besides color correction and cropping should be labeled as "photoshopped". And any usage of AI should be labeled as "Made with AI" because it cannot show which parts are real and which are not.

Besides, this is totally a skill issue. Removing this metadata is trivial.

Artists in 2023: "There should be labels on AI modified art!!"

Artists in 2024: "Wait, not like that..."

As a photographer I'm a bit torn on this one.

I believe AI art should definitely be labeled to minimize people being mislead about the source of the art. But at the same time the OP on the Adobe forums post did say they used it as any other tool for touching up and fixing inconsistencies.

If I were to for example arrange a photoshoot with a model and they happened to have a zit that day on their forehead of course I'm gonna edit that out. Or if I happened to have an assistant with me that got in the shot but I don't want to crop in making the background and feel of the photo tighter I would gladly remove that too. Sure Adobe already has the patch, clone and even magic eraser tool (Which also uses AI, that might or might not mark photos) to do these fix-ups but if I can use AI, that I hope is trained on data they're actually allowed to train on, I think I would prefer that because if I'm gonna spend 10 to 30 minutes fixing blemishes, zits and what not I'd much prefer to use the AI tools to get my job done quicker.

If the tools were however used to rigorously change, modify and edit the scene and subject then for sure, it might be best to add that.

Wouldn't it be better to not discourage the use of editing tools when those tools are used in a way that just makes one's job quicker? If I were to use Lightrooms subject quick selection, should it be slapped on then? Or if I were to use an editing preset created with AI that automatically adjusts the basic settings of an image and further my editing from that, should the label be created then? Or if I have a flat white background with some tapestry pattern and don't want to spend hours getting the alignment of the pattern just right as I try to fix a minor aspect ratio issue or want to get just a bit more breathing room on the subject and I use the mentioned AI tool in the OP.

Things OP mentioned in his post and the scenarios I mentioned are all things you can do without AI anyways it just takes a lot longer sometimes, there's no cheating in using the right tool for the right job IMO. I don't think it's too far off from someone who makes sculptures in clay uses an ice scream scoop with ridges to create texture or a Dremel to touch up and fix corners. Or a painter using different tools and brushes and scrapers to finish their painting.

Perhaps a better idea would be if we want to make the labels "fair" there should also be a label that the photo has been manipulated by a program in general or maybe add a percentage indicator to see how much of it has been edited specifically with AI. Slapping an "AI" label on someone because they decided to get equal results by using another tool to do normal touch-ups to a photo could potentially be damaging to ones career and credibility when it doesn't say how much of it was AI or in what reach, because now there's the chance someone might be looking for their next wedding photographer and be discouraged because of the bad rep regarding AI.

Better title: “Photographers complain when their use of AI is identified as such”

The label is accurate. Quit using AI if you don’t want your images labeled as such.

But they did use AI..

or... don't use generative fill. if all you did was remove something, regular methods do more than enough. with generative fill you can just select a part and say now add a polar bear. there's no way of knowing how much has changed.

That's the difference between "by" and "with".

No - I don't agree that they're completely different.

"Made by AI" would be completely different.

"Made with AI" actually means pretty much the exact same thing as "AI was used in this image" - it's just that the former lays it out baldly and the latter softens the impact by using indirect language.

I can certainly see how "photographers" who use AI in their images would tend to prefer the latter, but bluntly, fuck 'em. If they can't handle the shame of the fact that they did so they should stop doing it - get up off their asses and invest some time and effort into doing it all themselves. And if they can't manage that, they should stop pretending to be artists.

I'm not sure of the complaint, is the tag not accurate? If you use AI to make something are you not making it with ai? Like if I use strawberry to make a cake would the tag made with strawberries be inaccurate?

Like I failed to see the argument, if you don't want to be labeled as something accurate don't use it otherwise deal with it.

Can't wait for people to deliberately add the metadata to their image as a meme, such that a legit photograph without any AI used gets the unremovable made with ai tag

This would be more suited for asklemmy, this community isn't for opinion discussions

Guys, is clone tool ai?

We've been able to do this for years, way before the fill tool utilized AI. I don't see why it should be slapped with a label that makes it sound like the whole image was generated by AI.

Why many word when few good?

Seriously though, "AI" itself is misleading but if they want to be ignorant and whiny about it, then they should be labeled just as they are.

What they really seem to want is an automatic metadata tag that is more along the lines of "a human took this picture and then used 'AI' tools to modify it."

That may not work because by using Adobe products, the original metadata is being overwritten so Thotagram doesn't know that a photographer took the original.

A photographer could actually just type a little explanation ("I took this picture and then used Gen Fill only") in a plain text document, save it to their desktop, and copy & paste it in.

But then everyone would know that the image had been modified - which is what they're trying to avoid. They want everyone to believe that the picture they're posting is 100% their work.

The image looks like OP cherry picked some replies in the original thread. I wonder how many artists still want AI assisted art to be flagged as such.

EDIT The source is also linked under the images. They did leave out all the comments in favour of including AI metadata, but naturally they're there in the source linked under the images.

Bad photographers complaining to be called out as bad photographers.