Technology: Is Artificial Intelligence Destroying Art?

Preorder your copy of Luminar AI here: Save 10% on our full lengths photography tutorials with code …


Post Author: Fstoppers

25 thoughts on “Technology: Is Artificial Intelligence Destroying Art?

  • Fstoppers

    (October 30, 2020 - 5:08 pm)

    Preorder your copy of Luminar AI here:

    Save 10% on our full lengths photography tutorials with code "Save10FS":

    Gear and Workflow Recommendations:

    Our Favorite Gear –



    Epidemic Sound –


    Adobe Creative Cloud –

    Luminar 4 –

    Capture One –

    Support Fstoppers by shopping at:

    B&H –

    Amazon –

    Follow Fstoppers on Instagram:

    Follow Lee and Patrick's Puerto Rico Instagram:

    In this video, Patrick and Lee of Fstoppers talk about the role artificial intelligence will play in photography. Will automation in software like Luminar AI, Photoshop, Boris FX, and others allow photographers greater ability to create their art or will it bring about the end of classic photography as we know it? How will the industry change as the unique skills of retouching and post production move from highly skilled photographers to anyone possessing a camera and software?

    Zissou Moonshot

    (October 30, 2020 - 5:08 pm)

    True AI would be software that the user could talk to instead of moving sliders, with a name, a personality, and intelligence. Jarvis retouching for you.

    Wesley Harris

    (October 30, 2020 - 5:08 pm)

    Photography has a responsibility to be ethical with images. The result does not justify the means. If all images become fake what impact to human cultural self esteem will there be. If you blindly decide to further fakery on the AI level your decision makes you part of the gun that shots the bullet at the temple of each one of us. Artist have an ethical responsibility.


    (October 30, 2020 - 5:08 pm)

    AI on commercial photography is a necessity. It make the work flow faster and when things are done faster, you make money faster.

    For personal use, Wedding Photos, or just about anything that involve a memory at a personal level, using AI is very disrespectful and ruins the memory of that moment in time.


    (October 30, 2020 - 5:08 pm)

    If you thought the ocean of neon/pastel HDR 10 years ago was a hideous fad just wait until every photo has a dramatic sky and people with ping-pong ball sized eyes and physically impossible body proportions

  • ozgoodphotos

    (October 30, 2020 - 5:08 pm)

    !i think it has a lot to do with paying your dues. Us older photographers remember when a person had to actually learn about photography but today a 10 year old kid can make what used to be a beautiful original photo.


    (October 30, 2020 - 5:08 pm)

    The biggest issue I see is disclosure. As long as any person seeing an image or a video is warned that it is "fake"… We should be ok. But we all know, it won't happen. That's why there is discomfort. We're essentially creating an environment/world where we won't be able to trust most media, except for what we see with our own eyes. Great progress for artsy sci-fi unreal images. It might be the death of photo journalism though.

    Andrew Hamilton

    (October 30, 2020 - 5:08 pm)

    "Art stands on the shoulders of craft", Ai removes the craft, photography will die as an art as future generations ignore the need to learn the craft 🙁

    Dimas Deo

    (October 30, 2020 - 5:08 pm)

    If you look at people taking pictures with phones and posting in social media I think it’s fine… we’ll see the “rock effect” when billions of pictures of people sat on rocks with a lake on background (looking all the same) 🙂 but for the market where basics of composition and light retouch won’t be affected. You’ll always have McDonald’s and French restaurants. 😜

    hOnG k0nG fu3y

    (October 30, 2020 - 5:08 pm)

    i think the purists are pissed about AI, they go to some exotic location, wait for the perfect light and weather to get as nice photo. The Joe shmo rocks up rattles off a few pic, throws some AI on it and the end result makes the purists image look a bit bland.

  • c0re

    (October 30, 2020 - 5:08 pm)

    I feel like the digital medium is chipping away at reality piece by piece. We are at the point where people are only comfortable in the perfect illusory virtual world.

    We have continued improving our virtual reality in the last 20 years, but have done almost nothing to improve the real world.

    Dallas Roberts

    (October 30, 2020 - 5:08 pm)

    The genie is out of the bottle. Not a real fan. Well see how much we can now abuse the thing we all (most of us) professed to love.


    (October 30, 2020 - 5:08 pm)

    The primary of mine is that there is a danger in that it gives new users false expectations of what they can achieve with a camera, and when they are unable to produce images that can stand up against all the "Digital Art" on sites like Instagram which are touted as 'photographs'… I think it will cause new photogs to become disillusioned with photography. If people are comparing their 'out of camera' photographs with Digital Art that's a massive comp of various images into one, or an image that's edited with AI… people will never think they have any skill… because they wont know they are comparing their real photographs with Digital Art. The Secondary concern is that it will lead to people not actually learning photography and how to properly expose and balance exposures and such… because they know the software can do it for them. Digital brought an end to needing to think about your exposure because you could review instantly, and with modern Auto Mode on most DSLRs, thinking has all but been removed. I know of people marketing themselves as professionals on sites like Thumbtack and other places, that shoot in Auto. A few years ago I bumped into on at an Anime convention and they asked me "What setting do you turn on to get the background to be fuzzy?" IMHO, if you dont understand aperture control you shouldn't be marketing yourself as a pro and charging people those rates, because I feel it hurts the industry. If people see that the images they paid from from a "pro" they found online are no better than what they take with their phone… they'll be less likely to hire a pro in the future, and they'll miss out on what great photos they could have in their life because they judge the whole field by one person who was faking. Things like Luminar take even more skill and practice out of the equation because you can just click and go. While lowering the bar is great, it also has the effect of cheapening the value of the results because there's less effort involved. People equate value with difficulty or scarcity.

    Jeremy JS

    (October 30, 2020 - 5:08 pm)

    More angry painters… inception, photography annoyed painters. "OMG art is dead. Images without study, suffering, poverty and sickness (!)….and no more tweaking portrait features to make the subject (patron) feel happier. What are we to do ??". Now everyone can afford to make their own 'art' and we're agonising about them being able to change the light, the weather, body shapes, skin blemishes ? Are we not coming full circle ?

    Freelance Photographer

    (October 30, 2020 - 5:08 pm)

    This has been out for a while. Does a great job. It has one for the body and landscape and is budget-friendly. " PortraitPro "

  • CameraWork

    (October 30, 2020 - 5:08 pm)

    I dont want photography to become a fast food industry where you just push buttons and a computer algorithm fixes everything for you


    (October 30, 2020 - 5:08 pm)

    8:45 – this isn’t a tangent – this is a large part of the discussion for such apps.

    Steve A

    (October 30, 2020 - 5:08 pm)

    It’s a matter of diluting skill and effort with software. The difference between real and fake. We live in a world where falsities are acceptable… and that’s a really bad slippery slope.

    Deniz Kendirci

    (October 30, 2020 - 5:08 pm)

    even before digital retouch was a thing, most photos weren't real anyways.

    people in the photos are posing, and the photographer is trying to catch a composition that is extraordinary. they don't really look like that in their normal flow of life. most of the time, light in the scene is controlled, colors in the scene is controlled, clothing of the model is controlled etc. photographer controls everything he can, to create a photo which is extraordinary, not real. photograhpy is essentially painting. sensor is your canvas, lens and camera are the brush and photons (light) are the paint. technically photography is subgenre of painting. it's mostly an form of art, of course, there are documentaion photography, or hyperrealistic painting etc, these genres documents reality but other than that, it's art, so you control different elements to create a piece that corresponds to your imagination. whether it's done digitally or not, whether it's a series of complex actions or with the click of one button, it does not matter.

    Philip Vestgaard

    (October 30, 2020 - 5:08 pm)

    Well i think that the competition of photos is one of the most important things of a great photographer. If you look at analog photographer alot didn't do heavy editing but many of them is still very relevant.

    Abhishek Satish

    (October 30, 2020 - 5:08 pm)

    The ART in artificial intelligence stands for Art.

    Teetwo Dev

    (October 30, 2020 - 5:08 pm)

    This is just philosophical discussion. Humanity has never stopped technology. We've just adapted to it. Horse to train to auto, POTS to digital to cellular phone, still photos to moving black and white to color to digital, radio to bw TV to color to flatscreen HDTV. Whether one admits it or not you're already using computational photography and processing and AI. Once you take your camera off "manual" mode you're using it. Even autofocus, lens and body stabilization is computational reduced to a chip. Want non-AI, go full manual exposure and focus, on film. SLR sales are going down. Technology will just replace whatever is current. Self proclaimed "purists" are watching your show on Youtube via their computer or notebook. How ironic.

    kazuki nakamura

    (October 30, 2020 - 5:08 pm)

    I thought the guy on the left was AI.

    Reflections And Resonance

    (October 30, 2020 - 5:08 pm)

    When AI makes everything like portraits easy then it should be pushing photographers to be focusing harder on the subject matter they're including and emotions they're evoking with their images. Spectacle is easy, meaning in an image is something no AI can ever fake.

    The reason I gave up on trying to build a film career is because there is no point in learning all the technical stuff over and over when new tech comes out. It's more and more accessible all the time. So I decided it wasn't something I would pursue until 10 or 15 years down the line when I've focused more on life experiences and developing stories with real substance. We are getting to a point where you don't need to worry about how to film explosions or anything. It's going to get to a point where the only thing that matters is the story and everything else comes at the click of a button. The same thing is happening in photography.

    Giz Gad

    (October 30, 2020 - 5:08 pm)

    Matt is right here. Nice video and production.

Comments are closed.