Can AI replicate the human touch that artists bring to their work?
How do artists who have spent years honing their skills feel about the rise of AI-generated art, particularly as trends like the Ghibli-inspired AI images take the internet by storm?
These questions gain more significance among the creative community as AI continues to grow like a Frankenstein in nature.
In an interview with The New Indian Express, several prominent artists from around the world discussed their views on AI-generated art, sharing their concerns, frustrations, and hopes for the future of human creativity in a world increasingly dominated by AI.
Ben Templesmith, an Australian comic book artist best known for his work on 30 Days of Night and Fell, provided a powerful statement on the matter.
Templesmith views AI-generated art as a threat to both human civilisation and the very foundation of creative endeavors. According to him, art has always been about unique voices and individual signatures, with creators known for their distinct storytelling. He argues that AI can only generate generic works, based on past creations, and will never offer something truly new or innovative.
Is it an end to human creativity?
Templesmith is particularly concerned about how AI-generated art could impact emerging artists. He worries that corporations, seeking to cut costs, may turn to AI as a way to replace human artists, ultimately reducing opportunities for newcomers to the industry. "It’s not a threat to me," he says, "but as corporations seek to cut costs, I worry for the future of those just beginning in the industry."
He also expresses his concern about AI's inability to replicate the intricate and theoretical nature of sequential art. For Templesmith, storytelling in comics isn’t just about creating an image; it’s about conveying a narrative with intention and purpose, something AI can’t achieve. "AI can’t replicate sequential art in a meaningful way," he says. "It’s impossible to have 'purpose' in its generation the way a creative mind does."
While Templesmith doesn't think AI will completely replace traditional comic book art, he hopes that people will continue to seek out unique voices and personal styles instead of settling for generic AI-generated works. He also stresses the ethical issues surrounding AI, as it often creates art using material "stolen" from other artists. "The threat is coming from both ends of the spectrum," he says. "Fleecing our existing work, and attempting to deny us future work."
Are AI-generated images an insult to artists?
Kelly McMahon, a Los Angeles-based illustrator and graphic designer known for her minimalist style, shares similar concerns. McMahon, whose work has been featured in collaborations with companies like Lego and Image Comics, believes that the Ghibli AI trend where AI generates images in the style of Studio Ghibli is both a testament and an insult to the studio’s legacy. For her, AI-generated art doesn’t just replicate a style; it reduces the entire artistic process to mere "content," stripping away the depth and value that comes from years of dedication and refinement.
"Reducing everything down to 'content' has taken the value and perceived value out of what so many artists have spent their entire lives learning how to do," McMahon said. "I don’t think the average person understands that ripping off an artist’s style in the way that this trend and generative AI in general has done is not complementary to the creator, it's exploitative."
McMahon argues that AI-generated art not only threatens human creativity, but it also normalises the idea that art can be produced without effort or skill. She cautions that if this trend continues, AI will eventually replace human creativity entirely, particularly as consumers begin to view AI-generated works as a quick and efficient solution. "Consumers need to stop and realise that if we don’t push back on these companies now, AI will come for every job, every last bastion of expression, all in the name of efficiency and content,'" she explains.
Are AI models stealing works of artists?
For McMahon, the ethics of AI-generated art are particularly troubling. She explains that AI models are often trained on existing artworks, many of which belong to human creators who never gave consent for their work to be used. This, she believes, is a form of theft. "AI art is an insult to creativity," she says. "There is nothing creative about a program that mashes stolen images together to generate a 'new' image. There is no expression in this, no message, and no heart."
Though McMahon acknowledges that AI could serve as a tool in certain creative processes, she firmly believes that AI art lacks the emotional depth and intent that human-created art carries. "Creativity is about expressing yourself and saying something," she says. "As soon as you are allowing AI to generate the end result, you strip the image of any true meaning."
Miguel Co, an artist from Philadelphia who runs his own business, Migzy Co, shares similar concerns about AI-generated art. He sees it as soulless, lacking the human touch that makes art meaningful. "AI-generated art is based on stolen work from artists," Co says. "It is soulless and lacks human touch." Like Templesmith and McMahon, Co believes that trends like the Ghibli AI phenomenon do more harm than good, ultimately reducing the value of real art to mere imitation.
Co also expresses frustration with the fact that AI is increasingly being used in commercial spaces, including conventions. "I don’t think AI-generated art should be allowed at all in those industries," he says. "But I see it more and more these days."
In his view, AI is not just a tool, it's a direct threat to creative jobs. "AI should only be seen as a threat to creative jobs," Co asserts. Though he believes AI has potential as a tool, he sees the ease with which people can misuse it to exploit artists' work as a major issue. "Artists already get taken advantage of," he says. "This only helps selfish people do it more often and more easily."
Need for Protections in an AI-Driven Industry
As AI continues to make inroads into the art world, artists like Co, McMahon, and Templesmith believe that protections are needed to ensure that artists are fairly compensated for their work, especially when it is used to train AI systems. "At the very least, artists need to be given credit and compensation if their work is used to train AI," Co suggests.
McMahon also believes that ongoing conversations about the impact of AI on the creative process are essential. "Having meaningful discussions with political leaders, unions, and boards to put contracts and laws in place to safeguard our careers and skills is definitely needed," she says. "If governments don’t regulate AI and protect jobs, they will find cities worth of people unemployed and there won’t be new career paths or jobs to replace what AI has taken."
Value of Human Expression
Despite the challenges posed by AI, many artists remain hopeful about the future of traditional art. McMahon, for one, believes that human creativity will continue to hold value in a world dominated by AI. "An artist's value is in true expression and understanding of the human condition," she says. "AI can only spit back what has been put into the machine. It has no ability to grow, no ability to understand emotion and expression."
Templesmith echoes this sentiment, arguing that there will always be a demand for unique voices in art. "People will hopefully always want unique voices, instead of generic AI output, which has no personality or uniqueness," he says.
For these artists, the future of art lies in preserving the authenticity and depth of human creativity. While AI-generated art may have its place as a tool, it can never replace the rich emotional depth and storytelling that come from human artists. In the face of these challenges, artists continue to advocate for their work and ensure that their unique contributions to the creative world are recognised and valued.
As AI continues to grow, its impact on the creative endeavors will only become more pronounced. While some see AI as a tool to enhance the artistic process, many artists are concerned that it threatens the core values of creativity, originality, and expression. The rise of AI-generated art, particularly in trends like Ghibli-inspired images, has raised important ethical questions about authorship, consent, and the value of human-made art. As the industry grapples with these issues, one thing remains clear: the future of art depends on protecting the rights and voices of human creators in an increasingly digital world.