Skip to main content

Is AI Art 'Art'? The Say NO to AI Art Movement, and Why Human Artists Will Adapt

AI Art No T-Shirt by TET - Available in my RedBubble Store. Click Image.
AI Art No T-Shirt by TET
Also available on other items.

Right now there is a big debate over not just whether AI art is 'art' but whether AI's are actually ripping off the work of actual human artists, without their consent, to create their images - particularly images 'in the style of' specific artists.

From my own observations this debate started to get more traction when artist's signatures began appearing in the output of AI Art image generators.

Is It Art?

Cool Froyd the Cat Sketch by TET.
Cool Froyd the Cat Sketch by TET.
My style is very much influenced by
classic Disney and WB character styles.

To get some clarity on how real human artists work (of which I am one)... we, that is all of us... take influences from the art that has come before. i.e. whatever artists we like, have studied, seen etc. we are influenced by. It shows up in our work, intentionally or not.

If you really study my own cartoony art style you'll see I'm heavily influenced by early Disney and Warner Bros cartoons more than Marvel or DC comics despite the fact I'm a tragic nerd for Superhero Comic Book movies.

Neither studio style was something I intentionally set out to emulate. It was only much later in life, reflecting on my work, that I saw the similarities. I really liked the 'roundness' of the way both studios would draw their characters. Superhero comics on the other hand are often quite angular drawing designs.

AI Art Image Generators do pretty much the same thing, just in a lot more of a direct approach. They don't collage together existing artworks but instead learn the common features of an art style and apply them to a new image.

The reason why you might see a specific artists signature show up is fairly obvious. If an artist always signs their work, as part of their work, in an obvious way, the AI is going to think the signature is part of the art style based on the images it has learned from. The AI doesn't know a signature from a brush stroke (which is possibly why their ability to include text in images has been poor but improving over time).

One could make the case and say if an AI reproduces a signature who's to say it doesn't reproduce other parts of artworks verbatim too? What is it Pablo Picasso said:

Good artists copy. Great artists steal.

You can test this out by entering the specific name of any famous, public domain artwork and its artist into an AI art generator. You'll see it doesn't just spit out an exact copy of the image but a very close approximation, depending on how much data it has learned. See my comparison with Vermeer's Girl with a Pearl Earing below.

Original Girl with a Pearl Earing Oil Painting by Johannes Vermeer compared to output by Mage.ai for the same artwork.
Original Girl with a Pearl Earing Oil Painting by Johannes Vermeer (left) compared to output by Mage.space (AI) for the same artwork using the prompt "Girl with a Pearl Earring, oil painting by Johannes Vermeer".

You can see the proportions in the AI Vermeer image are pretty spot on but the color is much more high contrast. Interestingly I tried adding 'in the style of Vermeer' to the end of my prompt and it didn't tone down the contrast at all.

However when your prompt is so specific to an actual artwork it makes sense that the AI would focus entirely on images of just that artwork and come up with something that could be a badly colored but traced copy of the original. The coloring is likely to be the result, in part, of different photos of the same image that don't share the same exposure for the colors.

All of this is AI art nonsense is reminiscent of the debate over whether photography is art, and then whether digital photography is real photography and/or art? Who is going to want to commission a painted portrait when they can just snap a photo? Yet we still have art prizes for painting portraits. We still have professional photographers despite anyone who owns a phone having a high quality camera to hand.

AI Art can coexist with real, human generated art. Sure, AI art is going to have some impact on the bottom line of professional, commercial artists in the same way photography did decades ago. There's going to be an adjustment period.

I didn't see a lot of real human artists complain when the Print On Demand market started competing with their wall space. Despite the fact you can literally make your own print of a famous master's artwork from the public domain and have it shipped to your house in seconds for less than the price of an original work of art direct from a current, living artist.

The argument over whether AI Art is 'art' is resoundingly 'yes it is'. The only question is subjectively whether you think it's good, bad, meh, or worth every penny some art collector might pay for it. (I mean if minimalists can call what they do 'art'... right?).

The fact that it takes a computer almost no time at all to create AI art is irrelevant. I guarantee you I can draw a picture of a cat (I'm known for painting cartoon cats) in under a minute that looks better than anything someone who can't draw cats could do in the same amount of time. 

By this logic an AI that can make a breathtaking artwork of a cat in almost no time at all makes that work invaluable. (Noting that professional artists don't usually charge money for time because it penalizes those who can do amazing work in less time than it takes a less experienced artist to do mediocre work over many hours).    

But That's Not Really the Issue. Copyright Is.

Copyright Logo.
The Copyright Logo.

In the previous section I talked about artist's signatures appearing in AI art and demonstrated that AI can spit out a copy of specific artworks if it has learned enough data about them. This direct approach to reinterpreting an artist's style through AI is stepping on artist copying rights and intellectual property.

That is, many of these A.I's are being provided with data from specific artists without the artists themselves knowing that their work is being used. Right at this moment anyone (corporations or you and I) with a bit of knowledge can install and train an AI on our own computers to produce artwork in the style of our favorite artist without asking the artist if this is okay or giving the artist any kind of financial compensation.

The problem being that once an AI has been trained with an image it can't be 'untrained'. Much like once you see an image you can't 'un-see' it. Which is more a problem in commercial AI image generators like DALL-E that are made available to almost anyone. 

Things are not helped by the fact that you can literally ask for images in the style of specific artists. The closer the output is to that artist's style the higher the indication that the AI has been trained with that artist's artwork.

I can certainly sympathize with the copyright issue. Perhaps the people who train AIs need to be accountable to their source data? Maybe there needs to be some kind of licensing system in place. e.g. if a prompt specifically requests an artist's style the AI lets the user know that they'll need to make a royalty/license payment of some kind first before any images in that style can be used in commercial projects?

I don't know the answers here but there is a great video below by YouTuber and Artist, Sam Does Arts that describes these issues in more depth.

I'm obviously not anti AI art, and neither is Sam (as he says), but I find it hard to join this cause, as a professional artist. All the branding suggests there should be a total ban on AI Art but what's really being asked for is regulation and proper compensation to working artists.

Human Artists Will Adapt

The thing about humans is that we're excellent at adapting to anything new and different.

As AI art gets better I can see a day where human artists will train an AI on their own specific style for the purpose of producing new artworks in seconds. 

Where do you stand on this idea if you are the artist who not only crafts the text prompt for the A.I but you're also the originator of the style the AI uses in its output of new images? How original is this art? Is it art? Are you more the author of the idea or is the AI?

At the end of the day AIs are just another type of artist in the sea of artists. They're not going away. They will capture a percentage of the market. There will be detractors and people who are incredulous that a machine could come up with art that good.

Human artists will adapt. Whether that's embracing the idea that an actual human created work is more valuable and desirable than AI or incorporating AI into their workflow to reveal new possibilities for creativity will depend on how you view this new technology.

The very fact that more and more artists are going fully digital means that physical, true one of a kind artworks are going to become a commodity even more than they are now. Why do you think NFT's took off for a moment there? 

I feel there's still plenty of opportunity for artists resisting AI art to use its very existence to their advantage. At least as much opportunity as for those artists who wish to embrace AI art into their workflow.

 

Comments

Buy Gifts and Apparel featuring art by TET.

Popular posts from this blog

TV Series Review: Skeleton Crew (2024) (Disney+) *No Spoilers*

I f you saw the trailer for  Skeleton Crew  and decided the show looked too much like Star Wars for little kids, and didn't watch, you missed out on a real treat. While I will say this show was definitely targeted at bringing in younger fans to the Star Wars universe, it is very much more like family viewing than kids only TV. Not to mention, characters are literally gunned down or murdered on this show, but without the really graphic violence you might see on a more adult orientated show. It's actually no more kid only orientated than the first series of Stranger Things  (2016), or even the original  Star Wars  (1977) movie. In fact the whole show is a not so subtle homage to original Star Wars (1977), Treasure Island  (1950), and eighties movies like The Goonies  (1985), ET  (1982), Explorers  (1985) and others. The plot is very straight forward. A group of children, living in the Star Wars equivalent of the suburbs, find an aband...

I'm Confused About Why People Prefer to Say Discombobulated?

D iscombobulated. Is a word that I think someone rediscovered about three or four years ago (maybe more because the pandemic years have thrown out my sense of time) and now I hear it a lot. It's not a new word by any means, but when I started hearing multiple celebrities using it in everyday sentences, I actively had to look up what it meant. Define it with as many synonyms as you like but essentially it's just another word meaning 'confused'. Seinfeld Quotes: Quotes.net The words are pretty much interchangeable. He was discombobulated by too many choices. He was confused by too many choices.  My confusion is the length of the word. It's unnecessarily long with too many syllables. There are many other words that mean confused, and therefore also mean discombobulated. Most of them are shorter and easier to say. So why not just say 'confused'? Perhaps discombobulated sounds more intelligent, maybe?  Hawaii Five-0 Quotes: Quotes.net I've noticed it gets us...

TV Series Review: Creature Commandos (2024) *No Spoilers*

O fficially, Creature Commandos is the first show of James Gunn's kind of reboot of the DCU. Technically though, it starts with James Gunn's, The Suicide Squad , and includes his series, Peacemaker , as the events of both are either referenced or felt within the show. Potentially that means Margot Robbie is Harley Quinn in the DCU, but I'd be surprised if she would even want another crack at it, let alone that James didn't recast the role. However that's a whole other rabbit hole for a character that may not appear again for at least a few more years. Creature Commandos is Suicide Squad but with monsters, and no real threat of Suicide - well, having your head blown off if you stray from the mission at least. Though I don't recall that being a thing in Gunn's Suicide Squad movie since the team was renamed 'Task Force X'? Amanda Waller (Viola Davis) somehow still has a job, but is no longer allowed to use humans on her team, so she assembles a team of...

Introducing the Second Sunday Skateboard Sessions - Doing Less to Skateboard More

This was my second heelflip attempt of the day. I was pleased I at least got the full rotation even if I didn't land it. I  am determined to keep skating for as long as possible, though, since my last post in May 2024, about reigniting my kickflip battle at age 54 , I've probably been skateboarding less than I had hoped. Still haven't landed that elusive kickflip either. Strangely I've been wanting to film myself skateboarding again but have been reluctant to do so because it can be a bit of a hassle trying to create interesting content, not to mention a lot of editing, if you want to capture the full journey of learning a trick. I really hate editing. Looking at my camera equipment the other day I was thinking what is the most minimal setup that I can put together that would make it easy to film skate videos anywhere? I landed on using my Samsung A13, Android phone, mounted on a GoPro selfie stick that has a tripod base in the handle, and a wireless mic I bought some t...

Meanwhile, In Australia... The World's Most Boring Government Is Fine... We're All Fine.

That's um... What's his name? T o be honest, I stopped following politics in Australia years ago. The only time I check in is usually around election time just to see which set of woke lefty independents, I'm going to vote for, ahead of my fallbacks of the Greens, and then Labor. Despite my sister trying to categorise me as more of a 'left brained' person I definitely lean 'right brained' more at home with my cry baby, woke, alphabet, lefty people. (For the record, if this is the first musing of mine you've ever read, I'm a straight white male who identifies as an artist... Male artist - just in case you were thinking artist is some new kind of gender you hadn't heard of). This year is an election year for our Federal Government, potentially the world's most boring government, for no other reason than during its entire term, if you asked me who was our Prime Minister I'd actually have to stop and think for a moment. Maybe our 31st PM shou...

The Path to Becoming a Successful Visual Artist Selling Work for Thousands, or Even Millions of Dollars

I'm calling this, 'Stand Up Comedian'. Image by Leonardo.ai and TET. I  consider myself to be a successful working artist. I use the term 'working' quite loosely but basically what I mean is I work for myself, I earn money from my art or knowledge, and most of my time I can create art that interests me. I've never been motivated to be a 'career' artist. By that I mean, an artist whose work is displayed in all the top galleries, and that the super rich buy as more of an investment for wealth, than a love of art. Which is not to say these investors don't love art but when you're buying a single artwork for thousands, or even millions, of dollars, you're generally looking for a return on that investment too. That said, I'm not opposed to artists who want that kind of recognition. Certainly, if you're prepared to do the work, in countries like Australia, you can earn a nice passive income off the secondary market. Which means each time yo...

Squeezing the Toothpaste: A Metaphor

I remember when toothpaste was sold in a metal tube. Back then, as a child, you'd cop it from Mum or Dad if you squeezed the tube anywhere but from the bottom. You could even buy special keys that would wind the toothpaste tube up from the bottom so you could get every last bit of paste - no wastage. Then along came the plastic tubes. Finally you could squeeze anywhere and the tube would retain its shape - or so they said in the sales pitch. For the most part this was true. It wasn't as much of a problem squeezing the new plastic tube from the top. Squeezing toothpaste from the tube was now easy - or so you thought. The thing about squeezing the tube from the top (or even the middle) is that it leaves some of the paste at the bottom. Eventually you do have to spend extra time pushing the paste from the bottom up into the top of the tube. Not like the old days when squeezing from the bottom meant you got just the right amount of paste and the tube was always ready for the next p...