EVALUATING ARTISTIC MERIT OF AI-GENERATED PHOTOGRAPHS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.29121/shodhkosh.v7.i1s.2026.7126Keywords:
AI-Generated Photography, Artistic Merit, Aesthetics and Creativity, Human–AI Co-Creation, Cultural EvaluationAbstract [English]
The paper will address the artistic quality of AI-generated photographs and combine the aesthetic theory, computational imaging, and empirical analysis. With the growing ability of generative models to generate images of visual appeal, issues of creativity, originality, authorship, and cultural worth emerge. The research places AI photography in the frame of classical and contemporary aesthetics, the intentionality of humans and the algorithmic production. The work technologically reviews GAN-based, diffusion-based and transformer-driven image synthesis in focus of prompt engineering and human-AI co-creation workflow. The methodologically based curated set of AI-generated and human-created photographs are built, including a variety of genres, cultural motifs, and stylistic traditions. Mixed-method evaluation system is a hybrid quantitative rating scale with qualitative ratings by expert photographers, artists and curators as well as surveys by the audience. Comparative studies evaluate the quality of perceptions, emotional appeal, originality, and depth of storytelling of human and AI outputs and the output of various generative models. Findings suggest that AI generated photographs can take the top positions in terms of high technical and compositional ratings, but they are inconsistent in terms of perceived purposefulness and situational meaning. Evaluation is largely mediated by cultural background which manifests bias and conflicting aesthetic priorities. The article has implications on the practice, education, and curation of art, stating that AI photography should be seen as a hybrid creative process instead of a substitute of human art.
References
Ang, T. (2022). Photography: The Definitive Visual History. Penguin.
Cetinic, E., and She, J. (2022). Understanding and Creating Art With AI: Review and Outlook. ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications, and Applications, 18, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1145/3475799 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3475799
Fallahzadeh, A., and Yousof, G.-S. (2019). Piet Mondrian, Early Neo-Plastic Compositions, and Six Principles of Neo-Plasticism. Rupkatha Journal on Interdisciplinary Studies in Humanities, 11, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.21659/rupkatha.v11n3.12 DOI: https://doi.org/10.21659/rupkatha.v11n3.12
Greenier, V., and Moodie, I. (2021). Photo-Narrative Frames: Using Visuals With Narrative Research in Applied Linguistics. System, 102, 102597. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102597 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102597
Hermerén, G. (2024). Art and Artificial Intelligence. In Elements in Bioethics and Neuroethics. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009431798 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009431798
Jaruga-Rozdolska, A. (2022). Artificial Intelligence as Part of Future Practices in the Architect’s Work: MidJourney Generative Tool as Part of a Process of Creating an Architectural Form. Architectus, 3, 95–104. https://doi.org/10.37190/arc220310 DOI: https://doi.org/10.37190/arc220310
Jiménez Alonso, B., and Brescó, I. (2021). Narratives of Loss: Exploring Grief Through Photography. Qualitative Studies, 6, 2021. https://doi.org/10.7146/qs.v6i1.124433 DOI: https://doi.org/10.7146/qs.v6i1.124433
Lin, F., Xu, W., Li, Y., and Song, W. (2024). Exploring the Influence of Object, Subject, and Context on Aesthetic Evaluation Through Computational Aesthetics and Neuroaesthetics. Applied Sciences, 14, 7384. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14167384 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/app14167384
Marcus, G., Davis, E., and Aaronson, S. (2022). A Very Preliminary Analysis of DALL-E 2. arXiv.
Mazzone, M., and Elgammal, A. (2019). Art, Creativity, and the Potential of Artificial Intelligence. Arts, 8, 26. https://doi.org/10.3390/arts8010026 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/arts8010026
Rinehart, R., and Ippolito, J. (2022). Re-Collection: Art, New Media, and Social Memory. MIT Press.
Samo, A., and Highhouse, S. (2023). Artificial Intelligence and Art: Identifying the Aesthetic Judgment Factors That Distinguish Human- and Machine-Generated Artwork. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts.
Sikri, A., Sikri, J., & Gupta, R. (2024). AI-Powered Dentistry: Revolutionizing Oral Care. ShodhAI: Journal of Artificial Intelligence, 1(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.29121/shodhai.v1.i1.2024.2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.29121/shodhai.v1.i1.2024.2
Wen, Y., Jain, N., Kirchenbauer, J., Goldblum, M., Geiping, J., and Goldstein, T. (2024). Hard Prompts Made Easy: Gradient-Based Discrete Optimization for Prompt Tuning and Discovery. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36, 51008–51025.
Zhang, C., and Lu, Y. (2021). Study on Artificial Intelligence: The State of the Art and Future Prospects. Journal of Industrial Information Integration, 23, 100224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jii.2021.100224 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jii.2021.100224
Zhou, E., and Lee, D. (2024). Generative Artificial Intelligence, Human Creativity, and Art. PNAS Nexus, 3, 52. https://doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgae052 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgae052
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Anil Kumar , Zarafruz Burkhonova, Shweta Goyal, Rahul A. Padgilwar, Arivukkodi R., Subhash Kumar Verma
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
With the licence CC-BY, authors retain the copyright, allowing anyone to download, reuse, re-print, modify, distribute, and/or copy their contribution. The work must be properly attributed to its author.
It is not necessary to ask for further permission from the author or journal board.
This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.
