29/07/2026
I used AI to create this artwork,
now I’m an artist!
Yeah, sure you are.
Stop calling it "Artificial Intelligence" when applied to design and call it what it really is: plagiarism software.
When you use AI to create graphics, artworks etc. there is no artificial intelligence. It's not creating anything, it's just copying existing work by existing artists and designers and changing it enough to get around copyright laws. Please don't say "this is created by an artist using artificial intelligence" when you really should be saying "someone made this using plagiarism software"
AI ‘artworks’ are made from a collection of images it has no right to use. It does not create as artists do. It does not interpret or express originality. Artists did not opt-in their work for this. Al is sourcing content from all over the web. It simply scrapes images from portfolio sites like Behance, Art Station, Deviantart, Pinterest and God knows where else without any of the original author's consent.
AI cannot have output without a certain input. It cannot interpret and be inspired by something the way humans can. Al-generated images are compiled from other images. It needs to steal this images from other sources to learn to create anything.
And to claim it's just a tool to help designers and artists is bu****it. It's as much a tool as a robotic arm is on an assembly line. It's not meant for artists but as a replacement for artists. It is not a tool for them because it acts as the author. Al companies want amateurs to produce artwork without the need for further editing. It is marketed toward amateurs with the promise that they can create art without artistic skill.
Using Al to make art is the lamest way to make art you could possibly have dreamt of. Why? Because there is no skill or craftsmanship in programming plagiarized images. By removing imagination, personal touch, craft, and thoughtfulness you are removing the very process that is enjoyable and leads to a finished work of quality. It is the very reason artists become artists.
The tech bro’s are promoting the idea that Al will make your workflow faster and therefore, you more valuable. Decreasing production speed is good as long as you don't lose quality. If you change something from a creative expression to an automated task, it is to your detriment. You cannot remove the creative processes of your work- the core element that separates humans from robotic automation or one artist from another. If you do, you'll be hired for speed, not creativity, and that is a race to the bottom.
Their other argument is that an amateur with no artistic skill can create art (that is made from plagiarized images). This is their plan? What type of person thinks like this? What society turns the power to create from imagination and skill over to amateurs with neither?
This is what happened to sign writers and is now happening to the graphic design business. People who were highly skilled in their craft were replaced by vinyl printers who produced s**t banners with s**t type and colours created by someone's PA using Canva or some other template software. Our retail spaces and highways are now littered with them. We've chosen that over the beauty of original designs created with wood and paint and it makes our places, our cities, our living environment less than. By a lot.
And yes, I can hear all the CEOs saying "Why pay a designer? I can get my nephews mate who is good with computers to do all our logos, signage and marketing materials". Why not?
Because hopefully you're not a cheap, tasteless s**thead. Because hopefully you're a business of some sort that wants to stand out in your marketplace. Because you don't want poor-quality, plagiarised art attached to your business.
And, before anyone says that I'm gatekeeping or am just a luddite afraid of new technology l'il address that criticism.
Over my long career I've tried just about every medium of art there is. I've changed software and hardware many times over the years as a professional designer. I've progressed from the ‘cut and paste' era to the first very simple macs and on to the beautifully powerful software and computers we have today to help us generate our design visions. I dabbled in nearly everything to come over 45+ years to see if it helped me do the work I need to do as a designer and artist. Suggesting designers and artists are against Al because they're afraid of technology advancement is hysterically stupid.
My stance is against Al image generation, not all variations of Al. Al generators are built on art that it has no permission to use. They have skirted copyright law and used that art without permission. It is outright theft. It is unlawful, unethical, and immoral thievery.
As a designer and artist, I like to think of myself as a craftsman who has spent many years learning my trade. The thought of using Al generators to create ‘artwork’ is abhorrent to me. In no way could I call myself a creative designer or artist while doing that.
And if as a designer you think that one day ‘ethical' Al is going to be part of your future, be prepared to lower your prices. You're going to be serving designs made from stock images.
This sad existence is not something I am interested in and, though I am saddened for the future of artists and designers, I am in some way relieved that I have come to the end of my career and won't be involved in the dumbing down and de-valuing of an industry that I had been proud to be part of.
End of rant.
