AI art is fascinating ghibli art—it’s incredible how they can create beautiful pieces in seconds. But it also got me wondering about the impact on artists, especially those just starting out.
Artistic growth often starts with studying and mimicking styles before developing something unique. That process takes years of dedication, and it’s what makes each artist’s work so personal. When AI can instantly replicate those styles, it could unintentionally discourage young or emerging artists from finding their own voices. Plus, without a way to earn from it, artists might struggle to make a living.
I’m not against AI art—it’s an amazing tool. But I think a fairer approach could benefit both AI users and new artists and existing ones. What if AI tools had a system where:
Opt-In Licensing Model: Artists can choose to let AI use their work, either for a fee or through licensing.
Royalties or Commissions: When an AI creates in a specific style, the artist gets a small commission—kind of like how musicians earn from streaming platforms.
Credit & Visibility: AI-generated pieces could credit the original artist to increase their visibility.
Customization Rights: Artists could control how their style is used by AI.
I’d love to hear what you all think. Could something like this work? How can AI art tools support creativity without discouraging the next generation of artists?
Would these fledgling artists also be fined by more established artists for copying their style?
I think artists would do well to learn from the havoc and turmoil computers wrought upon the chess community in the mid-late 90’s and early 2000s.
Progress is inevitable, and any attempts to curtail it will fail. Whether OpenAI, Adobe, or some other providers implement C2PA and/or issue residuals to artists is pretty much irrelevant, because there are already open source models that don’t have to abide by that.
And even if you implement this on a legislative level, there will always be countries that will refuse to abide by these restrictions.
If a country is so hubristically inclined as to voluntarily curtail their own economic competitiveness, that should definitely be the people’s prerogative. But not every nation can, or is willing to afford that. And certainly no nation can afford that indefinitely.
Hey thanks for the welcome
Yes I get your point, certianly it’s also sets some certain restriction on creativity which can be used for getting powerful stories from a place that could not afford it.
But for mimicing arts, I was wondering if AI is capable of making unique styles if the style before does not exist as its based on trained data. I know I’m not in this profession to talk about it ,but i think foundational knowledge is needed for creating unique art style which might get skipped due to AI generating art at rapid pace. Artstyle that has not existed yet. I might be contradicting myself to use AI art and critiquing it all the same. But I’ve heard accounts from artists how they evolve in their art journeys and how their aet styles also change with the tool but their certain signature is always there.
Talking about the compensation, yea youre right it might be too heavy for any country to implement the conpensation and it might not be realistic.. but as a user, sometimes i do feel guilty and have dilmena to use ai over the art that is signature of a artist I admire for decades and without their consent. Becuase though amateur artist mimic the style but it shows a respect for the artist they are mimicing in evolving their art but when an ai model do that on trained data, is it a tribute or respect to the artist or just feeding fantasy for a trend for people.
It has tremendous potential for the future but right now there is dilemna, maybe thats why also i couldn’t help but post the thought here. What do you think?
