A Note About Computational/AI Photography And The Purists
Photography has always been a medium that has AT LEAST two major factions. Those who see it as art and those who see it as science.
The science side tends to foster the ethos of the photography purist. They boast about how their images are straight out of camera, and that they NEVER use Photoshop. They complain when winning images in contests have had even minor correction in post. They think the “PURE” photograph should get the nod. You can imagine how much they dislike the new AI Image craze.
(If you are pursuing Photojournalism there is indeed some reason to pay attention to the purist approach, since you are documenting things to tell a story — but otherwise, in my opinion, there are no limits.)
I am not a purist. In my opinion (and yes I am entitled to have one) is that it matters not what technology you used to get your picture. If it involved a camera, it’s something you can call a photograph. It’s the PICTURE that counts.
Now that we have AI photos, I have amended my feeling on the above statement to say — if it involves a camera AND an AI image and the two are somehow morphed, or remixed or composited; it remains a photograph although I might call it “photographic art.” I’m still developing my thinking on that last part.
There is simply no such thing (in the digital age) as a pure photograph. Even the act of photographing things in JPEG mode (using in-camera JPEG compression) causes small shifts in the original image.
The people who take this purist path are of course, entitled to their opinion. If they want to make photography harder than it needs to be, I say go for it. Just don’t expect to win a trophy for it. Why? Because if the image is really great — nobody really cares what you did to get it — If it’s a great image — that is. Because in the end, all they care about is the final product.
I predict that computational photography (which is absolutely, positively here to stay) will become the next beachhead for the purists. I predict that AI Photography will follow. They will speak out against such technology as if it were anathema. They will try to make photographers who rely on such technology] feel bad about their work. I hope that nobody falls for this.
Those who revel in PROCESS (the purists) are rarely able to produce award-winning images. In my opinion (and experience) pedantry leads to poor photographic art.
And since I am all about the results, I will do anything I feel necessary in post to get there. (Again — unless I am making photo journalism or natural science pictures — then it is hands off.)
If you have this debate with someone who is on the side of the purists, they will invariably bring up Ansel Adams. Those who do so simply haven’t studied Mr. Adams’ work. He was a huge proponent of photographic art. Sure, he knew and used the science better than any of his peers, but it was in service of his art.
Don’t believe me? Here are some famous Ansel Adams quotes that prove my point.
“There are no rules for good photographs, there are only good photographs.” — Ansel Adams
“The negative is comparable to the composer’s score and the print to its performance.” — Ansel Adams
“Dodging and burning are steps to take care of mistakes God made in establishing tonal relationships.” — Ansel Adams
“Some photographers take reality… and impose the domination of their own thought and spirit. Others come before reality more tenderly and a photograph to them is an instrument of love and revelation.” — Ansel Adams
“You don’t take a photograph, you make it.” — Ansel Adams
“Photography is more than a medium for factual communication of ideas. It is a creative art.” — Ansel Adams
These quotes surely sound to me like Mr. Adams is taking the side of the photography as art crowd. He spent a lot of time perfecting the Zone System for just that reason. ALL of his prints were heavily manipulated in a wet dark room. If he had Photoshop, well I can only imagine what he would have accomplished.
CONCLUSION
I am NOT going to change the minds of any purists reading this, nor do I care to try. And by the way, I absolutely think they have a right to their opinion and to practice photography as they see fit. I am merely stating my opinions here to give cover to those who seek photography as art. I wish to encourage them in the face of what will no doubt be DISCOURAGEMENT from the other side.
I say, respect but ignore those folks. Let them form their own club with their own clubhouse and their own “rules” for photography. The rest of us can go out and make the pictures we want to make, however we achieve the final results.
After all, I am now a full-time toy photographer. There simply are no rules at all where I work :) Your mileage may vary.
Remember, toys are joy.
For a list of my toy photo gear and props go to:
bit.ly/toyphotogear
Follow me on VERO
vero.co/scottbourne
Roughly 90% of my photos are finished in Topaz Labs’ product called Topaz Photo AI. It is a one click sharpening, noise reduction, resolution enhancement tool that uses AI to see what your photo needs and only applies as much correction as is required and only to the areas that require it. Check it out at bit.ly/TopazLabsPhotoAI
