The macro photography looks bizarrely uniform and the poses contrived. I feel like a sleuth trying to decide if this is AI generated or not. I suspect it isn't, but I'm somewhat distressed at how suspicious I am of cool things now.
As much as the website looks nice, the design looks AI generated - image loading animations, or quotation marks for species names. (Both a are needles decorations.)
Plenty of worries if those images are AI-generated. I'll give the author the benefit of the doubt as he's a macro photographer: <a href="https://www.nickybay.com/" rel="nofollow">https://www.nickybay.com/</a>
Indeed, I saw the watermarks. It's clearly a testament to his skill that his consistency is so unbelievable. Maybe that's common in macro photography but I'm genuinely floored by it.
> Plenty of worries if those images are AI-generated.<p>What would be so worrying about someone using AI to generate images for their site?
In my own experience, whenever I detect something AI generated I lose the ability to evaluate how much I can "trust" something. Compare an article on Medium with a published book on the same topic; both are human-originated but the substance of one implies authority, quality etc. Generating a website and pictures with AI requires very little effort and care, and I have no interest in carelessness. Like most humans, I can't help but evaluate the author alongside the art.
The whole point of the site is the images and facts.
I don't mind it at all for decorational images, but in this case I would mind. I suppose I would mind the inaccuracy, the worry that the creatures might not look exactly like the real world ones look.<p>Not that it actually matters but if those images were generated it would feel pointless to me, even if I can't tell the difference.
The kind of site that makes one happy the Internet exists
This may be the most important story of the year (for creatures with 20 pods.)
Cool site and beautiful photos!
I can't tell whether the images are heavily photoshopped or AI generated.