To be an artist takes time, dedication, and skill. Countless hours of practice have gone into each unique piece of art created by an artist.
To some, however, this dedication is overwhelming. Enter AI image generation. Why spend hours drafting, sketching, coloring, and rendering when you can type a few sentences and have a unique piece of art in mere minutes. Why commission an artist when so much of the software used for this image generation is far less expensive?
AI image generation has exploded in popularity over the past few years for these exact reasons. With this popularity boom comes controversy, however. What are the ethics of AI “art”? Is it really beneficial? Where do artists fit in a world where image generation is thousands of times cheaper and faster?
To begin, one must consider both sides of the argument. On one hand, AI image generation allows more people to create the art they want to see. On the other, it devalues the work of actual artists who have spent countless hours honing their craft.
Another issue that crops up when discussing AI image generation is where the AI has learned to “create”. Artificial intelligence cannot think on its own. It cannot create its own style. Which means that it must steal its style from the work of others. Each artificially generated image is trained by “studying” the work of artists and generating an image that matches that style. Oftentimes, the AI is trained on the work of artists who have not consented to having their work used.
Furthermore, there also comes the consideration of AI generated images being used for profit. Book covers, illustrations, movie posters, and more have all seen AI images being used in the past year has caused great debate.
With the software being trained on art by creators who may not even know their work is being used in this way, the ethics of using AI to generate images that are used to generate profit is certainly a hot button issue.
As an artist myself, my issues with AI image generation are numerous. While I appreciate the accessibility AI image generation provides, I believe it does more harm than good. The theft of an artist’s style, especially without their consent, is unforgivable. The fact that these images are being used for profit is even worse.
So what can be done? To start on a local level, I believe the University of Wyoming needs to make their stance on AI art clear. It should not be used for any academic work. For example, UW already has made their stance on AI generated writing obvious. It is plagiarism, and AI art is the same.
I also believe, on a larger scale, that the government needs to step in. While I think it’s too late, and too unreasonable, to ban AI image generation altogether, I think the use of AI for profit needs to be stopped.
The future of art is in our hands, and we need to make it clear. AI image generation will never be as valuable as art created by an artist.
