For years, photographers have edited images far beyond the moment the picture is taken. Adjustments include exposure, colour correction, softening of dark shadows, whitening faces, cropping out uninteresting details, erasing flaws, and manipulating lighting in order to make more effective images. This used to be done through chemical processes in the darkroom; now, it is done in a computer.
But in the modern day, when artificial intelligence helps to improve the photo, everyone instantly calls the image “artificial” or “manipulated.”
What’s the difference between using AI and what photographers have always done?
It is safe to say that photography has never been able to reflect reality accurately. This means that even before editing starts, the photo itself is already an interpretation. It is the choice of the lens that sets the perspective of the photograph, while the aperture and exposure affect the focus and mood of the picture.
The arrival of programs like Photoshop gave photographers more possibilities with their photographs than ever. Brighten areas of dark colours, bring out detail, add contrast, enhance colours, erase distracting elements and make images look much better than how they were at first. Such practices became standard for professional photography.
In such context, AI-assisted enhancement is simply an extension of existing methods of working with pictures and not a replacement of them.
When AI-assisted enhancement is being used to enhance lighting, recover hidden details, sharpen images, reduce noise, fix colour balance or other flaws in technical sense, many times it is doing what photographers or photo editors did before using computer programs. And the goal of those actions was always to make the picture reflect the vision of the photographer.
Critics often argue that AI-enhanced images are not authentic. But authenticity should not be judged by the tool used. It should be judged by the intent behind the edit.
There is an important distinction between enhancement and fabrication.
Enhancement improves an existing photograph. It may correct exposure, improve clarity, balance colours, or remove technical flaws while preserving the original scene and subject.
Fabrication creates elements that were never present or substantially alters reality.
These are not the same thing.
If a photographer spends thirty minutes adjusting shadows and highlights in editing software, few people object. If an AI system performs the same adjustments in thirty seconds, the result is suddenly called artificial. The difference is often not in the image itself but in the perception of the tool used to create it.
Since the beginning of photography, there have been many technologies introduced that photographer have resisted using. For example, colour photography was initially met with criticism from photographers that claimed that black and white pictures were the purest form. Digital cameras were rejected by film fans. There was a claim about Photoshop ruining the whole photography. Now it is time for AI.
The question here is not whether AI helped. The question is whether the picture captures the scene and the subject, and the idea of the photographer.
AI-enhanced photographs can still contain all the components that made the picture great. The technology will not change the essence of the picture. The technology will only help see the details, raise the quality, and solve the technical issues that would otherwise take hours to deal with.
Photography has always been developing together with technologies. AI is just another step in that long process.
For those who claim all AI-augmented photographs are fake, there is something worth considering: photographers have always had a hand in adjusting light, tones, contrast, and perceptions ever since the advent of photography. The methods have changed. The concept has not.
Please remember that opinions expressed above are not an attempt to impose my views on anyone. It is only a try to promote a healthy discussion among reasonable people. Reasonable people will always have different opinions because photography is both art and technology. And there is always a place for debate about what is right and what is wrong. I would be happy to know your opinion and experience. How do you see the border between photo enhancement and manipulation?
