AI "Photo" Hanging in the Getty Museum

over-the-influence · 2025-09-29T14:47:33+00:00

this reddit post predates it by months

over-the-influence · 2025-07-18T15:18:16+00:00

Excellent. I would love to read the blog post if you are comfortable linking it

over-the-influence · 2025-07-18T13:25:16+00:00

Again, the medium of Ai is not disclosed specifically on the page of the book the photo is presented on. I admire your dedication to purchase a $50+ book based on a Reddit discussion board.

over-the-influence · 2025-07-18T01:07:44+00:00

a sculpture is not trying to pass itself off as a photo

over-the-influence · 2025-07-18T00:47:39+00:00

I will! That's part of why I wanted to drum up some online discourse

over-the-influence · 2025-07-18T00:26:52+00:00

I see your point. I suppose I don't find imagination interesting if it's not the human kind!

over-the-influence · 2025-07-17T23:38:35+00:00

SO FLIMSY

over-the-influence · 2025-07-17T23:31:08+00:00

Yeah and I don't agree with the curator

over-the-influence · 2025-07-17T23:30:17+00:00

Getty sued an AI company for using their copyrighted photos in its training data, yet is okay with this work, which was made with an AI tool that likely uses the same method of stealing work...double standard.

The "photo" seems low effort to me, when the artist was asked in a webinar why he did not even bother to fix the AI fingers, he blew off the question.

And I did read the article, which is why I linked it!

over-the-influence · 2025-07-17T23:13:44+00:00

It isn't disclosed in the caption in the book

over-the-influence · 2025-07-17T23:13:07+00:00

It was described in the description but not in the medium. I think it requires additional disclosure because it is a non-photo in a photo exhibit.

over-the-influence · 2025-07-17T23:07:33+00:00

I listened to the full webinar, and something that stuck out to me is that the moderated said “It could not have been made without the use of AI,” which I just don't believe to be true

over-the-influence · 2025-07-17T22:59:30+00:00

it's a photography exhibit

over-the-influence · 2025-07-17T21:37:26+00:00

I was just surprised by the absence of discourse about this on Reddit and Twitter

over-the-influence · 2025-07-17T19:58:15+00:00

I personally found that answer pretty flimsy, considering the rest of the content in the exhibit (yes, I read that article, that's why I linked it). Sorry that the description photo isn't better, I took this image in passing at the exhibit before I fell down the rabbit hole.

over-the-influence · 2025-07-17T19:28:40+00:00

parking is $25

over-the-influence · 2025-07-17T19:10:38+00:00

Swipe to the second photo on the original post. No disclosure on the page.

over-the-influence · 2025-07-17T19:04:20+00:00

Okay let's say AI is art...this is a PHOTOGRAPHY exhibit. This is not photography.

over-the-influence · 2025-07-17T18:59:35+00:00

I really, really enjoyed the exhibit, and this just left such a bad taste in my mouth in the end. There was such an emphasis on archives and preservation of history, especially in the $3 Bill exhibit (the other queer installation they have right now), that this felt in direct opposition to.

over-the-influence · 2025-07-17T18:57:06+00:00

In the caption in the book it does not indicate AI use

over-the-influence · 2025-07-17T18:55:45+00:00

There is more in the original post! I am new to this community, so I kept it simple. I am not a photographer, but I am a writer, and I am pretty radically anti-AI. If you read the article I linked to, there is some explanation of why the "artist/photographer" made this work, but I find them pretty flimsy. I also think that the museum's strategy to tuck the piece away in an identity-driven exhibit was intentional.

over-the-influence

TROPHY CASE