José Gonzalez-Campelo/The Cougar
As AI-generated images continue to encroach on the art world, many ethical questions dilemmas arise. The most common concern is its impact on human jobs and whether it constitutes theft. Beyond ethical questions, a new problem has emerged.
AI generative imagery is negatively affecting the way we interact with art, and if appropriate restrictions are not implemented quickly, the trend will continue.
In some cases, generative AI has become indistinguishable from real art created by human hands. For example, in a recent illustration of Pokémon competition by The Pokemon Company, six AI-generated submissions, each under similar pseudonyms, made the top 300 submissions.
Fortunately, these submissions were eventually identified by other artists, leading to their disqualification. However, the fact that these works have progressed this far in the competition shows just how refined generative art is becoming.
What does this mean for the future of art? More importantly, what does this mean for artistic communities NOW?
Generative imagery is already changing the way we interact with art. Online artists and their audiences have learned to be skeptical of every piece they come across, as even established artists have started using templates like Midjourney or Stable Diffusion to design pieces rather than creating them manually. the hand.
Navigating online art environments has become a minefield, as it’s far too easy to become interested in AI images without knowing it. With the proliferation of AI art, many viewers have found themselves meticulously studying illustrations before offering any form of engagement.
There is a positive point: in-depth analysis of the art means that the audience takes more time to appreciate the artistic themes. However, what is the benefit when it arises from the fear of theft?
This generalized dilution of art undermines the value of true human creation. This breeds paranoia, and it has already led to real artists being accused to use generative images in place of their normal creations. If that’s the price we pay for viewers taking the time to stop and smell the roses, it’s simply it’s not worth it.
No one should have to endure the theft of their creations to obtain datasets that mimic real artistic skills. Plus, no one should have to deal with paranoid accusations that their art is fake because a large group of people don’t want to pick up a pencil and learn.
It is becoming far too difficult to meaningfully engage with art because of the attitudes that generative AI has created among artists and their audiences. Something has to change.
Although artists have already taken steps to prevent their works from being stolen by AI models by using things like Glaze and Nightshade, which slightly alter an image so that these models cannot imitate them correctly, these measures will not be enough not in the long term. run. Currently, there are no laws or restrictions on generative AI and the datasets used to train them.
To preserve real, meaningful art created with human intention, something must be done to prevent AI artists from further infiltrating our communities. Sustainable solutions are needed to eliminate paranoia and allow us to appreciate art for what it truly is: a display of human creativity and a labor of love.
Parker Hodges-Beggs is a second-year journalism student who can be contacted at (email protected)