Introduction
Let me begin by saying that I have nothing against Artificial Intelligence (AI)—in fact, I use it daily in my work as a developer to enhance efficiency and maintain consistency. It’s a powerful tool that helps streamline workflows, assist with writing, and speed up many tasks. Honestly, I even used AI to clean up the grammar in this article because, let’s face it, grammar isn’t my strongest suit. But after attending a recent panel discussion with three photographers who use AI, I realized there are important discussions to be had, particularly when it comes to generative AI and photography.
The art world is beginning to embrace AI—Aperture published an entire issue dedicated to the topic, Getty accepted its first AI-generated series, and a local photography gallery even held its first AI-exclusive exhibit. “AI is here and it’s not going away”—I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard that phrase. It’s often used as a rebuttal to any resistance, suggesting that opposing AI is futile, like “screaming at the ocean.” But here’s the thing—despite all the enthusiasm for AI, I haven’t seen many people asking the question: “Is AI photography?” It might sound like a silly question with an obvious answer, but I believe it’s worth asking.Â
As photographers, we make that distinction, but for the general public, it seems everything is lumped together, and the line between AI and traditional photography is getting increasingly blurred. Terms like “AI photos” or “AI photography” only make things more confusing. During that same panel, one AI artist argued that the process doesn’t matter as long as the final image looks good, and added that only photographers care about this—no one else does. Maybe he’s right on that last point, but if we don’t draw a clear line between the two, as AI evolves, it will become even harder to distinguish between AI-generated and traditionally captured photographs. We have already seen AI images win photography contests, thankfully the artist came clean and admitted he submitted them just to see if he could win.Â
I do believe AI has its place in both commercial applications and the art world, but let’s be clear—it’s not photography, and it should not be mistaken for it. Even the AI artists in the panel agreed that what they do isn’t photography, and they were transparent about their use of AI. But when asked whether they should take responsibility for making sure viewers are fully aware that an image was made by AI, they dismissed the question and changed the subject. At one point, a photojournalist raised concerns about how AI might affect news articles, and one artist’s response literally made my jaw drop. He suggested that why not use AI for news stories? Imagine a situation in North Korea where a photojournalist can’t access the area to take photos. Use AI to generate images with prompts from the on-site correspondent that enhance the story, because at the end of the day, isn’t the emotion the story evokes more important than having real photos to support it? (Let that sink in for a second.) Essentially, this artist was suggesting we abandon journalistic ethics and create the news we want to tell, rather than reporting what is actually happening. Although this is just one person’s view, I find it hard to believe there aren’t other AI artists who share the same perspective.
Now, let’s get to the basics of what photography is, and why AI-generated images should never be considered photography.
What Defines Photography?
Photography is the art and technique of capturing light using a camera. Whether film or digital, photography involves interacting with real-world subjects, manipulating exposure settings, composing frames, and adjusting to lighting conditions to achieve a desired result. AI-generated images, on the other hand, do not originate from physical reality. Instead, they are computationally synthesized by algorithms that analyze and predict visual patterns based on vast datasets of existing images. There is no light capture, no tangible subject, and no moment being preserved—making AI fundamentally distinct from photography.
Capturing vs. Generating
A key difference between photography and AI-generated images is the process. Photography requires an active engagement with reality, where the photographer makes deliberate choices regarding framing, depth of field, and timing. Environmental factors such as natural light, motion, and composition play crucial roles in the final outcome. The photographer is capturing that moment in time using the three main elements of the exposure triangle: ISO, shutter speed and aperture. Whether captured on film, a digital sensor, an x-ray, or even sun sensitive cyanotype paper, these three elements play a part in how that photo comes into existence onto some sort of photosensitive surface. In contrast, AI-generated images do not use any of the foundational elements of the photographic process and do not require any real-world interaction. Instead, users input textual prompts that guide an algorithm in generating an image. The AI does not perceive, react, or capture reality—it reconstructs imagery based on statistical patterns from pre-existing visual data. While prompt engineering requires skill, it does not equate to the nuanced craftsmanship required in photography. Â
The Role of the Photographer vs. AI
A photographer exercises creative and technical control over their work, making on-the-spot adjustments based on lighting conditions, subject movement, and personal artistic vision. They also develop an individual style through years of practice, refining their techniques in camera settings, lens selection, and post-processing. AI, by contrast, lacks intentionality and decision-making. The generation process is dictated by an algorithm that does not understand composition, emotion, or storytelling in the way a human does. While users can refine prompts and parameters, they are not engaging in the same level of real-time artistic decision-making as a photographer.
The Artist’s Intent
Photography is deeply connected to the photographer’s intent. Every shot is a result of choices made in composition, timing, and technique. A photographer’s unique perspective and interaction with their environment are integral to the artistic process. AI-generated images, however, are the result of algorithmic predictions rather than lived experience. While users can guide AI through prompt engineering, they do not exercise the same direct, moment-to-moment creative control as a photographer. The AI system generates the image based on learned probabilities rather than personal artistic intent.
Authenticity and Representation
Photography has historically been tied to the concept of authenticity. Even with digital editing and manipulation, traditional photographs originate from real-world scenes. They document moments, whether for artistic, journalistic, or historical purposes. AI-generated images, however, are entirely synthetic. They do not capture a real moment but instead, create a visual approximation based on learned patterns. While they can appear photorealistic, they lack any documentary or evidential value, which is a crucial distinction between photography and AI imagery.
Ethical Considerations
The rise of AI-generated images introduces ethical challenges, particularly regarding copyright and intellectual property. AI models are trained on vast datasets, often composed of copyrighted images, yet the photographers who created those images receive no recognition or compensation. This raises concerns about fairness, data consent, and the potential devaluation of human photographers’ work. Moreover, AI-generated images can be used to create misleading or entirely false visual content, further complicating their role in media and communication. The ease of generating hyper-realistic yet fabricated images has implications for misinformation, photojournalism, and the broader trustworthiness of visual media.Â
The Future of AI and Photography
AI is undoubtedly a powerful tool that will continue to influence creative fields, including photography. However, it is important to maintain a clear distinction between AI-generated images and authentic photography. Rather than replacing photography, AI should be seen as a completely separate category—useful for artistic experimentation and creative ideation. AI itself cannot replace the experiential, intentional, and real-world aspects that define photography.
Conclusion
While AI-generated images may resemble photography, they are fundamentally different in process, authorship, authenticity, and intent. Photography is the art of capturing reality, requiring skill, vision, and interaction with the world. AI, on the other hand, synthesizes images without direct human perception or engagement. As AI continues to evolve, it is crucial to recognize and preserve the distinct value of traditional photography. So, let’s call AI for what it is – digital imagery, but it is NOT photography.
Let’s keep the conversation going.