Why Fear AI-generated Art?

A new shift in art is upon us, in the form of images generated by artificial intelligence (AI). The media are abuzz with fear-mongerers predicting the end of the traditional art market, that “the AI” will replace the creative process of the human artist. Nothing to see here, folks - we’ve been here before.

Just by way of background, the new technology allows a user to enter keywords into a web-based interface, and the AI programme will then search the web and integrate its findings into a synthetic image that it thinks best fits the description. It allows for presentation in different art styles. So you could, for example, type in something like “egg and bacon in the style of jackson pollock” and get a picture that the entirety of the internet thinks satisfies that requirement. There’s no doubt about how clever it is, and how useful it will be for creators who have to produce industrial quantities of imaginative output.

I sense that AI will be to digital art what digital art was to traditional, for a couple of reasons. Firstly, the newest kid on the block will naturally be more intimidated by the new gang from around the corner - the old hands will know the routine and stay secure in their position in the neighbourhood. AI art is closer to digital than it is to traditional, an incremental development if you will, created by coders who have little or no interest in art save as a puzzle to be solved (if that is even possible). Were we beaten into submission by Procreate? No.

Secondly, there will always be a market for art created under a human hand - as there certainly will for the novelty of art by computer. AI art is not to be feared, they're two different approaches to the same end, and there will be room for both. In marketing terms, they're two highly differentiated products, and will appeal to different segments in the market. Almost certainly, AI art will steal a few traditional buyers, but will likely open a new market segment hitherto underserved, bringing new buyers and creators into the art world as a sort of gateway product. But there are millions of us who have no interest in digital creations at all, and the same will be true for AI.

Thirdly, the sensory appeal of human-created art is undeniable. The smell of paint and varnish, the imperfections in the rendering, and roughnesses in the surface of the painting. In a sense, both digital and AI art manifest behind a layer of glass that insulates the viewer from the tactile nature and natural randomnesses of true painting. I'm left wondering whether AI fans have ever, in fact, stood three feet from a real painting in their lives, but have rather only appreciated jpeg-compressed images through a cellphone screen.

Sure, you might fear that the imaginative process in art is at risk of being replaced, but consider the difference between how the AI "imagination" is triggered compared to the human... you have to come up with typed words to describe the target image - and that step in the process has to be performed by a living person. It is primitive and clunky compared to how the human brain actually integrates its life experiences, emotions, memories and musings, and synthesizes something new.

So, should we fear this new technology? No - or at least no more than our predecessors feared the arrival of photography, photocopiers, acrylic paint and the iPad. As I said, we’ve been here before.