The rise of AI in creative fields has been meteoric. From generating intricate images to composing music and scripting videos, AI seems capable of producing art in seconds that would take humans hours, if not days. Initially, this technological leap is thrilling—who wouldn’t be amazed by the ability to conjure sophisticated creations with a few keystrokes? However, as a passionate consumer and admirer of art, and having roots in the industry as an artist in games and VFX in my earlier career, I am growing increasingly cynical about AI-generated art. Despite its technical prowess, it lacks the human touch that imbues true art with meaning and emotion.
I touched on the subject in a separate post a few years back. I guess this can be seen as an extension of that, but with an evolved opinion based on my continuous observation and experience with the technology.
The Essence of Human Art
Art is one of the most profound expressions of humanity. It’s a window into the artist’s soul, reflecting their experiences, emotions, and perspectives. The journey an artist undertakes—years of practice, experimentation, and personal growth—culminates in works that resonate on a deeply personal level with audiences.
When I view a painting, listen to a song, or read a novel, I seek a connection with the creator. I want to feel their passion, understand their message, and experience the world through their eyes. This connection is what makes art transformative and enduring.
Patterns and Pitfalls of AI Art
AI-generated art, while often visually or audibly impressive, tends to lack this depth. After a while, AI art starts to blend together, exhibiting a sameness that’s hard to ignore. This is because AI models generate content based on patterns in existing data—they remix and reassemble what’s already out there without genuine creativity or intention. It is not entirely unlike how human creativity works with experience and exposure, but it is taken to a much bigger extreme.
Moreover, AI doesn’t experience emotions. It doesn’t know love, sorrow, joy, or pain. It can’t infuse its creations with feelings it doesn’t possess. As a result, AI art can feel hollow or superficial, missing the imperfections and idiosyncrasies that give human art its character.
One could argue that the so-called prompt engineer should fill this role. And perhaps a real artist can. But now that these generative tools have been democratized, the issue becomes that everyone can generate a highly rendered piece of art without much effort, missing the years of hard practice, struggle, and thoughtfulness that go into growing as an artist. Essentially flooding the space with meaningless pixels and hollow writings.
Ethical Concerns with AI in Art
Beyond the aesthetic shortcomings, there’s an ethical dilemma in how AI art is produced. AI models are trained on vast datasets of existing works, created by countless artists who receive no recognition or compensation. Unlike a student who learns from masters and credits their influences, AI obscures the lineage of its knowledge.
This raises questions about intellectual property and artistic integrity. Should the creators whose work trains these models receive acknowledgment? Is it fair for AI-generated art to potentially displace human artists in the marketplace, especially when it builds upon their labor without consent?
While AI has its place in augmenting creative processes or serving practical needs like generating thumbnails (acting more as a tool in the process, and not the final product), it falls short as a substitute for human artistry. Art is inherently human—a manifestation of our thoughts, emotions, and experiences. It thrives on imperfection and authenticity. As we navigate the integration of AI into creative fields, it’s crucial to preserve the value of human expression and ensure that artists are respected and credited for their contributions.