Ai Headshots and their prevalence in the market??

The post does not show examples of headshots used. There is a LOT of bad headshot photography out there, so a composited-AI headshot is likely to look better. I wonder how the data would read if the three headshot examples used where 1. typical grip-n-grin headshot 2. Headshot crew associate headshot. 3. AI headshot.

The photo, alone, isn't the only value. If that is the case, then our days are numbered. Think like an organizer, manager, facilitator, director, creator, marketing advisor......

I’m more concerned about the clear bias of the article and how the study was conducted - because there are problems in the design of the study and it’s being done by a company that sells AI services for job hunters.

“When the 1,087 recruiters in question were shown a blend of real professional headshot photos and others that had been generated by the AI platforms, a whopping 76.5% of them preferred the artificial images.

However, this only applied when they weren’t told that some of the images were AI-generated.

This was demonstrated by another question put forth to the recruiters, in which they were asked if they’d dislike a candidate who used an AI-generated headshot.

To this, in what was almost an inverse of their preference for AI-created images, almost 70% of the recruiters surveyed said that they’d find this off-putting.”

https://shotkit.com/news/study-claims-recruiters-…

Like everything else, it ultimately comes down to economics. Many recruiters opt for the cheap and convenient option when assembling a client’s resume package, often turning to AI-generated headshots. However, there’s still a small percentage of recruiters who wouldn’t dream of using AI for this purpose. Soon, the headshot market will likely be divided into two categories: AI or low-quality headshots, and high-end, luxury headshots. The middle-tier option will fade away, leaving only those who prioritize quality and a personalized touch at the top, and then those who only want the low-quality (cheap) headshot. Ex. You have those who want to buy a grill that you can purchase at any big box store. And then you got those who want to build a whole outdoor kitchen.

Well, I like this part anyway... "Three quarters (74.4%) of recruiters are more inclined to interview candidates with headshots"

Recruiters are trying to keep an edge as their jobs can be replaced by AI, waaaaaay quicker than ours. That is what I read in-between the lines. It can't be about the picture folks... it has to be about the experience as well.

Don't get me started James lol

If we’re only selling a picture — a head on a plain background — then yes, our days are numbered. If you feel a threat to your product, change the product. Stop selling pictures; start selling an experience, a confidence boost, and authenticity. With the right approach, a handmade premium headshot will only increase in value.

So, a simple answer to the question "what to do" — raise your rates. Yes, again. Because the niche of $30-50 headshots has now been taken over by AI. And elevate your product to a higher level.

The interesting thing is the reaction when a majority of recruiters feel mislead by someone if they find they’ve used an AI headshot. This is a key issue that people should be concerned about. If your AI-generated headshot doesn’t look like you in person, that recruiter or HR person meeting you in real time can feel misled. And then wonder what else you’re misleading them about. It calls into question if their resume was embellished, if they’re willing to cut corners to complete a project, for example. There are unforeseen consequences to going the AI route that some people don’t seem to realize.

James, my two cents - I think this article is deceiving and weighted towards the AI side of the equation. Art and Robert bring up a key point in the recruiting process - authenticity and honesty. AI by its very nature goes against this. Since moving to Europe this topic comes up frequently and the EU is looking long and hard at it. There is proposed legislation, that will be enacted in some form, which will require AI images to be clearly identified because of the lack of authenticity and potential to deceive. One of the things that I've taken note of is that a vast majority of the advertising I see here is far more raw (way fewer edits, more freckles, moles, and blemishes, hair less perfect) than what you'd see back in the States. I'm not so sure we are going to be replaced and this has a long way to play out. As Slava noted in his comment, if someone wants a $30-$50 headshot we can't compete. But is that where we want to play? Not me.