AI Enchanced Photos

[Celine0384]

On 5/19/2026 at 8:13 PM, Thomas said:

Click for HQ:

omg 😵

[blacktooth]

She is right. I think the best approach is honesty and proper labeling. If something is AI-edited or AI-generated, people should clearly say so. Real photos, scans, and authentic archives deserve respect and proper credit — especially for an artist like who has such an important photographic history.

[Thomas]

It's an interesting discussion that I like to read people's input on. I do have some thoughts.

You could put a tag in the corner like I did for my completely made up creations, I did that so people knew it wasn't an upscale or an unreleased shot. I think it goes someway to helping. But haters of AI will not settle for that, even a huge watermark across her face wouldn't cut it. The fact AI was used at all is enough for that work to be worthless/slop/disrespectful. And I am not talking about drove all night who you quoted, who has valid opinions and deserves to have her say. I am sure you have come across it yourself, it's an automatic hatred because the word AI is used, without even looking to see where it was used or why.

"Photoshopping" has been carried out since the invention of photography, long before computers. I was learning recently about photographers in the 1900's who carefully edited slides and painstakingly etched away or painted over wrinkles and improved hairstyles to make people look better and remove imperfections. Then it became easier and quicker with the invention of computers. Now what would have taken hours can be done in seconds, using the latest advancements in AI. Is it any better painting over a negative with acrylic paint than airbrushing a magazine cover with a computer and mouse? Or having AI improve a screenshot or a magazine scan in seconds? Not really, it's still editing an image to create an illusion, it isn't real. How can one illusion be acceptable and the other not?

Photoshopping became so standardised that it's part of life, a magazine cover without any airbrushing is so rare that it would probably only be done to make a statement against unrealistic beauty standards. It's almost unheard of. In fact, the haters of AI probably enjoy a million Celine photos that are airbrushed and photoshopped from all throughout her career. I would argue that editing Celine's nose smaller, reducing her chin, making her look 30 years younger is MORE disrespectful than someone using AI to envision a new album concept, a poster or a DVD cover. And yet we have seen it in official photos as recent as the Paris 2026 announcement, I'm not sure they could be any more airbrushed if they tried.

Yes I realise there is a whole separate argument about using Celine's image and the rights to use it. And there is definitely a difference between scanning in an old magazine and restoring it to making a completely made up image of Celine on the Moon, for instance. I think there will be specific laws brought in to address it. Not because someone made a poster, I think Celine as an incredibly progressive and open-minded person would find things like that very interesting, I think she would be amazed and impressed. But because of the people who put her in a bikini or stockings and lingerie (I'm sure we have all seen those on Facebook, they are not acceptable on this forum).

 

[blacktooth]

On 5/23/2026 at 5:19 AM, Thomas said:

"Photoshopping" has been carried out since the invention of photography, long before computers. I was learning recently about photographers in the 1900's who carefully edited slides and painstakingly etched away or painted over wrinkles and improved hairstyles to make people look better and remove imperfections. Then it became easier and quicker with the invention of computers. Now what would have taken hours can be done in seconds, using the latest advancements in AI. Is it any better painting over a negative with acrylic paint than airbrushing a magazine cover with a computer and mouse? Or having AI improve a screenshot or a magazine scan in seconds? Not really, it's still editing an image to create an illusion, it isn't real. How can one illusion be acceptable and the other not?

Yes, that’s exactly what some people don’t understand. Almost all the photos we’ve seen on magazine covers, advertisements, and even old photographs were edited in some way long before AI even existed. Back then, photographers and editors spent hours manually retouching negatives, painting over imperfections, improving hairstyles, smoothing skin, and creating the “perfect” image by hand.

Today, AI simply makes the process faster and more advanced. What used to take hours or even days of traditional editing can now be done in seconds. But at the end of the day, it’s still image editing and enhancement, just using newer technology. There’s really no huge difference between manually airbrushing a photo decades ago and using AI tools now — both are creating an improved or altered version of an image that isn’t fully “real.”

The only real difference is the speed and convenience AI brings.
At the end of the day, it’s still about the artist or editor behind the work, not just the tool being used.

I’ve been reading a lot of messages recently claiming I’m the one generating these AI pictures of Celine. I finally went and looked at the suspicious photo everyone is talking about, and hell no, that is definitely not my creation lmao. They completely changed her dress, gave her unnaturally bigger boobs, and the whole thing just looks undeniably fake. I actually care about preserving her true likeness and facial features. 
 

Edited May 23, 2026 at 06:13 AM by blacktooth

[blacktooth]

I've been waiting for the rare, unedited Courage outtakes to drop! Now that they are finally out, I can share my own edit—staying completely true to her original features and bringing out the best, high-quality details.

 

 

Edited May 23, 2026 at 06:19 AM by blacktooth

[blacktooth]

[blacktooth]

[blacktooth]

 

[Thomas]

On 5/23/2026 at 7:04 AM, blacktooth said:

Yes, that’s exactly what some people don’t understand. Almost all the photos we’ve seen on magazine covers, advertisements, and even old photographs were edited in some way long before AI even existed. Back then, photographers and editors spent hours manually retouching negatives, painting over imperfections, improving hairstyles, smoothing skin, and creating the “perfect” image by hand.

Today, AI simply makes the process faster and more advanced. What used to take hours or even days of traditional editing can now be done in seconds. But at the end of the day, it’s still image editing and enhancement, just using newer technology. There’s really no huge difference between manually airbrushing a photo decades ago and using AI tools now — both are creating an improved or altered version of an image that isn’t fully “real.”

The only real difference is the speed and convenience AI brings.
At the end of the day, it’s still about the artist or editor behind the work, not just the tool being used.

I’ve been reading a lot of messages recently claiming I’m the one generating these AI pictures of Celine. I finally went and looked at the suspicious photo everyone is talking about, and hell no, that is definitely not my creation lmao. They completely changed her dress, gave her unnaturally bigger boobs, and the whole thing just looks undeniably fake. I actually care about preserving her true likeness and facial features. 
 

Yes I feel the responsibility lies with the creator/editor but some fans just go completely wild. A lot of the images on Facebook are not acceptable, I have seen some very risqué images that I would not be comfortable in making or sharing. Sadly, as with traditional photoshopping before it, there will always be people who use it to sexualise someone or present them in a way they would not present themselves. But this is not an AI problem, this is a decades old problem. It's just more accessible now, they don't need any skill and so they never learned anything about the process, they take no responsibility because "AI made it".

And then there are the people who really don't know what they are doing and produce tons of "slop". It barely looks like Celine, has no thought or concept behind it, just loads of churned out content for no real purpose. You can barely use YouTube now because every video is slapped with an AI thumbnail that vaguely resembles Celine. Usually crying for some reason, they love to make images of her crying. And of course people see this and go, urgh AI is awful! Because it is, when it used like that. But then this is used to tar everyone with the same brush and lump everyone into the same category, and it is sad.

[blacktooth]

On 5/23/2026 at 5:48 PM, Thomas said:

Yes I feel the responsibility lies with the creator/editor but some fans just go completely wild. A lot of the images on Facebook are not acceptable, I have seen some very risqué images that I would not be comfortable in making or sharing. Sadly, as with traditional photoshopping before it, there will always be people who use it to sexualise someone or present them in a way they would not present themselves. But this is not an AI problem, this is a decades old problem. It's just more accessible now, they don't need any skill and so they never learned anything about the process, they take no responsibility because "AI made it".

And then there are the people who really don't know what they are doing and produce tons of "slop". It barely looks like Celine, has no thought or concept behind it, just loads of churned out content for no real purpose. You can barely use YouTube now because every video is slapped with an AI thumbnail that vaguely resembles Celine. Usually crying for some reason, they love to make images of her crying. And of course people see this and go, urgh AI is awful! Because it is, when it used like that. But then this is used to tar everyone with the same brush and lump everyone into the same category, and it is sad.

This was my response last week. 

[blacktooth]

Details about Céline Dion’s wardrobe appear to be hard to find.

[Thomas]

Which bit are you looking for? This jumpsuit is by The Blonds Fall 2018 Ready To Wear collection.

[Thomas]

I have no idea what ring Celine is wearing in this photo, it's too small to see and it doesn't seem to be shown in similar shots of this outfit. So I just picked one from the selection shown on the table in the behind the scenes video!

Click for HQ:

 

Edited May 24, 2026 at 06:42 PM by Thomas

[blacktooth]

[blacktooth]

On 5/24/2026 at 10:50 PM, Thomas said:

I have no idea what ring Celine is wearing in this photo, it's too small to see and it doesn't seem to be shown in similar shots of this outfit. So I just picked one from the selection shown on the table in the behind the scenes video!

Click for HQ:

you forgot her signature black mole on her face  

[Celine Fan 77]

On 5/24/2026 at 4:50 PM, Thomas said:

I have no idea what ring Celine is wearing in this photo, it's too small to see and it doesn't seem to be shown in similar shots of this outfit. So I just picked one from the selection shown on the table in the behind the scenes video!

Click for HQ:

Fabulous as always Thomas! Funny coincidence I watched the making of this photoshoot yesterday and couldn’t help but thinking how many unreleased photos they showed though those screens!

 

Here’s the only photo I could find where she wears the ring.

Edited May 24, 2026 at 04:49 PM by Celine Fan 77

[blacktooth]

On 5/24/2026 at 2:04 AM, Thomas said:

Which bit are you looking for? This jumpsuit is by The Blonds Fall 2018 Ready To Wear collection.

looks different 

[Thomas]

On 5/24/2026 at 5:46 PM, blacktooth said:

looks different 

 

It's definitely The Blonds, just without the belts and gloves.

Yes the mole, of course! I will need to add it.

[Thomas]

On 5/24/2026 at 5:44 PM, Celine Fan 77 said:

Fabulous as always Thomas! Funny coincidence I watched the making of this photoshoot yesterday and couldn’t help but thinking how many unreleased photos they showed though those screens!

Here’s the only photo I could find where she wears the ring.

 

Thanks! It does look like the same ring there. On the behind the scenes footage they cycle through a few outtakes and it looks more square. I guess she changed them up, I know she also did add a second necklace with this black dress ensemble, so they did alter the jewellery.

[blacktooth]

 

 

Edited May 25, 2026 at 06:25 AM by blacktooth

[blacktooth]

I tried but the dress is not matched 🤔

[Thomas]

You can try adding some references, the metal belt and the dress is Lanvin 2012. Best reference is the existing shot though!

[Thomas]

Click for HQ:

[blacktooth]

[blacktooth]

[Thomas]

Awww I can't see the "Misled" one, link is broken. Can you fix?

[blacktooth]

On 5/26/2026 at 4:40 PM, Thomas said:

Awww I can't see the "Misled" one, link is broken. Can you fix?

I think I accidentally deleted it 🤔
Anyway, here's another one i upscaled from the very poor-quality photo shared by another fan. https://imgbox.com/vd8j04di

 

Edited May 27, 2026 at 03:53 PM by blacktooth

[Thomas]

Sexy Celine! I wish they had done more with that photoshoot, it was the best of the Courage shoots for me.

[DrewSB80]

Thanks for the work you guys are doing restoring all these images, I'm currently just starting to try this myself on other artists images. It's not easy but when I get the results I want it makes me so happy. I'm just using gemini and chatgpt for most of it because atm it's all I can use, wish I had something better for the images I have trouble with

[Cullinan_13]

From today’s announcement xx