Is AI going to replace Photographers? Interview with Gerald Staufer, CEO of Photo Agency Westend61

Gerald Staufer is CEO of the well-known Munich-based photo agency Westend61. With many years of dedicated experience in the photography sector, he possesses in-depth knowledge of image sales and navigating the photography market. Fair Licensing’s Khrystyna Kuziv sat down with Gerald Stauffer and asked him important questions that concern many players in the photo industry, such as photographers and photo agencies.

Khrystyna:  Hi Gerald, nice to meet you! Could you tell us a bit about yourself and your agency?

Gerald: As the CEO of Westend61 in Munich, I co-founded this agency over 20 years ago with my friend and business partner, Stephan Bock. Our goal was to distribute high-quality royalty-free images from top photographers. I'm proud that we've succeeded in navigating this ship through often turbulent waters for so long, delivering authentic lifestyle content that many large and small companies, advertising agencies, publishers, and television networks appreciate and utilize.

Captured on Westend61

Khrystyna: How do you think the generative AI will change your agency? Is AI a friend or foe?

Gerald: Neither. AI is, to use a much-quoted term, a tool. We use AI ourselves. It's brilliant, for example, for tagging images, more precise than any human. I always thought we'd never have the budget to program a decent similarity search. Now one of our interns has taken it on and developed such a search with an open-source model that we're really happy with. However, it's not AI, just intelligence, so we benefit from the tremendous progress in machine learning. As for our product, generative AI sharpens our senses for the quality of real images; we become even more selective and better. Competition stimulates business; we focus more than ever on our core competencies.

"As for our product, generative AI sharpens our senses for the quality of real images; we become even more selective and better. Competition stimulates business; we focus more than ever on our core competencies".

Khrystyna: Your company is looking for photographers with the words "REAL. EMOTIONAL. FAIR." Can AI be emotional and real and replace a good photographer?

Gerald: Well, it can't be real for sure. The slogan aims for authenticity, both in front and behind the camera. I don't think AI can yet replicate the emotions captured by the camera. The skin is too smooth, the teeth too perfect, the hair too rigid - it's all quite stereotypical. But sure, in social media advertising, it might work, where instant images may suffice. Perhaps occasionally exaggerated, unreal emotions, almost caricature-like, are better, as people tend to linger on such 'loud' images. But I don't know; let's wait for studies that will surely come soon. I expect there'll soon be saturation with AI-generated images; you can't keep seeing them indefinitely.

Photo by Talia Ali from Westend61

Khrystyna: How do you assess the quality of AI-generated images compared to traditionally captured photos? And what differences do you see in the visual aesthetics between AI-generated images and those captured by humans?

Gerald: Let me start by saying, that I'm speaking specifically about Westend61's specialty, people and lifestyle photography. With AI, you can create some crazy images that aren't easily achievable through photography alone. You can let your creativity run wild and try things out. I've personally created some funny images that have made others laugh. But when it comes to our field, advertising lifestyle photography, AI-generated images almost always appear boring. The blur created looks like that of an iPhone; it doesn't replace a top-notch lens from well-known brands like Canon, Nikon, Sony, etc. The skin often looks unnatural or over-sharpened. Teeth are dazzling white and perfectly aligned; dentists become unnecessary in the AI world. This flawlessness is unbelievable.

AI sometimes creates terrible stereotypes; it feels like we're back in a world of images that we have already moved past. Just 10 or 15 years ago, stock photos portrayed questionable and unrealistic images of women and men. Women were all slim, mostly with long, often blonde hair; men were usually muscular types with square jaws, all perfectly dressed and with wide grins on their faces. We've slowly moved past all that in the last 10 years, with authenticity taking the forefront. Finally, people were allowed to be human, have flaws and all. And now AI is turning the wheel back, partly because it was trained on old stereotypical images from image agencies, and many users apparently find these images pleasing. Machines tend to generate what users like. On the subject of image generators and stereotypes, I highly recommend a very enlightening article from The Washington Post.

"AI sometimes creates terrible stereotypes; it feels like we're back in a world of images that we have already moved past. Just 10 or 15 years ago, stock photos portrayed questionable and unrealistic images of women and men... And now AI is turning the wheel back, partly because it was trained on old stereotypical images from image agencies..."

In the end, AI-generated images all start to look the same; they lack nuances in emotions, that twinkle in the eye, if you know what I mean; they somehow feel soulless. And when several people are depicted, it often becomes chaotic. Faces, are sometimes barely recognizable, contort, hands are in the wrong places, proportions are incorrect, and you discover artifacts and image errors endlessly.

Symbolic images without people may behave differently; they are easier to replace. But it depends on the size; on almost all images, many things are crooked and skewed when viewed in detail and high resolution.

Photo by Laetizia Haessig from Westend61

Khrystyna: What feedback do you receive from your customers? Are they experimenting with AI-generated images? 

Gerald: Some customers explicitly reject AI-generated images, preferring those with real people. While some are quiet on the matter, stable revenues suggest a continued demand for authentic lifestyle images. However, some experimentation occurs. I've seen interesting examples, like a recent cover on Apothekenumschau, but also numerous poor ones, which I occasionally showcase on LinkedIn (see LinkedIn account of Gerald).

Some reputable brands prioritize quantity over quality, embracing visual degradation. Yet, I believe this trend will diminish as it undermines brand trust. Customers value quality and may experiment with AI but prioritize authenticity. Additionally, legal uncertainties deter clients from AI images, preferring copyrighted content with clear legal standing.

"Customers value quality and may experiment with AI but prioritize authenticity. Additionally, legal uncertainties deter clients from AI images, preferring copyrighted content with clear legal standing".

Khrystyna: Could the value of genuine photography rise amidst the flood of AI-generated photography? 

Gerald: I'm convinced it will. Every hype eventually ends, and every movement spawns a counter-movement. There will be a world of images made by AI and one made by humans, each with its own value. Photography remains a vibrant form of expression for creative individuals, and that will never die out. Both worlds will find their place in the market, with hybrid forms emerging. Photographers will utilize AI tools to enhance their images, as they've already done with Photoshop, but it will become even more accessible. Ultimately, the most successful photographers will be those who excel at both photography and mastering new tools.

Photo by Joseffson from Westend61

Khrystyna: Should an AI-generated image be granted copyright protection? Why or why not?

Gerald: Currently, a purely machine-generated image does not enjoy copyright protection, and that's right. Regardless of the creative prompts provided, the final output is entirely reliant on what the machine produces; it's not a human creation. However, if a photographer uses AI tools to modify his own image, his copyright remains intact, which is justifiable and beneficial under current legal standards.

Khrystyna: Give us a passionate closing argument: Why will Westend61 and other agencies specializing in high-quality, authentic photography remain needed in the future?

Gerald: It's simple. Because people will always want to see other people, it's hard to imagine testimonials being generated by AI in the future. And because we won't let machines take away our creativity. That's something truly special. Emotionally, people crave human connection. Rationally, photographers can deliver results faster and better without the need for extensive fine-tuning of prompts.

Image by Maskot from Westenend61

Investing in genuine photography is often more cost-effective than spending hours perfecting AI-generated images, especially for high-end advertising. Imagine a world where all photographers stop taking photos, and images are solely generated by machines. They would become self-referential, perpetuating stereotypes and leading to a homogeneous visual landscape. This isn't the future of photography. That's why authentic photography will always be essential.

"Imagine a world where all photographers stop taking photos, and images are solely generated by machines. They would become self-referential, perpetuating stereotypes and leading to a homogeneous visual landscape".

Khrystyna: Thank you for sharing your thoughts with us. It was a very insightful conversation! 

Gerald: My pleasure!

While AI may pose a threat to traditional photography, it's essential to recognize that image theft may present an even larger challenge to your photography business. Moreover, it prevents you from fully utilizing the potential of your photos. Therefore, it is crucial to stay informed about various facets of photography copyright and remain up-to-date on strategies to safeguard your creative work.

Do you find this article helpful? Share it with friends on social media.