807
submitted 1 month ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] [email protected] 156 points 1 month ago

The turns! They tabled.

[-] [email protected] 142 points 1 month ago

Disqualification seems appropriate. If it is against the rules to use AI photos in a normal photo category and the winner gets disqualified for that, which has happened, and it is against the rules to use a non-AI photo in this category, then the person should similarly be disqualified.

Not sure if the person behind this actually made the point they thought they were? Because it just shows that being consistent in rules and disqualification is good and the contest was consistent.

[-] [email protected] 98 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

The stated point listed in the article was to prove that manual photography has merit and that 'nothing is more fascinating than Mother Nature herself', which he proved by winning the people's choice award. He didn't say the disqualification was inappropriate nor did he criticize the contest for inconsistent rules? It seems quite clear that he expected to be removed from the contest after making his statement, actually.

Personally I hope this doesn't become a trend of machine generation and manually shot/created work spoiling each other's contests.

[-] [email protected] 19 points 1 month ago

So, does that mean that AI photos have merit when they win photo competitions, as has happened in the past? Seems like the point he was trying to make would go both ways.

[-] [email protected] 33 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Sure, AI photos have their merit. I believe manual and ai generated photos are their own categories and can be appreciated seperately as such.

Why limit AI photos to being a clone of real photos? Push expression of the subconscious, the psychedelic, the eldritch, etc. Make something creatively unique from the photoreal, something manual photos would struggle to recreate.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

The monkey's paw curls....

Around hitlers dick

[-] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago

You're right. I'm trying to figure out what all the controversy is in this. I'm not seeing anything.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] [email protected] 66 points 1 month ago

EVP of Samsung, Patrick Chomet, recently said that "there's no such thing as a real picture". So this artist should object to the disqualification 🙂

[-] [email protected] 28 points 1 month ago

how can pictures be real if cameras aren't real?

[-] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago

Picture of a bird, no less. Nothing is real!

[-] [email protected] 14 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I'm also pretty sure the camera does use some ML algorithms in processing of the pictures, so it is an AI by today standarts.

[-] [email protected] 48 points 1 month ago

AI photographer seems to me like an incredibly bizarre title

[-] [email protected] 34 points 1 month ago

his entry has been disqualified in consideration for the other artists.

What artists? The ones who’s photographs have been scraped from the Internet with no consideration or credit to provide free artistic labour to techbros and companies?

Or the talentless hacks who think asking a machine to draw them a picture holds the same merits as creating the image themselves?

[-] [email protected] 12 points 1 month ago

who’s photographs

'who is photographs' makes no sense.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

Gottem!

That’s what you’ve taken away from this thread? A spelling error? You’ve got nothing to say on so many topics, except for the pedantic correction of minor spelling errors or word choice.

Argue my point, not my grammar.

[-] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago

HERE HERE!! Proofreading is the last retreat of COWARDS!!!!

[-] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago
[-] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

“Nuance matters. Brute.”

If we are playing that game.

[-] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago

u ran my comment thru an ai autocapitalizer whoooptie whoooop, brute

[-] [email protected] 22 points 1 month ago

Man bites dog.

[-] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I mean I feel like this is the same as entering a soap box derby and coming to the race with a gas-powered go-kart.

[-] [email protected] -1 points 1 month ago

His statement is so weird. No one said there is no merit in "real" artists. AI just makes it easier for non artists to add pictures into their projects. Like every industrial revolution it just takes work off of us.

[-] [email protected] 19 points 1 month ago

I would love for robots to take over the boring jobs like making art, I think it's a great advancement that our overlords have engineered for us. Now we can get back to things we really enjoy like shoveling shit and suffocating in mines.

Thank god they didn't make robots more useful for everyday life tasks, freeing up a portion of the day. I have a hard enough time deciding what to do with my free 25 minutes every week as it is.

Got to go, my mining shift at the shit factor.... Never mind they made robots to mine shit now, guess I'll go starve to death in line waiting for free bread crumbs.

[-] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Software to "make" 2d artistic images is much easier to develop than robots to do household tasks. Not that we don't see advancements there either, for example robot vacuums are becoming more commonplace.

[-] freeman -1 points 1 month ago

Robots and automation have been cutting 'mundane' jobs for literal centuries.

Artists are frankly out of touch and callous when they imply other people's jobs should be replaced.

[-] [email protected] -4 points 1 month ago

Or you could just... learn to draw? Sure it takes a while to learn, sure it takes a lot of time to make things, but it genuinely is worth it for the journey alone.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 12 Jun 2024
807 points (98.7% liked)

Not The Onion

11114 readers
703 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Comments must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS