Professional Artists' Reaction to AI art 

Excellent points; and good word-smithing.

I was going to write exactly that but you did so much better :-D Couldn’t agree more.

I'm still concerned. As a filmmaker I'm afraid about the future too with the irruption of Synthesia and the researching by Meta Ai videos 😥

@@kimerapolar I wouldn't be too worried about making the movie, just the type of movie that is becomes commercially viable. AI has a long way to go before it's able to simulate emotions and poetic perspectives and insights. But people no longer want the movie that is entertaining but also tells meaningful and profound stories.

Give me an original hardwood danish chair from the fifties over a replica from IKEA ANY day of the week. This is a tool, and a bad one, IMO

Exactly. Do you want to buy a Wolf sweater or art that won an award at a University made by hand...that was judged by other professionals? Maybe AI art machines and robots will also make physical art too. Who knows? And yes. A robot paints now.

@@randymulder9105 They already do. Not unlike "artists" who put a paintbrush on a string and let their cat bat it around. Or the wind. Or a random number generator. Abstract art is far more a farce than AI. They should be careful what they wish for.

People still make it out of hand but you wont know whether the artist took major inspiration or fully copied the ai art that was generated. So the creativity & composition is at question. All the artist has to do know is be good at recreating it, & that's what not what an artist is.

@@jasonphan2001 That's been true since photography existed. And they cried about the exact same thing back then. Yet nothing changed. What is actually happening is a new age of Luddites want something to cry about.

more liek people realize that they arent as special as they thought. People talk about the technology as if it is a person but they never mention the people that decided to make these tools. Fallacy of the western mind.

Not really. At least in my opinion. People overreacting as always when new revolution is coming. We had few. The most important - industrial, digital and now AI. In every period people were scared. Industrial - when art started being accesible by the masses, not always defined by status - some were afraid of competition, poor artists were called names and ofthen ostracized. Digital era brought digital painting. The "cheating" at first. This somehow has been accepted after a while. The photobashing on the other hand or matte painting not by everyone for a long time. Now this all is normal and we are coming to another change. This time AI will assist artist. Yeah - assist. As I believe that artists will actually benefit more in the long run. The AI will be able generate the images, but people still will be needed to generate ideas. And as far as AI will be able to generate prompts itself - only humans will have a deep understanding and feeling of coherence or a broad picture.

@@HCforLife1 False. There are already models that build prompts for you. There are models that can write, and that can do 3D. The models are always changing each week and eventually all creators of all media, be it videos, comics, books or even videogames will be replaced by company owned closed source AIs. We will lose our autonomy and the ability to have a voice. It will be one of the worst dystopias.

I list just a bunch of things: writing, paiting, using paper, watch making, paper books etc and the list may continue. although all of these have modern replacements that are more precise, more practical, cheaper to make and to distribute , all the mentioned things are still alive for one reason: they feel different. they return a different feeling. writing on paper with a fountain pen is much more emotional than using word, looking what time it is in a high-end and handmade swiss time piece is not the same thing as looking at our phone, painting with our hands and mind is not the same thing as creating a picture in 2 minutes with a computer. although technology changes drastically our lives, the intention of creating artworks won't stop.

@@giovannigio6217 good point

You need to ask permission to do a study of something?

@@philorsum Ah yes, doing a study of someones work to improve your own skill == feeding someones work to a machine so that machine can imitate said work and do most if not all the work for you, undercutting said professional whose hard work you just used to train this machine. Nothing wrong here, case closed people, go home! 🤪 Are you totally honest with this comparison or just a troll? 🤦‍♂

@@RedRocksies how exactly do you think a.i works? Or are you just ignorant and angry?

​@@RedRocksies I think you are misunderstanding somethings here, and let me just begin with, I'm also an artist and tech enthusiast. I am fascinated by these AIs, and they can produce really stunning images. But I'm also critical of it. I think we can analyze things and put passions aside, while seeing both the positive and negative aspects. Ethically and morally speaking I think these AIs are indeed concerning, and they are able to, easily, and with little to no time, both learn and create, what takes humans years and decades to do. That is a concern, for sure. But... The AI doesn't rely on specific images from specific artwork to create. If you feed it the concept of "hand", "pencil drawing" and "oil painting", it will learn (MUCH BETTER AND FASTER than any human) the patterns that create those concepts. So if I just feed photographs of hands, and some landscapes in pencil or oil painting (without hands), it will be able to output a hand in oil painting, if I ask it to. It's... a though problem, and blurs the concepts of art, artist and tool.

@@RedRocksies Obtuse much?

for freelance works, yes when the supply is surplus and even anyone can do it... the value of the product will become less. For the professional artists, It will be a tool because they have to do a lot of iterations and have to do it in less time. can be crowded space. job roles will change, and yes less pay will be the issue.

If you outsource your visual creativity for AI to give you ‘reference’, then you dont even deserve to be an artist. The genius of novel design and conscious determination of shape is gone.

@@Wandrative 2006: If you outsource your visual creativity for adobe Photoshop to give you ‘reference’, then you don't even deserve to be an artist. The genius of novel design and conscious determination of shape is gone. ROFL......

@@georgemartin4354 Oh so looks like you aren't even an artist who and was just pro AI afterall. Just masquerading as one to gaslight artists. Of course, photoshop was never art nor anything masterly. There is good photoshop and bad photoshop thats it. And AI is a even lower form of that that requires even less visual intelligence as it is automatic photoshopping. Nothing really changed from the sentiment of 2006 that you are trying to portray.

I see nothing good coming out of this AI. It will be the death of human visual culture that flourished for thousands of years. AI is dangerous, equal or worse threat to humanity as nuclear weapons. This is just early warning sign. Wait until they put it into autonomous military robots. Terrorist states like Russia will use it for war of conquest and killing civilians

I understand you. Just keep learning and enjoying your progress in creating your artwork. People will always love real human art because of the soul in it. Don´t worry, just put your heart and soul in your art and you´re so much better than any computer generated work which in my opinion is not art at all, because the "soul" is missing. Best wishes to you Laura!💙

Ikr. It's an incredibly life-saving feeling that you can always forget about all your stress and just sit down to learn something new about art and it will never be a waste of time. Not sure if it's the case now - whenever I'm considering learning anything today (not even art related), I immediately think about all the possibilities of the skill being automated in a matter of months. I've been welcoming all kinds of shortcuts until now - love digital art, 3d renders, painting over 3d geometry, even photobashing still feels like a form of drawing to me, because all of it still takes intention and lets you express your OWN thoughts correctly. Typing a prompt to get a random decent picture complete with composition and details? Definitely sounds more like commissioning a robot than producing something of my own. Thing is - even if they retrained all the models without using copyrighted artworks (which is impossible with SD being open-source, but just to entertain the idea), it would still make for a powerful tool that you'd have to use in your workflow to stay competitive, and It's depressing, because it really doesn't seem like an enjoyable tool to me.

i just wrote the same thing , but your english is better lol .. humanity will not recover easily from this

ugh, that's so pretentious. I say embrace it. Let humans create art and let AI create art. If you really love creating, you won't care if AI does it as well. Art is about expressing yourself, not being in competition, or seeking validation from strangers or making tons of money. People need to re learn that. AI will set things right again.

Exactly. It will destroy human visual culture and artistry that flourished for thousands of years. Kids don't want to learn to draw anymore. They get discouraged by AI in their phone, before they turn 10. And even if they don't, by they are 18, their parents have talked them out of silly dreams. Museums will be dead, because there will be nothing new to put into museums. There will be no new Rembrandts or Da Vincis. Nobody bothers to learn, kids learn that art is something that comes out when you press a button. Pretty images will lose their value by overexposure, become something like toilet paper. Nobody wants to get into art education either, why become a high school art teacher, when kids just whip out their phones and laugh at the teacher "who can't even beat AI". No teachers, no students, no art. The people who created this AI should be jailed... but instead they get filthy rich.

But at the same time, art will become more accessible for regular joes. I'm not that great at drawing, but i'm a programmer. If i want to make a game, i need art assets. For the characters, backgrounds, etc. The only way i can get that is: 1. Make it myself, which will take hours if i want it to look shit, and years of practice if i want to make decent art. 2. Pay for an artist to do it, which will also take some time, costs money and if i don't like the art its going to take more time and money. 3. Pay for premade assets and tilesets, which costs money and is generic. But with AI art, it costs nothing and is done in no time. So this will open up ways for game developers and others to use art and make good looking games easier. I'm very excited for the future

Jeezus the overreaction is hilarious.

Why? because it wont make you rich and famous? For people that really love drawing and painting (and don't do it for fame, attention or money), its not going to matter. Let AI be AI. The truth is, its always been hard to make money doing art.

@@MrXandervm I think there will come a time when people won't come to you to make a game. And you will have a lot of competitors

Im not sure why you would need that reference in the first place if it is in your head. Go pure, :)

Yes, same... It took me by surprise. Obviously the AI art isn't perfect because it has lots of errors such as wonky arm, hands and odd strand of hair, etc. It also struggle with groups.

@@-Pridebycreatons- look for more AI art, Im telling you some of them are so well made. Check ArtStaion AI arts.

@@rafisarhan2336 i still stand by what I said. ai struggle with groups. Also I have to log in to search arts on that website.

Oh you're going to loose allot more than that!

But its not the 'first thing'. Its the last thing that they were able to to. AI can do everything else. The problem is that society protected everyone else, but is quick to destroy art like its nothing right when the technology loosely emulates it.

Normal people don’t care. We don’t know how to differentiate. I don’t know who is this professional artist.

@@youtubedeletedmyaccountlma2263 nobody asked

Yea.... it's like a built in apocalyptic scenario... that leaves the thought that maybe this book will never Be physically seen again... cotdamn marketers!!!

And they'll get hired saying that? I hate to burst your bubble friend, but everything in the corporate world is about saving time and money. Why pay some human artist that takes 3 months when AI can do it in 10 seconds. Its pointless.

I 100% agree with you, I made the exact same points yesterday on a very loooong post in Reddit. But the problem becomes, artists leave from their work, and for some it is already a struggle. AIs are facilitating in an absurd quick and vast way, the emergence of as many artists as there are humans. That will have a tremendous impact in the art world and will affect the ability of artists that took years of learning and practice to be able to be rewarded enough to use art as a means to make a living. Without the ability to make a living out of art, human artists will slowly fade away. And that's the scary part.

Here is how I would disagree with what you wrote: The commercial clients pay for the outcome, not the journey. The question around whether AI can produce art or not is actually a pretty irrelevant distraction from the real problems. Everyone can only decide for themselves what is art and it has no inherent implications for anybody beyond that. Being paid less or not being hired at all anymore is a real existential problem for people. Also, the question around data harvesting is important. We are still in a brutally capitalist system and seemingly on our way towards (or maybe we've already reached the shores of) a kind of techno-feudalist society where a few private entities or rogue regimes (AI haves) rule not only over pretty much all the physical resources (e.g. processing power) but also digital resources (data) while the masses of peasants (AI not haves) have to be either obedient serfs or face outright obsolesence. I don't disagree with what you wrote but I hope most people see through the "is it art or not" distraction that's spreading like a virus. What is art is not existential but there's more and more existential questions right now forcing themselves onto our plate mostly because of our own ignorance. A lot of similar problems in many countries and of course globally and AI seems to be truly born in the middle of it, as we speak, while it is unclear that in total it will be used for positive impact or not.

@@LarsRichterMedia You're absolutely right, and I apologize for not thinking about artists that live with their craft. I make art just because I need to create, that's why I see the whole situation in a different light.

I understand that this part of it is significant, but I think art has to be more about the existence of beauty and form itself. And a talented artist is the one who has the capacity to understand and bring it into physical existence. Thus, the end outcome is what I put much more significance on. I do it to beautify the world. Sure, I get a lot of joy and pleasure from the process… but that sounds like art has been reduced to just a tool for a hedonistic life value. What difference is that compared to a druggie who enjoys being high all day? Why painstakingly perfectionise and work yourself to master art when you can have other easily accessible modes of acquiring pleasure? So I think the finished art is important. As for AI, it does not understand or have any spacial intelligence, aesthetic understanding, or a knowledge of beauty. It just imports a 2d grid of images and transcribes it as a math equation. It generates a new equation based on those and the prompts, which is transcribed back to a 2d image on screen. How does that equate to the genius of a visually intelligent mind?

Well if you draw as pure hobby yes just dont dare ever make any profit as an artist. That job is dead. Even before this being an Artist was a questionable job now its stupid.

Honestly I think art in general will become worthless and meaningless

No it wont. Just like MOST people shop at Walmart and Amazon instead of supporting the more expensive small business. Not enough people will care for it to actually be a GOOD THING. But I do appreciate the glass half full attitude.

Sadly, many can't recognize the difference... some AI generated work is highly evocative... people meet emotional art half-way and artists often aim at leaving space for the viewer to bring their own subjectivity to it... and that's what AI does -- it's empty of true emotion, but suggests enough for the viewer to fill it in... and if not labelled "AI", could fool many.

There will be a place for traditional mediums. Oil, charcoal, clay, etc. AI art is still digital art. And to many, digital art doesn't not have the same impact as oil on canvas or an actual sculpture.

@@zuki9537 to disrespect a master like Picasso is to disrespect all masters before or after him. You cannot nor can anyone ever create a Picasso ever again since his death. Only Picasso can tell you what Picasso would paint next. If you think matching aesthetic is the same matching a person you’re sorely mistaken. On the surface you may see persons as how they fall into groups but this simply isn’t realistic! Only one man ever knows how one man will react! And that is the man himself! You may use statistics but you’ll find that statistics are based on intrinsic bias! This level of bias is a hard concept to grasp at first but you will. AI art is a nice tool but a horrible master! If you truly want to learn how to create a work of art beyond thinking art is just built on it’s themes then go study the masters once more. See how they placed their values and led your eyes. Ai art mimics that! Ai didn’t create the rules it follows it. Nothing can replace the men and women who pushed us forward.

@@michaelpeters364 Its the history of the painter and how it was made that makes it gripping, also a required human connection. Though don't let pride take away potential opportunities with AI and art especially.

It will have a place but you wont be able to live as an artist anymore thats for sure. It will be a rare side gimmik now.

AI can do many thing but it can't express your deepest thoughts even you yourself will struggle with expressing them, your feelings is what makes it your art and you are what makes it unique art made by AI is just a print btw good luck with your career

Hyperrealists who paint over projected photographs and believe that the camera can see more than the human are the only ones who should be worried

AI will eventually reach our level of competence. You need to prepare for the inevitable

I think there should be some laws or regulations set in place to ban AI in certain fields so that they don't replace people. They should just be used as tools in work that requires human intervention.

@@tinag7506 while I share your sentiment, realistically I see no reason for these protectionist laws to come into fruition. Artist hold no lobby power over corporations, and the real problem will be comercial art. The “art market” will not be affected much because it is more about commodities than art. By making AI art cheap to produce, it will never have the same value in the market (NFTs is something different because those aren’t even about the art). Limited supply and branding is what makes the art market a desirable investment. That is not going to change because the “images” themselves don’t matter. Ultimately this revolution will cause people to reevaluate the “value” of a human being, since this will eventually flood into most carriers. Will we finally see humans for their intrinsic value, or will we continue to rank people on their productive and persuasive powers?

They might as well stop making art then! If showing someone art that is 'better' than theirs is enough for them to lose motivation then their conviction was never grounded in any meaningful way. *Real* artists will continue to work hard, continue to hone their craft, and continue to get better. An A.I can only do so well as the average artist, in other words, it cannot beat *good* artists, and it will *always* beat 'bad' artists. Having used some of these programs extensively over the past week, this has only inspired me to get better faster. I've found it's become easier to find motivation to hone my skills, to learn how proper anatomy works, how precise physics affect cloth and hair. Because the A.I can't do it. The A.I is bad at it, because the vast majority of artists are bad at it. So, all I need to do is 'git gud'. If someone was going to pay me money for my work, they'd be paying for *me* to make it, not because I'm the best at what I do, but because they want *me*. If someone was looking for actual talent and skillful drawings, they'd look for the best artists around and submit a commission. In other words, I was never going to be chosen in the first place if that was what they're looking for. Anyways, tl;dr: Good Artists will never be out of a job, but bad artists always will be, they're just shifting the blame from their circumstances to the next hottest thing.

@@errorunknown5701 I'm kinda not sure what you're saying even though your comment is pretty long. No one is suggesting good artists can't or won't improve/get better and so forth (or that no-so-great artists can't become amazing with lots of practice). The issue is the danger of the masses desiring AI art because its cheaper and faster to acquire. We as artists may look at AI art and see crap and inauthenticity and the loss of the artist's touch- but I think you're overestimating the number of people that value what we value (by "we" I mean real/good artists). There are loads of people who just want something that looks cool, is cheap and they could not care less where it comes from (and what looks cool to a good artist and to a random person on the street may be two very different things). People think good art is blowing air through a straw and watching the paint make neat swirly patterns on paper. Or, have you seen how many people put dentist office art in their freaking homes??? It's disgusting the lack of taste or appreciation masses of people have. I think you make other good points about your own philosophy/attitudes as an artist, but it kinda feels like you were responding to a completely different video than the one Jono posted.

Hope you have a nice day too Dr. Bruno

Yeah but that is practicly all the jobs, who already were insanely hard to find and get as an artist. Great that the best 10% of artist will survive, but what about the rest.

@@moskito80 That's the danger of AI that most of the video content about the subject misses.

@@moskito80 The best 10% is all that survives anyway. That has always been the case. And OP over estimates AI art's impact in industry. If the general populace found out their favorite art was made by AI, I doubt they would buy it. People despise AI art.

@@minixlemonade2335 people are not interested in art, we all know the famous painters from centuries ago, maybe we know some from the present, like a Banksy or something but none of us are interested in that, we dont have paintings of them on the wall, we dont buy there stuff. Most of us are interested in illustrations from games, movies, comics, that kind of stuff. And a lot of us dont even know who the illustrator is of our favorite movie poster, or that multiple artists worked on that amazing cover illustration of your fav game. We just dont care, we know some names like kim jung gi (may hé rest in peace) or a manga illustrators (who also work in teams) because they are hype for the moment. Most of the time its only us artists that tend to know more of the other artists, and yeah i will buy a piece of art from my fav artist because of the artist, but the rest of the consumers dont think like that, and why should they. I do think, in time ai will grab most of the work, and only leave some for the best of the best. And if that is fare, i dont know, i guess things will always change

A camera can copy a movie from a theater "faster" than a human can produce it. It's a bad argument to use because it's still theft. That the data is cleverly hidden in neural network weights rather than right out in the open is irrelevant. I can encrypt a movie to the point where you can't retrieve the movie anymore, and only with a password or "prompt" could you decode my blob of data and get the full movie out. Still theft, no matter how cleverly the data is hidden. I agree AI art is inevitable, but they should at least pay people to train the models, not just scrape the internet for free. And we all know where AI art would be right now without that mass theft.

You're right. It does resonate much more when it's a tangible, 100% human work

But its faster. Why would a company wait 3 months for a design when they can have it in 10 seconds. THATS the problem. All they care about is saving time and money.

@@brokenmember1658 the AI art can't create everything. Also, it does groups of people really badly.

How? that's what it does. It replicates real human art lol.

Finally! A comment that makes sense. We have to embrace it. The act creativity comes from within. AI can't take that away from real artists, they MUST create, its in their DNA.

young kids are not worrying about this, adults are the ones that are freaking out.

@@dibbidydoo4318 I think you are probably right here. It is usually the established that freak the most when change comes knocking.

Yes on one hand you are right, but there are also a lot of negatives, with how ai art is improving so fast, all you will need to create the perfect art you need will only require sliders and prompts, yea for now artists are required, but after a while you won't need them anymore, ai art will be so easy that, you won't need to hire a lot of artists for big projects or anything, you can either learn it yourself or comission it to someone who can generate all the art you want for dirt cheap.

@@aelion7761 even if it becomes this easy to produce it will be a step in the right direction! The power of art will always lye with the artist. Let’s be honest here no AI art will ever be able to truly create a masterpiece even with the world of prompts. There is a reason why art is so close to us. It is felt not just seen. Also I wouldn’t mind seeing projects produced faster, and seeing artist work on what they love vs what they have been forced to work on! Let’s enjoy the change while appreciating the traditional.

@@topenterclips Well ai art has already won a big competition, the judges deemed it a 'masterpiece', so you are wrong on that, but I do agree on the fact that ai will be a great tool for artists most artists will prosper with it.

@@aelion7761 I saw that already, I won’t say I was wrong. Albeit you may consider it a wrong if you’d like. I didn’t mean that it wouldn’t create quality art, it has a human element in it and it always will (in every industry it will have art directors to build on the canvas) it can also perform better than some-most artist at this point but it won’t exactly produce what we will especially mistake wise! What that man did only proved two things 1) that he can defraud judges 2) that he doesn’t want to create something from his own soul. I think there are masterpieces among the Ai Art but judging it by traditional means is pointless! (Plus we aren’t even interested in judging something computerized outside of performance based judgment) I think there are masterpieces at the Digital level and masterpieces at the traditional level as well. But I don’t think we will ever compare an engine to an actual Van Gogh or Picasso (simply because they are autonomous and think for themselves and feel human emotions) then they lay that on canvas! And the entire world is forever impacted by what masters create! AI can probably achieve a semblance of this, but generally humans tend to celebrate humans who they think have immense ‘Talent’ and skill and worked hard for what they loved! (Example: Any musician ever) I don’t think a masterpiece of ai art will ever need to hang in a gallery, it can just be in an online gallery! But I wouldn’t want to be against it because There is much art that never enters galleries! I specifically like the concept designs for many stages and cars! Once you’re a fan of art then the entire process fascinates you regardless of what kind of art it is… because someone somewhere had a unique way of viewing the world and created something out of it! Like a Lamborghini or a Porsche! Like a Ferrari or a Tom Ford! Like the buildings around us or the signs we see everyday! AI art may mimic our skills but never our swagger! It may know we enjoy blue skies and moods but it will never direct a scene with John wick or Tom cruise and make precisely cool choices like a specific aviator sun glasses throughout an entire film! It can only make cool choices after the fact! We can make choices cool! There is a reason why people run around in cosplay! There is a reason why everyone wants to be a model in vogue! But when we talk purely the spirit of the painter you’ll find that the story compels you sometimes more than the art ever will! Human stories drive everything! Like the story of the team I’m sure that built this AI! But as for perfect art (which doesn’t exist btw) it’s always in the communication skills of the artist! When AI starts communicating with us through its art! Then maybe we can take it as seriously!

Chess is a sport. They didn't stop running 100 meters, just because invention of motorbike. Or powerlifting, just because there is industrial cranes. Commercial art (like illustration) however is not a sport, people pay for the image itself, and you won't beat the AI not matter what you do. It works 1000x faster than you, even if you reach similar results.

@@shredd5705 And people won't stop drawing just because a computer can do it better. Art is a passion, not just a job, just like chess. Even today people still ride horses, not because they need to, but because they *want* to.

@@SkepticalCaveman Passion alone doesn't earn you money.

@@Shiranova I never claimed that it did.

cry more in your pencil cave ive generated 200 digital paintings of cyborg mecha fairies today

Traditional artists do the same thing. They make use of copyrighted works of art to build upon and develop their style.

Next the AI will live in your house, drive your car, and have sex for you so you won't have to. You live in a 2x2 meter box, outside the city

Yeah if you draw as a hobby yes go wild but as a career youre doomed

If Picasso and Braque listened to the artists of their day and thought of photography and moving pictures as a threat, they may have not invented Cubism which was their idea of how to compress images over time into a single two dimensional canvas. There is an unreasonable amount of irrational hyperbole coming from “freaked out” artists scared of change and lacking enough belief in their own ability to adapt and change how they do things that opportunities for entirely new possibilities are probably being overlooked by most, and recognized by a few. What could be more human than that?

@@mjeffn2 "their idea of how to compress images over time into a single two dimensional canvas." something mathematicians and physicists were doing for a much longer with time graphs.

I think this is the best use and when it starts catching on, will take art to a new level for artists. It's like looking into someone elses imagination.

Hi Drew, I agree with your sentiments here but AI image creation is really in it's infancy. The General Artifical Inteligence (GAI) that is coming will I think inevitably blur the lines even further. Microsoft have already demonstrated that 3D printing of paintings that use AI are pretty indistinguishable from human artists by a human audience. My hope is that the individual artist will be protected in some way from the AI clone systems.

why does it matter what camp he falls in. That type of naeutrality is nothing to be 'admired'. Just say you're happy that he didn't bash AI art as an artist.

@@MentalPistol that type of neutrality is going to be necessary for people to make decisions on this topic moving forward. I don't want artists to feel abused and I don't want people to ban AI art. Let's find the middle ground.

Do you really think you give people time to get creative? When I look around me I see them only busy with their phone and remote control.

@@tomhighsmith I understand what you mean.... the point is that if NOBODY had to work, then every individual can choose whether or not they want to be creative (or i suppose spend all day on their phones 😂) because everyone would have the time and energy. Theres lots of people that would be creative if you took working life away from them...if nothing else, they'd be creative just out of boredom. All the best mate 👍

An artist can choose any reference he likes. If your choice is Ai that is fine :) have fun!