Make intelligent art, not artificial intelligence
What do we do about AI as illustrators?
Sidenote: I didn’t come up with this title, I saw it on Puk Ewdokia’s wonderful Instagram post and was originally created by Franz Bomberg.
If you, like me, live in the world, you will most likely encounter Artificial Intelligence more and more these days: as a tool for writing, researching or planning, in the shape of videos or images that have too many (or too few) legs, or in the ever-green debates about how it’s taking over the planet. It’s a complex topic, and I’m trying to keep some nuance in here, so buckle up, because this might be a long one.
What’s the issue?
As an illustrator, AI mostly sends a shiver down my spine. For me, I see two main problems: One, the very foundation of AI-image creation tools are fed by images made by (mainly) non-consenting human artists. Two, I see more and more examples of AI generated pictures / “illustrations” being used, in order to save money, time or effort. This means less paid jobs for actual illustrators, less understanding of the time, skill and knowledge it takes to create good work and in turn, less appreciation for the value of good work. Not to speak of the fact that so far, so many AI generated images simply have a lot of non-sensical errors in them. Something uncanny, that is often not easy to catch right away, but genuinely concerns me in terms of our ability think critically and look at details, both as viewers and creators.
(Of course, there’s the whole environmental impact of AI, not to speak of the fact that I find it concerning to get used to not having to summarize or analyze texts with our own brains anymore – but that’s a whole other can of worms.)
The fear
If I put my most fashionable tinfoil hat on for a second, here’s what I imagine the future of the illustration industry will look like: there will be less and less opportunities for human editorial illustrators, because newspapers and magazines have hired people to create these illustrations much faster (and cheaper) with AI tools. Children’s books and games will have AI generated illustrations, graphic recording will be done by an AI program, and I will find an office job and do my silly little drawings on the side.
Or will the job of an illustrator simply shift from being a direct creator (sketching the concepts, drawing the lines, deciding on the color and composition) to a facilitator? Someone who gives prompts into a program, edits ideas and refines the details? At least then the analytical and visual communication skills I have will still come into play and create more thoughtful images than a random intern. My point is: illustration is not just the act of drawing or painting itself: it’s analyzing a concept, creating a visual language, telling a story. Every single line, color and random blob is a decision I’ve made. I might be preaching to the choir here, but I think it’s so important to reiterate. The whole point of something being “generative” implies that it is generated from something: a prompt, an existing image, a text. But what is my role if I’m not in charge of the actual generation? Just the editor around it?
As someone who currently working on a children’s book, I am very aware of how much time, thought, skills and effort it takes to make – and the jury’s still out on whether it will even be any good! Even if you are lucky enough to get through to a publisher, and get that elusive contract, it’s still not usually something that will make you a good living, at least not right away. But we do it because we love it. That’s why I was so outraged when I saw that a well-known Danish children’s TV-presenter had written a non-fiction book about animals, and the illustrations throughout the whole book showed animals with an incorrect amount of legs, claws or fingers. This was from a relatively large publisher, too. This makes the tendency clear that, to some publishers, it’s genuinely just about money: the children won’t even notice, right? I find that incredibly disheartening: not only because I love creating stories for children and would be heartbroken if that was not something that was valued anymore, but because I believe children are just as deserving of quality art as adults are.
A picture book is the first art gallery a child visits.
– Květa Pacovská
We need good, well-thought out and visually varied illustrations for both children and adults, and we need to pay the illustrators properly and give them enough time to do their work well. I hope my tinfoil hat vision will not become reality, but I think we all need to be aware and vocal in standing up for ourselves and the value we bring.
Another example of AI being proposed as a substitute for actual illustration work was something I encountered directly. The trade union in Denmark that is responsible for journalism, but under that umbrella also represents illustrators and photographers, had organized an event for their members. This event was entitled “Make your own illustrations with AI: Midjourney – everyone can join in”, with a description promising how easy it is to make images and illustrations if you only have a laptop. Reading it gave me a bad taste in my mouth: why would a union, supposedly representing illustrators and photographers, offer a way to make “illustrations” quickly with AI?
I spent a few days figuring out if I was over-reacting (I am a woman, after all!) before I wrote an angry email. I outlined the same points as above, and elaborated on why I found this event problematic. Here are some excerpts:
AI is a tool which is already taking over the jobs of image creators and I find it unethical that precisely our trade union teaches their members to contribute to this. The implication is that i.e. illustration work, which is created with consideration by professional illustrators, doesn’t have any value because AI can do it faster and quicker.
When a trade union offers a course in creating images “easily” and “for free” through the use of AI, I find it to be deeply problematic. I’m assuming that [the trade union] also wouldn’t offer courses for illustrators in how to use ChatGPT to write articles quickly and easily instead of collaborating with a journalist.
I never heard from the actual people who had organized the event, but the response I got from the general administration of the union was something along the lines of: “AI is here to stay and we need to understand how to use it as a tool, even if it’s built on a problematic foundation. ” I understand the point that is being made, but I’m not sure I find that a satisfying answer. Not by a union who one should think should fight for and protect the rights of the industries they are supporting. I think there is a conversation to be had about artists who are using AI as a tool in interesting, explorative ways. I found an interesting archive of creatives using AI in their art, as a starting point or like a collaboration. However, events like this seem less about that, rather than just undermining the work, experience and thought that actual drawing (analog and digital) requires.
Trying to find a silver lining
I am aware that times are always changing and people have always been skeptical of new technology. Drawing digitally on a computer or an iPad seemed outlandish or even blasphemous for a while until people saw the incredible work that can come out of it. Music artists had to adapt from mainly selling physical records to selling digital downloads to putting their music on streaming services. Creatives who try to blatantly ignore technological developments are in danger of being left behind – however, I still think there is a massive difference between a new type of tool or platform, and a new type of intelligence creating the work from “scratch”.
I suppose the best case scenario for the inevitable increase of AI as an illustrator is to use it at exactly that: a tool. That’s what we should do, in order to keep our work, according to people like Jamie Brindle, whose insights and tips on freelance work I really enjoy. His point is that we should use AI to “offload repetitive tasks and focus on high-value work”, not as something that will replace the creative expertise and skills we have. Maybe the point is to get AI to write the boring emails or figure out how I can get paid what I deserve. Sure, if there was an AI tool that could scan my work, remove the white background, remove smudges and stray hairs as seamlessly as I can do it manually (and that’s something I’ve yet to discover, dear Adobe), I could maybe get behind that. Oh, and without it stealing my images to generate more, please and thank you. I must admit I’m having trouble seeing where else it should be useful in my work, though. I like using my own brain, my own eyes, typing my own words and making my own decisions. However, I’m trying to keep an open mind and I’d love to hear if you have found any ways in which you use AI to your advantage.
The one thing I do know is that I will not stop making art. Even if that is only for small group of people, or even only for myself in the end. Humans have always been creating and we need it. We need to make it and we need to see it made by other humans. I can’t predict what impact technology will have on my industry or the future of my career, but I can keep emphasizing the importance of art and creativity as a human form of expression, reflection and connection. And that’s simply not something I’m interested in from an artificial intelligence, no matter how many human thoughts it has been stuffed with.
I really don’t want to become a grumpy old conservative person, who thinks everything was better in the olden days. I think AI can be extremely useful in many different fields and uses. Maybe there’s even somewhere it can be a good tool as an illustrator – I am open to finding new perspectives. I do, however, think we all need to be vocal about the value that human made art has: both for ourselves, but also for the rest of the world.
How do you feel about AI in the creative fields? Or in general? Have you found any useful ways to implement it or are you totally against it? I’d love to know.
Thanks so much for reading,
Lots of love,
Signe
When people no longer have clean water to drink (and that's already the case), I highly doubt they'll be happy to see "beautiful" illustrations created by AI.
It's already too late...
I draw by hand, I clean up my hand drawings, and I don't worry about being up to date.
This was so beautiful and thoughtful. I am an author not an illustrator but I did my PhD on comics in youth mental health arguing that it’s the wobbly vulnerability of the hand drawn line that makes comics the perfect medium for communicating crisis and care. But I also know if AI had existed I would never have got the job that led to the project and then led to me hiring other writers and illustrators because we had to fight hard to convince the scientists we worked for that the mess making of comics was a good investment. They highly valued creative people it’s just that they weren’t always aware what the value was. They thought we were translators as in a word for word translation of technical language into ‘youth speak’. But we embodied the message - we translated through our felt experience, through emergent processes, through listening. We were creating a third space of encounter, and the drawings were their own language. Anyway this is what this beautiful post made me think of.