Scattered papers marked with rapid sketches, jars of murky water with wooden-handled brushes breaking the surface like sunken ships, a large smooth tile covered with puddles of color layered and mixed haphazardly next to a well-loved easel positioned next to a sweeping window overlooking a flower-dotted garden — an artist’s studio seemingly right out of a picture book.
An older woman with wild salt and pepper hair tucks some larger canvases into a nook to make some room before pulling up a stool, a wry grin playing across her lips.
“I am a painter primarily, but like most artists I know, I dabble,” she says, waving a hand at some charcoal and ink drawings in progress across her desk behind her.
Miriam Claasen recounts her youth filled with finger paints and torn paper collages with nostalgia before her expression turns serious in response to the mention of Artificial Intelligence (AI).
“The world of art is always in flux. Artists and creatives are a passionate bunch and, as a group, we rarely agree on much. There’s always some new argument going on. Every generation has it. Art historians study it,” Claasen noted.
“Many things have changed quite rapidly over my lifetime… uniquely so. The dissonance between artists and technology isn’t going anywhere anytime soon. AI is just the newest topic.”
Since the recent advancements in AI capability, artists have seen an unprecedented surge in AI-created art, frequently to the detriment of human artists. Claasen was one of many who has felt the sting of her creative work being fed into the AI algorithm to teach it to make better, more convincing art.
“It was alarming to discover. It’s one of those things you hear of but feel it will never happen to me,” Claasen said, referring to discovering her art had been scraped and fed to an AI.
Many artists share Claasen’s experience. Out of 100 artists surveyed by IMPACT magazine, nearly a third reported that they had been victims of their art being fed into an AI without their consent.
In recent years, artists have started to build their brand and customer base by sharing their art on social media. This makes it all the more concerning when Instagram and, more recently, X (formerly Twitter) added policies to their user agreements that allows them to take user data, art included, to train their respective AIs. Even more so when artists are either without the option to opt-out or an option to request to opt-out that can be denied.
This year, in particular, there has been a trend of companies making digital spaces once used by artists full of AI-generated content and problematic AI policies. A policy update made by Adobe at the beginning of this year made vague allusions to the use of artists’ personal work saved in the Creative Cloud to improve their AI components. While Adobe has since clarified that it doesn’t intend to use unpublicized works, the trust was already broken and many artists took to their communities for program alternatives.
“I think if these companies were less profit-driven and more interested in ethical long-term solutions, they could have approached this differently. They should have reached out to artists and asked for consent. The default should have been opt-in, rather than putting the onus on the artist to opt out,” said Kelly McKernan, a fantasy artist best known for her work on Dark Horse Comics, in an interview with Creative Bloq.
Responding to a need for artists to have a scraping-free space to share their work, photographer Zhang Jingna founded Cara in 2023. Cara is a social media platform created by artists for artists that promises user data won’t be used to train AI.
“We believe that the future of creative industries will involve heavy use of AI, and it’s paramount that our governments work to regulate the rampant unethical data usage as well as provide safety nets for the impact AI will have on our society,” stated Cara’s about page, which highlights the concerns many artists have with the uncharted waters of AI ethics.
When Meta announced its AI policy this summer, membership on Cara exploded from 40 thousand to nearly a million.
“I have personally seen artists’ work scraped against their will without consent or compensation, and have felt a crushing blow not only to my own resources (image references, online info, safe posting platforms, etc.) but to the deeply essential human need for artistic expression as a whole,” said artist Olivia H.
As Miriam Claasen noted, the art world is once again facing a major change and artists are split on whether that change is positive or negative. It is evident that digital art and graphic design careers are seeing a massive shift away from human artists to AI. Even so, some artists see the value of AI as a new tool in their toolbox.
Digital artist Liam Hunt found himself on both sides.
“It’s a weird world out there for creatives these days. Jobs that sprung up in the past thirty or so years where artists could directly use their skills and passion and get paid well for it are suddenly gone. I was one of those. My boss thought AI could do it cheaper, and suddenly I was back in the job market,” Hunt said.
He noted that the shock made it hard not to be bitter and disillusioned about the future of his field, a sentiment many of the artists surveyed echoed.
“I was angry at first. I ranted at anyone who would listen… it still stings a bit to feel replaced like that. I’ve heard it over and over in the community: book illustrators, video game concept artists, animators, graphic designers are all struggling,” he said.
However, as with any life-changing development, everyone experiences it differently.
While some artists feel disillusioned, others have taken it in stride, incorporating AI into their process to streamline some of the more tedious aspects. In fact, of the artists surveyed, nearly half said AI has positively impacted their artistic practices.
Many artists commented on the inspiration AI has been able to provide as well as its use as a tool to simplify areas of their practice. Over 60% confirmed they would or might use AI in their practices, including Hunt.
“At the end of the day, AI isn’t going anywhere. I’ve got a new job and a new boss who values what a human artist can bring to the table while, at the same time, utilizing AI. Learning to view it as a tool. To use it ethically. That’s the key,” Hunt said.
While the shifting landscape inspires diverse emotions from those already vested in creative fields, future artists don’t seem to be deterred. Of the 40 Palomar art students surveyed by IMPACT, more than 80% are still planning to pursue a career in an art-related field.
Like Hunt, students agreed that AI is a tool, nothing more, but nearly half reported they would only use it with caution. Over a third reported they wouldn’t use it at all. Beyond the general acceptance, many noted they were concerned with both the ethics of how AIs use artists’ work and the current trajectory of their chosen career paths. While passionate about their futures, fears and doubts still loom over their decision to continue toward creative professions.
“I have considered giving up on my dreams of becoming an illustrator/ novelist due to the surge of AI media popping up everywhere, and I hope I won’t have to worry about dropping my lifelong passion for much longer — however I know that there is no guarantee of that in a profit-driven society, especially as someone just starting out as an independent artist,” said Palomar student artist Nico Chmura.
Others, like Mason Guthrie, were more confident in the future, with 75% of respondents believing AI won’t be able to effectively take the place of working artists.
“It hasn’t impacted, nor impeded, my growth as an artist. It is merely a tool that will never be able to do what an artist can. It only creates images that look good at a quick glance,” said Guthrie. “[Generative AI (GenAI)] can’t create designs with intent behind it, nor can it use design techniques. GenAI can only copy and Frankenstein what has already been made.”
Like Pandora’s box unleashing curses on humanity, there is no way to shut the proverbial lid on AI.
Overwhelmingly, student artists and artists in general agreed that AI is here to stay. The concern becomes less about stopping AI in its tracks and more about finding a balance between lauding advancement and respecting moral and ethical concerns.
Similar to privacy and data protections for social media users, the legal aspects that should be in place to protect artists and others from data scraping are lagging behind rapid technological advancements.
In IMPACT’s survey of 100 artists, more than half said there needed to be an adjustment to legislation to protect creative property. Another 20% felt that new legislation would make no difference, reflecting some artists’ feelings of hopelessness in the face of the changing landscape.
As with many fields adjusting to the addition of AI, finding a viable path forward will take time and hard work. In the meantime, all many artists can do is advocate for their own work, and the work of their peers, to remain in their control and out of the mouths of AI machines. It’s fight or return to the non-digital.
Painter Miriam Claasen has chosen the latter.
“I’m a small artist. I’m older. I never had a very strong online presence. I was just barely starting to use social media as a tool to share my art with more people… I’ve chosen to remove myself. I’m lucky to be in a position where I can do so without too many negatives. I’ll go back to selling my art at art fairs and local shows like I did before all this and leave it at that,” Claasen said with a short laugh.
“I’m too set in my ways to make use of it or combat it, and there likely won’t be systems in place to protect artists in my lifetime — so I’m respectfully signing off.”
