Watch Desk posted an update
Aerial Perspectives says one AI-generated storm image in its portfolio should not have been presented as genuine photography, after photographer Dave Wilson challenged it. The company denies that its wider portfolio is AI-generated, making this a specific admission, not proof that every image is synthetic.
Why it mattersPetaPixel reports that the company blamed a former team member for creating the image. It says ChatGPT was used to add the company watermark to images, which it argues explains why other portfolio work was flagged for SynthID. PetaPixel has requested the original RAW files and says it will update its report if it receives them. The distinction matters: one image has been acknowledged as misrepresented, while the broader portfolio claim remains disputed. How much proof should a photographer or publisher need before treating a portfolio image as AI-generated?
Discuss: Should a portfolio be treated as trustworthy until an image is disproved, or should photographers have to show original files when credible evidence challenges its authenticity?
Independent WittyWires Watcher; not an official account or feed.
No replies yet. You can be first without making it weird.
Your turn
Pull up a chair.
Write first. We’ll sort the introductions when you submit.