--- title: 'A perspective on AI "art"' date: 2026-09-27 tags: [Personal, Art] --- Recently, I got into a small spat with someone on the internet over a piece of AI "art" they prompted and proceeded to share on Twitter as well as in a Discord server of well over 1,000 members. I won't name and shame, because I think we're good now, and I think everyone deserves a second chance in this matter, especially those coming from an uninformed background. This is far from the first time I've been in a situation like this (admittedly I tend to start these conversations basically any time I see generative AI used like this), so I thought, why not compile my thoughts on it for my blog, since one of its purposes is to collect complex information I have to convey often. I think this kind of post reads very differently based on who writes it. A professional artist obviously has a vested interest in minimising the use of AI to create art, while someone who works with AI is probably more likely to want you to use it, for example. So, a reminder of my background, for those unfamiliar: I'm a professional software developer with a decent knowledge of how AI technically works. I'm also an amateur artist - mostly fibre arts, more recently photography - who's never particularly wanted money, recognition, or any other form of compensation for what I create. I am a self-proclaimed member of a community of artists (furries), but I do not particularly consider myself an artist by trade or speciality. So, this post comes from the perspective of someone who is first and foremost an informed and passionate consumer. So, why shouldn't you share AI "art"? First off, it threatens the livelihoods of artists. Companies all over the world are firing artists and refusing to hire new ones because their executives are under the impression that using AI is cheaper. It's hard to get a good number on just how many people have lost their jobs because of this, since art spans a wide variety of un-coordinated disciplines, but it's evident that this is happening across many industries where the primary output is a digital good or service, including movies, television, animation, digital art, and music. Many independent artists also report a drop in commissions due to AI, some to the point where being an indie artist is no longer a sustainable career. When you think about sharing AI art, it's important to consider, how many real artists are losing out here? How many will be fired? Unable to find another job in their industry? Unable to support their families? There's also the question of copyright and ethical use. It's undeniable that AI has been trained on art by creators who did not and would not consent to this particular application of their work. This work is so fundamentally baked into AI models that it is functionally impossible to prompt up art that doesn't incorporate aspects of work that was used without permission. When a real artist creates art, they can attribute their inspirations, and are expected to fairly compensate anyone whose proprietary work they incorporated, often held to account if they don't. AI artists can't do that, and literally all parts of AI art are taken from somewhere else, so it's difficult to justify ethically. Another matter is simply the quality of the work. AI art is often full of mistakes. Textural inconsistencies can contribute to the classic "AI slop" look that makes viewers feel like the art is cheap and ill-thought-out, made by someone who doesn't care that much about quality. In educational applications, these mistakes can be a lot more impactful - for example, an AI-generated anatomical diagram in a medical textbook could result in serious harm if it contained even a minor error. Beyond that, art made quickly and effortlessly by AI can detract from the personal value of the piece. Imagine a real artist and an AI artist, who independently produce the same piece of art. Even if it's byte-for-byte the same, the real artist's work is significantly more personally meaningful. Real art has value far beyond the sensory output. It represents years of experience, refined creative intention, and beautiful imperfection. The full value of art is intrinsically tied up in the humanity involved in creating it, and using AI to create it trivialises that value. And, of course, the environmental impact. AI data centres are popping up all over the place. These buildings consume vast amounts of electricity, which equates to tons of carbon dioxide being pumped into the atmosphere and contributing to global warming. They can also impact local communities' access to clean drinking water, and bother residents with sound and light pollution, and their sites are often built over natural habitats, displacing and threatening wildlife populations. So, when you engage positively with AI art, whether that's by sharing it, liking it, or even generating it once for your own eyes and then deleting it, you create a point of data. That point tells companies: "Yes, we will take AI art. Please keep firing your artists and frankensteining their work. Please keep burning the planet. Please keep feeding us slop. We accept this." We do **not** accept this. If you've engaged positively with AI art without considering these points, that's OK! I forgive you, as will most generally reasonable people. You've got plenty of time and opportunities to make amends, too! I don't expect you to become an anti-AI social justice warrior and send a custom essay to everyone you see who posts AI art, but it would be helpful to the cause if you could rescind your endorsements of AI art, and perhaps share your reconsideration with any followers you may have. Perhaps avoid patronising businesses who use AI, or make some real art for a small business you care about. If you've considered these points and decided that it's justifiable to keep engaging with AI art, then shame on you. The lack of humanity in your art is clearly reflected in your character, and you should be ashamed to call yourself an artist. If you want to engage with art positively, I urge you to stay away from AI. If you have an idea you want to make, go commission someone! I know it can be expensive, but believe me, it's worth it, to support creativity. And if you aren't in a position to commission someone, do it yourself! You may not be good at first, but nobody ever is, and imperfection is part of what makes real art beautiful. I'd rather you create something visually clunky that is truly your own than prompt up a perfectly orchestrated piece from a machine that lacks the soul required for true art. Go, now. Log off. Touch some pencil.