You're onto something re: interpretation. I see a lot of AI-generated illustrations is in clickbait or other disposable venues (the stock image companies must be taking a beating); hard to weep about that. The art-directed AI content I see in feature pieces is created by a real person using AI tools, which is no small task. To generate something that connects with the soul takes significant creative effort, though at a tablet and a keyboard not an easel. So there's a new tier of artist developing comparable to the transition portrait painters faced with the advent of photography.
It’s certainly not easy to get a finished product that you can say you constructed peace by piece using these tools. Artistic decisions still need to be made within the prompt.
It’s deeply unfortunate that many of these tools were trained on the work of those who know how to do this without prompting .
If ChatGTP (or Firefly or FLUX or...) sent you 3 cents each time someone asked for "in the style of Jason Chatfield" that could be an interesting twist.
"Twice as hard for half as much" is a powerful phrase. As an artist (and, to be honest, as an employee in many different jobs) I have often felt that I am volunteering much more than I am paid for. Alas, that's capitalism isn't it? Someone capitalizing on your effort/talent. But isn't "Half as hard for twice as much" the promise being held out for AI?
I’ve definitely seen editorial work dry up the past decade and I’ve had to shift to all things human: live events, workshops, installation, retreats Artists have always had to stay competitive so they aren’t left behind. I don’t think illustration will go away but it will become even more competitive.
Ooooo, my Irrepressible Optimism so wants to spar with you about all of this!!!
I'm not saying you're wrong, or that things are great - but my fingers itch when I read in your example two illustrators complaining about not getting any work anymore through Instagram DMs... I've NEVER gotten work through Instagram, mainly because I've never let it become the main way to contact me (as I see so many artists around me have done). NEVER give away the power of your professional autonomy to a social media platform - own and control your own website, and IF anyone finds you on the socials and wants to work with you, let them email you. Keep all your work correspondence in one place. Also: have people pay you up front for assignments. If that would be a reason for them not to hire you, they weren't good clients anyway.
There is a truth in the adagium: you teach people how to treat you. Artists who have profiled themselves mainly on fleeting, superficial social media should not be surprised that they are discarded as quickly as someone can swipe left (or type in a prompt). Put some worth on yourself by creating a good website, charging good prices and demanding clear communication. That way, you attract clients that respect you, pay well and will come back because you are YOU: a professional artist who takes themselves seriously.
Want to set up a public conversation about this in a DMA, Jason? I'm quite passionate about this! (Can you tell? ;) )
Oh, I completely agree with you— I never put my stocks into Instagram. I was on Mailchimp more often than Instagram before Substack came along, but I do know a lot of illustrators who used to pay their rent with commissions that came through the lead pipeline of social media until Instagram started mimicking TikTok.
Putting any faith in a social media network is ill advised but at the time these kids were told when they graduated that they needed to get their work out there and social media seemed to be the big shiny place to do it.
I feel for you and your situation, but I have no ideas. I would support publications who pledge not to use robot writers or artists. I think we’re moving into a video world, though. Don’t care for it.
You're onto something re: interpretation. I see a lot of AI-generated illustrations is in clickbait or other disposable venues (the stock image companies must be taking a beating); hard to weep about that. The art-directed AI content I see in feature pieces is created by a real person using AI tools, which is no small task. To generate something that connects with the soul takes significant creative effort, though at a tablet and a keyboard not an easel. So there's a new tier of artist developing comparable to the transition portrait painters faced with the advent of photography.
It’s certainly not easy to get a finished product that you can say you constructed peace by piece using these tools. Artistic decisions still need to be made within the prompt.
It’s deeply unfortunate that many of these tools were trained on the work of those who know how to do this without prompting .
If ChatGTP (or Firefly or FLUX or...) sent you 3 cents each time someone asked for "in the style of Jason Chatfield" that could be an interesting twist.
God forbid!
"Twice as hard for half as much" is a powerful phrase. As an artist (and, to be honest, as an employee in many different jobs) I have often felt that I am volunteering much more than I am paid for. Alas, that's capitalism isn't it? Someone capitalizing on your effort/talent. But isn't "Half as hard for twice as much" the promise being held out for AI?
I’ve definitely seen editorial work dry up the past decade and I’ve had to shift to all things human: live events, workshops, installation, retreats Artists have always had to stay competitive so they aren’t left behind. I don’t think illustration will go away but it will become even more competitive.
Ooooo, my Irrepressible Optimism so wants to spar with you about all of this!!!
I'm not saying you're wrong, or that things are great - but my fingers itch when I read in your example two illustrators complaining about not getting any work anymore through Instagram DMs... I've NEVER gotten work through Instagram, mainly because I've never let it become the main way to contact me (as I see so many artists around me have done). NEVER give away the power of your professional autonomy to a social media platform - own and control your own website, and IF anyone finds you on the socials and wants to work with you, let them email you. Keep all your work correspondence in one place. Also: have people pay you up front for assignments. If that would be a reason for them not to hire you, they weren't good clients anyway.
There is a truth in the adagium: you teach people how to treat you. Artists who have profiled themselves mainly on fleeting, superficial social media should not be surprised that they are discarded as quickly as someone can swipe left (or type in a prompt). Put some worth on yourself by creating a good website, charging good prices and demanding clear communication. That way, you attract clients that respect you, pay well and will come back because you are YOU: a professional artist who takes themselves seriously.
Want to set up a public conversation about this in a DMA, Jason? I'm quite passionate about this! (Can you tell? ;) )
Oh, I completely agree with you— I never put my stocks into Instagram. I was on Mailchimp more often than Instagram before Substack came along, but I do know a lot of illustrators who used to pay their rent with commissions that came through the lead pipeline of social media until Instagram started mimicking TikTok.
Putting any faith in a social media network is ill advised but at the time these kids were told when they graduated that they needed to get their work out there and social media seemed to be the big shiny place to do it.
I wrote about this a few years ago If you’re interested: https://www.jasonchatfield.com/blog/cartoons-via-email-vs-social-media
I feel for you and your situation, but I have no ideas. I would support publications who pledge not to use robot writers or artists. I think we’re moving into a video world, though. Don’t care for it.
There is hope - we are human! But the corporations won't look after illustrators, only other humans will... to be discussed this afternoon, perhaps.