Should AI-generated pictures win “Creative” categories of photo contests?

Apr 7, 2023

Dunja Djudjic

Dunja Djudjic is a multi-talented artist based in Novi Sad, Serbia. With 15 years of experience as a photographer, she specializes in capturing the beauty of nature, travel, and fine art. In addition to her photography, Dunja also expresses her creativity through writing, embroidery, and jewelry making.

Should AI-generated pictures win “Creative” categories of photo contests?

Apr 7, 2023

Dunja Djudjic

Dunja Djudjic is a multi-talented artist based in Novi Sad, Serbia. With 15 years of experience as a photographer, she specializes in capturing the beauty of nature, travel, and fine art. In addition to her photography, Dunja also expresses her creativity through writing, embroidery, and jewelry making.

Join the Discussion

Share on:

Sony World Photography Awards recently published the winners and shortlists of its Open competition. The photos are absolutely stunning, but there’s just one problem – the Creative category winner isn’t a photo at all. The winning image resembles a portrait photo from the 1940s, with a characteristic vintage, nostalgic feel. But on a closer look, you can spot the weird hands – one of the biggest weaknesses of text-to-image generators.

This case sparked some serious debate in the photo community. It also made me think about AI and its place in photography. Should AI-generated art enter and win photography contests? Is it fair? Are there legal issues? I wanted to discuss all of this and more in this article.

[Related reading: Why AI is a threat to the photography industry]

The backstory

The winner of the Creative category of this year’s Sony World Photography Awards is Boris Eldagsen with his AI-generated image PSEUDOMNESIA | The Electrician. To be clear, Boris is a photographer with over two decades of medium experience, so he knows his craft. Also, he fully disclosed that it was an AI image he submitted to SWPA, and he didn’t try to pass it as photography.

“I have been photographing since 1989, been a photomedia artist since 2000. After two decades of photography, my artistic focus has shifted to exploring the creative possibilities of AI generators.

The work SWPA has chosen is the result of a complex interplay of prompt engineering, inpainting and outpainting that draws on my wealth of photographic knowledge. For me, working with AI image generators is a co-creation, in which I am the director. It is not about pressing a button – and done it is. It is about exploring the complexity of this process, starting with refining text prompts, then developing a complex workflow, and mixing various platforms and techniques. The more you create such a workflow and define parameters, the higher your creative part becomes.”

It’s worth noting that Boris explained his process behind this image before the winners were selected. This means his win wasn’t the jury’s oversight but a conscious decision.

Previous cases of AI-generated images winning photo contests

As you might already know, this wasn’t the first time something like this had happened. The first time (that we know of) was in September 2022, which sparked an outrage in the photo community. Then it happened again earlier this year, but it turned out that it was a marketing stunt.

Potential issues

Other than public outrage, AI-generated images winning photography contests can lead to a series of other issues.

Legal issues

First and foremost, cases like this cancel out the copyright policy of all photography contests. When you enter your image into any contest, your entry must not contain any copyrighted material owned by third parties.” And in the case of AI-generated images, this is a major grey area.

On the one hand, text-to-image generators like Midjourney create images based on everything they learned by training. And of course, they learned from photos other people took. They don’t generate a direct composite of other people’s photos. However, they still rely on them for the result – and we could debate if this is okay regarding “copyrighted material owned by third parties.”

On the other hand, there’s the issue of protecting your own AI-generated work. According to the US government, this type of work doesn’t fall under copyright protection. This means that anyone can use your image as they please, and you won’t get compensated.

Needless to say, I made this in Midjourney.

Lack of clear guidelines

As Profi Foto notes, SWPA’s FAQ is silent regarding the submission of AI-generated images to the contest. They’re neither banned nor encouraged; they’re not even mentioned. This leaves much room for doubt and uncertainties, and it can also be one of the causes of the drop in photographers’ motivation.

Photographers’ motivation issues

I’ve used Midjourney myself since I like keeping up to date with new technologies. This led me to some Facebook groups dedicated to text-to-image generators, and I’ve seen growing disappointment with how it affects photography. It’s becoming increasingly difficult to distinguish AI images from photos, making photographers lose motivation to share their work and submit it to contests. I am seeing growing apathy on the one hand and growing frustration and worry on the other. And I don’t like either.

 ai creative category photo contests frustration

Does AI have a place in photography contests?

I’ve been thinking about this a lot, and I always circle back to the same answer. In short, my answer is no. I’ve recently seen a bunch of articles and social media posts saying that “AI is not photography, and it never will be,” and my thought was always, “Well, thanks, Captain Obvious.” However, this doesn’t seem to be that obvious to contest judges, regardless of whether it’s SWPA or another competition.

To me, it’s really that obvious – an AI-generated image is not a photo. Sure, it was based on a gazillion photos that text-to-image generators used to feed their algorithm, but it’s still not photography. Even if you spent hours searching for the perfect prompt – nope, it’s still not photography.

In the “Creative” categories of photo contests, photographers submit photos they might have heavily edited and composited – but they still took them. As I mentioned above, your creations mustn’t contain any copyrighted material owned by a third party, so it’s still your photo you’re submitting – you just got creative with it.

 ai creative category photo contests portrait

Potential solutions

As I mentioned, I play with text-to-image generators (especially Midjourney), and it’s really fun. I even found it therapeutical in some cases, but that’s the topic for another day. So, I’m not trying to demonize AI image generators. I’m aware that they’re here to stay, so is there a way to incorporate the images they render into contests?

I think so. If we completely disregard the legal grey area for now, I think our AI creations should get a place to be displayed and awarded. There could be separate categories of photo contests dedicated to AI work. So, not the “Creative” category of the photography contest but a completely separate category. Also, the growing popularity of Midjourney and other AI tools opens room for new competitions that will be dedicated to AI-generated work only.

I just don’t think AI-generated work belongs within any photographic category because, as Captains Obvious of the Internet say: AI is not photography.

What do you think? Should AI work win photography contests? Should it be submitted in the first place, even in the “Creative” category?

Find this interesting? Share it with your friends!

Dunja Djudjic

Dunja Djudjic

Dunja Djudjic is a multi-talented artist based in Novi Sad, Serbia. With 15 years of experience as a photographer, she specializes in capturing the beauty of nature, travel, and fine art. In addition to her photography, Dunja also expresses her creativity through writing, embroidery, and jewelry making.

Join the Discussion

DIYP Comment Policy
Be nice, be on-topic, no personal information or flames.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

21 responses to “Should AI-generated pictures win “Creative” categories of photo contests?”

  1. Amilcar de Oliveira Avatar
    Amilcar de Oliveira

    A client requests of a photographer that a picture be made. He gives information about the intended use and his own tastes. The photographer creates the picture, showing his ability in order that future sales happen. The client receives a limited right of use according to contract.
    The client’s needs and tastes are just that and creativity lies with the photographer.
    A person using an AI spells to it her/his needs and the AI, using what in the end is a complex set of rules, delivers an image. Why the AI doesn’t have rights over the picture? Because it can’t do nothing but pictures. In other words, it’s not a person. And the one who ordered the picture? He’s a client. He ordered a picture having some characteristics but did not create it, as did the photographer’s client. What a person who ordered a picture from an AI does have is full commercial rights. He/her may be the originator but not the creator of the picture.

  2. Mike Shwarts Avatar
    Mike Shwarts

    Not in a photo contest. A separate contest could be made for AI generated images could be created.

  3. D.S. Light Recordings Photography Avatar
    D.S. Light Recordings Photography

    No.

  4. Tom Barrows Avatar
    Tom Barrows

    I also think that AI should not be a part of traditional photo contests but perhaps either a separate contest for AI generated “photorealistic” images, or a rating system for the amount of AI use could be established. Virtually every photograph has some degree of AI or other form of manipulation altering it from what the camera captured and our eyes see. For example, a rating of 1 might indicate minimal manipulation such as auto-tone or simple adjustments. 2 might be applying a color or other camera profile such as the Fuji film simulations along with the usual minimal slider adjustments. Numbers above 5 might indicate more serious manipulation that fundamentally changes the image. Sky replacement for example. Do we reward someone who can instantly swap any gray, dull sky for an amazing sunrise or sunset or do we recognize the possibly weeks and months of effort visiting a location, following weather predictions, etc., to catch the scene at just the right time? Ultimately, the higher the number on the scale, the greater the amount of manipulation, AI or human.

  5. DianaNicholetteJeon Avatar
    DianaNicholetteJeon

    There is glaring difference in something stated here and what he said in his own words in an interview with Alasdair Foster at Talking Pictures earlier this month.

    You write: “It’s worth noting that Boris explained his process behind this image before the winners were selected. This means his win wasn’t the jury’s oversight but a conscious decision.”

    Are you sure you got that accurately? To me, it seems much more complicated than that. Because answering Foster’s question, “Were the organisers aware that this was an image created using AI?” Eldagsen stated in his own words:

    “When I applied, I submitted three images from the ‘Pseudomnesia’ series, the other two being ‘The Connoisseur’ and ‘The Deal’. Those other two images were obviously AI, with all the flaws and mistakes that AI images had back in August 2022.

    I checked if the regulations excluded AI generated images and, if not, applied without giving further information. In January, the award organisers asked for links to my website, my Instagram account, and for the exhibition history of the picture. If they had looked at the information I sent them, it would have been obvious that the image was AI generated. What information the jury was aware of, I don’t know. Why they chose it has not so far been communicated.

    Sony informed me of the award in advance of making it public. At that time, I made the situation clear to them. I offered to disqualify myself, freeing them to give the win to a ‘real’ photographer. Or, as an alternative, to use this as an opportunity for an open discussion on the complex relationship between photography and AI, which could take the form of an online discussion or an on-stage panel.”

    Foster went on to ask, “How did they respond?” To which Eldgasen replied, “Four days later, I was told I could keep the award, but my suggestion to use this to launch an open discussion was not addressed.”

  6. Jay L Avatar
    Jay L

    Oxford definition of photography:

    the art or practice of taking and processing photographs.

    if the contestant manipulated a photo he or she photographed, I would bend and say OK.
    if the contestant created or used an image without having photographed it, I would DISQUALIFY that image.

    Such contestants and their work should be in ART competitions, not PHOTOGRAPHY competitions. Very valid art form, but to call it photography is a corruption of photography. To allow such ‘art’ to win photography contests is FRAUD, perpetrated against all contestants who submit their own photography.

  7. John Beatty Avatar
    John Beatty

    This is a issue that we are just seeing the beginning of. Look how long the debate about having photographs in art contests (they are created using a camera the painters cry!).
    Shari Lewis said it the best….This is the song that never ends, it goes on and on my friends…

  8. allenwrench Avatar
    allenwrench

    Sure, but for the AI category only.

  9. Ron Pruss Avatar
    Ron Pruss

    Absolutely not. It’s not photography. Maybe in an AI created image contest of it’s own.

  10. Zach Alan Avatar
    Zach Alan

    Great article Dunja! I totally agree, I think it’s a bit ridiculous that you can even enter an AI image into a “photography” contest in the first place. I too really enjoy generating images, I even have a local version of Stable Diffusion running on my home GPU. What’s beginning to annoy me are the new “AI Auteurs” that have never picked up a pencil, camera, or any other artform that act as if they’re now super advanced creators that should be respected universally. It’s weird, and I’m sorry but I’ll never respect it.

  11. Keith Heinrich Avatar
    Keith Heinrich

    An AI image is not a photograph. Period.

    However if there is a competition for AI art then by all means because AI art and photography are different and separate things.

  12. Tunes Firwood Avatar
    Tunes Firwood

    Depends. Does the competition allow other forms of painting to compete?

  13. INOAH Photographer Avatar
    INOAH Photographer

    Should you work harder to come up with a question you don’t already know the answer to?

  14. Danny Sutter Avatar
    Danny Sutter

    This may not be a popular opinion, but if there’s a category for it, then by all means. A 100% AI generated image is not a photograph though and if it’s a photography competition, it should not count. (In the same vein, a digital photo would not qualify for an analog competition. This is why the rules are important.) My question, what if you manipulate your own photo with AI? I’ve watched artists’ workflows who know what they want to create and use AI as a tool to achieve their vision. In these situations, the AI is just a tool like clone stamping.

  15. Daniel Shanley Avatar
    Daniel Shanley

    Unless you’re using your own work to train this AI, no.

  16. Martin Gillette Avatar
    Martin Gillette

    Of course it shouldn’t. This form of art can do it’s own contests. There is no need to include something, that isn’t a photograph, as a photograph.

  17. Sherri Vallie Avatar
    Sherri Vallie

    AI is NOT photography – it is digital illustration –

  18. JR Dee Avatar
    JR Dee

    Nope….it’s a contest of one’s skills. Not somebody else’s artwork copied to EMMULATE their own..

  19. Dan Hostettler Avatar
    Dan Hostettler

    Nope

  20. Clifton Davis Avatar
    Clifton Davis

    No

  21. Lis Thomsen Avatar
    Lis Thomsen

    No, it’s a photo contest, not a ‘my computer program is better than yours’ contest.