I believe AI generated nude images will prove to be a detriment to nudism. Al will produce images that would be considered to be perfect compared to the reality of imperfections that we as nudists have grown to appreciate.
Making AI generated nudes illegal would set a terrible precedent, and one that is all too likely. I can just imagine cops, district attorneys, and judges pouring over the pictures. Not a good use of tax dollars.
I follow a lot of nudists on Flickr, where, in the interest of normalizing nudity and rejecting shame, I also post nudes of myself. Like most humans, I enjoy seeing young and subjectively "perfect" bodies, but I also appreciate seeing a range of body shapes and ages. In other words, I'm not dead... but neither am I seeking or providing porn.
Lately, a fellow I had followed for years began posting AI generated images of hunky, muscular, unrealistically well endowed men. I had to look carefully to ascertain whether they were actual photos. I caught myself being somewhat turned on by some of the pictures. I have unfollowed that person. His AI posts serve only to make ordinary mortals feel inadequate. I'm pushing 73, I don't resemble a superhero, and have what is probably an average penis. It's damaging to compare myself or others to an impossible standard of beauty.
There is a time and place for it. One example is in naturist fiction stories. Imagine if the next anthology had one GenAI image that captured the essence of each story. Almost like a novel cover art, but significantly easier to create.
Nope. If you're a writer, either do the illustration yourself, hire an artist (plenty of nudist and adjacent talent out there) or go without. As was said by Reinder, using AI in one aspect doesn't give the impression of authenticity or seriousness to the entire project.
Naturism is about being authentically human. I don’t see a place for inauthentic, inhuman AI in that.
AI has its uses and I’m sure we’ll continue to find more, but telling a human how to be their most human self is never going to be something it’ll be better at than, you know, an actual person.
"One of the most important and valuable aspects of naturism is *authenticity*. We can be our authentic selves and relate in an authentic way. This is so rare and valuable in our modern world! And genAI is the polar opposite of it. It has no place in our community."
Just a comment on the Photo by Mukul Kumar on Unsplash in you article. There is something wrong with the ulnar side of the wrist and small finger. Could make a case for a dorsal ganglion cyst. There is no ulnar styloid where it should further lateral and the small finger and ulnar side of the hand are deformed.
If people are producing exaggerated images the truth comes out when they disrobe at a nudist venue or sexual event! Best they hang in on the internet.
You're right it does look a little strange. Could it be that someone has unecessarily made the woman's arm and hand wider to cover her areola. Manipulated real photos are as much an issue as completely artificial ones
I'm not saying that someone didn't use AI to augment them before they were uploaded to the stock sites where I acquired them, I suppose that's possible. But I acquired them trhough these platforms—did not generate them—and personally i believe they both genuinely depict real people (and their actual anatomy).
It's easy to overlook this sort of thing until it's pointed out. If someone can do such a bad job of a small edit to a picture then who knows might happen with a fake picture of a whole person. The idea that you could make an entirely computer generated feature film that was indistinguishable from photography has been in science fiction for decades but it is now within touching distance.
I think we have to find ways to utilize it to our advantage. It's here to stay. Even though imagery. It's unfortunate that most naturists have to hide themselves so maybe AI can be a tool to express those images without risk. If someone paints a picture of nudism, we seem to be OK to use it, but we fear AI isn't authenticity human. As long as we know what it is... let's work within some boundaries.
No, it can't and it should not be used.
Shoulds are matters of personal discretion, and I'll agree with you there.
But making them illegal is not a good idea.
I believe AI generated nude images will prove to be a detriment to nudism. Al will produce images that would be considered to be perfect compared to the reality of imperfections that we as nudists have grown to appreciate.
I hope that they will lead to a more measured attitude about pictures of naked bodies. Less sensibility, more sensibleness.
Making AI generated nudes illegal would set a terrible precedent, and one that is all too likely. I can just imagine cops, district attorneys, and judges pouring over the pictures. Not a good use of tax dollars.
Keep the government out of personal matters.
I follow a lot of nudists on Flickr, where, in the interest of normalizing nudity and rejecting shame, I also post nudes of myself. Like most humans, I enjoy seeing young and subjectively "perfect" bodies, but I also appreciate seeing a range of body shapes and ages. In other words, I'm not dead... but neither am I seeking or providing porn.
Lately, a fellow I had followed for years began posting AI generated images of hunky, muscular, unrealistically well endowed men. I had to look carefully to ascertain whether they were actual photos. I caught myself being somewhat turned on by some of the pictures. I have unfollowed that person. His AI posts serve only to make ordinary mortals feel inadequate. I'm pushing 73, I don't resemble a superhero, and have what is probably an average penis. It's damaging to compare myself or others to an impossible standard of beauty.
There is a time and place for it. One example is in naturist fiction stories. Imagine if the next anthology had one GenAI image that captured the essence of each story. Almost like a novel cover art, but significantly easier to create.
It would make me wonder if the text was AI-generated as well. Hard pass.
Nope. If you're a writer, either do the illustration yourself, hire an artist (plenty of nudist and adjacent talent out there) or go without. As was said by Reinder, using AI in one aspect doesn't give the impression of authenticity or seriousness to the entire project.
The few nude ai images I've seen have had exaggerated or distorted genitals as if they wanted to focus on or divert attention from them
Naturism is about being authentically human. I don’t see a place for inauthentic, inhuman AI in that.
AI has its uses and I’m sure we’ll continue to find more, but telling a human how to be their most human self is never going to be something it’ll be better at than, you know, an actual person.
I agree with what Matthew McDermott wrote over on Bluesky:
https://bsky.app/profile/canudian1.bsky.social/post/3lupls6ncv227
"One of the most important and valuable aspects of naturism is *authenticity*. We can be our authentic selves and relate in an authentic way. This is so rare and valuable in our modern world! And genAI is the polar opposite of it. It has no place in our community."
Just a comment on the Photo by Mukul Kumar on Unsplash in you article. There is something wrong with the ulnar side of the wrist and small finger. Could make a case for a dorsal ganglion cyst. There is no ulnar styloid where it should further lateral and the small finger and ulnar side of the hand are deformed.
If people are producing exaggerated images the truth comes out when they disrobe at a nudist venue or sexual event! Best they hang in on the internet.
You're right it does look a little strange. Could it be that someone has unecessarily made the woman's arm and hand wider to cover her areola. Manipulated real photos are as much an issue as completely artificial ones
True, the AI may be programed to cover the areola but was poorly programed on wrist and hand anatomy distortion.
Just to be clear, I have not used any AI images in this post. The image that was originally in the post when it was sent out, as well as the one that replaced it that is now above in this post, are both stock images and came with photographer credits. The former is located here: https://unsplash.com/photos/a-naked-woman-laying-on-top-of-a-bed-oWfo8H7wvWo The latter one is located here: https://elements.envato.com/self-loving-attractive-woman-plus-size-in-underwea-DHKA8X4
I'm not saying that someone didn't use AI to augment them before they were uploaded to the stock sites where I acquired them, I suppose that's possible. But I acquired them trhough these platforms—did not generate them—and personally i believe they both genuinely depict real people (and their actual anatomy).
It's easy to overlook this sort of thing until it's pointed out. If someone can do such a bad job of a small edit to a picture then who knows might happen with a fake picture of a whole person. The idea that you could make an entirely computer generated feature film that was indistinguishable from photography has been in science fiction for decades but it is now within touching distance.
I smell a trap in the obvious conclusion that it's inauthentic:
Nudists against nudity.
Generative ai offers a "fake it until you make it" way to paint the world you want to see and share your visions
I think we have to find ways to utilize it to our advantage. It's here to stay. Even though imagery. It's unfortunate that most naturists have to hide themselves so maybe AI can be a tool to express those images without risk. If someone paints a picture of nudism, we seem to be OK to use it, but we fear AI isn't authenticity human. As long as we know what it is... let's work within some boundaries.