Bea Beltran Culture 12.14.2022 02:Dec AM EST

Guillermo del Toro Expresses Disdain Toward AI Art

AI art has been gaining popularity as of late since it generates intricate illustrations in just a fraction of the time artists would take. This, however, is not as appreciated by people in the entertainment industry. Among those people is Guillermo del Toro.

Man-Made Art Remains Superior

Despite the convenience that art-generating AI can provide, acclaimed director Guillermo del Toro is not as impressed. He referred to the art generator as "an insult to life itself," which was quoted from Hayao Miyazaki, a Japanese film director.

"I consume and love art made by humans." says del Torro. He also expressed that he was moved by it and is not interested in illustrations created by machines and the extrapolation of information, as mentioned in Polygon.

The "Pinocchio" director named artists that he admired, like the animator Miyazaki, as well as English comic book artist and illustrator Dave McKean, who also expressed concerns about the emerging popularity of AI art.

The Impact of Fast Art

The art industry is still facing many issues today like artists being underpaid, among others. Yet, another obstacle has come their way in the form of a competitor. AI art can now create illustrations that would take hours, if not days, for human artists to make.

Artists are already worried that machines will take over their jobs just as they did others. Some argue that AI art is not only faster but also cheaper if not free. These are certainly important factors that can pull clients away from actual artists.

However, Anne Ploin from the Oxford Internet Institute, who is researching the effect of AI art in the industry, claimed that AI art generators wouldn't be able to replace human artists. Humans are able to analyze which concept to tackle, identify the target audience, and select an appropriate medium.

Machines are taught to make art using code and algorithms, which is still far from what a human can do by being sentient beings. People understand and interact with emotions, which are reflected in the artist's artwork, as mentioned in Carter Art.

Those factors cannot be programmed in an art-generating AI. All it can do is learn to replicate or recreate what humans have already made. Programmers are yet to discover how to put creativity, sentiment, and innovation into codes.

Recognition of AI Art

Somehow, that does not seem to be the case for Colorado State Fair's yearly art competition. The award went to Jason M. Allen, which faced backlash since his artwork was created using Midjourney, which is a text-to-image artificial intelligence art generator, as mentioned in The New York Times.

It was the first AI-generated artwork to win. The artist behind it defended himself, saying that he submitted it with the title "Jason M. Allen via Midjourney," clearly stating that it was created using the program and that he did not deceive anyone.

The division he submitted to was for digital art or digitally manipulated photography, so there is some fairness to using a program. It's a different argument altogether if the program did all the work, as opposed to artists who actually made every stroke and managed the color schemes themselves.

It would be a good idea to create a separate division for AI-generated art. It does take creativity to think of specific words or phrases which lead to an artwork, but artists who manually draw and paint their digital art should also be recognized separately. They are essentially different mediums.