This week, I experimented with writing a factual post using ChatGPT.

I asked ChatGPT to write a 250-300 word blog post comparing Celiac Disease and Severe Non-Celiac Gluten Intolerance. What it gave me seemed relevant and factual; however, having a lot of knowledge and personal experience with the topic, I knew that some of the information was outdated and not quite accurate.

After attempting to edit the post for more accurate information, I found that it was difficult to input my own tone. I ended up spending a lot more time trying to edit the post than I would have spent just researching and writing it myself. Having to fact-check the information wasn’t super difficult since I had previous knowledge, but if I didn’t have this knowledge, I would not have known what to look for or what was incorrect. This can be dangerous if people use ChatGPT at face value and do not properly analyze the information it provides.

In the future, I do not plan to use ChatGPT to write anything factual. I do not trust that it has all of the appropriate information. I trust my own research abilities to be more accurate and, actually, a faster way to get information. There is no way to know where the data is sourced from with ChatGPT or how current and accurate it is. While I think ChatGPT can be useful, it is not a tool I would rely on. It did not benefit me in this scenario and made me realize that it cannot be trusted fully. Doing the work myself is the only way to ensure the best quality and most accurate information.

In recent years, the photography world has seen a significant transformation with the rise of Artificial Intelligence (AI) technology. AI-powered photo generators, such as Dall-E, have become increasingly popular, offering quick and realistic images at the click of a button. While AI’s capabilities are undoubtedly impressive, it’s crucial to remember that these tools, despite their advancements, are unlikely to replace the artistic vision and creativity of human photographers.

One of the primary reasons AI is limited in its ability to truly replicate human creativity is its reliance on existing data. These AI generators pull from pre-existing content on the internet to generate new images based on user requests. As a result, the generated content is often a blend of existing works, lacking the detail and originality that human photographers bring to their art.

The use of AI in photography raises ethical concerns surrounding copyright and ownership. The ease with which AI can access copyrighted images poses challenges for tracking and eliminating copyright violations. As technology advances, AI developers and photographers should work together to implement measures that protect the rights of content creators and ensure fair usage of images.

One potential avenue for navigating this challenging new relationship would be collaborations between photographers and AI programs, with photographers providing images as stock photos for AI to use when generating new requests, rather than pulling from all images online.

In addition, addressing ethical considerations regarding AI-generated content passing off as the work of human photographers is equally crucial. It will be vital to maintain transparency and clear attribution to ensure the credibility and trustworthiness of any images used in media. It’s also essential to emphasize and celebrate the value of original photographic works, reminding audiences of the irreplaceable role that human photographers play in crafting authentic and meaningful images.

While AI can be beneficial as a supplemental tool in photo editing, assisting with minor adjustments, it cannot fully replace the human touch in capturing the world through a unique lens. One way photographers can maintain their distinctive vision is by continuously creating new content, which is beyond AI’s capabilities.

Through my own observations, it seems that AI’s limitations in generating highly detailed and accurate photos becomes apparent when compared to specific genres such as macro photography or high-resolution landscape photography. The intricate details and artistic choices that photographers make in these genres set their work apart and showcase the depth of human creativity that AI struggles to match.

While AI undoubtedly has its place in enhancing certain aspects of photography, I think it falls short of fully replacing human photographers’ creativity and artistic expression. The uniqueness of human vision, the ability to capture the present world with authenticity, and the constant ability to create fresh ideas are aspects that AI cannot replicate. Rather than fearing AI as a threat to the industry, photographers can embrace it as a complementary tool while preserving the essence of their craft and ensuring that human photography continues to thrive in this AI-driven era.

A – Photo I took myself

B – Photo generated in Dall-E using description of the photo I took myself

C – Stock image found using the same description used to generate photo in Dall-E