News & Events
\n<\/span><\/h2>[\/vc_column][\/vc_row][vc_row padding_top_multiplier=”custom” columns_gap=”40″ equal_column_height=”equal” padding_top=”5%”][vc_column width=”1\/12″][\/vc_column][vc_column width=”5\/6″][vc_column_text]<\/p>\nHow Photographers Can Protect Their Photos (and Democracy) from Generative AI
\nby Marshall Mayer
\nPublished by Peta Pixel<\/a><\/h4>\nSight was the first of our senses to be technologically shared in a world we did not witness with our own eyes. Photography\u2014writing with light\u2014has historically meant a one-to-one relationship between what was before a camera (defined as a lens focusing light on a recording media) and what came out the other end, created by a human. For nearly 200 years, democracy and photography evolved together, to their mutual benefit. We could agree on what we were seeing in an authentic photograph, and often what it meant. The photographic still serves as a hallmark of visual reliability. Photographs have often been the catalyst for social understanding\u2014and social change\u2014because we could trust what photographs represented.Photography can still represent \u201ctruth.\u201d But a photographer is the key to establishing visual trust. There is a well-developed but heretofore implicit ethic (\u201ctell the truth\u201d) to establish this trust relationship. First and foremost is, \u201cI was there,\u201d i.e., the photographer is a witness.<\/p>\n
But photography as we trusted it in 2022 no longer exists. At the end of that year, OpenAI released DALL-E, the first publicly available artificial intelligence tool that generates images based simply on typing a text prompt.<\/p>\n
Read the full article at Peta Pixel<\/strong><\/a>[\/vc_column_text]<\/div>[vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1\/6″][\/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”2\/3″]![\"\"](\"https:\/\/wwlight.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Screenshot-2024-03-11-at-15.09.56.png\")
<\/div><\/div> <\/div><\/div>[\/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1\/6″][\/vc_column_inner][\/vc_row_inner][\/vc_column][\/vc_row][vc_row padding_top_multiplier=”custom” columns_gap=”40″ equal_column_height=”equal” padding_top=”5%”][vc_column width=”1\/12″][\/vc_column][vc_column width=”5\/6″][vc_column_text]<\/p>\nThe Role of the Photographer in the Age of AI
\nPossible Paths Forward
\nby Savannah Dodd
\nPublished by Trigger<\/a>
\nIn Conjunction with FOMU Museum<\/h4>\nGiven the massive growth of generative AI technologies throughout 2023, it\u2019s important to take stock of the challenges and opportunities for ethical photographic practice that they present. However, one article cannot possibly address the multitude of ethical considerations that come with these technologies, which are growing in number day by day. Instead, I\u2019ll narrow the focus of this article to three objectives: to articulate the ethical imperative for photographers to broaden the dataset; to consider how to ethically make work about others using generative AI; and to problematise the speed of AI in a culture of productivity in which visual artists necessarily operate. While these themes may seem disparate, I will demonstrate how they\u2019re interrelated, and how understanding this interrelation can help photographers situate their practice in light of these emergent technologies.<\/p>\n
Read the full article at Trigger<\/strong><\/a>[\/vc_column_text]<\/div>[vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1\/6″][\/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1\/3″]![\"\"](\"https:\/\/wwlight.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/savannah1.png\")
<\/div><\/div> <\/div><\/div>[\/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1\/3″]![\"\"](\"https:\/\/wwlight.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/savannah2.png\")
<\/div><\/div> <\/div><\/div>[\/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1\/6″][\/vc_column_inner][\/vc_row_inner][\/vc_column][\/vc_row][vc_row padding_top_multiplier=”custom” columns_gap=”40″ equal_column_height=”equal” padding_top=”5%”][vc_column width=”1\/12″][\/vc_column][vc_column width=”5\/6″][vc_column_text]<\/p>\nFred Ritchin: Challenges and Possibilities of the Digital and AI Revolution – Published by Hot Mirror<\/a><\/h4>\nHM:<\/strong> You\u2019ve been working on efforts to establish more the line between AI and actual photographs. You’ve created an organization working on that.<\/em><\/p>\nFR:<\/strong> Recently we did the Writing with Light campaign with World Press Photo, Magnum Photos, National Press Photographers Association, and others. What we’re saying is, you can’t trust the camera, it’s no more reliable than a pen or a typewriter or a computer for a writer. You have to trust the photographer as the author, that what he or she is photographing is not heavily manipulated, synthetic, or distorted in any substantial way. That’s where our effort has gone.<\/p>\nThere are other efforts to put watermarks on pictures, such as that the camera has a cryptographic signature on it \u2014 where and when it was taken, any changes made to the image. But to me, if you start registering any changes to an image then you’re giving the reader potentially the right to keep clicking and find every change you made to an image. As a writer, if I do an interview, I’m not going to allow a reader to click and see the entire transcript. You have to trust the integrity of the writer, the editor, the editorial process.<\/p>\n
I think these kinds of cryptographic safeguards, for insurance purposes, forensic purposes, can be very useful. For editors, it can be very reassuring to see that somebody’s GPS says they were in the place they said they were, and so on. But I think above all, we really have to be able to trust the human being, the photographer, to do the right thing.<\/p>\n
\nby Marshall Mayer
\nPublished by Peta Pixel<\/a><\/h4>\n
Sight was the first of our senses to be technologically shared in a world we did not witness with our own eyes. Photography\u2014writing with light\u2014has historically meant a one-to-one relationship between what was before a camera (defined as a lens focusing light on a recording media) and what came out the other end, created by a human. For nearly 200 years, democracy and photography evolved together, to their mutual benefit. We could agree on what we were seeing in an authentic photograph, and often what it meant. The photographic still serves as a hallmark of visual reliability. Photographs have often been the catalyst for social understanding\u2014and social change\u2014because we could trust what photographs represented.Photography can still represent \u201ctruth.\u201d But a photographer is the key to establishing visual trust. There is a well-developed but heretofore implicit ethic (\u201ctell the truth\u201d) to establish this trust relationship. First and foremost is, \u201cI was there,\u201d i.e., the photographer is a witness.<\/p>\n
But photography as we trusted it in 2022 no longer exists. At the end of that year, OpenAI released DALL-E, the first publicly available artificial intelligence tool that generates images based simply on typing a text prompt.<\/p>\n
Read the full article at Peta Pixel<\/strong><\/a>[\/vc_column_text] Given the massive growth of generative AI technologies throughout 2023, it\u2019s important to take stock of the challenges and opportunities for ethical photographic practice that they present. However, one article cannot possibly address the multitude of ethical considerations that come with these technologies, which are growing in number day by day. Instead, I\u2019ll narrow the focus of this article to three objectives: to articulate the ethical imperative for photographers to broaden the dataset; to consider how to ethically make work about others using generative AI; and to problematise the speed of AI in a culture of productivity in which visual artists necessarily operate. While these themes may seem disparate, I will demonstrate how they\u2019re interrelated, and how understanding this interrelation can help photographers situate their practice in light of these emergent technologies.<\/p>\n Read the full article at Trigger<\/strong><\/a>[\/vc_column_text] HM:<\/strong> You\u2019ve been working on efforts to establish more the line between AI and actual photographs. You’ve created an organization working on that.<\/em><\/p>\n FR:<\/strong> Recently we did the Writing with Light campaign with World Press Photo, Magnum Photos, National Press Photographers Association, and others. What we’re saying is, you can’t trust the camera, it’s no more reliable than a pen or a typewriter or a computer for a writer. You have to trust the photographer as the author, that what he or she is photographing is not heavily manipulated, synthetic, or distorted in any substantial way. That’s where our effort has gone.<\/p>\n There are other efforts to put watermarks on pictures, such as that the camera has a cryptographic signature on it \u2014 where and when it was taken, any changes made to the image. But to me, if you start registering any changes to an image then you’re giving the reader potentially the right to keep clicking and find every change you made to an image. As a writer, if I do an interview, I’m not going to allow a reader to click and see the entire transcript. You have to trust the integrity of the writer, the editor, the editorial process.<\/p>\n I think these kinds of cryptographic safeguards, for insurance purposes, forensic purposes, can be very useful. For editors, it can be very reassuring to see that somebody’s GPS says they were in the place they said they were, and so on. But I think above all, we really have to be able to trust the human being, the photographer, to do the right thing.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div> <\/div><\/div>[\/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1\/6″][\/vc_column_inner][\/vc_row_inner][\/vc_column][\/vc_row][vc_row padding_top_multiplier=”custom” columns_gap=”40″ equal_column_height=”equal” padding_top=”5%”][vc_column width=”1\/12″][\/vc_column][vc_column width=”5\/6″][vc_column_text]<\/p>\nThe Role of the Photographer in the Age of AI
\nPossible Paths Forward
\nby Savannah Dodd
\nPublished by Trigger<\/a>
\nIn Conjunction with FOMU Museum<\/h4>\n<\/div><\/div> <\/div><\/div>[\/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1\/3″]<\/div><\/div> <\/div><\/div>[\/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1\/6″][\/vc_column_inner][\/vc_row_inner][\/vc_column][\/vc_row][vc_row padding_top_multiplier=”custom” columns_gap=”40″ equal_column_height=”equal” padding_top=”5%”][vc_column width=”1\/12″][\/vc_column][vc_column width=”5\/6″][vc_column_text]<\/p>\nFred Ritchin: Challenges and Possibilities of the Digital and AI Revolution – Published by Hot Mirror<\/a><\/h4>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/wwlight.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Screenshot-2024-02-29-at-17.08.59.png\")
<\/div><\/div> <\/div><\/div>[vc_column_text text_style=”small-text”]Fred Ritchin (right) in a panel discussion titled \u201cCan Photography Still Be Helpful in the World?\u201d with photographer Sasha Maslov and Magnum Photos Editorial Director Giulietta Palumbo. Photo by Emily Pederson.[\/vc_column_text][\/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1\/2″]![\"\"](\"https:\/\/wwlight.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Sacrdddeenshot-2024-02-29-at-17.08.35.png\")
<\/div><\/div> <\/div><\/div>[vc_column_text]Ukrainian Perspectives: Photography from the 1940’s\u2013Now, a photography and multimedia exhibit curated by Fred Ritchin and Ira Lupu. ChaShaMa, New York, April 2023. Photo by Emily Pederson.[\/vc_column_text][\/vc_column_inner][\/vc_row_inner][\/vc_column][\/vc_row][vc_row padding_top_multiplier=”custom” columns_gap=”40″ equal_column_height=”equal” padding_top=”5%”][vc_column width=”1\/12″][\/vc_column][vc_column width=”5\/6″][vc_column_text]<\/p>\n