AI art has proven so controversial that we can understand why organizers of art and photography competitions are now extremely suspicious. We’ve seen examples of AI-generated images winning contests in both fields, with judges not realizing the winning entries were created by AI, and no contest jury wanting to do the same. error.
But could increased vigilance now work against traditional artists and photographers? Photography contest judges had to apologize after disqualifying a real photo, suspecting it was AI art (if you’re looking to create your own contest-ready work, check out our choice of best AI art generators or the best cameras depending on where you are).
Suzi Dougherty’s entry in the photography competition organized by Sydney printing company Charing Cross Photo shows her 18-year-old son posing with models in a Gucci exhibit at the Powerhouse Museum. Taken on her iPhone, it matched the “fashion” of the contest, and the judges admit to being “intrigued” by the image. However, they decided to disqualify the shot as they began to suspect that it was not a photograph but an AI build.
Given the controversy around winning AI art contests, I can see why they would be nervous. In addition to this, the mannequins give the image an eerie valley feeling. Unable to verify the veracity of the image using metadata, the judges said they decided to play it safe and disqualify the image.
In an Instagram post, the store wrote that AI is “a murky field right now, and until we figure out the best way to fairly judge these images, we just can’t accept them. “. But perhaps they could have probed a little deeper. After all, if they had asked Dougherty, she could have told them where she had taken the photo. Dougherty, says The Guardian she has never used AI image generators and does not know how they work.
Iain Anderson, the owner of Charing Cross Photo, has now apologized for the error. In an Instagram post, he says he takes full responsibility for the error. “I unreservedly apologize to her for the mistake I made in allowing this to happen; for allowing the manner in which the publication of her image inferred a false accusation of being Ai, when ‘in fact it was not; to our local community and to those of you overseas for any distress or offense this has caused.”
He added: “Before the fashion theme, the subject of AI was (and continues to be) hotly discussed in the photo lab. It was in the collective subconscious of the judges when the image of Suzi, one of 23 entries submitted to the fashion-themed competition, has been marked.”
Dougherty and the shop can be happy that the controversy has won the image and the competition more fame than it would without being banned, and Dougherty’s picture is now framed in the shop window and up for sale for $500. Dougherty’s photo of his son holding a mannequin’s hand turned out to be a very timely exploration of the line between reality and artifice (see our article on weird ai art for examples of how people have used image generators).
