Why Real Photography Will Outlive AI
"Let AI paint its dreams.
I will continue photographing what only a human can feel."
Anastasiia Terentieva
Photographer, Visual Storyteller
There is a particular kind of silence in the moment a shutter clicks. It is not the silence of absence, but of presence — of breath held, of light captured, of time paused. The photographs I create are born in that silence. They are not generated. They are lived.

Each image in this series was made before artificial intelligence became the new default. Before prompts replaced presence and pixels replaced patience. I worked with natural light, human skin, wind and movement — not because I feared technology, but because I sought connection. And now, in a moment when AI-generated images are winning photo contests, headlining exhibitions, and even confusing seasoned judges, I feel more confident than ever that real photography — the kind shaped by soul, vision, and the intimacy between artist and subject — will not only survive. It will become even more necessary. Even more sacred.

AI can generate visuals. It can replicate aesthetics. It can even approximate what we call “beauty.” But it cannot replace experience. It cannot feel the nervous laughter between photographer and model. It cannot sense the shift in mood when the clouds move, or the instinct to wait for one more second before releasing the shutter. That kind of knowing lives in the body. It comes from shared presence, from breath, from touch — and no algorithm can access it.

In my work, I often photograph women. Not just as subjects, but as collaborators in a visual ritual. The body becomes language. Fabric becomes movement. Light becomes emotion. There is a quiet choreography in these sessions: the way a shoulder turns, the way fingers grasp a flower, the way the model breathes in before closing her eyes. These are not just poses. They are conversations. AI can replicate a visual of a woman standing in a field — but it cannot replicate the moment she decides to let go of shame.

We’ve seen this cycle before. With the industrialization of porcelain, handmade ceramics were called outdated. Yet what remains in museums and collector homes is not the mass-produced bowl, but the one brushed by a human hand. In fashion, fast fashion offers speed, but we revere couture for the hours of labor stitched into every seam. In architecture, AI can design, but it cannot walk through a space and feel its soul.

Fine art photography is walking this same line — between automation and authenticity, between simulation and spirit.

Of course, we cannot ignore AI. It’s here. It’s powerful. It’s seductive. But when everything becomes frictionless, when every image is effortless, it is the rough edges we begin to crave again. A slightly out-of-focus frame. A scar on the skin. The asymmetry of a real face in real light. These imperfections are not flaws. They are fingerprints. They are proof that someone was there.
Fine art photography is walking this same line — between automation and authenticity, between simulation and spirit.

Of course, we cannot ignore AI. It’s here. It’s powerful. It’s seductive. But when everything becomes frictionless, when every image is effortless, it is the rough edges we begin to crave again. A slightly out-of-focus frame. A scar on the skin. The asymmetry of a real face in real light. These imperfections are not flaws. They are fingerprints. They are proof that someone was there.

Fine art photography is walking this same line — between automation and authenticity, between simulation and spirit.

Of course, we cannot ignore AI. It’s here. It’s powerful. It’s seductive. But when everything becomes frictionless, when every image is effortless, it is the rough edges we begin to crave again. A slightly out-of-focus frame. A scar on the skin. The asymmetry of a real face in real light. These imperfections are not flaws. They are fingerprints. They are proof that someone was there.
I do not oppose AI. But I do advocate for memory. For slowness. For the handmade image in a world of instant simulation. My photographs are not a rejection of the future — they are an offering to the present. A reminder that we can still create something real, with our hands, our eyes, our voices.

I recently watched an AI-generated photo of a girl with wind-blown hair go viral. It was breathtaking — but hollow. The light was perfect. The expression haunting. And yet something was missing: the tension, the story, the presence. It was a photo of a ghost. Beautiful, but untethered.

My images — the ones you see in this series — were created with effort. With trust. With the texture of real sand on knees, with ribbons that wouldn’t lie flat, with sunlight that moved too fast. Each image carries with it a residue of the day it was made. The weather. The breath. The human emotion. That residue is the art. That residue is the truth.



Interviewed and recorded by Mark Schneider