Over the last few years our social media feeds have become filled with content generated by Artificial Intelligence (AI) algorithms. For a lack of a better way of putting it; it’s taken the world by storm. In the art space we predominantly see it as ‘AI Slop’ – the abundance of low quality generative AI images we see every time we open an app. Things like the ‘white aurora’ and ‘ginger cat’s dressed in period outfits being standouts.

If think about my own photography, these type of images are about as far away from my own creative vision as possible. Landscape and nature photography to me, is about interpreting these subjects in a way that is possible within the bounds of the technical tools I have at my disposal. And my own brain of course.

But this piece is not about the ethics of AI. That is a whole article (or many for that matter) itself. This is about how we are having the discussion around how it’s affecting photography as an art.

How I view Photography, Creativity & AI

I think at this point I should make my views on AI clear. Just to eliminate any confusion. I am a firm believer in creativity and also in photography as a creative art. Albeit one that is bounded in the recording/documenting and ultimately the interpretation of what surrounds us as humans. This could be the landscape, wildlife, buildings or even the other people that share this rock with us.

Through our cameras we can choose to interpret the entire scene or even fragments of it. This is the first step in our creative process. Later on we may choose to edit our work in a way that is a natural representation of what we saw or even stylised (or edited) to represent an artist vision or feeling. At the core of this very over simplified view of the creative process is us. Humans. People. We use our technical skills and artistic vision to create striking and, to be honest, sometimes some incredible interpretations of the reality that surrounds us.

This is where I sit on creativity. My images are my interpretation of the natural world and are presented in a way that feels true to my artistic thoughts. Aside from a few tools incorporated into my editing software (AI Remove and AI denoise in Adobe Lightroom for instance) I don’t use AI to create my images. I am comfortable using the tools at my disposal to make small changes to my images to achieve the final result. Cloning out a sweet wrapper for instance, or even reducing the noise from shooting at high ISO. For my own photography, I am not comfortable adding AI elements (such as a replacement sky for instance) to my images. I want my work to have a natural feel to it and by using AI, it defeats the object and also serves to misrepresent the viewers of the image who may believe what they are looking at is real.

Before I delve into the proliferation of AI in photography, I feel it’s pertinent to address (not in great detail) the environmental side of this tool. It’s an incredibly complex and nuanced conversation, but ultimately it is a drain on our planets resources. This is especially true when it comes to energy consumption primarily linked to fossil fuels and water use to cool the vast data centres springing up everywhere. Data centres equal more computing hardware and as result more earth metals being extracted from the ground. This has a massive environmental impact in itself. Not to mentioned how prices of RAM, etc has skyrocketed due to the demand for these components. These are also considerations I am acutely aware of when it comes to my own use of AI.

Enter ‘AI Slop’ – a term the internet has coined to characterise work that is generally fully, or partly, created by AI algorithms. Some of these images are blatantly created using AI software, yet some are more subtle and take a keen eye to tell the difference. Some of the content is visually blurring the lines between something that is created my algorithms and images that are created through true photographic mediums. I, for one, am tired of seeing ‘fake’ and entirely AI generated content on my social media feeds. I think I echo the sentiments of many. As the BBC pointed out in a recent article; a backlash is coming. It’s an interesting read – read it by clicking on the link here.

However (and it’s a big however here), I do believe that people are free to express their creativity in ways that they choose. Even if it uses methods I wouldn’t use in my own work. Furthermore, I would prefer if artists were open and honest about the use of AI in their work. It would help massively to endorse images that are created using traditional photographic methods, albeit they are already made using skills and techniques to distort reality. A good example here is ICM or multiple-exposure photography, but can also be attributed to the images are composed in what we chose to include or exclude from the frame.

The decision to honestly represent the use of AI in images is ultimately the choice of the (digital? AI?) artist. In the same way that myself and many of the people I shoot with choose to present their imagery. I have seen some incredible images where artists have combined traditional photography and AI to create some truly mesmerising pieces of art. This is still creativity right? Should we celebrate it?

I think so! After all creativity is an individual pursuit and people should be free to express that in ways true to their vision.

The Online Debate

I am all for healthy debate and discourse over hot topics such as this. There is so much that affects us as artists but also as humans on this planet. If we can discuss these matters in a mature manner with dignity, then all is good in my book.

Throw back and few years and the discussion revolved around conservation of and the disclosure of locations where we made our images. I’m specifically referring to landscape and nature photography here. The message, in my opinion, was right. Many places were getting trashed and permanently damaged and yet ‘undiscovered’ places like them needed protection. In general though the tone of conversation was positive and discussions happened in a reasonably civil manner, with a definite educational tone.

Then came the debate about composites and the rise of ‘digital artists’. This was where people were compositing images together from photos taken a different locations to create something that looked real. Again, not something I would do in my own work for personal ethical reasons but ultimately choice of the artist. Some of them created some amazing images and were open about their process. Yet they were still called out for it. The tone was changing. It was becoming more aggressive.

NFT’s were next and the anger levels went up another notch. Enter AI – the tone has changed again. The aggression from some people has been turned up to 1000.

What has happened!?!? I get all the reasons people don’t like AI, and more so how AI is used to create bountiful levels of fake imagery we see everywhere and 1 million other reasons I can cite here (and some I’ve probably not considered).

But why are we attacking people for using it? I’m mostly talking about people who have used it in their creative process and, for the most part, been open and honest about how they used it. Only a few weeks ago, I saw how a well known photographer was pulled apart on social media for re-imagining his own images with AI – all this while being open and honest about what they had done. I get the downsides of AI as I’ve discussed already but this photographer was being publicly discredited in a way that could be extremely harmful to their career, not to mention their mental health.

While I’d rather see imagery that is more bounded in reality, I don’t agree with taking aim at artists for what some people perceive to be immoral artistic practices. Having a voice on the internet seems to be an important part of a photographers arsenal of marketing and engagement tools these days, but I feel that it’s important how that influence is used. Some of us have massive followings – audiences appreciate the work they see and also listen to the voice behind the images. Anger and aggression, sadly breeds anger and aggression.

The humanity in these conversations is on the decline. It’s no longer a bi-lateral discussion, but rather sides calling out each other in ways that can be extremely harmful. Sadly it seems to be the nature of social media these days. It no longer feels like a place where there is a sense of community and uplift of fellow artists.

It now feels like a place where artists are being put down for the sake of amplifying someone else voice. It’s a very sad reality.

Where do we go from here?

Honestly, I’m not really sure what happens next. I do feel that AI is here to stay whether we like it or not. Somehow we need to learn to live with it and the artists who use it as part of their creative process. I would argue that seeing complete digital manifestation created by training AI algorithms with other artists work is something the big tech companies need to address.

I feel that we need to distinguish what we are arguing about. Maybe separate the discussion about the abundance of low quality AI slop that litters the internet and people who are using AI as part of their creative process would be a good start.

Furthermore, the tone needs to change and add our humanity back into it. As a species we will never fully agree with each other, whether it’s AI, politics, the type of beer we like or whether we prefer cats or dogs, but at the end of the day we need need to conduct the conversation in a constructive and non-damaging way.

I believe in having an opinion and in healthy discourse, but I also believe that any discussion should be conducted with compassion. Ultimately we need to use social media in a positive way to discuss the topics that affect our art, not in a way that divides us further.

Stay true to what you believe, but treat others well in the process!