>>4170639thanks anon. Thankfully my pubes don't get on my sensor!
>>4170641I don't samefag. I come here to shitpost, educate and dunk on others(croplets, film fags, and nophotos) for fun. I'll post proof if you'd like but I'd rather post more photos.
>your photos could be generated by IA easily.I have a more in-depth post about AI generated images on that thread. But no, they couldn't. The current tech is several years away from being about to spit out files with enough resolution for print work. tech fags that "4k" is high resolution, its not, its good for like 8x10 print at 300ppi. Even at this size, the files print like shit. They have no edges, they're blurry and soft all the way down. My s1r RAWs are good for extremely sharp, noise free 16x20" prints when properly sharpened and printed on a smooth paper with my ipf8400.
Besides all that, my work is interesting bc its photography. Its tied to reality in a way that AI generated imagery, or any trad art medium can never be. It's special and interesting bc its real, otherwise it would just be another abstract painting or drawing, and there are plenty of that shit out there already.
