There's a lot of discussion right now over AI stealing from artists and killing creativity, but rarely talk of a solution. What can we actually do about all of the "AI slop" besides boycotting it, watermarking it, or whinging about it?
Photographers are collectively giving AI the finger by leaning into the beauty of human error, and I absolutely love this notion. The medium is moving away from the pursuit of perfection, and shifting towards authenticity, sincerity, storytelling, and emotion - something that AI cannot truly conjure.
A survey carried out by AI-heavy software company Aftershoot has found that 2026 photography trends are ditching sharp aesthetics and aiming to document real human experiences as the new visual language. Our sister site, Digital Camera World, has reported that analogue photography will be key in 2026, with AI still present but taking a more backseat behind-the-scenes role for faster culling and editing.
So, how badly has AI affected photography? To me, the evolution of smartphone cameras has caused just as big a hiccup (some of the best camera phones and best iPhones for photography are as powerful as my DSLR), but it has allowed photography to become more accessible. When you throw ChatGPT and generative AI into the mix, however, it begs the question of who would want to pay for photography when AI is more affordable and accessible.
Today, AI is being actively encouraged and discouraged at the same time, and I think for a lot of people it's confusing to know where to draw the line. I'm a photographer with a Master's degree in the subject, and I think we have to accept that it's here to stay. We can't stop people from using AI, and there's no denying that it can be incredibly useful for idea generation and managing daily admin.
But with that said, AI can't completely replace photographers, and I'd love to see people try to generate their own wedding photos, or recreate a sentimental moment, such as a child graduating, or perhaps a loved one's birthday.
Should AI be eradicated?
I personally struggle with understanding the ethics of AI (beyond copyright infringement and ruining creative careers) when we're told that AI uses dangerously high energy consumption and a massive amount of water to cool data centres – yet almost every major company (including heavyweights like Adobe) are implementing AI into software packages and creating personal assistants (Google Gemini) built into our smartphones.
Can AI really be that catastrophically damaging if everyone is being encouraged to use it? I'll admit that I don't see the harm in generating assets for personal use (I've been creating elements to 3D print), but I would never consider getting commercial with it.
I think the key to fighting AI slop might be education, offering tools to create higher quality outputs, and proving that nothing will ever beat the legitimacy of human creation, which it seems is the message photographers are pushing by reverting back to traditional practices. I'm definitely not against using a darkroom, and I'd take an instant print over an AI image any day.
The bottom line is that to document reality, you need to hire a photographer. The most important moments in life can't be captured through prompts, and I hope that authenticity and human emotion win the AI race in the end.
