When Perfection Became Suspicious
Concluded: A TWiP Member Mixer Discussion
For decades, technical perfection signaled professionalism. Flawless retouching meant someone cared enough to get it right.
Then AI made “perfect” easy. And now when I see an impossibly smooth portrait or mathematically balanced composition, my first thought isn’t “professional”—it’s “probably AI.”
The scarcity flipped. Perfection used to be rare. Now realness is what’s rare.
Join us for a conversation about this shift—what I’ve been calling “reality hunger.” We’ll talk about why imperfection is becoming a trust signal, how to position your work when AI can generate flawless images in seconds, and where you draw your own lines on AI in your practice.
Come ready to share your perspective. This one’s going to be good.
Post Game Roundup:
Key Discussion Points:
AI for correction vs. recreation — Phil made a distinction that resonated: “there’s a difference between tech that helps take a better picture and tech that helps you remake a picture.”
Image manipulation isn’t new — Dennis and Troy pointed out that “faking” images has been happening since film days. Dennis mentioned Jerry Uelsmann (darkroom compositing pioneer), and the group discussed Steve McCurry and Peter Lik’s controversies around manipulation.
The viewer expectation question — Marc framed his approach around never making viewers “question if it’s real or not” — particularly relevant for location/landscape work.
Market reality check — Renee noted that AI-generated or heavily manipulated prints sell well at farmers markets, especially to older buyers. Troy added they’re usually undervalued, but Renee’s point was they still move. The premium market is different from the volume market.
Shared Resources
| Resource | Context |
|---|---|
| Vividon Beta — Relight in Photoshop (No Prompts) | Renee mentioned this AI relighting tool |
| Spotify AI bot streaming fraud — futurism.com link | Phil shared; parallel to photography’s authenticity issues |
| California AI disclosure law for real estate — barneswalker.com article + Nathan Cool’s video | Marc shared; legal requirements now in effect as of Jan 1, 2026 |
| Chris McCaw — hainesgallery.com | Phil shared; artist using physical/analog processes |
| Bilawal’s 3D advancement talk — YouTube | Marc shared; shows how fast 3D capture is evolving |
| NetworkChuck YouTube — youtube.com/@NetworkChuck | Frederick shared; popular channel for AI, IT and security information |
Follow-up Items
Phil asked about PPA’s AI standards for competitions. Michael responded that the rules differ between MIR (Merit Image Review) and IPC (International Photographic Competition) and are “continually evolving.” Could be worth a deeper dive or dedicated discussion.
Attendees Who Participated in Chat
Dennis, Renee Robyn, Troy Miller, Phil Lewenthal, Marc Charette, Michael Ryno, Craig Colvin, Jim, Frederick
Watch the Replay
This event has ended.