.jpg){kind=small}
Artistic innovation is exploring Generative AI art and in this article we explore the power of AI art and whether we need to give AI due credit.
History of visual artists giving credit when collaborating
Throughout history, visual artists have recognized the importance of giving due credit when collaborating with their peers. From the Renaissance to the contemporary art scene, collaboration has been a cornerstone of artistic practice.
During the Renaissance period, renowned artists such as Leonardo da Vinci and Michelangelo often worked alongside apprentices and assistants, acknowledging their contributions in the final artwork. Similarly, movements like Dadaism and Surrealism embraced collective creation, with artists attributing authorship to the group rather than individual names.
In the modern era, collaborations between artists have become more prevalent, with joint exhibitions and projects showcasing the diverse talents of each participant. Whether through formal agreements or informal acknowledgments, visual artists have long understood the value of recognizing the contributions of their collaborators, ensuring that the creative process remains transparent and inclusive. But in the 21st century due to me-ism and social media there has been a trend to fail to recognize contributors of an artwork such as the new generative AI which often does 99% of the work.
A case for giving credit to the "AI Artist"
In the ever-evolving landscape of art creation, technology continues to push boundaries, blurring the lines between traditional and digital mediums. One such groundbreaking innovation is Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) art, a realm where machines collaborate with human artists to produce mesmerizing visual masterpieces. However, as this form of art gains prominence, a crucial aspect often overlooked is the recognition and credit due to the AI algorithms and the companies behind them.
Shouldn't we do the same for the visual artist called generative AI art generator? It’s a digital artist created by engineers and programmers to become an AI artist. Which not only has stolen millions of images and footage of other artists but the artists that use those tools often fail to co-credit the art by the AI. Lets see the morality of this practice and whether it should change.
The Collaborative Nature of Generative AI Art
Generative Al art represents a fusion of human creativity and machine intelligence. Just as a customer approaches a visual artist with verbal instructions, so does an Al receive input from its human counterparts, albeit in the form of code or parameters.
Through this collaborative process, the Al interprets and executes the artist’s vision, generating stunning images or videos that captivate the imagination.
Acknowledging the Role of Generative AI Platforms in Art
Much like commissioning a piece from a human artist, utilizing a generative AI art platform involves leveraging the capabilities of a specific technology.
Just as an artist's tools are integral to the creation process, so too are the algorithms and frameworks provided by AI platforms. Therefore, it is imperative to give credit where it's due – to the companies that develop these innovative tools and enable artists to explore new frontiers of creativity.
Addressing the Issue of Credit Appropriation
Unfortunately, the lack of crediting AI platforms and companies in generative AI art creation is a growing concern. Human artists sometimes receive sole recognition for works generated in collaboration with AI, inadvertently overshadowing the technological contributions.
This oversight not only undermines the efforts of AI developers but also perpetuates a narrative of human superiority in the creative process.
The other aspect that that is raging in the art community is the legal aspects of the use of AI art generators and where the data was scraped from. It's almost similar to when Napster facilitated illegal download of music. Later the music industry struck a deal with technology companies and Apple paved the way to music streaming with iTunes.
What will be the middle ground for AI art generators and how strict will the law courts be in what the future holds for AI art generators? Will they be dismantled or upgraded to remove all copyrighted scraped data from other artists? Time will tell.
We also have to resolve the issue of AI art generators creating usually most of an artwork but getting zero credit. Firstly, it becomes an artwork that is not technically legally owned by the person who prompted to make it. Secondly there is a trend to "pretend" by the human artist that they created the artwork and yet they haven't. They simply have prompted the AI generator to create something with words.
Advocating for Ethical Recognition
To rectify this issue, in my opinion, it's essential for the art community to adopt ethical practices that acknowledge the collaborative nature of generative AI art.
Artists should proactively credit the AI platforms and companies involved in the creation process, just as they would acknowledge any other collaborator or tool used in their artwork. By doing so, we honor the symbiotic relationship between human ingenuity and technological advancement.
When AI is used just in the ideas gathering process but not in arts creation in medium artist could mention AI was used in ideas building. But when AI creates the artwork or a part of it the artist should co-credit the AI. Its ethical.
Embracing Innovation and Collaboration
Rather than viewing generative AI as a threat to traditional artistry, we should embrace it as a catalyst for innovation and collaboration.
By recognizing the pivotal role played by AI platforms and companies, we uphold the principles of fairness and transparency in the art world. Moreover, by celebrating the marriage of human creativity and machine intelligence, we open doors to new realms of artistic expression and exploration.
But we must do this responsibly. And we shouldn't go down the path of no co-crediting AI and scraping artworks from other artists and generating artworks through those AI generators. AI art generators should be reprogrammed to not scrape other artists work but create totally novel and unique artworks and content for artists to mix and create. I just think it will create a more healthy art community.
Conclusion
In the dynamic landscape of art creation, generative AI represents a groundbreaking frontier where human ingenuity converges with technological prowess and will continue to expand as AI and Robotics start to become more advanced. Imagine artworks created purely by robots and AI, but prompted by a human artist. Will that artist continue to credit themselves rather than co-credit the robot(s) and the AI involved?
There's even emerging AI based 3D sculpting robots and machines being made and designed which will put pressure in traditional sculpting. So the same issue of co-crediting the robot AI sculptor in any sculpture or installation still rings true.
To foster a culture of inclusivity, honesty and collaboration, it's important I believe to give credit where it's due – to the AI platforms and companies that enable artists to push the boundaries of creativity such as co-artist credit to AI when its used in artworks creation or mention AI in the medium or description of if its just used in ideas gathering.
By embracing innovation and ethical recognition, we pave the way for a future where art knows no bounds with AI as a responsibly used tool for making art. I strongly feel this will strike a balanced approach legally and ethically in the future with AI beside us. ❤️
Regards
Michal Plis
Written by Michal Plis but Co-Edited by Michal, OpenAI ChatGPT and Google Gemini.