Should AI edited photos be labelled?

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/using/content-credentials.html

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[LocalHero1953]

1 hour ago, Alberti said:

I thought content credentials have to do with 1) 'original ownership=authorship' and 2) use of photoshop; 3) 'owner of an M11' — so the latter leaves 90% of posters out of this game.

This is Content Authentication, not Content Credentials - different but related. When exporting an image from Lightroom Classic, if you select the beta Content Authentication option, a summary of your edits is embedded in the metadata of your exported image. As Jaap noted, LinkedIn and Adobe Behance now include simple tools to reveal this info. I agree it would be useful if this forum did the same. I don't know if, at present, an image posted here then downloaded would reveal the info or if it is removed by the forum upload software.

As it's mainly an Adobe initiative at the moment, then its relevance is limited to those who use Lightroom or Photoshop. And perhaps it's limited to files that Adobe imported as raw - I haven't looked that far.

Edited September 26 by LocalHero1953

[jaapv]

DNG was an Adobe initiative...

[LocalHero1953]

This image has Content Authentication added to the metadata.
It was a Q3 43 raw file edited in LR Classic and exported with CA. If I drag it into the Adobe inspector, then the edit summary is revealed.

Edit. After downloading it from my original post, the Adobe inspector just gives an error message, so I assume the CA has been stripped. 
It would certainly be a lot simpler for each person posting an image to state the major edits - adding, removal, generative fill.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited September 26 by LocalHero1953

[LocalHero1953]

More.....

I added the Adobe Content Authenticity browser extension to Brave (it's a Chrome extension, and Brave is a Chrome derivative). It told me there were 'no Content Credentials found on this page'.

@jaapv - your new signature may therefore be misleading (unless CA checking works with embedded Flickr links etc).

Edited September 26 by LocalHero1953

[jaapv]

It is still in beta, it will develop and spread. For the time being I will mark images using Generative AI editing ( very rare) with GAI. 

[01maciel]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Am 26.9.2025 um 12:47 schrieb 01maciel:

Didn't I read recently that the Content Credential System from (I think) Fuji was hacked?

It wasn't Fuji, it was Nikon.

https://www.heise.de/en/news/Photo-news-Lessons-learnt-from-the-C2PA-debacle-10672949.html

 

[jaapv]

Correct - Nikon decided to go their own way with their own cloud, whilst Leica uses the system provided by Adobe. Obviously content credentials generated in the camera are more secure than the part out of camera, as encryption is applied at the source in that case. However Adobe does encrypt and tamper-proof as effectively as they can and is still working on the aspect to make it as secure as possible. Nikon's mistake was to take it too lightly, so it was possible to replace  the credentials from one NEF image by those of another. 
As it is, Nikon implemented in-camera certification for the Z6III only, now suspended. Likewise, Leica only certifies the M11, other new models will follow in the future, I am sure. This is a technology in the early stages of development. I think they are wise to follow Adobe, as they were with DNG. 

The Certification we are looking at in this thread, though, commences at the point where we take up post-processing, so this hack was in another part of the forest. 

[01maciel]

Yes, DNG has been a success story since its specification in 2004. However, this is only because the file format is open and not subject to any intellectual property or patent restrictions. It is also based on the equally open TIFF format with additional metadata-based features.
A lot of time has passed since 2004, and Adobe has also changed significantly in terms of its commercial goals. Their Content Credential system cannot be compared to DNG because it is not an open system. Other manufacturers can license it for themselves. It is “still” free for users. If I earned my living from photography, that would certainly be OK, but then I would probably have starved to death by now.
As I said, relying on one manufacturer and on their license-policy is risky. 

[jaapv]

Maybe, but the Adobe system has more chance of being adopted by the mainstream than a wholly brand-specific one like Nikon which even has its own closed Cloud.