A Reel has appeared on Topaz Labs’ Instagram (@topazlabs) showcasing the photo and video editing software developer’s Redefine model in Gigapixel 8, being used to upscale Lunch Atop a Skyscraper. The legendary photograph was captured by an unknown photographer in 1932 and depicts a group of workers eating lunch on a girder, high above New York – taken as a publicity shot during the construction of the Rockefeller Center.
If you check out the video (below), you’ll find Gigapixel 8’s AI does a pretty astounding job of sharpening the image, and crucially, retaining detail. But however positive my reaction to the impressive software, I couldn't ignore the aching of my furrowed brow...
Artificial intelligence is here to stay and I dare say it will continue to cement its place within the photography industry, but meddling with a legendary film photograph ain’t the right application. I don’t mean to sound over the top here, but this isn’t AI upscaling an old photograph as much as it is AI desecrating an important piece of photographic history.
Can you imagine if somebody decided to ‘improve’ the Mona Lisa? And before anyone points out that the Mona Lisa has received some restoration – although never been fully restored – restoration is about gently turning back the clock, not showing how much more vibrant the painting would have looked if Leonardo ditched the Tempera Grassa, popped down to his local Michaels and bought a pack of Winsor & Newton oils!
Now, I will come down off my high horse momentarily by broaching the subject of restored footage and audio. I wasn’t complaining when Queen announced their remixed and remastered Queen I album, and I wasn’t grumbling when Peter Jackson colorized and restored reels of footage from the First World War for his documentary They Shall Not Grow Old.
But I think these examples are different. First and foremost, Queen can do whatever the heck they like with their own masters, and Peter Jackson sourced his footage from the Imperial War Museum. Lunch Atop a Skyscraper by comparison sits within the public domain and the photographer who took it is something of a mystery. Remastering is also much more prevalent and accepted in the music and filmmaking industries, whereas it’s a lot more frowned upon to alter an existing photograph.
You also have to consider the reason for remastering the work in question. They Shall Not Grow Old used dated, largely unseen footage. By remastering it, Jackson gave it a new lease of life, allowing it to reach and educate a much wider audience than would have otherwise been possible. His team turned archaic black-and-white footage with awkward framerates into something viewers could relate to. It humanized the men, women, and children involved, brought their stories to the fore, and made it harder for them to be dismissed as faceless relics of a bygone era.
The same cannot be said for Lunch Atop a Skyscraper, one of the most famous photographs in the world. Sharpening the image won't reach a different audience and it doesn't really add anything to the image's already far-reaching impact. The subjects are still charming, the composition still works beautifully, and the moment captured is still utterly compelling. I actually think the sharpening process takes something away from the original.
Authenticity is a huge deal in photography. And imperfections in old photographs are a large part of that. There's a reason many photographers still opt for the best film cameras or the best retro cameras or shoot almost exclusively using retro Fujifilm Film Simulations. Besides, if you make an old photo look too clean, people will just dismiss it as an AI creation anyway.
We consume photography in a different way than film and audio, too. Notice that black-and-white film has all but died out in mainstream cinema and television, but we still readily consume black-and-white photography. And even in 1932, cameras were capable of capturing very high-quality images that still hold up today. This is evidenced by the fact that a huge portion of the most viewed images in human history are film images. Think the moon landings, Alfred Eisenstaedt’s V-J Day in Times Square, and Steve McCurry’s Afghan Girl. That's because, when it comes to photography, the subject and moment trump all.
Remastered footage and audio are typically very upfront about alterations, too, it’s a selling point. But legendary photographs find their way into books and videos, onto billboards and merchandise, if we're not careful, the lines between remaster and original work could become blurred. Part of me thinks I'm being a little hard on Topaz Labs here. After all, the software is incredible. It's ideal for upscaling family photos or fixing a modern image that's a little soft.
And Topaz Labs is hardly the first to alter a legendary image. A book publisher would add a spot of contrast here and perhaps a fine amount of sharpening there. But AI is undoubtedly something different. This is about safeguarding our versions of the Mona Lisa. If we set a precedent now that it’s fine for AI to upscale legendary images, the originals could quietly work their way out of usage without anyone noticing. And that would be a great shame.
You might also like...
Interested in film photography? Check out the best film for 35mm cameras on the market.
Want to learn more about the hot topic that is AI in photography? Find out how AI became a mainstream part of photography.
Perhaps you want to give AI image creation a go yourself. Well, here are the best AI image generators.
