Recently, I have been exploring AI as a tool for “non-human” photography. In this context, non-human photography refers to the use of technology to generate visual information without direct human involvement. An intriguing feature of AI software like Midjourney, for instance, is that it can generate realistic images relying solely on user input prompts. The software's capability to create is contingent upon the user's proficiency in accurately communicating the prompt. I have been experimenting with feeding the AI images from renowned fine arts photographers I studied during my degree, recreating their photographs without the physical camera. While AI-prompting, I provide detailed descriptions of camera angles, colours, and composition to assist the software in approximating the reproduction. Despite the advanced nature of the technology and public ethical concerns related to intellectual theft, AI tends to interpret rather than replicate. The output often resembles the aesthetic of digital painting rather than the realism of traditional photographs, allowing creative liberties in reproducing colours, compositions, and expressions. Ultimately, the resulting images are original, even though the reference is clear to those familiar with the source material.
This project serves as an experiment that prompts reflection on the role of photography and cameras in an era where these tools face potential obsolescence. The project also aims to challenge ideas surrounding scarcity, artist labour, and originality within the art market. In an art market where artists often feel compelled to emulate the work of art historical figures, the emergence of software capable of replicating any artistic style and generating variations at an unprecedented pace raises critical questions. What significance does art hold in the absence of human labor? Is our appreciation of art directed towards the human effort invested or the artistic object itself? note: Edition of 5. Can be sold separately or together.
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
