AI and the Erosion of Photography's Indexical Power

Charles Sanders Peirce’s theory of semiotics, centered on his model of the semiotic triad, is a benchmark in the theoretical study of photography since the 19th century. Throughout the medium’s history, scholars and artists have debated photography’s place within the semiotic triad, but the canonical argument as seized upon by influential figures is that the photographic image is an instrument of indexicality (Krauss 1977). In truth, photography’s indexicality has never been fully bulletproof from opposing claims, and in 2023 this became harder than ever to defend with the sudden presence of AI-constructed images in our everyday lives. 

In “The Ontology of the Photographic Image,” Andre Bazin writes: “the existence of the photographed object…shares in the existence of the model, like a fingerprint.” While he never directly mentions Peirce’s nor semiotics, we have come to understand Bazin’s landmark essay as a fulcrum for photography’s truth claim, whether in its documentary format or even its artistic and conceptual evolutions (Schonig 2022).

In Cindy Sherman's seminal work Untitled Film Stills (1977-1980), we can witness the manifestation of this idea in two distinct manners: the self-portraits operate as indices of the artist's existence and practice, and her deliberate artistic choices utilize the indexical presence entrenched in our shared unconsciousness through references to cultural works such as the 50's and 60's films and their portrayals of women (Heiferman 1981). In a recent project, Sherman's artistry has engaged with the visual language of Instagram by constructing a profile primarily consisting of self-portraits that are heavily stylized to resemble grotesque, cartoonish, or distorted versions of herself (Sehgal 2018). This output by Sherman can be interpreted as a subversive critique of the standards of beauty and self-representation as promulgated by social media algorithms and influencers, and how these images come to be interpreted as indexical by social media users, despite editing and interference. 

Sherman, ever the prescient artist, anticipated the complete dismantling of the social media image’s indexical power in 2023, as evidenced by the lightning-fast ubiquitous rise of the Bold Glamour filter. This year, more than 48 million images and videos have been captured using Bold Glamour, which goes beyond previous viral photo filters by:

 [using] advanced artificial intelligence to remold a face into something entirely new. Noses are thinned, chins are more sculpted, cheeks are raised and eyes are brightened, as a process known as machine learning remaps people's faces. (Allyn 2023)

Bold Glamour blurs the boundaries between the actual and the idealized self, in a way that previous photographic technology never achieved. Its sudden popularity dovetails with ongoing debates around social media's ability to shape and manipulate young people's self-perception, and how this is potentially contributing to an ongoing global mental health crisis. Despite media attention surrounding Bold Glamour, little has been said about the implications of AI-powered filters on the photographic device’s indexical power. In The Virtual Life of Film, D.N. Rodowick states that “in digital capture, the indexical link to physical reality is weakened, because light must be converted into an abstract symbolic independent of and discontinuous of time and space.” Since Rodowick's book was published in 2007, the physical link between digital photography and reality has only deteriorated further due to AI capabilities like Bold Glamour, which eliminate the intermediary steps between photo capture and final results. As AI-powered filters continue to proliferate, they may eventually cause consumers to abandon the very expectation that photographic devices should produce an indexical image. Instead, the allure of the fantastical, glamorous images of social media algorithms may become the new norm, molding consumers' expectations and desires.

Strict categorization of photography as an instrument of indexicality is a risky move, one that can lead to the unraveling of lines between fact and fiction. The works of Joan Fontcuberta often delve into this theme, as evidenced by his 1977 essay "Contravisiones, la subversion fotografica de la realidad," which he further defended by stating:

Contravision aspires to pervert the reality principle assigned to photography and does not represent

as much a critique of vision as of visual intention, it is therefore an attitude

and not in a style (Fontcuberta 1998).

Joan Fontcuberta has consistently examined and refined his concept of "contravision" throughout his various projects, such as Sputnik (1997), a project that sheds light on the ways in which photographic images can traverse the boundary between authenticity and falsification. Sputnik aims to recount Soviet pilot Ivan Istochnikov’s death in outer space, and his subsequent disappearance from the historical record. Fontcuberta takes real photos of Istochnikov and juxtaposes with Soviet propaganda in which he is erased, as well as reconstructions of missing gaps in Istochnikov's life, in which Fontcuberta portrayed the astronaut himself (Hernandez 2013). Sputnik examines the intricate relationships between the genuine and the fabricated. Istochnikov was subtracted from the Soviet Union's official story on its space exploration program to present a favorable narrative. 

In the present day we can recognize echoes of this story with the case of Samsung, which is accused of adding information to photographs taken by their smartphones that was initially absent. Since 2018, smartphone manufacturer Samsung has promoted its "Space Zoom" feature as the ultimate solution for consumers seeking to capture celestial wonders and engage in night photography. However, recent revelations by Reddit users in 2023 suggest that Samsung's claims may be deceptive - that the ultra-detailed photographs of the moon that it purports to offer may in fact be the result of computational meddling, not a faithful representation of light captured by the camera's sensor. What we thought was an indexical image, a photographic trace of the moon's light, turns out to be an AI-generated symbol, a simulation of an idealized likeness of the moon. (Vincent & Porter 2023). Samsung has denied these allegations, reading the proverbial room and picking up on the widespread skepticism and unease around AI-generated images. As noted in The Verge article, the very idea of what is real and what is fake in photography is undergoing a seismic shift. The recent public resistance to both the Samsung moon photos and the Bold Glamour filters demonstrate that society is not yet willing to relinquish the indexical authority of photographic images. 

However, this prevailing attitude may be shot-lived in the face of AI’s increasing dominance and how it can potentially serve the interests of large corporations such as Samsung or Sony. A recent incident involved Sony’s World Photography Award 2023, in which the winner, Boris Eldagsen, used AI to create his entry "Pseudomnesia: The Electrician." Eldagsen refused the prize, stating that “AI images and photography should not compete with each other in an award like this…they are different entities. AI is not photograph” (Watson 2023). Eldagsen's stance marks the beginning of an ongoing debate that is sure to gain momentum as technology advances.

Bibliography

Allyn, B. (2023, marzo 10). Does the ‘Bold Glamour’ Filter Push Unrealistic Beauty Standards? TikTokkers Think So. NPR. https://www.npr.org/2022/03/10/1162286785/does-the-bold-glamour-filter-push-unrealistic-beauty-standards-tiktokkers-think-

Bazin, A. (1960). The ontology of the photographic image. Film Quarterly, 13(4), 4-9.

Cruz Hernandez, R. M. (2014). Joan Fontcuberta Teoría e Historia Fotografía en Cataluña. 1974-2014 (Master's thesis). Universitat Barcelona.

Fontcuberta, J. (1998). Contravisiones. Madrid: Gustavo Gili. (p. 45-46)

Heiferman, M. (1981). In front of the camera, behind the scene: Cindy Sherman's "Untitled Film Stills". Art in America, 69-75.

Krauss, R. (1977). Notes on the Index: Seventies Art in America. October, vol. 3, pp. 68-81.

Schonig, J. [Film & Media Studies]. (2022, febrero 19). Digital Photography, Truth Claims, and C.S. Peirce's Indexicality. Retrieved https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dztn_hGEv48

Sehgal, P. (2018, octubre 5). Ugly Beauty: Cindy Sherman’s New Self-Portraits Are Her First Pure Protagonists: Gloriously, Catastrophically Themselves. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/13/magazine/ugly-beauty-cindy-shermans-new-self-portraits-are-her-first-pure-protagonists-gloriously-catastrophically-themselves.html.

Vincent, J., & Porter, J. (2023, March 13). Samsung caught faking zoom photos of the Moon. The Verge. https://www.theverge.com/2023/3/13/23637401/samsung-fake-moon-photos-ai-galaxy-s21-s23-ultra

Watson, C. (2023, April 18). The Camera Never Lies: Creator of AI image rejects prestigious photo award. The Art Newspaper. https://www.theartnewspaper.com/news/the-camera-never-lies-creator-of-ai-image-rejects-prestigious-photo-award