Artificial Intelligence (AI) is slowly creeping into every aspect of society, and now its presence in the art world has become problematic. Generative AI should not be used as a tool to create art entirely on its own.
As generative AI programs improve exponentially, it has become harder to differentiate AI art from human-made art. It’s no longer simply noticing the strange-looking hands, misspelled and deformed text, or random flying objects.
Usually, AI use isn’t declared, so people are constantly deceived. “Artists” claim they made a piece when they really didn’t, reaping the benefits without having to do any work.
“I saw this video the other day of someone showing their drawing, and so many comments were saying it was AI that the creator ended up posting a video of them making it to prove it wasn’t,” said junior Violet Berman.
The opposite is happening too. Audiences don’t believe that an extraordinary piece is human-made because they’ve been previously tricked by AI artwork.
People are not supporting human artists in fear that they are using AI which is destroying artists’ reputation and businesses.
AI art programs have their benefits in efficiency, refinement and inspiration, however, those positive aspects come at a cost to human artists.
According to the Adobe website AI uses an algorithm, “that finds patterns in big sets of data. When you prompt an AI generator to depict a tree, it’s using the information it has learned about what trees look like to create a new image.”
This data includes artwork available online, without the creator’s knowledge, consent or compensation.
When songs are used to educate, the creator gets paid, so why are artists being so neglected and why are these companies facing little repercussions?
“It’s unfair to the original artist for their art to be stolen and used to create unoriginal artwork,” said sophomore Marlo Buber.
This predicament is both a moral and legal issue that has to be addressed; otherwise, artists won’t continue to feel comfortable sharing their work to the world in fear of exploitation by AI.
“Since AI and Adobe Firefly came along, my teaching and tutoring have dropped dead,” said graphic designer Susan Oakes in an article from Blood In The Machine.
As similarly shown in other fields, the desire to have a skill is drastically reduced when AI can just do it for you.
For the second year in a row, Coca-Cola has released an AI-generated holiday commercial, which has received an overwhelmingly negative response from the public.
According to The Wall Street Journal, “The animator and writer Alex Hirsch responded to last year’s AI ads by declaring that Coca-Cola is ‘red because it’s made from the blood of out-of-work artists.’”
Coca-Cola did not respond to an email asking if they would continue making AI ads or their rationale behind choosing AI over human animators.
In addition to objectively reducing an artist’s monetary value, AI art generation is harming an artist’s self-worth.
Junior Caleb Lebeau said, “It’s sad to hear AI is taking away people’s motivation to create art when AI can create it within seconds.”
When businesses choose an AI image generator over a human artist, they feel like they’re losing value as a person, like their efforts are useless.
“I see AI art, and I just feel like I’m an awful artist… I would love to be good at backgrounds, but I don’t have the motivation and knowledge, honestly, people would rather see AI art than my actual art, I feel like I should just give up,” said Reddit user OttselPuppy in a post.
In the end, art isn’t just an image; it’s the intention, emotion and effort behind it. Art is a crucial part to our society and has been a constant since the dawn of time, and AI should not be able to take that away completely.
While AI is capable of creating the same art as any human can, human involvement is necessary to maintain a lively, cultured society.
