This is getting weird.

If I would generate an image with an AI and then take a photo of it, I could copyright the photo, even if the underlying art is not copyrightable, just like the leaves?

So, in an hypothetical way, I could hold a copyright on the photo of the image, but not on the image itself.

So if someone would find the model, seed, inference engine and prompt they could theoretically redo the image and use it, but until then they would be unable to use my photo for it?

So I would have a copyright to it through obscurity, trying to make it unfeasible to replicate?

This does sound bananas, which - to be fair - is pretty in line with my general impression of copyright laws.