On AI in my works

In the current climate surrounding AI usage in art, I believe it is important to be transparent about what is what. Given that I believe generative AI is a valid way to create art, I have used it a few times already, gaining an intimate sort of understanding of how this affects both me and my audience from the much appreciated feedback. If I use AI generation in my work, I will make it obvious. In visual artworks, I will alter my signature to include “AI”. In any other case I will explicitly state if AI had been used. This short blog aims to make clear why I choose to do so.

Can I even?

Skillful execution isn’t something I pride myself on—not because I don’t believe I can do something skillfully, or that I can judge if that’s the case. This is irrelevant to the topic at hand. I create with an “it is what it is” mentality, as that’s what allows me to stay sane and keep my perfectionism mostly contained.

Ok, why even?

What I consider lazy is often seen as beautiful, and what I consider beautiful is often seen as slop. While it is always nice to hear niceties said about the look (“quality”) of my works, this isn’t what I look forward to most. It gets worse when the appraisal is about skill, which in actuality, isn’t there to begin with. Such is the case with AI assisted artworks. By saying this I don’t mean to imply that AI generated imagery takes no skill to conjure, believing so is always a sign of ignorance of the medium. This is all to say that what bothers me is a confused compliment, a misattribution of skill. Because of this, in order to make myself more at ease, I plan to make it extra clear when I use generative AI creatively.