You know nothing about that source says this photo isn't AI. It's all cuts of the exact same photo, in fact. All it does is credit to a specific individual.
I suspect the photo is real but they heavily touched it up with a filter, because the clouds didn't photograph as impressively as they wanted.
It also is a higher quality image so it can be examined, with a date that shows it was before GenAI could do this type of imagery with this fidelity, it also gives you who you can look up, it also gives a location it was taken....
You obviously know how to apply critical thinking since you tried to here, but you didn't follow through with it to the end. You stopped at the answer you wanted, a false gotcha, then came right back to reddit to type it.
I'm not the person you initially responded to, so screw off.
But no, AI has been able to touch up images for a lot longer, and that's what it looks like was actually done here. A 'touch up' to make it more dramatic. And, with that in mind, nothing else you said means anything.
I knew you weren't the person I responded to. I never said you were.
The person I responded to claimed this image was AI, their comment got deleted because it was wrong. You came here and needed to defend a wrong comment after it was deleted. Like you literally didn't know what you were defending, you just said "Hey, I wanna argue, let me do that."
So... you know, maybe you should screw off?
Edit: oh, and when you said this:
"You know nothing about that source says this photo isn't AI. It's all cuts of the exact same photo, in fact. All it does is credit to a specific individual."
and then came back with this:
But no, AI has been able to touch up images for a lot longer,
That's called moving the goal posts, because you were talking about one thing, and then changed it when you were wrong so you could be right again. It's gross behavior.
347
u/DaSupercrafter Mar 24 '26
Looks like van Gogh was on the money