Comment on Photographers Push Back on Facebook's 'Made with AI' Labels Triggered by Adobe Metadata. Do you agree “‘AI was used in this image’ is completely different than ‘Made with AI’”?

• ASeriesOfPoorChoices@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

  🤦‍♂️

  source

  • hperrin@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

    There are absolutely different levels of image editing. Color correction, cropping, scale, and rotation are basic enough that I would say they don’t even count as alterations. They’re just correcting what the camera didn’t. (Fun fact, what the sensor sees is not what it presents you in a jpeg.) Then there are more deceptive levels of editing, like removing or adding objects, altering someone’s appearance, swapping faces from different shots. Those are definitely image alterations, and what most people mean when they say an image is “photoshopped” (and you know that, don’t lie). Then there’s AI, where you’re just generating new information to put into the image. That’s extreme image alteration.

    These all can be done with or without any sort of nefarious intent.

    source

    • ASeriesOfPoorChoices@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

      [deleted]

      source

      • hperrin@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

        I literally described to you what people mean by “photoshopping” in the comment you’re responding to. Can you really not tell that I know that? Also, dropping the r slur will definitely help get your point across, right?

        source

        • -> View More Comments
• lord_ryvan@ttrpg.network ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

  So we agree cropping is plain and simple image editing, yes?

  source

  • hperrin@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

    Yes. I think the question was should it be labeled as “photoshopped” (or probably “manipulated”). I don’t think it should. I think those labels would be meaningless if you can’t event change the aspect ratio of a photo without it being called “photoshopped”.

    source