[gnicholas]

Honestly, I could see AI also disrupting wedding photography. For example, instead of paying several thousands of dollars for a photographer, you could instead pay $1,000 to rent a set of 4 tripod-mounted 360 degree cameras. These would monitor everything that's happening during the ceremony from different angles. Then you have each guest do an "optimization photo" when they sign your guest book. This would be like an abbreviated version of setting up FaceID on your iPhone — getting a couple different angles.

The software would then create a bunch of photos based on the positioning and expressions captured by the tripod-mounted panoramic cameras, but enhanced with the facial photos taken at check-in. The number of photos you could create would be infinite, of course (and would likely be priced based on the number of photos you review and download).

Photographers do provide value when they compose photos, but this aspect would be less important if you can edit photos after-the-fact using AI. Hell, I might like to touch up some of the photos from my wedding, to get rid of unsightly background elements that the (expensive) photographer failed to account for.

[cableshaft]

While I can see that being interesting, almost like a photo booth that's a common addition to weddings, at the same time I also think it wouldn't replace an actual photographer for pretty much anyone, since they would capture what actually happened during that time period with proper composition.

If people wanted just any old pictures at their wedding, they'd put some disposable cameras on the tables and call it a day (and some do exactly that, to be fair, and save a lot of money. But most people don't).

A.I. is not likely going to provide authentic in the moment photos anytime soon, if ever, and if it ever does then it's basically just an motorized mechanical photographer anyway, that would need to be able to go over various terrain effectively or be a drone, probably. At that point it'd likely be about as expensive as just hiring a person, and a person would probably be more friendly and get better photos out of people.

[gnicholas]

I'm envisioning the ability to actually create photos with proper composition, using a combination of the tripod-mounted cameras. In particular, I'm thinking of how the NFL uses multiple cameras to create imagery that pivots through space, even where there are no cameras. The quality isn't super great, but that is created in near-realtime. With these tripod cameras, you could create shots from anywhere, after the fact. And you wouldn't have someone crouching in the aisle, clicking away. I'm sure the technology isn't ready just yet, but I imagine that within a few years it will be possible to create these sorts of shots with hardware that is competitively priced compared to a professional photographer.

[cableshaft]

Maybe you're right, I don't know. I still think it will remain a niche novelty for quite some time, though, as it won't be considered authentic enough.

NFL has plenty of authentic camera work mixed in with a bit of flair like that (I didn't know they did that now, that's interesting), but I imagine for a wedding they care even more about making sure it's fully accurate and not generated. Maybe I'm wrong, guess we'll see what happens in the next ten years.

I do know in my case that we could have gone cheaper on photographers and we didn't, though (we saved money by not getting video or paying for a physical album afterwards, not the people), and I wouldn't be interested in A.I. generating the pictures (even assuming it would be better quality than today) in any way instead of snapping what actually happened.

And I'm not someone who's against people using generative A.I. for the most part, so that doesn't have anything to do with my preference.