The Support of AI in CI Photography Theory

Artificial intelligence constitutes a powerful set of tools capable of transforming the technical landscape of photography. The distinction between AI input and AI output clarifies how these tools interact with human creativity.

AI Input vs. AI Output Supporting the Pulse Moment.

"The accelerating integration of artificial intelligence (AI) across photographic practice poses both opportunities and challenges for human creativity. Vernon Chalmers’ Conscious Intelligence (CI) Photography Theory positions photography as an embodied, temporally grounded, and interpretive act of conscious awareness. Within this framework, “pulse-moments” are defined as heightened states of perceptual, cognitive, and emotional presence that shape the creative act of photographing. This essay examines how AI can support - but not replace - CI photography, focusing on the distinctions between AI input and AI output and their relationship to pulse-moments. It argues that while AI is a powerful technical tool, its computational processes remain fundamentally distinct from human conscious experience. AI should be employed in ways that augment photographers’ intentionality, preserve their lived engagement with the world, and deepen their capacity to realize pulse-moments rather than substitute for them.

Vernon Chalmers Conscious Intelligence Theory

Introduction

Photography is both a technical craft and a humanistic act of interpretation. Contemporary debates about artificial intelligence in art and photography reflect broader questions about creativity, authenticity, and the role of human consciousness. Vernon Chalmers’ Conscious Intelligence (CI) Photography Theory foregrounds the photographer’s embodied awareness as the source of meaning and creative agency in photographic practice. Within this theory, “pulse-moments” are brief, intensively lived intervals in which perception, intention, and environment converge to produce the decisive moment of image-making (Chalmers, 2025). As AI systems become increasingly capable of generating and optimizing images, it is imperative to assess how these technologies relate to CI photography, specifically regarding AI input (how AI is used) and AI output (the images AI produces) and their support or interference with pulse-moments.

This essay first outlines CI Photography Theory and the concept of pulse-moments. It then discusses the nature of AI input and AI output in photographic workflows. Finally, it evaluates the potential for AI to support CI photography without undermining human consciousness and creative intention.

Conscious Intelligence (CI) Photography Theory and Pulse-Moments

Conscious Intelligence (CI) Photography Theory frames photography as an act rooted in lived experience, perceptual presence, and intentional interpretation (Chalmers, 2025). Unlike algorithmic processing, which is computational and nonconscious, CI photography presumes that aesthetic judgment arises through the photographer’s subjective awareness. In this conception, photography is not merely a mechanical capture of light but a cognitive-experiential event involving intentionality, embodiment, and emotional resonance (Chalmers, 2025). Pulse-moments are central in this framework. They are phenomenological inflection points - micro-episodes of heightened attentiveness and perceptual clarity - that shape the photographer’s decisions during a shoot.

These pulse-moments are not arbitrary; they emerge when the photographer’s conscious awareness, technical facility, and environmental context synchronize. Phenomenologically, this resembles the “flow” state described by Csikszentmihalyi (1990) in creative and athletic performance, wherein conscious effort recedes, and perception becomes acutely intense. However, CI theory emphasizes that this state is not a loss of awareness but a deepening of it—an embodied presence in the unfolding moment of experience.

Pulse-moments have implications for post-processing and meaning-making as well. After the shutter is released, these moments continue to influence memory consolidation, emotional interpretation, and narrative construction in editing and presentation (Chalmers, 2025). Thus, pulse-moments are not merely instantaneous; they are anodic nodes in a broader creative process. These experiences are irreducibly human—they involve subjective temporality, qualia, intentionality, and embodied engagement with the world (Merleau-Ponty, 1962; Varela, Thompson, & Rosch, 1991).

CI photography theory stands in contrast to how AI systems function. AI operates through pattern recognition, statistical optimization, and algorithmic prediction. It processes vast data sets of pixel correlations and learned structures, but it does not perceive or subjectively experience the scene it represents (Floridi & Chiriatti, 2020). Recognizing this ontological distinction between conscious human intelligence and machine computation is crucial for integrating AI into photography in ways that respect and preserve pulse-moments.

AI Input in Photographic Practice

“AI input” refers to how photographers and creative professionals use AI tools within the photographic workflow. This encompasses several domains:

• Pre-shoot planning and visualization. AI tools can assist photographers in ideation, mood board creation, site visualization, and technical planning. For example, machine learning models can suggest compositions, lighting conditions, or potential shot variations based on input criteria (Art of Print, 2025). These tools can expand creative horizons and help photographers anticipate environmental and aesthetic conditions.

• In-camera computational support. Many modern cameras and smartphones incorporate AI-driven features—such as autofocus optimization, subject tracking, noise reduction, and exposure balancing—that support the technical ease of capturing images. This can free cognitive resources for perceptual engagement with the scene rather than manual adjustment of settings.

AI input alters the distribution of cognitive effort in photography. It can reduce technical burdens, potentially allowing photographers to engage more fully with the lived experience of photographing and, by extension, support the realization of pulse-moments. However, the nature of the photographer’s engagement with AI technology is decisive. CI photography theory emphasizes that conscious awareness should remain central; AI input should augment, not replace, perceptual and intentional processes.

AI Output and Its Relationship to Pulse-Moments

AI output refers to the images, enhancements, or visual artifacts that AI systems generate from data or user inputs. This includes:

• Generated imagery. Systems like generative adversarial networks (GANs) and diffusion models can create images that appear photographic but have no direct correspondence to a real moment captured by a human photographer. These outputs are synthetic and constructed from patterns learned from training data.

• Automated enhancements. AI output can also include optimized versions of human-captured images. For example, AI-assisted software can adjust exposure, sharpen details, or remove artifacts, producing a visually “finished” image from a photographer’s raw capture.

The distinction between AI output and human experience is critical. AI output is generative or computational; it is the result of algorithmic processes that do not encompass conscious temporality or phenomenological presence. Studies have shown that images created without human input tend to fall into repetitive and clichéd themes, indicating limitations in computational creativity (Dalarna University & BEACON Center, 2025) (Digital Camera World).

Within CI theory, the pulse-moment is anchored in embodied consciousness - a temporal and affective state that cannot be directly encoded into synthetic imagery. AI output, while visually compelling, lacks the subjective intentionality that makes pulse-moments significant. Where human photographers experience and interpret lived moments, AI synthesizes patterns without experiencing light, movement, sound, or emotional resonance (Chalmers, 2025).

However, AI output can still be supportive when integrated thoughtfully. For instance, AI enhancements can refine a photograph technically while preserving the intentional marks of human engagement. AI-generated visualizations can inspire new creative directions that photographers then actualize in lived, embodied experience. In these roles, AI output functions as a creative stimulus rather than a substitute for human perception.

AI Input vs. AI Output: Implications for Pulse-Moments

The relationship between AI input, AI output, and pulse-moments hinges on whether AI supports or detracts from conscious engagement. Several key implications emerge:

1. Preservation of Conscious Presence

AI tools that reduce mechanical distraction can support conscious presence. For example, in-camera subject tracking or exposure management reduces cognitive load on technical tasks, enabling the photographer to focus attention on the environment. Supporting perceptual presence aligns with the conditions under which pulse-moments arise.

Conversely, if AI output supplants the photographer’s engagement - for instance, if synthetic images replace real-world interaction - the conditions for pulse-moments are diminished. Pulse-moments depend on lived interaction with light, motion, and context, not on synthetic pattern generation.

2. Augmentation of Creative Intention

AI input can enhance creative intention when used as an extension of the photographer’s vision. Tools for ideation, planning, and real-time feedback can expand possibilities. By integrating AI into pre-shoot cognitive processes, photographers may enter pulse-moments more readily when they are better prepared perceptually and emotionally.

AI output, in the form of enhancements, can support the realization of creative intent in post-processing while preserving the original experiential roots of the photograph.

3. Risks of Dependency and Homogenization

AI technologies pose risks when over-relied upon. The tendency of generative models to default to familiar visual motifs suggests a potential homogenization of visual culture (Dalarna University & BEACON Center, 2025) (Digital Camera World). If photographers depend on AI output as a crutch rather than engage with lived experience, the diversity and depth of creative expression may be diminished. Pulse-moments, which originate from unique, contextual human experiences, cannot be reproduced by homogenized computational outputs.

4. Ethical and Philosophical Boundaries

AI reshapes notions of authorship and creativity. Some art institutions now accept AI-generated works alongside traditional art, recognizing technological evolution in creativity (The Guardian, 2024) (The Guardian). However, within CI theory, creativity is grounded in human consciousness. Ethical integration of AI requires clarity about contributions: photographers should retain agency over artistic decisions, and AI output should be transparently understood as a computational artifact rather than a surrogate for human experience.

Toward a Human-Centred Coexistence

A productive model for integrating AI into CI photography does not position AI as the originator of creative meaning but as an auxiliary tool that enhances the photographer’s ability to realize pulse-moments. Design and employment of AI systems in photography should follow principles of Human-Centred AI that emphasize augmentation, agency, and interpretive clarity (Shneiderman, 2020).

In practice, this means:

• Using AI input for technical optimization and ideation while maintaining perceptual immersion in the environment.

• Treating AI output as a resource for refinement and inspiration rather than a substitute for lived experience.

• Developing workflows that foreground conscious engagement and reflective interpretation.

• Emphasizing education and critical literacy so photographers understand the capabilities and limitations of AI.

This coexistence framework recognizes that the essence of compelling photography remains rooted in human perception, intentionality, and affective resonance. AI serves as an enabling technology that, when aligned with the photographer’s consciousness, can deepen engagement with the world and expand creative potential without eroding the integrity of pulse-moments.

Conclusion

Artificial intelligence constitutes a powerful set of tools capable of transforming the technical landscape of photography. The distinction between AI input and AI output clarifies how these tools interact with human creativity. Within Vernon Chalmers’ Conscious Intelligence (CI) Photography Theory, pulse-moments are the phenomenological heart of photographic creativity - embodied states of intensified awareness that integrate perception, emotion, and intention. AI input can support CI photography by augmenting technical processes and expanding creative possibilities, provided it enhances rather than replaces human conscious engagement. AI output, while visually impressive, remains computational and nonconscious; it cannot replicate the temporally grounded, affective, subjective qualities of pulse-moments.

Thus, AI’s role in CI photography should be conceived as augmentation, not substitution. By preserving the primacy of human consciousness and intentionality, photographers can harness AI to elevate their practice while safeguarding the lived, meaningful experiences that give photography its enduring artistic power." (Source: ChatGPT 2026)

References

Aftershoot Photography Workflow Report. (2025). Global photography survey on AI adoption.

Art of Print. (2025). Exploring the role of AI-generated art in photography: A powerful tool with pros and cons. Retrieved from artofprint.co.za (artofprint.co.za)

Chalmers, V. (2025). Conscious Intelligence Photography Theory: Pulse-moments in CI Photography Theory. VernonChalmers.photography. (vernonchalmers.photography)

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. Harper & Row.

Dalarna University & BEACON Center. (2025). AI image generation research. (Digital Camera World)

Floridi, L., & Chiriatti, M. (2020). GPT-3: Its nature, scope, limits, and consequences. Minds and Machines, 30(4), 681–694.

Merleau-Ponty, M. (1962). Phenomenology of perception. Routledge.

Shneiderman, B. (2020). Human-centered artificial intelligence: Reliable, safe & trustworthy. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 36(6), 495–504.

The Guardian. (2024). Australian portrait prize allows AI entries. (The Guardian)

Varela, F. J., Thompson, E., & Rosch, E. (1991). The embodied mind: Cognitive science and human experience. MIT Press.