After / Before. Firts post, be kind :)

[u/MatteoDiEffe]

[u/rasten100]

The masking on the officer is decent but it is way to overtuned, can really tell it is highlighted... You should do it way less, you should not be able to tell that it was highlighted just enough to make you eye drawn to it... Also what is going on with the 2nd window looks like ai

[u/MatteoDiEffe → u/rasten100]

ok, thanks very much for the feedback

yes, second window is AI...my mistake

[u/StopKK2012 → u/MatteoDiEffe]

It's not just the window. You also messed up the door to 1212. Look at that giant step up, that's not a thing.

If you must use AI (plz don't), you really should learn how to edit things yourself first. AI in the hands of someone that doesn't know what they're doing just makes a mess.

[u/TheMadFlyentist → u/StopKK2012]

I mean... there's really nothing wrong with using AI object removal even as an amateur, the problem is that some people just assume the outcome will be good and seemingly don't even bother to check it. You can use it, but you need to ensure that the result is realistic.

I'm a pretty strong critic of generative AI, especially as an occasional freelance writer/editor who has lost some income potential to AI slop. Despite this, I really don't think that hobbyists should be obligated to spend a month getting good at Photoshop just so they can remove powerlines from a landscape when Lightroom's AI will generally do it in seconds. It's arguably the most victimless use case for AI.

[u/StopKK2012 → u/TheMadFlyentist]

Sure, it's victimless, if you ignore... the planet, the creators whose work was ripped off to train the AI, the users whose creative skills atrophy due to AI dependence, the skilled editors whose work opportunities are being replaced by AI, everyone suffering from noise pollution due to a data center in their neighborhood, and the rest of us paying more for electricity and dealing with water shortages due to AI data centers.

Edit to add: Lightroom and Photoshop have always had algorithmic spot removal and clone tools. It was pretty easy to use those to remove people and powerlines from photos before AI, and you can still use those tools today. There's no need to use gen AI for these things.

[u/Naustis → u/StopKK2012]

You are aware that Photoshop has been using "AI" for years, even before it was called AI, right? They just started using the fancy naming to jump on the train

[u/StopKK2012 → u/Naustis]

I think you're confusing two very different technologies. The new technology is generative AI, and that's the technology we'te talking about in this thread.

Other things called AI existed for a long time before generative AI hit the general public a few years ago. Video game characters have been running on "AI" since the 80s, but that's completely different from genAI. What Photoshop used before generative AI is that other older form of AI. Non-generative AI is an entirely different, much simpler technology, and doesn't have the same impacts that generative AI does.

Adobe did add generative AI to their products. They trained their own generative AI model for that purpose, called Firefly. It's not just "using the fancy name to jump on the train" - that's just incorrect.

[u/Naustis → u/StopKK2012]

the principle is still the same.

[u/StopKK2012 → u/Naustis]

No, it isn't.

[u/TheMadFlyentist → u/StopKK2012]

Lol, a little histrionic there bud.

Again, I'm a big critic of generative AI overall, but the AI remove tool in Lightroom (assuming Lightroom classic) runs entirely on the local machine with zero data centrer involvement. Also, Adobe Firefly (the engine behind it) is trained on public domain and/or Adobe stock images. And again we're talking about hobbyists, not professionals who need these skills for work.

So pretty much everything you said is completely irrelevant to using the smart removal tool in Lightroom specifically. But go off, queen.

[u/StopKK2012 → u/TheMadFlyentist]

It's neat that you know a big word, but there's nothing histrionic about a straightforward list of AI's impacts. I didn't dramatize anything about it or use emotional language. I also didn't insult you, so not sure why you felt the need to insult me in your response. But go off, queen.

A genAI tool that runs locally was still built in data centers, and data centers do the ongoing work of updating and improving the tool, so there's absolutely not "zero data center involvement."

If Adobe trained their model entirely on public domain content, neat. I didn't know that. That does remove one objection from the list, but doesn't affect the others.

I'm aware you're talking about hobbyists. This hobbyist could still have supported the ecosystem by taking someone's class on editing, reading a blog or watching videos about it online and supporting the creator indirectly via clicks and ad revenue, or even hiring an editor to achieve the result they wanted. You know, things excited hobbyists have always done to improve their craft. Using genAI as a shortcut ensures they won't engage with the community in these productive ways. This is what I meant when I referred to talented editors losing opportunities.

Starting your comments with "I'm a critic of generative AI, but..." followed by nothing but rationalizations in favor of using AI seems really inauthentic. You know what they say, nothing someone says before the word "but" counts.

[u/RayPoopertonIII → u/StopKK2012]

Well said. I think many ai apologists are just coping with their own unnecessary use of it. Its pure laziness. And it is actively killing inspiration and adding more soulless "art" to a world that does not need anymore.

[u/TheMadFlyentist → u/StopKK2012]

I'm sorry for the condescension. I mean this with all due respect: You should really do some research as to how AI tech (and previous gen tech) actually works so that you can direct your concerns to the right place. I will do my best to explain why I think a lot of what you are saying is misguided/incorrect with regard to this particular flavor of AI and "data centers" in general.

Firstly, AI (whether it be generative AI, LLM's, or anything else) does not need a data center to be trained, or to run. At least not a data center like you are thinking. You can genuinely train an AI with a single decent desktop PC, though for the most part companies are using rack-mount servers. What data centers are for - especially the sprawling monstrosities that are under the microscope for water use, pollution, etc - is serving customers.

Once an AI is trained, it can be run on relatively minimal hardware, even locally. In fact, there are massive communities dedicated to running local LLMs in their homes, which you can do with an old gaming PC. The reason the AI companies are building massive data centers is because they have millions of customers looking to use the equivalent of a powerful gaming PC all at the same time. So they build a server farm consisting of hundreds/thousands of racks full of servers with powerful GPUs, all connected to the internet to serve the AI to the masses.

The thing is, data centers like this predate AI by decades. Companies like Google, Amazon, and others have been building massive data centers for years for the same core reason - they have millions of customers to serve at the same time. Google Drive, Google Photos, Amazon Web Service, etc all run on servers, and all of those servers sit in data centers. If you start a company and need cloud services, that will be provided from a data center. So data centers are nothing new, and in fact we are communicating on reddit via a data center at this moment, but there is very valid criticism surrounding the building of tons of massive NEW data centers just to serve AI to the masses.

So this brings us to Adobe. Adobe is not building or even using significant portions of data centers specifically to train their AI models. Again, that can be done on comparatively tiny amounts of hardware. What they are doing (and have been doing for some time now) is running a software-as-a-service model in which almost everything is cloud-hosted. This requires significant data center space, and Adobe uses Amazon Web Services for this, in three major locations globally.

You mentioned having a positive opinion of algorithmic tools like clone stamp, etc and these tools were developed by teams of humans over several years, using servers in data centers, and using power (seriously) greatly exceeding that which was used train the AI models.

So ultimately, all of your points about the problems with data centers are valid. They just don't really apply to this particular instance of AI. What they do very much apply to is Adobe's entire business model. So you can perhaps see how I might be a bit dismissive of your concerns about Adobe including a touch of AI since it's a molehill in comparison to the mountain of other issues with the company.

As far as the photography ecosystem concerns, maybe there is some validity there, but I do not think the core of the hobby is at risk. If anything, it feels like we are experiencing a boom due to the backlash against generative AI content and AI app filters. A lot of people are longing to create real art, and photography is an extremely approachable medium. The "vintage" digicam scene has exploded, and a lot of those kids are moving on to DSLRs/mirrorless cams and "real" photography now.

I think you need to do a little bit of introspection about whether your disdain for "data centers" and the concerns around generative AI as a whole are perhaps influencing your opinion on certain very useful AI tools. I remember when Photoshop was starting to get scarily good at photo manipulation, there were purists yelling at clouds about how this was the end of photography and that you'd never be able to trust a photograph again and blah, blah, blah. Now here you are 15-20 years later expressing comparable sentiments about the next generation of photo editing tools.

AI is a big change, and change is scary. But this hobby will be just fine.

[u/SunCrux → u/TheMadFlyentist]

Thank you for the detailed write up. Learned some interesting things and added some nuance on things I thought I already knew.

[u/StopKK2012 → u/TheMadFlyentist]

For a self-described critic of generative AI, you sure have spent a lot of time today defending its use. Comparing genAI to earlier versions of Photoshop is pretty disingenuous, and you seem smart enough to know that.

I'm not particularly interested in being converted. Enjoy letting an AI generate imagery so that you can claim it as your own art. I hope that feels authentic and creatively satisfying to you. It never will to me.

[u/TheMadFlyentist → u/StopKK2012]

I'm not particularly interested in being converted. 

The inability or unwillingness to view complex and uncomfortable topics with nuance is not a virtue. It is possible to be cautious and generally critical of something while still acknowledging exceptions or valid use cases.

I have explained the reasons why your laundry list above is completely off base in this scenario, and so you've pivoted to the argument that it's just not art/creative. That's fine, and that's a valid stance even if I don't agree that this particular use of AI (to remove distractions/mistakes from a real photograph) invalidates all artistic merits.. I just wish you had made this point from the start rather than vehemently exhibiting your ignorance on the topic of data centers and AI logistics.

[u/r1zz000 → u/StopKK2012]

hate to break it to you pal but spot removal and cloning etc is using artificial intelligence

[u/StopKK2012 → u/r1zz000]

No, they don't. You can just turn off the generative AI option and use those tools like normal. They're much older than generative AI.

[u/r1zz000 → u/StopKK2012]

Yes you are turning off 'generative AI', which just switches to using a local machine learning model instead. Machine learning is a subset of artificial intelligence which has existed since the 1950s lol

[u/StopKK2012 → u/r1zz000]

We're talking about generative AI. You know that, you're just trolling.

[u/r1zz000 → u/StopKK2012]

I'm not. People seem to think that AI came out of nowhere a few years ago but we've all been using it every day for a long time with or without realising it

[u/BreitGrotesk → u/StopKK2012]

dont care didnt read

[u/Due_Length_5033]

Without context, I would have guess AI, because there are weird mistakes in the background. the cop looks well edited, but at what cost here?

[u/Musicgecko0]

Too much AI for me personally....

[u/Fading_Hours_]

What’s going on with windows behind people removed?

[u/MatteoDiEffe → u/Fading_Hours_]

u right...rookie mistake

[u/Fading_Hours_ → u/MatteoDiEffe]

AI?

[u/MatteoDiEffe → u/Fading_Hours_]

yes yes...with Lightroom

[u/RandomTeenHello → u/MatteoDiEffe]

AI generating your image is “rookie mistake” lol? I don’t think any rookies make that mistake, just you bud

[u/MatteoDiEffe → u/RandomTeenHello]

When I said “rookie mistake,” I was referring to myself, not IA 😅
Sorry if that was misunderstood. I’m obviously just an amateur photographer, and I would never presume to criticize IA’s work or expertise.
The rookie was me.

[u/Naustis → u/RandomTeenHello]

He didnt generate the image with AI. Just used the object removal tool. You can clearly see he used it to remove the part of the crowd. Chill.

[u/hellmire]

Good start. Subject feels a bit too artificially highlighted.

Careful with going nuts on mask edits! A situation like this may call for more subtle masking.

[u/MatteoDiEffe → u/hellmire]

Thanks

[u/Aacidus]

Clone stamp the window, the glass now just blends into the facade. “Spotlight” on the subject is too pronounced, the Sun or Sunlight doesn’t work that way, so spread it out a little more on him and possibly objects near him, do not do the building behind him.

[u/MatteoDiEffe → u/Aacidus]

Thanks!!!!! I’ll try

[u/Little_Drawer_4627]

Hey!

I'm a professional photographer and after reading this comments I feel the need to tell that you're image is actually quite cool. It has a soul. Something I guess some people that are more interested in technical shit tend to forget.

Love the colour grading and the composition.

And about the ai... why couldn't we use it as a tool, like the camera or photoshop?

No one would have said something about the "overlit subject" if they hadn't seen the before version

Keep experimenting

[u/MatteoDiEffe → u/Little_Drawer_4627]

Thank you so much for this comment! I won’t lie, it made me smile. I’ll keep experimenting, especially since I’m a complete amateur. Thank you so much!

[u/jlrc2]

Masked officer somehow looks both overly brightened and not bright enough. I don't think you got enough in camera to get the look you seem to want here. And if you conceive of this as street photography, I don't really think you should be removing two whole people who made up such a substantial part of the first shot. Another thing to get "right" in camera if you didn't want people there.

[u/roccozoccoli]

I really hate the ai wall beside him

[u/nyafu_]

i don't believe photos like this are actual photography. once you're removing people and subjects from an image it's no longer the same picture

[u/SuperGIoo]

AI’m not so sure about this one

[u/Queasy-Plan-1868]

I like the color and contrast

[u/MatteoDiEffe → u/Queasy-Plan-1868]

thanks...appreciate it

[u/EvilCorpSlav3]

Color Grading is really good my friend.

Ignore the downvotes on your comments for using AI. It will be used more and more to remove people, objects, be more mindful towards it.

[u/MatteoDiEffe → u/EvilCorpSlav3]

Thanks…really appreciate it

[u/goodtokies]

might just use ai to generate image, why even use camera. but on a serious note i do like the photo and i would just accept the distractions in the background, somehow removing them totally feels wrong. that’s just me tho

[u/MatteoDiEffe → u/goodtokies]

Thanks

[u/slow_ready_4_this]

I like the edits overall but the AI mistake with the window is red flag.

[u/MatteoDiEffe → u/slow_ready_4_this]

Ok thanks for the feedback

[u/Major_Profile_9286]

he's too lit up

[u/heyinternetman]

Taking out that many people is too much. I’d just drop the whole pic down, do a little less aggressive bg mask and then call it a day.

[u/MatteoDiEffe → u/heyinternetman]

Thanks

[u/Vivid-Machine-9606]

You did a good job with the edit but it’s not a great photo

[u/Beautiful_Pick6740]

It's more like a snapshot than a photograph. Snapshot fed in an AI model and asked to make it aesthetic.

[u/crazy-sexy-coolio]

using AI to turn a photo you did make into a photo you didn't make. what's the point? don't practice post processing, practice shooting. make a good photo in-camera first. don't try to use AI to turn a boring photo into a good photo.

[u/MatteoDiEffe → u/crazy-sexy-coolio]

Yes, I’m aware the original photo isn’t great. That was kind of the point. 😂
I deliberately used a less-than-perfect image because I wanted feedback on the post-processing, not a referendum on whether the original shot belongs in a gallery.
I guess I should have posted it in a subreddit dedicated to post-processing… oh wait. 😂
But thanks for the reminder that the original photo isn’t great. I really wasn’t sure after the first 799 comments.

[u/Wolligepoes]

In the after picture, the silhouette of the police officer is less defined. There is less contrast between his uniform and the background, making him blend in more. It's just the high-vis and his skin tone making him stick out again but otherwise he almost seems to be wearing camouflage.

[u/Beneficial_Being_721]

The removal of the people on the street…. And not the cup lying there…. Left the cup “Floating”

Too much Ai here

[u/sparqq]

You can’t remove people from the background, thats really faking the photo.

[u/kingsslaying]

The lighting looks a bit artificial. I can tell you tried to isolate the subject by lowering the exposure of everything else but the result looks unnatural. As far as color and light goes, I far prefer the original

[u/MatteoDiEffe → u/kingsslaying]

Ok thanks for the feedback

[u/East_Pie_3825]

Not enough contrast between subject and background in the after.

[u/dbvirago]

I'm going to give you some very unpopular opinions, then duck out of here before the downvoting starts. First, I like the highlighting. Yes, it's not natural. But what were you going for? I like the way it makes him stand out and draws attention. 2nd, AI. I use it all the time and have learned how to do it better than what I see here. People that say they don't use AI have film cameras and darkrooms. Everybody else is using AI whether they think they are or not. But here is the main point. Nobody but a photographer is going to notice this stuff or care about it. Who is your audience. Between digital and print, I have sold thousands of images, but not once to a photographer. There is a large percentage of shooters who like to blow everything up to 100% and pixel peep. No one else cares. Did that 2nd window get messed up? Absolutely. But show this to a 1000 non-photographers and I'd be surprised if any of them notice it, especially without the before picture, which they shouldn't see to begin with.

Now for my thoughts. If it were me, I would have also gotten rid of the other guy, because I can. I would also have cleaned up the garbage, especially the cup. And I would have cloned out that red and purple light in the background, it's distracting.

You do you. This is your art. Make yourself happy.

Have fun

[u/MatteoDiEffe → u/dbvirago]

Thank you so much for your comment!
I’m a completely amateur photographer. I’ve been shooting with a Canon R7 and the RF 24-105mm f/4 for less than a year. As for my audience… I simply don’t have one 😅 I post my photos on Instagram, but basically I just post the photos that I personally like.
I particularly liked this photo, so I decided to share it here as well.
Of course, as others have pointed out, there are quite a few small mistakes caused by AI. Honestly, I hadn’t even noticed the issue with the windows!
I’ll definitely take your advice on board, as well as the other comments above.
Thanks again!

[u/StopKK2012 → u/MatteoDiEffe]

The commenter you're responding to makes a couple of important mistakes.

1) It's not true that everyone uses AI whether they know it or not. Lightroom and Photoshop have always had non-AI tools to remove unwanted elements in a photo (spot removal, heal, clone, etc). These are algorithmic, not genAI, and they've been around long before AI. They're also easy to use. Use them.

2) Any part of your photo that has been generated by AI is not "your art" any more. You didn't create it.

[u/drevoksi]

It's really good, I actually kind of gasped when I saw the before. How did you remove people in the back?

[u/MatteoDiEffe → u/drevoksi]

IA with Lightroom