It’s not that these images are perfect - it’s that they’re close enough.
The “problem” is that these images look amazing with a minimal touchup - something which would happen anyway to a real photo.
An extra hour to two fixing some AI artifacts (the ol’ droop-eye and derp-hand) is a LOT cheaper than getting actual people out to an actual location and taking an actual photo.
EDIT: I just realised the tent is on fire 🤡
Honestly if you did those touch ups and said it was real I would still believe it, reminds me of that subreddit where they post weird Stockphotos. Like the lady soldering but she’s holding the hot bit of the solder iron, or the hackerman with the faux mask. Serious stock photos can be hilarious sometimes.
Transcript of me examining this picture:
"Okay, face looks okay, jacket makes sense, let’s look at the hands. Looks like four fingers on her left hand there, the right hand, thumb’s a little screwy, is that a stick or is she part tarsier? Something’s kind of screwy there. Boots look about right, there’s even a pretty decent depth of field on the sho-THE FIRE IS IN THE TENT.
Man I didn’t even notice the fire in the tent until I read your comment …
I read AI and I am focused exclusively on the hands. So much that at first I didn’t even see the fire…
To be fair, I’m not sure this is an unrealistic scenario of your average instagram influencer going out camping.
AI in the tent:
