I have recently come across a user (I am sure there are many) that is uploading images that are AI generated or at least heavily enhanced. I realize this is probably nothing new, but I feel that if this behavior is allowed to continue this will no longer be a nature lovers’ site. With the rapid incr…

OK, this has been released: https://www.inaturalist.org/blog/118284

:-) I think we do want to show reality here. But we can manipulate photos somewhat. I crop them (all I have the skills for) and that’s certainly OK. What else? “Photos” the AI make up are certainly NOT OK. But where to draw the line – and how to explain what’s OK and what isn’t? I think we al…

Exactly. I think there are many uses for AI and forbid all of them would be counter productive. For an extreme example, if a strict no AI policy was enacted here, I would not be able to use my camera anymore, as my OM system body includes AI scene detection to assist focus. Of course, I am all for …

Phones have tiny lense(s) and tiny sensor(s) and would not be able to produce acceptable quality photos without stacking, noise reduction and (interpolating) infill. Some will reduce glare and apply other algorithmic filters. The only reason we don’t have all that tech in cameras is that the proces…

Forcing it? They are doing it in response to popular demand: “I want to take my phone and point it at something (landscape, kitten, lasagna) and upload it to [social platform] and get bazillions of likes/engagement/followers/fame.” Any output that is not colorful, shiny, smooth, eye-candy, screamin…

I believe that the only solution to this and to all other issues arising as a result of AI generated content is for there to be a universal requirement for all AI content to be clearly labeled as such, and for penalties and fines to be levied against anyone who does not. There is a growing need for…

[image] TheJungleExplorer: I believe that the only solution to this and to all other issues arising as a result of AI generated content is for there to be a universal requirement for all AI content to be clearly labeled as such, and for penalties and fines to be levied against anyone who does no…

All these threads about AI have moved me. I shall feed an AI model all the pictures of myself that I have, and have it generate a photorealistic profile avatar of me. :grin:

I agree it’s difficult to know where to draw the line. For example, modern, low-end phone photo editing software can do things like adjust exposure, which is usually going to be considered fine for photo processing. But simple photo editing apps and programs can now also automatically detect the sk…

Enhancing is not new. Enhancing does not fundamentally alter the image. For 30 years, image editing software has had Auto Enhance functions, and I think you would be hard pressed to find a non-raw digital image that has not recieved some form of Auto Enhancement, as this is fundamentally part of how…

[image] alfamax: After reading this thread, I think I finally get it, photography on iNat isn’t about documenting reality. It’s about atoning for it. I’ll begin my next observation with a ceremonial bath, smear mud on my lens, and whisper “unaltered entropy” three times into the wind. Then I’ll …

AI Generated or Enhanced Images as "observations"

General

upupa-epops July 27, 2025, 5:33pm 39

This thread (along with similar threads, particularly this one) has just been discussing how this not really feasible because there is a whole spectrum of AI enhancement ranging from minor sharpness/denoise to entirely recreating the image. How do you draw the line?

Topic		Replies	Views
Use of AI upscaling General	62	2560	August 1, 2024
Beware: AI Images on inat General	187	11139	October 7, 2025
Evidence accurately depicts organism or scene” Data Quality Metric questions General	34	836	October 10, 2025
Coming soon: Deep fake nature photography? General	26	2470	August 23, 2022
Article on AI generated image(s) on iNat General	66	2910	April 2, 2026

AI Generated or Enhanced Images as "observations"

Related topics