What Is AI Art Good For?

Serving Any Purpose?

Tripwire contributing writer Paul N Neal continues his look at AI comic art and what purpose it serves in the current comics industry…

The purpose of my second article with regard to Artificially Generated “Art” is to ask another basic question. It follows my first piece that simply asked for a definition of the term and perhaps some of the problems surrounding this extremely hot topic within the comic community. That article can be found below…

https://tripwiremagazine.co.uk/headlines/just-what-is-ai-art-and-how-it-is-created/

In order to write about the subject here, I shall remain neutral. (My personal opinions can be found elsewhere online.) So, the question is simple. Does AI art have any use or purpose in the world we live in? As before, I asked for little bit of help to avoid being biased. In order to be balanced I have asked online for opinions.

Comic book writer David Thomas had a perspective to share. I asked simply if there are any uses for Artificially Generated Images? He said this:
“Yeah loads. new designs for buildings, cars, TVs, houses, ornaments fashion the list is endless. the only limits are the limits of your imagination. Like Chat GPT –  it’s all about what you ask and how to work the algorithms, and it will create new jobs because it isn’t AI as it needs humans to operate it.”

His perspective does have merit. Technology certainly does change the world. In the early 1980s, cash points scared many bank employees into thinking that they would their jobs, but other opportunities in the financial sectors became very rapidly available. It is possible the same logic could be applied to the decline in mining for fossil fuels but an increase in many endeavours to harness greener energy has created many opportunities for employment. The numbers may not be perfect at all, but Thomas has a point of view. To use his analogy for example: if the NHS could use AI to design  new hospitals or care homes, then perhaps there are some uses for AI art.

Yet there is always the elephant in the room of course. This new technology could seriously impact the livelihoods of a great many of comic artists, and potentially many passionate writers and publishers who work freelance, who perhaps have no pension plans, and view this new technology as outright theft of their own specific abilities and skills. Although while I humbly suggest that in the last two decades, technology may have oddly done a service to the many underappreciated letterers and colourists within the comic community, this development feels rather different indeed. All of the skills mentioned could be under threat given the march of technology.

So I also spoke to accomplished artist and 2000AD alumni Ben MacLeod, who offered his own take on the subject:

“I think the most odd but perhaps understandable opinion that this debate throws up comes from the non-artists who think having a machine do 99% of the work for you is somehow progress. That it is more desirable somehow that we have machines do our designing for us and reduce the time that it takes for artists to do that themselves. As if speed and elimination of effort and skill is a positive goal. AI is of course profit driven and the wider onslaught of AI or automated work production is not something we should welcome.”

Following Macleod’s thoughts, I found some balance from a talented local Brighton creator named Rhys Wootton:

“AI art and AI shouldn’t be confused, and your questions seems to be linking them.

Ai tools can be a real bonus in helping artists and creative workers in solving tasks quicker. But AI creation is something entirely different and conflating the argument that AI art and AI tools are the same is where it gets dangerous, both for society and industry. We start seeing artistic humans in the same way as  disposable tools, then artists become the same as a self-service till in a check out. It renders the intrinsic human creative power as just a machine that you punch in, and it produces. Nothing more spectacular than a calculator. And that is very sad day for civilisation. We should question – Have we really lost faith in humanity?”

So, the conclusion here is difficult. It may be the case in some sectors that AI generated images or technology might have a place but it certainly  sounds like it should be used extremely carefully. To describe what the technology produces as ART may be pushing the boundaries and true definition of that three-letter word. I am left with a final thought. It comes from the Steven Spielberg movie Jurassic Park. As Jeff Goldblum famously said:

“Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn’t stop to think if they should.”

The third article in my series will simply ask: “If AI “art” is here, can it be stopped?”