Artists and AI Art: A Look at the Art Industry

In this article, Connor Upshaw talks about new technical art.

Artists and Ai

By Connor Upshaw

Imagine this scenario: there is an idea for a piece of art that is demanding to be made. There is only one issue. Art does not come easily to you. Until recently, someone who wanted a custom piece of art only really had the option of commissions. Commissions are when someone pays an artist to make art for them. This is beneficial for both the consumer and the artist, as both get something out of it. The only issue is that they are often expensive and not always reliable; they may not represent the vision of the commissioner. Additionally, price can vary greatly depending on the quality of the artwork. High quality work takes a lot of time, so it can often cost hundreds of dollars.

Let us say high prices are not an option. There is a new technology called AI art where you can download Dreams on your phone and type some parameters in the prompt box. It takes only a minute for it to load. You sit back in your chair, waiting excited to see what comes out, and then: bam! The image is difficult to even understand what is happening. It is the face of a person, but it is distorted. The nose is twisted unnaturally, and one of the eyes is pointing the wrong direction. The background is full of abstract shapes that escape description, and the person’s smile is just a little too wide. It looks like you have commissioned Cthulhu.

Image by Ton Zijlstra on Flickr

As of now, this is the state of most AI art. It does not generally compare to something an actual artist makes, and this is partly due to how it’s coded. AI doesn’t have any creativity; the art generated is based entirely on parameters defined by the user. In this way, AI art programs serve as an automatic, robotic commission. Once it receives commands, the program will search the Internet for keywords used. With some editing, it will mash these images together in a way that resembles the prompt. This may not be a perfect process, but it is certainly getting better. The technology has grown very rapidly, to the point where a well thought-out prompt can be indistinguishable from a piece of art of a traditional artist. This is where the problem lies, and the controversy behind AI art makes itself clear.

Image by Jernej Furman on Flickr

On Aug. 25, 2022, digital artist Jason Allen submitted a piece to the Colorado Art Fair and won first place in the digital art competition. There’s only one issue: his piece was AI generated. The idea of AI art winning a competition shocked and outraged the art community. Both artists competing and those from all over the world protested this as robbing their many hours of hard work. Many had spent years perfecting their craft, only to be beaten by an algorithm. According to The New York Times, Allen responded that he was not “going to apologize for it. I won, and I didn’t break any rules.” It is true that the rules of the competition did not specify whether AI art could be entered. However, this raises the concern that future competitions should limit what kind of art is allowed. AI art may be more valid in a competition designed for it, separate from art created through more traditional means. Still, this whole situation presents a worrying glimpse at how AI can take the place of other art.

While all these fears are certainly valid, many supporters of AI art see it much the same as photography or digital art when they were first popularized. Neither was widely regarded as real art, despite being very recognized nowadays. Stephen Marche of The Atlantic phrased AI deniers as “the latest in a long line of people who said the same thing about some of the most important art of the 21st century.” He compared AI to the likes of Warhol or Pollock, artists who had been very controversial in their eras. The difference between these unique forms of art and AI, however, is that AI art can look like anything. With the right parameters, AI art can accurately produce the likeness of any artistic style, from watercolor to concept to cartoon. While other forms of art are easily distinguishable in their own niche, AI art could replace all of them to the point it would be hard for the average person to even tell the difference. Some may compare this to digital art, which is generally easier to use than traditional methods. However, it still takes hours of skill, creativity and effort. A comparable piece of AI art can be made in seconds.

As of now, the fear that AI will seriously affect the art industry remains to be seen. Traditional artists outcompete AI on a quality level, but this may not always be the case. There are many businesses that could cut their hired artists and use AI in their place, if it proves more profitable. Companies could stop paying wages to their artists and instead type prompts in a generator to automatically get art pieces. This isn’t just wild speculation, either; there’s already evidence of this happening. In June, a group at Cosmopolitan magazine typed a prompt into the DALL-E 2 engine and produced the first ever AI magazine cover. This was a great showcase of the technology, but it is problematic for professional artists. If their work can be reproduced at the same quality with a fraction of the effort, how useful are their skills? How can someone compete with a computer?

Image from Cosmopolitan magazine

Unfortunately, there is no definitive answer to these questions. The future of art as we know it is very uncertain right now, and depending on how the technology grows, the rise of AI could take over the livelihoods of many artists. Only time will tell whether AI art leads to a source of inspiration for artists, or the catalyst to replace them outright.

Sources:

Page updated

Report abuse