Garry k wrote:
Fashion Advertising Industry as we know it today (photographers , agencies , models , makeup artists etc ) is my prediction

Simply because Clothing Designers can get High Quality Images ( for their advertising ) at a fraction of the cost

Probably more like 90%. It won't be long.

Garry k wrote:
Fashion Advertising Industry as we know it today (photographers , agencies , models , makeup artists etc ) is my prediction

Simply because Clothing Designers can get High Quality Images ( for their advertising ) at a fraction of the cost

Remember when digital replaced film? Now, AI will replace digital.
Learning how to create AI models and learning how to draft prompts is the only way to stay competitive in the digital playground of tomorrow.
By tomorrow, I literally mean tomorrow. Start learning AI now before you get left behind.

jonathanhallphotography wrote:
Photographers, artists, musicians, actors - all of these professions are in peril. People will have to adapt.

There are always some that master the latest technologies and use it to improve their services.  Often using the other related skills that they already have.  Such as a strong visual eye for composition, their extensive experience as to what type of images "work" best for a desired commercial purpose, etc, etc.

Extensive experience that they can combine with the latest tools, to give themselves that extra "edge"....

AndysPrints wrote:
Remember when digital replaced film? Now, AI will replace digital.
Learning how to create AI models and learning how to draft prompts is the only way to stay competitive in the digital playground of tomorrow.
By tomorrow, I literally mean tomorrow. Start learning AI now before you get left behind.

any edge from learning how to draft prompts was 12 months ago! yes, I would list that under prerequisite at this point. basically you let a different AI read a prompting tutorial, and let it come up with prompts for the AI you actually want to use. for example, copy and paste Midjourney's image generation tutorial into ChatGPT4, and ChatGPT4 will create prompts that will do better images than from prompts you could come up with. I've been doing that since last spring.

after the company realized people were doing this, they made it even easier and this is what ChatGPT4V does with Dalle3 (a Midjourney competitor) behind the scenes

I use multimodal AI many times a day

sometimes I think about making a new contract and asking models to be an AI version of themselves, but then I think "nah leave that bullshit coping to SAG-AFTRA, the actors union", the reality is creating new models and not incorporating a human at all

Roaring 20s wrote:
sometimes I think about making a new contract and asking models to be an AI version of themselves, but then I think "nah leave that bullshit coping to SAG-AFTRA, the actors union", the reality is creating new models and not incorporating a human at all

Including the human that crafted your post and does your present job. Be careful what you wish for.

Focuspuller wrote:

Including the human that crafted your post and does your present job. Be careful what you wish for.

its not a wish, its adapting in real time to something I already perceive. well, that both of us already perceive.

Roaring 20s wrote:

its not a wish, its adapting in real time to something I already perceive. well, that both of us already perceive.

For a prescient take on the issue: "Player Piano", Kurt Vonnegut's first novel.

"The problem is this: How to love people who have no use. Unlike much dystopian fiction, the novel's society was created by indifference, both of the populace and the technology that replaced it. As such, it is the sense of purposelessness of those living in a capitalistic society that has outgrown a need for them that must be rectified.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Player_Piano_(novel)

Focuspuller wrote:
For a prescient take on the issue: "Player Piano", Kurt Vonnegut's first novel.

"The problem is this: How to love people who have no use. Unlike much dystopian fiction, the novel's society was created by indifference, both of the populace and the technology that replaced it. As such, it is the sense of purposelessness of those living in a capitalistic society that has outgrown a need for them that must be rectified.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Player_Piano_(novel)

yeah, compared to other big automation advances and shifts, this time it is happening extremely fast, there's seemingly no time to retrain into the next thing

hence a greater incentive to leverage this stuff faster for revenue now, so that's a self-fulfilling prophecy in that regards

Adventure Photos wrote:
I've seen posts  throughout the internet with these cheesy fake people used. (Even in porn vids, they are showing up!)   Some are meant to be animae style I guess, others are really trying to trick you with a fake.   I'd say that AI has a long way to go to duplicate, replicate all the qualities of a real model.

you mean the ones you noticed.

there are similarities to having an opinion about fake breasts, the only thing polarizing are the big gravity defying bolt ons, while nobody notices the lady with the subtle fake b-cups standing right next to you, smiling and nodding along with whatever your opinion happens to be

Adventure Photos wrote:
I've seen posts  throughout the internet with these cheesy fake people used. (Even in porn vids, they are showing up!)   Some are meant to be animae style I guess, others are really trying to trick you with a fake.   I'd say that AI has a long way to go to duplicate, replicate all the qualities of a real model.    Sad that it may be gone as fast as some stated.

Seriously ?

Green Wave Photo 312 wrote:
I just like to believe there will always be a place for photographers that can really develop a niche and a strong client following and know how to make a business of it. Clients have some very specific desires when it comes to how their brands are represented and AI is just too general. Sure somebody who has a mom and pop coffee shop might AI some coffee image onto a sign and hang it out front, but Starbucks is always going to want to create unique imagery.

I think you're right but I think your reasoning, or example, is wrong. AI is not too general at all and can be controlled and fine tuned. While at the same time, demand for photographers or simply the entertainment of appreciating photography will remain.

AndysPrints wrote:

Remember when digital replaced film? Now, AI will replace digital.
Learning how to create AI models and learning how to draft prompts is the only way to stay competitive in the digital playground of tomorrow.
By tomorrow, I literally mean tomorrow. Start learning AI now before you get left behind.

It's going to be a different job description. Just like when photoshop became mainstream. Yes as a photographer you have to know the basics but high end retoucher is it's own job and often they aren't photographers. Clients will have visions that will require a mix of photography and AI. The best photographers won't be the best at AI and the best at AI won't be photographers. So they will have to hire both to work together along with all of the other aspects of the production.

I think as a photographer maybe you have to learn some AI if that's the photographer you want to be. But personally I would spend my time better by marketing or creating new images. Let the people who want to immerse in AI do that. Then if you need them you hire them and bill it to the client.

Garry k wrote:
Fashion Advertising Industry as we know it today (photographers , agencies , models , makeup artists etc ) is my prediction

Simply because Clothing Designers can get High Quality Images ( for their advertising ) at a fraction of the cost

I agree. I'm already seeing it.

When I started out on MM my niche was the Chinese wholesale clothing market. They wanted American models for their clothes and I had a nice gig going until 2008/2009 when every company I worked with went out of business.

Then I got into e-book illustrations and now that niche is going the way of the dodo bird as the authors can go to an AI, create a 'model' and get exactly what they want for pennies on the dollar compared to what I did.

Right now I have two e-book gigs pending. One this month and one in April.

I expect they'll be my last such gigs.

But there will always be weddings, real estate, and etc.

AndysPrints wrote:

Remember when digital replaced film? Now, AI will replace digital.
Learning how to create AI models and learning how to draft prompts is the only way to stay competitive in the digital playground of tomorrow.
By tomorrow, I literally mean tomorrow. Start learning AI now before you get left behind.

That's actually very true for commercial, editorial, and fashion photographers. As for boudoir, wedding and possibly family portrait photographers, they are pretty much safe since AI can't create the one thing we do. The experience.

Green Wave Photo 312 wrote:
Meh,

I'm old enough to have been a photographer through two "professional photography will become extinct" phases. 1) When the switch was made from film to digital 2) The advent of cameras on phones and now 3) AI will take over! (I might add in there somewhere when motion went digital people speculated clients would just pull stills from motion reels and do without stills photography... welp, that didn't happen either)

Sure, some of the low lying fruit got picked away through all of those phases.

I have some bad news for you. What I guess you are unaware of is that in the last 20 years in the conversion from analog/legacy media to electronic has decimated the paid opportunities for professional photography (as in reduce to 1/10th).  Not only are there now fewer than 50% of the printed magazines than there were at that time, the number of pages in each issue have gone down in the remaining ones been reduced by around 50%. Fewer ad pages means fewer ad shoots, smaller budgets for editorial shoots. The virtual elimination of direct mail marketing (catalogs) and the transition from fully produced concept catalogs to simplistic e-commerce shoots (figure about one e-commerce day eliminates about 4 days of full production shoots). All of those leading to downward pressure on rates and general devaluation of still photography. If AI doesn't kill 75% of professional photography it is because so much of it has already gone away.

Is this adding up to 'meh' for you? Are those the low hanging fruits? Or maybe you just don't see the big picture.

JSouthworth wrote:
I don't agree with the OP. AI will replace clerical workers and manual workers in factories, not creative people like photographers, models and designers (all of whom will be professional users of computer technology).

Tell that the the thousands of graphic artists, illustrators, copywriters, production/art directors, etc. who have ALREADY lost their livelihood (replaced by admins/clerical workers using generative AI services) in the film/advertising/production/creative/entertainment industries.
In fact, in Hollywood, a recent study finds that generative AI poses a significant threat to workers in visual effects and other pre- and post-production work in particular. In the study, 100 executives said that over 20% of all entertainment industry jobs, or 118,500 positions, will be cut by 2026.

According to a recent report from Forrester, it is projected that generative AI will replace approximately 2.4 million job positions in the United States by the year 2030 and will also have a significant impact on an additional 11 million roles. The report also warns that white-collar jobs will not be immune from this impact. Specifically, roles such as technical writers, research assistants, proofreaders, artists, designers, copywriters, and administrative/production positions are most at risk.

JSouthworth wrote:
While it may be technically possible to create and photograph artificial people in virtual reality, there are not many advantages to be gained from doing so. The cost of the computer hardware and software required will greatly exceed the cost of employing photographers and models.

You do realize that a subscription to Midjourney (or similar generative AI services) costs about $100-200/year? That's all you need to generate amazing AI images, videos, etc. If you want to claim copyright of an AI generated image/video (users are initially only granted a usage license), all you have to do is use Photoshop/Premiere to make a "derivative" version, and... voila!

JSouthworth wrote:
I don't agree with the OP. AI will replace clerical workers and manual workers in factories, not creative people like photographers, models and designers (all of whom will be professional users of computer technology).

While it may be technically possible to create and photograph artificial people in virtual reality, there are not many advantages to be gained from doing so. The cost of the computer hardware and software required will greatly exceed the cost of employing photographers and models.

Potential buyers for clothing will usually want to see the real clothes on real models rather than computer simulations.

Simplistic, oblivious, and false.

"..not many advantages to be gained from doing so."

Really? The billionaire class which, since you don't seem to know, controls pretty much all production for ma$$ con$umption, is perfectly content to rely on generative AI origination because there are no strikes, no healthcare, no benefit packages, no retirement obligations, no ROYALTIES to pay with non-human creators, despite your personal assurances.

The masses are already addicted to consuming "creative " products on tiny screens in their hands and soon strapped to their skulls, further devaluing actual human creativity.

"Potential buyers for clothing will usually want to see the real clothes on real models rather than computer simulations."

You are a bit behind, old chap. By several years. Still stuck in pre-Covid thinking? For your information, many and increasing numbers of consumers are MASSIVELY happy to purchase clothing via remote shopping, ordering, delivery, and an easy returns process. You should try it some time, or do you still insist on being fitted in person in your favorite bespoke tailor's on Savile Row? Hate to break it to you, but even that world is changing and you've apparently missed it.

SAVILE ROW TAILOR USES ROBOT TO PERFORM REMOTE FITTINGS

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1DFO-HDjHw

TO SURVIVE THE PANDEMIC, SAVILE ROW CUTS A BESPOKE STRATEGY

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/15/busi … covid.html

Focuspuller wrote:
The masses are already addicted to consuming "creative " products on tiny screens in their hands and soon strapped to their skulls, further devaluing actual human creativity.

Will it make any difference in your case, do you think? You clearly rely on other websites for most of the conspiracy trash you post in this one.

LightDreams wrote:
You know it's April Fools Day when J ("Rust") Southworth accuses others of posting "conspiracy trash" on this website.  Hah!

Captain Projection right on cue. Self-awareness not his forte. 😂

DeaqonJames wrote:

That's actually very true for commercial, editorial, and fashion photographers. As for boudoir, wedding and possibly family portrait photographers, they are pretty much safe since AI can't create the one thing we do. The experience.

There may be the experience but there also is the authenticity

I don’t think AI will replace any form of photography aimed at capturing real people and or real events - for the sake of personal memory including maternity , baby, portraits , weddings etc ( however AI will probably used to enhance such photographs )

JSouthworth wrote:
While it may be technically possible to create and photograph artificial people in virtual reality, there are not many advantages to be gained from doing so. The cost of the computer hardware and software required will greatly exceed the cost of employing photographers and models.

.

You are kidding right?

Garry k wrote:

You are kidding right?

About the cost of the computer hardware and software? No. And would you buy clothes through a website on the basis of computer generated images? I would want to see the real thing first.

JSouthworth wrote:
About the cost of the computer hardware and software? No. And would you buy clothes through a website on the basis of computer generated images? I would want to see the real thing first.

So …. I guess I need to bring you up to date with respect to commercial fashion photography . “ Expensive “ computers have been used in this process for a couple of decades now - as such most images created this way have been photoshopped in one way or anther

A decent AI mage creating program like Midjourney will cost you about $25 per month ( though it’s best to combine it with Photoshop which rents for about the same price )

If You are able to get t know some Fashionable Women - It might surprise You as to how they shop on line ( as well as the real world )

How You or I shop for clothes has little relevance

Garry k wrote:

So …. I guess I need to bring you up to date with respect to commercial fashion photography . “ Expensive “ computers have been used in this process for a couple of decades now - as such most images created this way have been photoshopped in one way or anther

An edited photograph is one thing, a computer generated image is another. The latter may or may not bear any resemblance to what it purports to represent, this is the problem from the buyer's perspective.

JSouthworth wrote:
Will it make any difference in your case, do you think? You clearly rely on other websites for most of the conspiracy trash you post in this one.

Do I?

From the depths of the virtual reality known only to you, name one "website" and one "conspiracy" derived from it.

JSouthworth wrote:

An edited photograph is one thing, a computer generated image is another. The latter may or may not bear any resemblance to what it purports to represent, this is the problem from the buyer's perspective.

it appears that you have quickly forgotten that your only claim was that computers ( and their programs ) made AI Image Creation too expensive

Garry k wrote:
it appears that you have quickly forgotten that your only claim was that computers ( and their programs ) made AI Image Creation too expensive

He hasn't forgotten he's just moved the goal posts. It is an intellectually dishonest tactic and a favorite of those that have had their arguments soundly refuted and a cynical attempt to change the discourse.

Shadow Dancer wrote:

Probably more like 90%. It won't be long.

Agreed.