This happened one day in the window well outside my office. I got banned from r/pics for posting it.
-
I remember trying to warn people on Reddit that their anti-AI crusades were going to hurt real people making real art, especially surrealists, and got banned from a bunch of art subs for being “pro-AI” as a result. Actually, they phrased it in far more hurtful and inflammatory ways, like “advocating theft.” Apparently caring about not hurting real human beings making real human art is “advocating theft.”
I don’t miss Reddit. That place was bad for my mental health.
P.S. This photo is beautiful and I’m happy you had a mind to capture it and share it. Thank you.
Nah fuck AI, this shit wouldn't be happening if people routinely respected the rule so we could establish trust and benefit of doubt.
-
Right? It's a standard color pass. People acting like it has to be RAW/LOG to be real.
raw should be the default phones take
-
I'm coming!
We trained him wrong on purpose, as a joke.
-
I don't think its silly at all, even tho I think this image is real I still applaud the zero tolerance rule enforcement.
The reason this got removed isn't that mods are powertripping, its because AI is such a menace. Place blame where it belongs.
Hard dissent. First, Ban content not users. But even if you are banning users, just a quick detour through OPs history would have been enough to see it as a legit account, with a human behind it.. Plus, the picture surely has proving metadata, and detailed pixels.
-
We trained him wrong on purpose, as a joke.
You go that way. I'll go home.
-
Thanks for your meaningful, informed, and helpful contribution.
Of course it’s edited. Pro tip: every image is edited. Nothing anyone sees is raw from the sensor. It’s all completely arbitrary. Even people who shoot film show edited photos, they just offload the editing to the film lab. Someone else is doing the processing for them.
Even direct from a digital camera to jpeg, the camera is performing countless transformations and adjustment s before burning to jpeg. See film emulations on Fuji cameras for example.
The entire point of photography is to present to people a compelling vision that feels the way you did when you saw it.
That being said, this is basic curve and a vignette.
So you don't have the original anymore?
-
Thanks for your meaningful, informed, and helpful contribution.
Of course it’s edited. Pro tip: every image is edited. Nothing anyone sees is raw from the sensor. It’s all completely arbitrary. Even people who shoot film show edited photos, they just offload the editing to the film lab. Someone else is doing the processing for them.
Even direct from a digital camera to jpeg, the camera is performing countless transformations and adjustment s before burning to jpeg. See film emulations on Fuji cameras for example.
The entire point of photography is to present to people a compelling vision that feels the way you did when you saw it.
That being said, this is basic curve and a vignette.
Post original or its AI
-
Hard dissent. First, Ban content not users. But even if you are banning users, just a quick detour through OPs history would have been enough to see it as a legit account, with a human behind it.. Plus, the picture surely has proving metadata, and detailed pixels.
wrote last edited by [email protected]I wish being a legit account headed by a real person were enough to guarantee AI won't be posted, but Lemmy is a testament against that.
-
Sharing hardware specs doesn't need "because it was all I had" tho.
It answers the question of why they wouldnt use a professional camera instead.
-
Thanks for your meaningful, informed, and helpful contribution.
Of course it’s edited. Pro tip: every image is edited. Nothing anyone sees is raw from the sensor. It’s all completely arbitrary. Even people who shoot film show edited photos, they just offload the editing to the film lab. Someone else is doing the processing for them.
Even direct from a digital camera to jpeg, the camera is performing countless transformations and adjustment s before burning to jpeg. See film emulations on Fuji cameras for example.
The entire point of photography is to present to people a compelling vision that feels the way you did when you saw it.
That being said, this is basic curve and a vignette.
post the original, then.
-
Thanks for your meaningful, informed, and helpful contribution.
Of course it’s edited. Pro tip: every image is edited. Nothing anyone sees is raw from the sensor. It’s all completely arbitrary. Even people who shoot film show edited photos, they just offload the editing to the film lab. Someone else is doing the processing for them.
Even direct from a digital camera to jpeg, the camera is performing countless transformations and adjustment s before burning to jpeg. See film emulations on Fuji cameras for example.
The entire point of photography is to present to people a compelling vision that feels the way you did when you saw it.
That being said, this is basic curve and a vignette.
The interesting part about doing a vignette is that it shows up in ELA when you run it through any one of the dozen doctored image detector websites, the re-encode around the changes shows up in the data when it inspects them, this image has zero error level deviation.
That's interesting because it also doesn't appear as AI at all through the AI detection tests. But here you're saying it's actually edited. Maybe the CDN was heavy-handed enough to destroy the ELA. Zip up your edited copy and give that to the masses. The nay-sayers can run it through Fotoforensics and see it's manually edited. You have already passed all the AI detection pages with 0% AI probability.
