For anyone looking for the newly released Maryland State Fair 2027 photography categories and rules, I’m happy to say that the rules and regulations now explicitly prohibit AI. I’m sharing a photo below, with the new policy in Rule 8.

8. The use of artificial intelligence (AI) is prohibited. This includes, but is not limited to AI generated images, generative fill, AI created or replicated subjects or backgrounds, and other AI based image manipulation. Entries in violation will be disqualified.

This follows the controversy over the first-place entry in the 2026 “Neon Lights” photography category. I entered a photograph of Dolle’s Candyland, featuring actual neon lights, so this was something I cared about personally.

Baltimore photographer Michael Wriston raised the issue in a letter to the Maryland State Fair Board of Directors and subsequent public posts on Reddit and Substack. His concern went beyond a ribbon or the $11 prize: what does it mean to recognize AI-created imagery in a competition meant to showcase photography?

According to Wriston’s account, the winning entrant openly described using Nano Banana to transform an older HDR photograph. The image had previously won at the Maryland Sheep and Wool Festival in a category called “Computer art generated from a Photo” – a title that made the nature of the work clear.

The Maryland State Fair’s response was that the entry was an embellished photograph in a “fun” class intended for creative experimentation. It also emphasized that the entrant had been open about the process. Wriston’s follow-up shifted the focus toward the Maryland State Fair’s responsibility to define what was allowed and ensure entrants understood the rules.

The Baltimore Banner followed up with an article on the controversy, as did the Baltimore Sun, “AI-altered photo wins Maryland State Fair contest, stirs controversy.” And even Yahoo! News got into the action.

My primary concern was that a photograph entered in “Neon Lights” should depict actual neon lights. Enhancing a photograph of existing neon is different from using AI to create neon that was never there. Permission to embellish did not clearly tell entrants they would be competing against AI-created content. When I first saw the winning photo, I immediately thought it was AI-generated. See this photo for all of the “Neon Lights” entries.

Wriston called for clearer rules and disclosure of how images were made. I also wrote a letter expressing my concerns and asking for an explicit policy, with AI work limited to a separately identified category.

I’m glad to see the Maryland State Fair put a clear prohibition in writing for 2027. The updated rules still allow Photoshop embellishment in designated classes, while expressly prohibiting AI use. That gives photographers and judges a much clearer standard.

Also, if you’re curious, the Maryland State fair 2027 special categories for photography are: “Maryland Front Porches/Stoops” and “Fashion – May be embellished.”

I appreciate the Maryland State Fair taking these concerns seriously.

This is my letter to the Maryland State Fair that I dropped off today when I picked up my submissions:

September 14, 2026

To the Maryland State Fair Board of Directors and Photography Department:

As an entrant in this year’s “Neon Lights” photography category, I want to express my disappointment with the decision to award first place to an image created using AI, a process the entrant has openly acknowledged.

My submission was a photograph of Dolle’s Candyland, featuring actual neon lights. I entered with the understanding that the category called for photographs of that subject. My central concern is straightforward: a photograph in a “Neon Lights” category should depict actual neon lights. Enhancing a photograph of existing neon is fundamentally different from using AI to create the appearance of neon that was never there.

I understand that the Maryland State Fair has described this as a “fun” class that allows embellishment and experimentation. However, that description does not remove the expectation that an entry meet the stated subject. Nor does permission to embellish clearly tell photographers that they will be competing against images generated or transformed by AI.

This concern is about the Maryland State Fair’s standards and judging process, rather than the entrant’s intentions. Photographers deserve clear rules and confidence that entries are evaluated consistently against those rules.

I ask the Maryland State Fair to review the winning entry’s eligibility and establish an explicit policy that AI-generated content is permitted only in a separate category whose title clearly identifies it as AI or computer-generated art.

I value the opportunity to share my photography at the Maryland State Fair. I hope the Maryland State Fair will address this concern in a way that respects the work exhibitors submit and restores confidence in the competition.

Sincerely,

Alissa Arford